Do you really need a guide? It works exactly the same as Windows. The only difference is you need to run it through WINE with Proton. That’s easiest handled with Heroic Launcher or Lutris, which you’re probably already using one of these already. Just add the executable and launch it. (You may need to run an installer first, which Heroic at least makes really easy.)
Sony came up with the idea of the disc drive, it only made sense them wanting more profit from the part they designed. It was just a disgusting move by Nintendo to go behind their backs and close a deal with another company, while not telling Sony.
Yeah that feeling of spacial awareness as you’re kiting around groups of enemies. Helps to have simple, easily identifiable level geometry for that matter.
I tried the demo, it has a lot of problems outside of it being a AAA single player shooter. The “magic” system is just reskinned guns, the story is nonsensical at times, and the movement is stiff and slow. It’s like they never play tested the game and just said it was done one day. That’s not even mentioning the almost ten minute walk around the city at the beginning doing nothing but following what I will assume is a non critical character to the plot.
They cleaned a lot of that up, at least on the console version I played. And that character ends up being quite critical to the plot. You also revisit that city later in the game, so that intro serves to establish the setting and starts the plot.
My God they cleaned it up?! I can’t imagine it being a longer intro. The fact that you revisit the city later is just disappointing, that city was terrible in it’s design.
I remember Half-Life 2 opening with a walk around a city, and it was so memorable to me. I guess in part because it was reliant on its own atmosphere, and still let the player be an interactive part of it rather than bound to a tight track.
Planning DLCs before you’ve even launched the game should be illegal. So pretty much. They are planning to release an unfinished game where micropurchases rule supreme so everyone gets on the same content level.
Hey you bought the game? Cool. But if you wanna play with us you need this this and that DLC pack. It’s only an extra 40 bucks.
I mean even if they hadn’t announced, it’s Payday it was expected. Fuck it I even prefer this, I am surprised companies do this, now we know what is on it and what is coming and if is worth it buying it now or not. The alternative is finding out when you already bought the game.
I dont want to defend this kind of monetization, but pd2 probably had the best kind of approach, as only the host needed it start it, so if someone had it in your friend group had it you were good. Well exept for the weapon and perk decks, as you only got them if you had the dlc, but it didn’t split the playerbase. (also fuck the loot boxes)
I get triggered as a gamedev when people complain about dlc because if a game came out and it was $200 for all the content made you would probably scoff and pirate it. The harsh truth is nobody wants to front the actual production cost of games anymore. PS2 games were $40 back in 2003 when my old ass was entering high school and you could still find a decent slice of pizza for just over a dollar. It’s 2023 and it’s basically the same price now after 2 decades of insane inflation. You may find an outlier or two on steam but even AAA titles tend to stay 60 or under.
It’s honestly the best option. Just buy the base game then. By definition you don’t need anything else. You get what you afforded and you don’t get upset. Don’t forget the company that made Payday filed for bankruptcy not too long ago. This isn’t quite EA shitting out a Madden update with the same code and 3d models. They were restructured and probably have loans or investors to pay back. I’m just happy we got a payday 3.
go ahead and downvote, but just consider what I said with an open mind afterwards.
The problem with DLCs isn’t the DLC. It’s how it’s used. And your whole argument is total bullshit, proven wrong by so many great games who does not have to rely on predatory DLC requirements.
The problem here. Is that they’ve already started working on DLCs before the game has even launched. You don’t see a problem with that from a consumer standpoint?
And be real. They’re not implementing this DLC strategy because they have to, because funding is difficult for them. It’s because it’s proven to be the most profitable With PayDay2 as proof.
The problem here. Is that they’ve already started working on DLCs before the game has even launched. You don’t see a problem with that from a consumer standpoint?
Sort of a complicated scenario. Where do you draw the line for it being anti consumer? Say the people on the dev team who do: concept art, writing, modeling, etc. What should they be doing. At this stage most of the development going into the game is very final touches (if that) and bug squashing. I don’t think it’s out of line for those people to be working on future content. Seems a bit strange to hold them until the release date. It definitely is a tough line to find though, and can change depending on the context of when and how the dlc development started.
Aka the market has rejected your overpriced bullshit. Adapt or die. Welcome to the free market.
It doesn’t matter if you’re a mega corporation and previously had the winning formula. You adapt to meet evolving market demand or you die.
These c suites got too comfy doing everything to only please their shareholders. They forgot that pleasing their consumers wasn’t optional. We are your money supply. If you lose us, it all comes crashing down.
Nintendo doesn’t report digital sales of their games… so RDR2 has sold more than Mario kart 8 physical sales. The impressive part is that it’s still likely so far behind Mario kart 8’s total sales count.
I am a bit surprised of the bad reporting in this article to not realize that distinction
I think there is an implication that if you buy a game which is online by nature (e.g. an MMO) that the servers can and will shut down eventually. My cupboard is filled with defunct MMOs. And people do not “own” any commercial software per se, they run it under licence.
So I don’t see that Ubisoft has any legal obligation here. But as a good will gesture they really should put the server code in escrow, or open source chunks of it so that games can continue to enjoy life after the company itself has no economic incentive to continue running it.
I really hope that something gets done about games not being playable anymore. This is really important for the sake of our hobby and clearly not acceptable.
I could understand how multiplayer games would be harder to maintain 20 years after their release, but there is no excuse for solo games.
Wouldn’t be surprised if stop servicing/selling a game came with a tax write-off (small due to deprecation). If that were the case, I strongly believe they should, at least, release the server and remove all DRM. Let the community make it work again.
Who preserves historical artwork? Who makes sure it is available for all to enjoy?
I think governments and nonprofits (like museums) need to consider that archival of an interactive artwork means allowing it to continue being accessible and interactive. That’d be the real preservation.
Laws that say if you create something like this and it reaches some metric, then you are required to turn over all resources regarding it to open source public consumption once you are done actively maintaining it.
Art restoration is actually sort of similar to cracking games. (A difference being those games are still protected by copyright so it’s technically illegal.)
Going by US laws (life + 70 years), all of Picasso’s art is all still copyright protected in the US until 2043, so it’s even less of a difference than you may realize.
I don’t know where the line is because with art restoration you’re actually modifying a physical object. I guess a better comparison would be modifying an arcade cabinet or something.
It’s not the most robust analogy, but I actually really like your comparison to painting restoration; to do it well, one must understand the techniques and materials used in the original (even stuff below the visible surface).
Not a lawyer, but I think the original work is still copyrighted, and that restoration wouldn’t (or certainly shouldn’t) constitute a new artwork. Though now I’m wondering about that terrible Jesus painting restoration from a few years back — it’s certainly different from the original, and whilst it might not seem reasonable to call it a new piece of “art”, it’s certainly inspired a great many people(to make memes)
Whats funny is that most 20 year old multiplayer games today (at least on PC) are still perfectly playable because the server tech was given to the community, at launch. Battlefield 2 hasn’t been available for purchase anywhere officially in well over a decade, there’s still a dedicated, albiet small community.
I understand that with large, persistent worlds, it’s hard to release that server tech, but at least some form of it should be published. Ie, a smaller variant that maybe just lets a couple people join up as a co-op party, rather than dozens of people running around a large map at random, like in The Crew.
gamesradar.com
Ważne