I hope the cat in the movie will look more natural than the one in the game.
In the game, the animation looks great. I’m sure they took a lot of effort with the motion capture.
But there is something weird about the cat’s face. It just doesn’t look like a cat, no realistically, not cartoonish either. Perhaps some adjustment in the facial modelling will help.
[Baldur’s Gate 3] will also be out on Xbox before the end of 2023. (…) “It’s 2023. And 2023 is narrowing, so it’s already pretty precise in my book. Between September and November… So, as fast as we can honestly,” Vincke said.
Is this a single player game? Then cool, 100%, love it. Co-op? Probably fine, but I’d have some implementation questions.
Pvp? I ate the biggest backlash I’ve had on the Internet on another forum when I argued that players shouldn’t be able to unilaterally make the game easier for just themselves in a competitive game, and I’m still mad about it.
That’s probably fine. Like if you want to play with triple iframes you can play with other people that have triple iframes (or who said they’re ok with that). I just don’t think you should be able to adjust your iframes whenever you want. Like, not in the middle of a match you’re losing.
I don’t know how to solve match making if you have a lot of those settings. Like if you can change iframes, parry frames, max health, max stamina, max incoming damage, min outgoing damage, and so on, that’s an explosive set of variables. You’d be lucky to find someone with your exact settings. Which is maybe fine? Maybe most people would use the defaults.
But the last time I had this conversation, some guy was adamant he should be able to play with me even if he has his settings tweaked to be nigh indestructible.
When did games go from being something fun to do, to people getting so serious about them that they would rather fuck over a bunch of disabled people than lose a game?
Whenever I play competitive games I see people raging in the comments like every game, and it's usually people who aren't doing very good that round because they want to blame everyone else for losing. Idk why y'all are paying $60+ just to be angry the entire time. Fuck around and have fun, it's not that serious.
It's so bad you're STILL mad about a hypothetical situation that doesn't even exist. Spiderman 2 is single player. If it was competitive, and disabled people being able to play ruins your life sooo much, then don't play it. Crisis averted.
Yes, I do get upset when people act like disabled people needing accommodations is ruining their life. For obvious reasons. Disabled people had no accommodations in games for literal decades and suddenly able bodied people act like it's the end of the world when they start getting introduced. The difference is that some disabled people literally cannot play when you have a choice. And ranting, on multiple forums, about how accommodations will ruin your hypothetical competitive game that doesn't even exist yet!
And games are not the only scenario, I see a similar attitude in every instance where disabled people are granted accomodations.
You want accomodations to not exist in certain scenarios. Your comment was clear.
You’re not engaging with what I’m actually saying. I’m not saying accomodations are ruining my life.
It feels to me like what you’re saying is that “Accommodations” has an unbound scope. Anything and everything can be changed in the name of accommodations. Double your health in street fighter? Fine. See the other players hands in Poker. Sure. Turn on slow-mo in Quake9? Well okay.
And any of those things might be fine and fun if everyone playing agrees. Maybe you’re new at poker and I want to show one of my cards as a boost to you, the rookie. But for you to walk into a game and be like “yo I need to see your cards to play” seems egregious.
Maybe that’s not what you meant.
Maybe for you this is a “for me it was Tuesday.” You’ve possibly spent your whole life arguing with assholes like me who can just take their presumably abled asses and just walk away when it’s no longer interesting to them. I’m sorry for your struggles and injustices. You don’t really owe me anything.
I'm not sure what you're on about but he wasn't complaining about Spider-Man 2. He even said if a game is 1P, then he's fine with any settings a player wants.
His complaint was about competitive games and I think it's a fair complaint (albeit a bit off topic) I don't think it's in your (or anyone else's) purview to tell others what games are or aren't about nor how seriously they should take their games.
We have entire competitive (and, imo, friendly) communities centered around competition and the notion that the rules are the same for everyone.
You could give bullet time to one player while the other moves and controls slowly. Or you could give one player bigger iframes to sort of approximate it.
Like, for one player they’re invulnerable for a full two seconds after pushing dodge, but the other player is only invulnerable for a quarter second.
Lots of ways to try
But as someone else in this thread said, this was kind of me going off topic. Slightly related but not exactly what the article was about.
Don’t make me point to the sign with people standing on boxes in front of a fence.
This should be very easily solved with matchmaking lobby settings.
Anyway, most accessibility settings are either something every competitive player should be using anyway (reasonable color contrast settings, HUD tweaks for clarity) or things that only people who need them despately would ever use (remapping all buttons to be able to play using only a stick in the players mouth, because they have no hands).
This seems to me like a total non-issue. And in the very few cases it is, the ranked lobbies can just diable that setting.
The backlash was probably because for you and I a harmed pvp experience is a “could happen” while for a bunch of gamers the lack of accessibility is a daily undeniable part of their reality. For some people, games are a critical sanity-saving retreat from the rest of their life. Let’s let them have their tweaks outside of ranked play.
I don’t have problems with control changes, subtitles, HUD stuff, all the things that are typically considered accessibility. I reject the idea that any arbitrary piece of a multiplayer game can be unilaterally changed in the name of accessibility. Which is maybe not a take any reasonable person has., but it’s one I’ve encountered.
But your last paragraph is probably right in that for them it was an emotionally charged “every day I deal with this bullshit” and I was coming off as “yeah but like what if i’m mildly inconvenienced one day?”.
Do you guys think these companies will retroactively raise game prices for older titles?
There’s a couple of Nintendo games that never go on sale that I’ve been waiting on. I have a gift card, so I’m thinking maybe I should snag em now before things get stupid expensive
I don’t think they’ll do that for already-released games, but I wouldn’t put the big 3 (Sony, MS, Nintendon’t) from doing the barest ‘remasters’, and replacing their digital versions of those games with the ‘remasters’.
Ahh, that’s something I didn’t consider. EA did that recently with the Sims 1&2. Something like that at least. I hate that. At the very least, both options should be available.
In the case with the Sims, they didn’t include regional variants of the game, and they also were missing an ikea dlc due to licensing
It’s sad to see so much hate. I wasn’t reading anything about the patch when it came out and I was digging it, then I checked out reddit and it was all negative. I think at least some of it is just from the nerf patch numbers and not how it actually plays. GGG has a lot of credit with me based on how they’ve run poe1 so that might just be my own bias. They’ll turn it around though, and I’m happy to play through the early access ups and downs.
Last I heard they cancelled work on the next sims, doubled down on “improving the health” of The Sims 4 with improvements instead. Truly transformed into a GaaS, being 10+ years old.
Ah, didn’t know that. I thought I’d seen a teaser or something for a new game years ago but didn’t know if it was true as I hadn’t seen anything new about it in ages.
While it’s not a game I’d play, they should just make a new game I agree.
To be fair, their predatory DLC model for Sims 4 means that their primary customer base has hundreds of dollars invested. Abandoning it at this point might piss a ton of them off. It’s also worth considering that a lot of their users aren’t normal gamers. They typically have basic devices that aren’t really geared towards gaming, so a newer game that’s more demanding might further alienate their base.
A million sales is a lot, but it’s nothing compared to over 85 million copies sold that Sims 4 has achieved.
It sold almost 470,000 copies on PC in its first week 11 years ago. The number of PC gamers has dramatically increased since then, so comparing launch numbers between now and then isn’t really an apt comparison.
If you can’t fathom why I compare a game’s total sales to its competing newcomer, maybe you’re missing the whole point of the specific comment thread I responded to. If you want more recent numbers for a better comparison , EA claims they sold an additional 15 million copies in 2024 alone.
The main point is, I do not think EA is sweating quite yet. They’re a shitty, massive corporation and I’m sure they’ll pump out a sequel if they determine the newcomer is actively taking large enough chunks of their player base.
Small correction - they said they *gained *15 million players, not that they *sold *15 million new copies - the Sims 4 base game is free to play. Also, there was some recent backlash around how Inzoi handles LGBTQ characters and EA seemingly capitalized on that by releasing a big LGBTQ update for free, months ahead of pride month. So, they might be sweating it a little. But, Sims is on a whole other level culturally than a lot of games, it’s got a lot of players that play only the Sims franchise, and it’s been doing well enough to keep a steady stream of DLC coming out for years now.
Not to mention it would be a buggy mess, geared towards on-line only content and predatory gacha mechanics. Remember that abortion that was the last SimCity ? It pretty much gave Cities: Skylines a permission to print money.
Which is really unfortunate because The Sims 4 was my least favorite of the franchise. Probably only played it for about 20 hours over the years while I have hundreds in 2 and 3.
It was my favorite for artstyle/graphics, but I was not pleased when I tried to stir up drama by kissing a Sim’s partner in the same room. That would have gotten the partner racing over to slap someone, an argument, and a Furious status in The Sims 2. In The Sims 4, they just didn’t notice, no consequences.
ign.com
Ważne