I bought the PSVR1 at launch back in 2016, excited to finally BE in a virtual world. And for some games, I was absolutely blown away by the immersion. Skyrim, Dirt and RE were awesome in VR. Especially Skyrim was everything I was looking for.
I waited and hoped for more true games but all that kept coming was mostly short ‘experiences’ that felt like early 2000s shovelware, just in VR.
The best VR games were not Sony games but mostly third party games remade for VR.
When the PSVR2 came out, I decided to wait and see if Sony had learned their lessons and had at least many deals with third party studios to remake existing games in VR.
For now, it does not look that way, and a few exclusive tech demo games and some years-old PC ported games just do not justify buying a PSVR2.
The discourse here is disappointing considering this isn’t reddit and you expect people to be smarter. Go download and play it right now if you need to form an opinion, because the language you’re all using clearly indicates you haven’t.
Play it so you can give it its valid criticism instead of parroting an internet lynch mob from 10 years ago.
See, the problem is that’s not a criticism if you play it. It’s playable now so why slap a 1.0 label on it until it’s ready. Real criticism would be something like ‘updates are too slow’, ‘shop weapons are way too expensive’, ‘it takes way too long to get to my ship’, ‘server wipes are too extreme and I should be able to keep expensive ships’, ‘basic mechanics are not maintained and bug free enough between feature updates’ <- all criticism mine by the way.
But games journalists are the most ethical and truthful of all journalists and definitely haven’t been misrepresenting this project to drum up drama and clicks for years. It’s just a coincidence that Star Citizen drama makes their shareholders richer.
No need for an informed opinion here, I will keep the opinion The Escapist and the Reddit Hive Mind told me to have, they’re never wrong. Derek Smart? More like Derek Genius.
However, there is still no release date or even release window for Star Citizen 1.0. CIG will share the roadmap later this year.
12 years in and the update is that a later update will announce when they may, or may not, release the game.
This is, and always has been, the issue regarding this game. Even putting aside the budget they’ve burned through to date (which is impressively massive), the fact that they are still unsure of when they think the game is done is mind-boggling.
Years ago, I thought I was being relatively pessimistic that the game may take until 2023-2024 to release. And here we are in 2024 with the “release date will be announced later” updates still coming.
I mean, it was no secret that the game is an ongoing project with ‘it’s ready when it’s ready’ as the goal. Like literally every other public alpha. So I guess people like me will continue enjoying games like SC, DayZ, Arma, Valheim, Zomboid, 7dtd, and countless others just like it while people like you can keep getting mad on the internet. For this game in particular I got far more enjoyment than I deserved for spending $50 I don’t know how people can justify being so lame and self-righteous.
In a blog post, CIG chief Chris Roberts said 2024 will see the launch of Star Citizen Alpha 4.0 (yes, Star Citizen is still in alpha) […] However, there is still no release date or even release window for Star Citizen 1.0. CIG will share the roadmap later this year.
Lol. I wish I, too, was able to convince people to give me 600 million dollars to do fuck all for 12 years.
They didn’t do fuck all! They have an extremely unstable alpha of one game mechanic! They just need another few hundred million to get everything else done.
Oh and there’s yet another engine upgrade they’re going to do, and then implement this cool technology over here, and VR, and cryptocurrency, and AI…
It is a bit more involved than your typical battlefront match, but the reward is a Star Wars game we could have only dreamed of in the past. I can’t overstate how good of a mod this is.
Another game launch, another broken game. How hard is it to just release a game that works? This is a port as well - pretty much their entire job with this was fixing issues and optimisation
I want to blame the company but from their point of view this business model works so I understand why it keeps happening.
Steam refunds are great for situations like these but I doubt the average casual knows how easy it is. The other platforms are much stricter on refunds.
There’s also the culture shift of gamers defending broken releases with “at least they fixed it!” Or “they released a roadmap for future fixes” that encourages early releases.
Harder than delivering shit and cashing in just as much. The grab&run simply is more profitable than actually putting in the work - especially since there seem to be no palpable negative consequences.
Weren’t there a bunch of mods for the original releases that upgraded textures, added maps and factions and all that? Why would anyone buy these rereleases instead?
Sear the name Aspyr into your mind, and look out for them when they redo old star wars games like this. An underwhelming experience is what I've come to expect from their attempts at Jedi Outcast/Academy and Republic Commando on Switch.
The best you can expect from them is bare minimum passably running games, sort of the antithesis to Night Dive
Sear the name Embracer into your mind. This is what’s going to happen with any studio owned by them. This is what ruthlessly taking a blowtorch to all of your studios headcounts gets you.
Generally speaking, game devs never like putting out a bad product. It’s a creative industry, and one that people go into because they love games (otherwise they’d be working in fintech where the pay is much better). I guarantee it was Embracer who made the call to launch this product in its current broken state, and probably also Embracer who put so little money aside for server infrastructure.
For those wondering if this is under exaggerated, it’s not. Now my experience is on the Switch.
This issues I saw in my time before I got refunded was as follow. Texture Flickering and Shadow Flickering (hard to see as a screen shot so this is the worse I saw)
Well I’m glad you laying it out for us, I’ve got a better idea what I’m dealing with. And it really does miff me on how unnecessarily wasteful the game is with storage
Ditto, I sadly didn’t go online so no comment there. Well I mean I tried once and I couldn’t connect so I just jumped into instant action. But yeah the storage requirements are a bit unrealistic on Switch. I don’t think you can even play it on OG switch without a Micro SD Card.
But you’re actually probably at least partly right. I’m sure they’ve done at least some upscaling and stored at a higher res which may actually take up more space.
The controls are “fine” for the most part. If you were on an Xbox controller it would work. Space Battles in Battlefront II are an improvement, but the same treatment was never made to Battlefront 1. If I had to complain about anything, it’s that the auto aim needs to be more sensitive and when you blast an enemy it auto locks on them like the console games. Mouse and keyboard this would be annoying but on controller it’s necessary.
Looking at the 34GB install, I’m guessing it’s some kind of massive emulation layer; it’s scary to say but I feel like we’ve just run out of game developers that can genuinely code against the machine itself to optimize install size and performance.
When you look back on the meager specs of old consoles and what they got running there, it now feels more and more impressive.
From what I read on Steam: Three servers, 64 players max each. Embarrassingly miniscule for one of the best selling, best received Star Wars games of its time, if not of all time. You’d expect more than 192 people would buy your game on launch, especially something this big.
Dude, imagine you buy a brand new car for a 5 person family and then as you arrive to drive it off the lot you find out its only got the two front seats… Launches like this are completely unacceptable.
…but not before launch? The game launched and they weren’t there? So they released a game and there were only three servers available? Hours later they added a bunch of servers? AFTER LAUNCH? Is there another way I can phrase this so you realise how stupid it is that you’re defending it?
Game has online problems for the first few hours after launch. This has never happened before in the history of video games. 🙄
Wasn’t Helldivers 2 almost impossible to play for the first month? Yet there wasn’t much anger about that. This has a problem for a few hours and it’s the worst thing that has ever happened. 😂
I recall there being plenty of talk about Helldivers servers. About a month’s worth. Meanwhile I haven’t seen a single person say this is the worst thing that’s ever happened or that it’s never happened before with other games, just that releasing a multiplayer game and only having three servers available is absurd. That and the apparently poor port at least on Switch detailed in another comment.
Believe it or not, shit happening before doesn’t change anything. Shit’s still shit. And we all already know the only actual obstacle to ensuring a smooth multiplayer launch (assuming a competently made game, of course) is paying for enough servers to handle the initial surge. They just prefer not to spend that money and present a poor experience to customers who buy the game at launch instead, because fuck them right.
I don’t own the game. It’s not a problem for me at all. It’s a principle, and a reflection of a publisher’s greed and disrespect towards its customers.
Do you know that people bought the game, downloaded it, installed it, sat to play it, and couldn’t because the publisher didn’t want to pay for the required servers for their most loyal customers to do so?
Sure, it’s good that there are servers now, but that’s the minimum I expect and I expect them there at launch. You know, so people who have paid money to play their game actually can. Far be it for me to think an online multiplayer game should have servers to play online multiplayer in when it’s available to buy.
Believe it or not it’s possible to gather information about things without directly experiencing it and I tend to do this with new games. I also already have the originals on steam.
Yes and it’s a multiplayer classic that they couldn’t play multiplayer in. It doesn’t ruin the game, it didn’t destroy the experience permanently, it’s not the end of the world, but it’s shit and only happened because of the publisher’s greed. No clue why you feel the need to defend it really.
[Edit] I also haven’t said a single word that even implies I’m an expert on it. I mentioned bugginess that I said I saw in a comment and talked about servers being unavailable. What level of star wars battlefront expert do you think I need to be to discuss specific star wars battlefront things like…bugs and servers?
But all people have said is that it’s buggy on switch (with screenshot proof) and that there weren’t enough servers for hours after launch. Is it you that’s overblowing it?
Not *A * multiplayer game. A multiplayer STAR WARS game. And not just any multiplayer Star Wars game - no, the single best received Star Wars game of its kind in the last two decades, coupled with its prequel… And they estimated around 200 people to play it at launch.
Night Dive should've been given some of these old Lucas Arts SW games. These were my childhood, and I've watched as Aspyr has been assigned game after game of my childhood to be released on modern platforms, and time and time again they either don't give enough of a shit to do anything more than get them running (sometimes barely that, Republic Commando runs worse on a switch than an original Xbox), or they're not given the proper time or financial budget to pull it off.
ign.com
Gorące