Holy fuck, this looks incredible. For context, Fat Shark have been working very hard to address the criticisms of the game at launch, and they’ve really, really listened to the community in a big way. Many concerns have been addressed already, and the two big ones left were the lack of missions (which is slowly improving, but mapmaking takes time, so I can’t be too salty on that one) and the lack of class variety. This looks like it completely addresses that last issue.
Back when the game launched I wrote a review on steam that basically said “Despite all its flaws I enjoy this game a lot and will continue to play it, but I can’t in good conscience recommend it.” Every now and I go back and ask myself if it’s time to go back and finally flip that review to a “Recommended”. Every time so far the answer has been no, not yet. This might finally be the thing that pushes it over into a yes.
I haven’t played much since launch. I liked the game, but it felt like there was still a lot missing so I figured I’d put it down and play something else. Now I’m busy with bg3 but it may be time to jump back into darktide soon.
For me the games I have enjoyed the most are Ratchet and Clank games. I’m so lucky there has been many releases with most of them being good. Longer development cycles and the mindset of releasing when ready would be better for these games too.
I haven’t played the last 3 games but I know that one very appealing idea for them that keeps players around is the newer fluid mechanics and lack of bugs on launch. This series is like the bread and butter of Sony games, you’re never feeling like it’s just a reskin of the previous game.
For me it wasn't the fire that kept drawing comparisons to Divinity. It was the writing. The opening is beat for beat Divinity tropes and it was off-putting. It took hours more gameplay and character development for that edge to wear down, though it has probably permanently shaded my first playthrough. Perhaps that opening was one of the first things written, and thus the most akin to its predecessor.
Once the game settles in, things feel less Divinity and more Faerun. The fire metaphor is apt though. Things do creep in from time to time to remind you who built this adventure. It's like a signature. I don't always like it, seeing the hand in this case is more jarring because of how sensitive I am towards the setting and gameplay. But the craft is so thoughtful otherwise, it's broken through those barriers for me.
I agree, and it comes through in the companions, too. And despite them singling out Jaheira in the article I have a hard time recognising much of her, except for the appearance. Maybe the hundred years passing is the excuse but I wish her bossy, sarcastic, witty personality was more present and recognisable.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the game and it has been monopolizing my attention but it’s still not beating the Divinity 3 allegations (though I’m only at the end of Act 2, still).
As a casual viewer of LTT this is surprising. The show seemed relatively wholesome and helpful, but obviously I missed moments to the contrary that people are pointing out now. Being an infrequent watcher, seeing threads suddenly popup that call for Linus to step back/step down are like whaaaaaat. Internet is a fast moving place.
The obsession with the fact that GN didn’t reach out for lmg’s response to the story is extremely rich given that ltt didn’t give billet labs that exact same courtesy
I mean Billet sent them a unit for review. That implies they’re expecting to be reported upon. Now, LTT half-assed the reporting and then accidentally put the prototype into their auction system, but I’d say “damning reporting” is an expected possible outcome of sending something to a reviewing org to be reviewed that doesn’t require special notice.
However they sent a 3090 GPU and a prototype cooler for that specific board, which they mounted on a 4090 board which has a potentially different layout and was not tested.
Imagine they were a small company , whose first product was the LTT screwdriver, and they had sent an early prototype to a YouTuber who complained that none of the bits he had laying around worked on that screwdriver, so no one should buy the LTT screwdriver because it just doesn’t work. When people complain that they weren’t doing the product justice by testing it with the wrong things they replied “I’m not spending money retesting a screwdriver that no one should buy because it’s useless”. Then turned around and sold the prototype at an auction. Then when people complained they said “we didn’t sell it, we auctioned it for charity, and have already sent money to replace it” having sent the email agreeing to pay seconds before saying that stupid excuse.
They did a LOT of wrong things there, a bad review is the least of the problems. For all I know the product is in fact shit, but because of their methodology, plus all that they did afterwards, I can’t trust that they would ever produce an honest review of the product. And this is a house of cards, as soon as one review can’t be trusted, no review can be trusted. Can you assure that they used proper protocol when testing other things if they can’t even use the GPU that was sent together with the cooler? And that when people point this instead of retesting they just dig themselves deeper into “we’re right”… Plus you should watch the GN video, they point a LOT of inconsistencies and errors in other videos, showing that the cooler is NOT an isolated thing.
For all I know the product is in fact shit, but because of their methodology, plus all that they did afterwards, I can’t trust that they would ever produce an honest review of the product.
I mean yeah I’m not arguing that point. Maybe calling that “half-assed” is an understatement when they were clearly showing their whole asses on that effort, but still:
Billet sent a unit to get reviewed, and the reviewers made a review. A grossly incompetent review, but a review. I don’t see why that would be worthy of special notification. Losing/selling the prototype was just a further demonstration of that incompetence.
Whereas if you’re going to do a long-form report on a group’s involvement in an event, it’s considered good form to reach out for comment.
Either way, imho the Billet story has kind of been eclipsed by the Xeets by their ex-employee about the toxic workplace.
Basically, Linus’ company is a complete trainwreck and he has no credibility on fixing it since it seems like the disastrous culture is his own fault. Sitting and saying “this is fine, I’m taking care of it” to every disaster while pushing for more and more content to the point that quality slips to legally actionable levels is piss-poor leadership.
I understand that point but my counter is that if someone sends you a product/video in private to review you have more reson to contact them about what you will say before you do than if the product/video is publicly available.
Do you think LTT should contact the companies that they do secret shopping before releasing the video? Any comments that they might have won’t change what happened on their experience, and any promises of improvement won’t prevent them from publishing the video so it’s kind of pointless.
Even if GN had contacted and they had explained what they already explained, the GN video would be the exact same with an added part for LTT’s response, which LTT is perfectly capable of doing themselves, and would do regardless of GN’s video.
I’m glad GN didn’t reach out. Linus emailed Billet Labs 2 hours after the GN video with an offer to reimburse them for the prototype, so that he could claim that GN got their facts wrong. But we have the receipts!
That was the nail in the coffin, for me. Making mistakes is fine, even big ones. I understand that Youtube is the devil, and it’s easy to fall into a trap of shoveling nonsense out onto the platform. I’m honestly sympathetic to that. If Linus said “You’re right, quality has suffered cuz we’ve been going too fast. We need to take another look at this.” I’d be completely happy.
But to lie – not just by words, but by actions – in order to cast doubt on the people who are trying to give you a reality check and get your work back on track… That’s really bad.
I did watch the response video before commenting. Did you read the forum post? He said it’s all settled, it’s just gotta go through the bean counters now. But the fact that he emailed them immediately before posting proves that he knew it was not all settled.
What if they replied “Actually, you can’t just reimburse us for that. The manufacturing process that produced it is being overhauled and we won’t be able to replace it for at least 6 months and we’ve got conferences to demo at between then and now. We need you to get it back.”
GN sticks to tech news, and I respect that that Steve sticks to his area of expertise when it comes to reporting on issues in the tech field. LTT has repeatedly shown glaring errors in their testing, and that’s what was reported on by GN.
The staff and professional issues the company faces are for an entirely different style of journalism, and I do hope someone picks up that story.
Linus has always struck me as someone who would be kinda cool to be friends with, but the worst person to be your boss. He can be arrogant, dismissive of employee ideas, and penny pinching. I’ve seen it time and time again in videos where he participates, and it’s always rubbed me the wrong way. I only hope the people who faced discrimination and burnout at LTT are in better places now and have found ways to let their obvious expertise shine.
I also hope one of these employees can summon the strength to report LMG to the relevant Canadian authorities for their blatant abuse of their employees. No matter the “opportunities” and employer offers, or the “contracts” they make employees sign, workers have rights, and their should be a reckoning when those rights are violated.
Yeah, Canada is not the country to fuck with people’s rights in. Many still do, of course, but if they actually fight back companies will usually be willing to give 5 figures once their lawyers get word of what’s happening, in hopes of avoiding the 6 or 7 figure judgement that the courts might give them.
Btw, if you want to learn about your rights, take a course meant to train HR people. It’s their job to protect the company and they need to know where the lines are to do so effectively.
Don’t wanna say I was expecting it but I was always kinda waiting for “something” to come out of ltt. A bunch of tech bros in their 30s still making penis and 69 jokes every video doesn’t seem like a good environment lmao
Yeah enough of their company culture had leaked into their videos and through some of the things Linus had said that I wasn’t really that surprised to see that thread. The power imbalance was thrown around for jokes and Linus comes off as a stingy bastard who will spend a ton of money in some places and then complain about a relatively trivial expense elsewhere. And the way he talks about it implies that he thinks everyone sees it that way.
Linus really doesn’t respond well to criticism. He’s trying to act like a sale and an auction are 2 different things? If some hardware vendor tried to feed him that excuse he’d devote a whole video to it! Hell, if someone had sold one of his screwdriver prototypes he’d probably have thrown a fit and sued (as is his right)!
He’s picking quantity of videos over quality, so stuff like this is only going to accelerate.
Ignoring everything else, because other accusations seem to have more credibility, although a charity auction is certainly a type of sale, sale has completely different connotations than charity auction when devoid of context. It's a fair issue for them to have and raise.
No it’s not. It’s not how the item got out of LTT’s hands that the issue here. It’s that LTT didn’t return a fucking prototype! Sold, lost, melted down, really doesn’t matter. If I’m making products and want to send one to LMG for a review, I’m insisting on him paying a hefty deposit first, because he clearly can’t be trusted.
I see this as a “you’re technically right, there is a legal difference; BUT the issue here is not how it was passed to someone else and not returned to the owners, but that it happened at all” type deal.
The wording doesn’t matter. Call it an auction, sale, donation, grand theft, whatever you want. But that the end of the day, a small company now no longer has access to their expensive prototype. That’s very damaging to them as a business, let alone the damage that LTT caused to Billet’s image by their haphazard review process. Billet has every right to sue for damages over this, and I personally think they should.
Seriously. This doesn’t belong here. I don’t know why PCG is wading into some youtuber controversy that seems to have only the most tenuous connection to their bailiwick.
pcgamer.com
Aktywne