So why did they drop the team numbers from 6 to 5? Does it really make that much of a difference? Couldn’t they just have both modes available (like Halo has 16v16, 32v32 and such)?
It makes a massive difference, the game was balanced with 6v6 from the get go, removing a tank completely changes how the game works.
They had problems with certain tank combinations, but instead of addressing that directly, they just removed one. A lot of changes they made just felt like justifications to calling it a 'new game'.
The devs are too proud to add a 6v6 mode along side, it's took so much pressure for them to finally 'experiment' with 6v6, they just won't admit their modes, changes etc are failures.
It also essentially undermines the whole idea of the game. “More FPS focus” and “more focus on individual gameplay” are not why I enjoyed OW1 in the first place, after all. It was the game to play with real life friends while hanging out on voice chat and relaxing after work. The mix of high-precision, low-precision, no-precision, tanking, healing, everything meant that there was something for everybody and we could all easily play together and just spend an evening talking shit and doing shit.
They want everyone to feel powerful on every hero (to sell skins), but that's not Overwatch's identity. They took a lot of skill expression and teamplay out of the game.
I mean the devs are completely clueless anyway, they removed mccrees stun citing "too much CC in the game" while simultaneously adding more CC through both new heros and changing existing ones. Just reading their patch notes shows how lost they are.
Oh the grenade part was so silly. “Hey we are removing the stun, too much CC and let’s be honest, it makes it far too easy to blow up stunned flankers”.
…
“Here, as a replacement that’s a homing grenade that just straight up kills the flanker, no stunning necessary.”
It’s worth it to read the director’s take that goes with this announcement, it’s quite long but goes into great detail about the motivation and effects.
I hate the change, but I can totally understand why they did it. Much as I personally dislike it.
While I enjoyed it, it was also very stressful. I think we just played wrong. We covered every millimeter of the plot with farms or other useful stuff and then proceeded to be busy for more than half the day with just maintenance. At some point this meant that we never got to explore and often barely had time to go to the stores or talk to the people in the village.
Apart from overcooked it was probably the most stressful game Is ever played and it’s not supposed to be like that
Some people have a money anxiety built in that translates into the game. The funny thing is they bring it all themselves, the game makes absolutely no fuzz at all about making money.
The very first scene is the main character running away from the ratrace to a farm. Yet the very first thing some players do is bring in the ratrace with them. Everything in the game makes money and no money at all is ever required by the game from the player, except to advance the farming itself. It doesn’t even have banks or debts like animal crossing.
It’s bizarre how people, when left to their own devices, simply reproduce the worse habits of real life.
No the game has a much, much worse anxiety time crunch in trying to 100% it before the end of year… 2 ( I think) when grandpa shrine first measures progress.
You don’t find out what that means unless you made it to year two and it immediately tells you that you can keep trying anytime you want.
It’s not a one and done, you can literally retry the test infinitely. There is no crunch period at all, this anxiety comes from players misunderstanding things the game says in plain English.
I might be remembering wrong, but I think it is entirely possible to develop relationships with the town characters and see almost all of the cutscenes without ever upgrading any of those.
Then you don’t engage with over 60% of the game anyways. Sounds to me like a balanced game that has something to offer to a variety of players, and anxieties, overfixation and stress with some gameplay and not other seems to be something the player brings in and is not caused by the game.
To open the community center (the primary goal for the first year+) specifically takes quite a lot of money actually, and outside of talking with NPC’s once a day, money is necessary to get every other advancement I can think of. I agree that many players probably go too hard into trying to min/max things, but the game isn’t as loosey-goosey with costs as you suggest.
I never understand why anyone puts together those massive farms. Personally, I always end up leaving the vast majority of the space unused. My farms only ever occupy the space directly in front of the house, and even that needs sprinklers asap.
I guess it’s just a mindset difference. I’d say me and my friends are all pretty competitive gamers (as opposed to more creative gamers). We tend to play games mostly for the challenge. Also didn’t help that we had just finished our Facorio playthrough. So in our mind we still had “the factory must grow”. So our minds were like “if space -> use space”.
Sorry, I probably could have been more clear that I was referring more to people that play SD for irl years and have crops spread all across their farm. I can definitely sympathize with new players that spread out too much without the experience to know what that entails. Hell, I’m pretty sure did the same my first time playing. It seems petty natural to make that choice.
Fwiw, if you end up trying the game again, I found QOL mods really enhanced my enjoyment of the game, particularly the one that provided the option to change how long days were. Even just a 20% change really helped make the game less stressful for me.
I find it funny, because it is not required at all. You could be the most casual lazy ass gamer, and still see and accomplish every piece of content inside the game. The game doesn’t penalize you, and instead goes out of the way to reward the player for everything they do, even if it is just loitering around and barely progressing stuff at random and by chance.
It doesn’t feel like that though. For example, trying to earn money and progress by going into the cave or whatever to fight nets you almost no money gains and eventually your gear can’t keep up.
As someone who doesn’t enjoy farming sims because they feel like work, it just doesn’t feel like the game cares if you progress in other ways. And it may not penalize you, but a lot of the other options feel tedious because of the drastically lower rewards you get from trying to earn money through those activities.
Thing is, that’s ok. The game just isn’t for me and I am fine having moved on.
Personally I’d say that “always striving for the maximum and stressing myself out” is a personality trait that’s not only a problem in Stardew Valley for me haha. I’m o it’s not a great mindset to have, but unfortunately it’s a subconscious drive that’s hard to eliminate.
There are probably games or other media that you love that the average Stardew Valley fan wouldn’t click with. You’re not missing out, you’ve just got other stuff you enjoy.
Very true, but then again most Overwhelmingly Positive games I find amazing. I do have a long list of games I love and a selection I actually always keep installed, some of which are mediocre by many people’s standards ;)
Because in our society we very much need money and gambling sells itself by making you believe you’ll get money. Cosmetics in games has no such issues.
EDIT: as long as you can’t sell them for money a la CSGO.
Paid cosmetics being fine stems from a time where not every other game weaponized FOMO by basically hacking your brain. Yes, it is still easily avoidable by a lot of people, but we shouldn’t allow vulnerable people being preyed on.
If you search “EULA deleting all copies of any materials or software in your possession” you’ll see this shows up in pretty much every EULA for every piece of software, including most games. Phasmophobia, Baldur’s Gate 3, Risk of Rain 2, and Steam itself show up on that list.
Lies. Steam themselves say they’ll make efforts if they can to make games playable, as far as they can influence steam services at that point. They EXPLICITLY say you can keep any game you’ve already downloaded.
You become a subscriber of Steam (“Subscriber”) by completing the registration of a Steam user account.
TERM AND TERMINATION
A. Term
The term of this Agreement (the “Term”) commences on the date you first indicate your acceptance of these terms, and will continue in effect until otherwise terminated in accordance with this Agreement.
B. Termination by You
You may cancel your Account at any time. You may cease use of a Subscription at any time or, if you choose, you may request that Valve terminate your access to a Subscription. However, Subscriptions are not transferable, and even if your access to a Subscription for a particular game or application is terminated, the original activation key will not be able to be registered to any other account, even if the Subscription was obtained in a retail store. Access to Subscriptions ordered as a part of a pack or bundle cannot be terminated individually, termination of access to one game within the bundle will result in termination of access to all games ordered in the pack. Your cancellation of an Account, or your cessation of use of any Subscription or request that access to a Subscription be terminated, will not entitle you to any refund, including of any Subscription fees. Valve reserves the right to collect fees, surcharges or costs incurred prior to the cancellation of your Account or termination of your access to a particular Subscription. In addition, you are responsible for any charges incurred to third-party vendors or content providers before your cancellation.
C. Termination by Valve
Valve may restrict or cancel your Account or any particular Subscription(s) at any time in the event that (a) Valve ceases providing such Subscriptions to similarly situated Subscribers generally, or (b) you breach any terms of this Agreement (including any Subscription Terms or Rules of Use). In the event that your Account or a particular Subscription is restricted or terminated or cancelled by Valve for a violation of this Agreement or improper or illegal activity, no refund, including of any Subscription fees or of any unused funds in your Steam Wallet, will be granted.
Every time Valve has brought it up before, it’s been in interviews where they have mentioned they have contingency plans to make your library available somehow if they ever have to close up shop. Though, originally Steam had a way of creating physical backups in the program itself. If it still does, it’s been moved somewhere in the UI I don’t know about. But you may not need it anyway, because back then games were stored in their own proprietary containers (GFC files). These days, it’s the same structure as any other installation and you can often just copy that to something and not even need cracks for it to run.
I get that they say this in interviews, but that is not what their user agreement says. They can remove games from your library and revoke access to your account. To my knowledge, they’ve never abused this power but it’s still in their agreement. My point is nearly every company has agreements like Ubisoft has. There’s no reason to single out theirs.
What’s attempted to be singled out isn’t the “we can terminate your access at any time.” They are claiming that Ubisoft’s suggests you need to destroy the copies you already have if they stop supporting it.
Though it doesn’t even look like that is actually the case looking at the very clause the article is quoting. It’s the standard “we can revoke your ability to download this thing at any time” shit. Where the fuck does it suggest users have to destroy their copies?
Upon termination all licenses granted to you in this Pact shall immediately terminate and you must immediately and permanently remove the Game from your device and destroy all copies of the Game in your possession.
10.2.3 you must immediately delete or remove the Game from all computer equipment in your possession and immediately destroy or return to us (at our option) all copies of the Game then in your possession, custody or control and, in the case of destruction, certify to us that you have done so.
So why Ubisoft? It’s common in lots of games. Do people want to change EULAs in general or just want to hate on Ubisoft for doing something that’s common?
Ubisoft is generally shit all around so maybe it’s just bias. Or maybe they do have such a clause in something, they just didn’t quote the actual relevant bits in this article.
It’s pretty common to say “hey we can turn this off at any time and you will not be entitled to a refund and won’t be able to access anything via our online services” but this “hey if we decide to shut down the online services, you need to delete everything related to it you have on your device too” is new. And even more consumer hostile.
If Larian goes belly up, they can suck my left nut if they think I am gonna delete BG3 off my hard-drive.
Upon termination for any reason, You must immediately uninstall the Product and destroy all copies of the Product in Your possession.
Even though this clause seems to be in most EULA I’ve never heard of it actually being enforced. I’m guessing it’s to prevent some kind of loophole where you can agree to an EULA, install a game, and then terminate your agreement in order to use the game without needing to follow any rules. If you can terminate the agreement at any time without needing to delete the game, then why not always do that?
You probably could. Buy game, download game, make backup of game, refund game, maybe crack the game you now have backed up, play game basically for free. But it’s just piracy with extra steps. And if you do it enough, they probably will ban your account from even making purchases.
As a Subscriber you may obtain access to certain services, software and content available to Subscribers or purchase certain Hardware (as defined below) on Steam. The Steam client software and any other software, content, and updates you download or access via Steam, including but not limited to Valve or third-party video games and in-game content, software associated with Hardware and any virtual items you trade, sell or purchase in a Steam Subscription Marketplace are referred to in this Agreement as “Content and Services;” the rights to access and/or use any Content and Services accessible through Steam are referred to in this Agreement as “Subscriptions.”
It’s in the quoted text: “Including third-party games”. I’ll bold it.
B. Hardware, Subscriptions; Content and Services
As a Subscriber you may obtain access to certain services, software and content available to Subscribers or purchase certain Hardware (as defined below) on Steam. The Steam client software and any other software, content, and updates you download or access via Steam, including but not limited to Valve or third-party video games and in-game content, software associated with Hardware and any virtual items you trade, sell or purchase in a Steam Subscription Marketplace are referred to in this Agreement as “Content and Services;” the rights to access and/or use any Content and Services accessible through Steam are referred to in this Agreement as “Subscriptions.”
dexerto.com
Ważne