It was deliberate choice by them to make even the single player campaign online homie. It ain’t an mmo, and it never should have been built like this.
Don’t even play like that wasnt fucked up, ok? If your actual argument is “i think companies should get to do what they want” them say that, with your whole chest, not this Weak socratic-method-bootlick-bull…
Take that stand and defend it. Or you could also stfu
It was deliberate choice by them to make even the single player campaign online homie.
As one would expect from an online racing game. Anyone buying it would know in advance that single player offline modes do not exist when they bought the game.
It ain’t an mmo, and it never should have been built like this.
It kind of was and it was intended to work as it did by the company that made it.
If your actual argument is “i think companies should get to do what they want”
My argument us that this is a game designed to be played online only. When you bought the game the packaging/materials do not talk about offline play so you shouldn’t expect it to work in a way it expressly isn’t designed to do. Adults should be aware of what things do when they buy them.
It ain’t an mmo, and it never should have been built like this.
It kind of was and it was intended to work as it did by the company that made it.
Adults don’t dance around semantics in debate when they’re called out. I told you to stand up and this is your response? Mebbe you’re not even hidin! Maybe it’s the only way you can talk?
I guess you disagree, but I find your speech pattern embarrassing and tiring.
Your perspective seems to be you should get whatever you want regardless of the actual product you were sold and the terms of that sale. That’s not rational. You bought an online only game. If you wanted a single player offline mode to exist then you should have bought a game that had one.
My perspective is quite clear. I’m calling you a liar and (because liars are such) a loser, in no uncertain terms. Pretending authority is your only tactic. As the likely old-head here I deny you my permission to “be the adult in the room”
Eh, the argument was never civil. I don’t like the whole schtick of “showing immense disrespect buuut not actually name-calling” i see so many lowbrow edgelords employ. That sulky teen shit makes me maldy as all get out. I get there’s gotta be lines somewhere an i crossed em, but i gots to call a spade by its name.
I put wheels on my car which are a cheap copy of a very popular wheel because they were $500 not $2000 and I dont race. Every car meet someone has to comment that Im running “fakes” and try to give me a hard time about it. Yeah, Ive got a mortgage and a kid. Fuck off with your Supreme snapback ass hypebeast bullshit. I’m building the car I can afford.
People are toxic, even communities who preach peace and love as their doctrine have people who will whip out the moral-cock ruler and start shit over who is more peaceful and loving.
I am safer by not giving my information to a company that can’t stop hackers from revealing all the details about the people who have PSN accounts. Sony just throws our data and privacy into the void and doesn’t actually care about the loss. They either need bigger fines on a more consistent frequency levied against them or they need to drop the PSN account requirements and learn how to make money like they did before PSN.
And I feel the hardware requirements end up way lower, when I had a bad PC I could play Burnout Revenge at full speed on the 360 emulator, but the PS2 version ran like a turtle.
So why didn’t he stop playing at level 100 or 200 or whatever but waited with this rant until almost level 300 in a stream with large attention? Pure coincidence? To me it looks like he wanted to go out with a bang and rage bait.
Seriously. Why do gamers spend thousands of hours on games they hate. Life’s full of shit to do. Go play something else. Or, God forbid, touch some grass. Why waste the little time you have on earth doing something you don’t like.
Why do gamers spend thousands of hours on games they hate.
It's because that "hate" comes from a place of love, and isn't really hate at all. From the outside, it can be hard to understand, but the people who hate certain games the most are usually the biggest fans. They hate seeing squandered potential when something they love gets ruined by updates.
They don't hate the game, itself. They love the game, and they love what it could be under different circumstances. They love the memories they've had with the game, the connections they've made, the experiences they've shared. The "hate" they seem to have isn't really hate at all; it's passion. They love the game and want to see it in a better state. That's why they're so hyper critical, because they care the most.
Yup exactly. They see wasted potential, and that pisses them off. Because there’s something they truly want to enjoy, so watching the devs make seemingly dumb decisions can be incredibly frustrating.
Which is basically the same situation as being in an abusive relationship.
And all the people who keep coming back, knowing it will never actually improve, are ultimately deluding themselves in some kind of way, and are too addicted to want to stop, or too immature or stupid to realize that dedicating a ton of time and energy to something that on net lets you down or harms you is not a healthy way to live.
Try telling that to a Warthunder player, or League of Legends, or anything like that.
They know the games are ruining their lives but uh sunken cost fallacy.
Its always amazed me that people can become addicted to an actual negative experience that has many negative side effects… but half (more?) The games industry is built on that these days.
They’re addicted to the high of winning, which happens at random intervals. That’s the core of gambling addiction and MOBA addiction. They will win again… eventually. So they keep playing even though losing sucks.
“Over here [in Heroic] it’s free-to-play friendly, by a considerable margin,” niru begins, talking over a graphic showing the player distribution between the world types, with Heroic leading in global MapleStory by some margin. “Pay-to-win is accepted here [in Interactive World], but the free-to-play experience is awful and that’s what needs to be improved right now.”
(Edit: it’s not made clear in that quote so I’ll just mention it here, they play in an Interactive world)
I get addiction is real and it’s not easy to quit for some people. What I don’t get is that the game apparently has a different world type that is just better and he’s actively choosing not to play it instead. That’s like picking to play P2W poker where you can buy better hands and then complaining that it’s not fun when you could just go play real poker at the next table instead. At some point I just lose a lot of my sympathy for them.
I play a lot of single player shooters. One thing they all have in common is that I know they exist, which I’m thinking could potentially be part of the problem with this one. Based on reactions in this thread it seems like a lot of people are in the same position I’m in, where the first they hear of the game is when it’s being pronounced a flop. I’m getting big The Producers vibes.
Starfield has it’s negatives for sure, but he has a point about what the communities have been like (including here on Lemmy).
There have been so many armchair gamedevs who overnight know intricacies of engines, how programming works, how 8 year old computers should be able to run brand new AAA titles at 120fps. It’s been just exhausting reading these conversations.
For example, one thing I read again and again was “Starfield just wasn’t optimized, they easily could have reduced memory and bumped framerates”. Which any actual programmer will immediately feel a pit of dread in their stomach because we’ve been asked to reduce ram usage or speed something up, and that is a daunting task in our simple little apps - let alone a major AAA game.
Again I’m not saying Starfield was perfect. It has a lot of flaws, biggest one for me is that it felt like a game that came out 10 years ago in terms of how it played. But it didn’t deserve the overall destruction it received online. Any developer knows that the only people who can say “how” their game could have been done better were the ones who actually wrote it.
For example, one thing I read again and again was “Starfield just wasn’t optimized, they easily could have reduced memory and bumped framerates”. Which any actual programmer will immediately feel a pit of dread in their stomach because we’ve been asked to reduce ram usage or speed something up, and that is a daunting task in our simple little apps - let alone a major AAA game.
This thing in particular was picked apart by actual devs in news articles and editorials that showed that Bethesda really didn’t optimize the game at all along with all the technical reasoning and proof showing how it could have been improved.
It’s not just the players, who for the most part, have been citing those articles when they make that particular critique. I mean, shit, they haven’t even used their own texture compression system for the last few games they made, and that’s so easy even someone with minimal modding knowledge can fix because the game already has the tools to make it work better.
Please share these articles you speak of. From developers with real world game dev experience. Without pointing me to some 2 hour rambling YouTube video.
And do you seriously think that someone with minimal modding knowledge can “fix” texture compression and the actual devs of the game hadn’t known or thought of doing so too? Say what you will about the Starfield producers and management but I absolutely 100% guarantee you if they chose not to use that feature, it was for very good reasons.
Say what you will about the Starfield producers and management but I absolutely 100% guarantee you if they chose not to use that feature, it was for very good reasons.
Not the original commenter, but this whole argument you put here falls completely on it’s face since we know that modders HAVE done this and haven’t had any issues (or at the very least have been able to solve said issues), if compressing the textures and whatnot actually broke the game then the modders wouldn’t have been able to do it without breaking the game
Even if they supposedly had a reason, then it was a bad one
When some rando with a mod package plugging into an undocumented ABI can dramatically improve the performance... Yeah, it's not optimized at all. Don't let them excuse themselves from due diligence.
To be fair, this is an old, old engine with several generation defining blockbusters making use of it. Not to mention the massive modding communities who’ve probably spent more collective hours fighting with the engine over the past few years than Bethesda has.
It’s honestly a really well polished game and I’ve only had a very small handful of bug encounters. Its less buggy than curent patches of FO4 and Skyrim
My biggest common Bethesda glitches so far was ONCE, one of the NPCs had the white squares attached to her hair and played miss sparkle for our conversation and then the occasional alien getting caught on geometry and then vibrating because the engine didn’t know what to do. Outside of that it’s been remarkably bug-free so far. Oh, I’m 30 hours in too!
Yeah, i found a couple of crates that decided to co exist in the same location as my most bethesda bug so far. I have had 1 quest fail to progress at one point but a quit out and load an earlier autosave fixed that.
Ironically I think BG3 is buggier than Starfield on release.
I’ve experienced a few instances of bethesda jank, but nothing game breaking or even requiring a reload in ~55 hours of play. Just silly things like bodies getting stuck in a ceiling after an explosion. My SO is playing BG3 and has been getting CTD’s and other more egrigious bugs since hitting act 3.
I won’t buy this at full price, when Outer World’s two goes on sale at 50% or more off, that is when I will buy it! By then, all the major bugs should be resolved, and new content will be making this game even better. I blame Obsidian Games from not trying to shout down Microsoft and fight them in a Waffle House parking lot over this price.
While the company would love you to buy it at launch for $80, they’re fine if you wait for a (first party) sale.
Look at the first Outer World. At launch sold for $60. Three months post launch, $50. Six months post launch, $40. One year post launch, $30.
If this new game sells the exact same, but starts at $80, they’re ahead. Even if the $80 number scares away a lot of people, they’re ahead. Only if it scares away a shit ton of people will it be a problem.
In a way, I hope it scares enough gamers away that it sends a message. I want there to be repercussions, Nintendo might get away with it (due to fanbase), but other companies need to be curtailed and fast!
Nintendo gets away with it because their games rarely have a discount. An $80 game today will be $80 in a year. After several years you sometimes get a limited discount for their best selling games. A bundle or a voucher can be a small loss leader, usually if you buy one of something you buy another.
The other thing of course is that Nintendo makes absolutely top tier games. The fan base is earned. You can buy a Mario or Zelda game, knowing nothing about it, and it’s going to be good. Pokemon is the obvious exception here, the mainline games are fine, but would be nothing without the brand. (I also won’t forgive them for Super Mario Party, that was a $30 game, not $60.)
I don’t expect $80 games to go away, because as long as someone will pay it, it’s free money. But if sales slump too much in the long run I do see quick discounts, possibly even for Nintendo games.
Nintendo makes pretty good games but nothing about their product is “top tier”. The online experience is terrible, their flagship games suffer from framerate dips, pop-in, and stuttering because they don’t invest in better hardware, and speaking of hardware they went with the same will-break-down-and-drift sticks because they’ve been coasting for ages. Meanwhile they’re suing fan projects into the dirt and growing increasingly out of touch. (Sony and Xbox are hot on their heels, the big three could really do with some outside competition)
Oh I absolutely agree there are plenty of criticisms about the company itself and their other offerings, but the games are absolutely top tier.
Their online is miles behind, games from Smash Bros to Mario Maker to Mario Kart could all be improving with better online, but since they were terrible at online I never used them, but those games were still excellent.
A lower powered system or poorly optimized game has some frame rate dips or stuttering, but never in a way that gameplay was affected. I know people will disagree but I’ve never had an issue with it.
Yes, joycon drift is a real problem. But that’s a hardware problem. We should absolutely give Nintendo shit for hardware problems.
Suing fan projects or being aggressive about YouTube/Twitch take down, all fair. Fuck Nintendo for all that.
But all of that is different from their games being solid. I don’t blame people who choose to emulate their games, they’re awesome games.
I’ll give you that Sony might be competitive, I don’t see Xbox/Microsoft anywhere close. I think Valve and the SteamDeck are probably 4th in the race, but Valve has to actually make a game. They made great games and should continue to do so.
This is what I have a problem with. The fan base WAS earned but now is taken for granted.
You can’t just pretend that online play isn’t important for multiplayer games. It’s a huge knock against the titles you mentioned.
Kirby and the Forgotten Land tries so hard to keep gameplay smooth that any enemies more than like 15 feet away drop to 8fps and it still dips when there’s too many effects on screen. Breath of the Wild simply banishes mobs that get too far away (or just run for too long) to keep the memory functional (and many things don’t even render at the edge of bow range). Super Mario Odyssey also aggressively culls actors and gets a bit sad when you force too much on screen (high up in Metro Kingdom, for example) It might not matter to you but it impacts the game enough for me to notice it.
I simply don’t think that you can trust a Nintendo game to be worth the day 1 cost.
I suppose the reason I’m so forgiving of the online features, is that I don’t use them. They’re a nice little addition for sure, but I do not see them as core to the game.
I think it’s embarrassing that they’re sooooo far behind. Definitely if they’re a thing you’re expecting, it’s going to sour your view of the game.
Performance is a personal thing.You’re not alone, it’s a common complaint, I won’t deny that. I’ve played all three of those games, Kirby, Zelda & Mario but never remember having an issue. I’m sure I did, but it never stuck with me. I remember Arceus looking like an GameCube game. But I also remember completing the Pokedex 100%.
I was burned by Super Mario Party, so that franchise is dead to me. Maybe others will burn me too.
I think the Switch 2 launching with just Mario Kart was a huge mistake. No Mario. No Zelda. I can’t remember the last time that happened. Donkey Kong is coming soon, and it’s supposedly similar to Oddessy… But we’ll have to see. There are great DK games, but he’s no Mario and it’s been a while.
I bought it in Fall 2024 for like 25 bucks with all DLCs. So I’ll wait year or two with BL4 no problem, there’s plenty other games I can play. I never buy brand new games.
Oh boy. If you look at Ubisoft’s stock prices, it’s way down.
Like high 80s in 2018. And now it’s 8, roughly 1/10th if it’s value.
They aren’t going to survive another few years at this rate without some bangers. How stupid their leadership has been, with NFTs, with their sexual harassment lawsuits, with bonehead anti-consumer practices is just accelerating this downfall.
See, boycotts do in fact work. They may not work instantly, but they do work if it’s your actual customer base doing the boycott. The Bud Light boycott also worked. The Target boycott currently has their stock in a tailspin, regardless of what they are claiming are the company’s actual issues.
gamesradar.com
Ważne