When Destiny started, Bungie was tied to Activision and whenever there were design decisions people hated, they blamed Activision for them.
Then Destiny 2 launched, Bungie was able to buy out the Activision contract, and everything went to shit.
Turned out, Activision had been the voice of reason the whole time.
Bungie started eliminating story missions, vaulting content people had paid for, including a full 1/2 of the base game and multiple expansions. They sunset gears and weapons people spent hundreds of hours earning and curating because they claimed they didn’t know how to develop scenarios for them any more.
A full Sony takeover would be a huge improvement over what Bungie has done since separating from Activision.
Walpeach and waldaisy would’ve been real cool actually. And then we could have a upside down world type style Mario/wario game where walpeach saves wario
A step back in what sense? Technically? Yeah probably. Starfield is the first Bethesda game to have working ladders(one slight sort of exception in Fallout 4) lol. But in terms of story, and world building, I think it’s fair to say Starfield is much ahead in that.
That’d be more meaningful if Bethesda had ever managed to create a story with any worth. Sometimes the bones of a decent story are there, but the execution is usually amateur hour.
In my opinion Starfield has the best story Bethesda has written. Not entirely saying much, but the main story and the side stories are at least more interesting and less predictable that Fallout 4 and Skyrim quests.
Assuming you haven’t already, you should give Morrowind a shot. If you can get past the dated graphics and mechanics, the story is by far Bethesda’s best work imho.
Yeah, I have played Morrowind(well actually TES3MP) and in terms of flexibility and story Morrowind is definitely great, my issue is that my least favorite aspect of Bethesda games are the tedious winding dungeons(why NV and Starfield are my favorite because they have the least of that) and Morrowind unfortunately has a lot. One aspect of Morrowind that I really enjoyed actually though, was the opportunity to be given information to actually take notes on(I wrote down directions quest givers gave for example) and Starfield was the only other Bethesda game I’ve played with a taste of that. Although unfortunately much less.
Man, feels like we played totally different games regarding Morrowind. Most of Morrowind’s dungeons are the smallest of any Bethesda game, and honestly it had the least amount of quests that even sent you to dungeons. Still, if you found them tedious you found them tedious. (anychance you installed other mods besides MP?)
All the same, I think the story is by far Bethesda’s magnum opus. (I mean Bethesda proper, since New Vegas was Obsidian and all)
And while I find exploration in Starfield to be extremely tedious, I will say they employed a “Skyrim/FO4” style sensibility where each dungeon should roughly take 10-20 minutes, making for nice bite sized chunks of gameplay.
I completely agree that NV had stellar use of dungeons that almost never overstayed their welcome.
Though if you want real tedium, in both winding dungeons and exploration, give Daggerfall unity a try. Great game, but my god does it go on and on and on.
So someone will take his mods and make actual pirate versions of them. If he's trying to Streisand it, couldn't have done a better job. I don't see it being very profitable, though...
Publishers are a key ingredient in the recipe for trash games. Buying IP and telling some dev team that is doing it for the paycheck to slap something together is not making a game, it’s parasitism.
IGN put out a first preview video of Arc Raiders couple months ago and it was borderline hit piece. The quality of the video was unbelievably bad. They made the game look muddy, dated, and choppy. This wasn’t IGN trying to showcase the game on some realistic typical gaming hardware. In reality the game is well optimized and visually really good on moderate level hardware. I hear the game looks fantastic on consoles. Maybe they’ll do a full review now that the game is finally released but I question the journalistic integrity of IGN.
They’ve done this with a few other games. I remember the EU5 review being really choppy and it turned out they were running it on like 6-7 year old hardware. It might just be a cost cutting measure to not buy the latest stuff for all their reviewers but I basically ignore most of what they say now.
tbf a lot of people don’t buy a top notch rig for RTS games, so I think it’s entirely valid to test on a dated PC and point out if this is a weakness - but not record gameplay on it exclusively.
If one reviewer has an insufficient PC, assign it to a different person - at least the gameplay recording.
EU5 is grand strategy, not RTS. Just a small correction. RTS is like Starcraft — ~30m matches and then everything goes away. Grand Strategy is ~100+h of constant progress where nothing resets. They’re both strategy games, but they couldn’t be more different.
Ah. I’ve spent hundreds of hours on Anno games and always considered them part of the range of RTS. Are you sure those terms are incompatible? Seems like a strategy game can be “grand” and “real-time” at the same time.
Anno is more city builder with some RTS elements. Definitely not Grand Strategy —arguably RTS.
I wouldn’t say they’re “incompatible” but they aren’t synonyms. I haven’t seen a grand strategy that is also an RTS, but I could see them co-existing potentially. Total War is close with its battles, except I think creating units and buildings is a requirement for the RTS genre.
Grand Strategy is generally: you control a nation and operate on a map of the world (sometimes limited to a region). You’re continuously progressing your nation, constructing permanent buildings, unlocking permanent technologies, and improving your economy.
Examples: Europa Universalis, Crusader Kings, Total War.
RTS is: you control an army and win a battle on a relatively small map, where individual people are a relevant scale. You build units during the battle, but very few to no resources come into the battle from anything before, and very little to nothing changes after the battle.
Examples: Command and Conquer, Dune II, Starcraft.
IGN: “Traditional gamer journalism is dying. Please support honest journalists.”
Also IGN: “Good work, 47. Now publish the article and locate an exit.”
Maybe someone else on the IGN payroll will do a proper review because a big reason the review was ass is because the reviewer was also ass. He was literally pressing the “ESC” button at the bottom left with a mouse. IMO the biggest crime of this IGN review is that the reviewer still works at IGN.
100% I will pirate this game if it has any of that always connected shit.
Its a full price purchase otherwise, the three hitman games I was happy to support given their studio position at the time but they are not getting any leeway this time.
There was an interview with Vincke right around award season 2023 where he said they already knew their next project and were expecting to beat the development time on BG3 in a world without a new eastern European war or a new pandemic. It was something like, “We think it’ll take us 3 years, so it’ll probably take 4.” I’m looking forward to hearing more in 2027.
Well the people playing melee today aren’t doing it for the 4 player all items on free for all mode. Most people who play fighting games enjoy the competitive aspect, in which the two are pretty different.
I’m not gonna lie I found he died today when I was double-checking the spelling with a quick google. I then had to check the timeline to make sure he was actually involved in the sale.
Basically selling user data from BNET didn’t work out and after the year of flops the board got antsy. Still blame Altman tho.
ign.com
Ważne