Is there a way to play without having to give wine/beer to your colonists?
I bought this game day 1 cause I LOVE the concept, but as a personal rule I stay away from all things alcohol. Even the virtual concept of handing out beer felt awful. Had to drop the game eventually.
If anyone knows wether its possible to win a round without touching the virtual drink, please let me know. Good town building games are so damn rare :(
It’s possible to win a round without producing any. You might get some as a random drop. Alcohol and it’s production buildings will also pop up as a takable option and by not taking it ever the game will be harder. Meaning the game will punish you by being harder for ignoring it. You can also forbid your colonists from drinking it except in some very rare scenarios where you could just abandon a run/town. So basically you can avoid it but it’s always gonna be in your face. Feel free to ask if you want more info :)
I usually don’t advertise my personal aversion to alcohol specifically because I’m not interested in getting backlash for it like you did. It would be understandable backlash if you were being judgmental about those who do drink, but you were not doing that, so it just feels plain bad to see that people downvoted you for your innocent question. I like to keep it out of my life too, and I do the same in games when I can, so you’re not alone.
The article was incredibly light on specifics. What were the hateful / threatening messages? Why would anyone have a problem with helping developers find new jobs? Why were those developers fired in the first place?
The “Go woke, go broke” man babies who believes that failed games were because of politics™, and any attempt to help those people is a act of aggression.
Because the term means nothing, really. It’s just a vehicle for hateful rhetoric, incorrectly applied to everything that they don’t like. Yet half the things they like would be considered “woke” by their standards if they were released today.
I will not pay 15-ish bucks for decade old games that I already purchased long time ago at release. Also not with another buck discount off. Definitely not since they are Blizzard games and these days that studio is not worth supporting anymore.
Good initiative from GOG, but this feels like wasted money to me. Warcraft 1 is definitely a hard sell because of how terrible playing it will feel. Or did they change that in the Remaster? You used to be able to only control one unit at a time. In Warcraft 2 they upped it to 9 units? Or am I off and it was 9 units in 1 and already more in 2?
If you already purchased it a long time ago, and you can still get that copy working, then cool. But having a DRM-free copy designed to work with modern systems is very appealing. Buying DRM-free shows them where customers want to purchase their games. There are plenty of decades-old games worth more than $7.50 each.
The good thing is that thanks to how GOG works, as long as some pirate purchases a copy, they will always be able to keep a current update available to the pirate community.
Yeah, I said I will not. I didn’t say no one should. I think it is great that GOG preserves them but the price is still to high for something from a scumbag company.
How does it work with the money GOG is charging, does Blizzard see anything of that? If not, then nice, makes it more worth to me to pay so GOG gets more funding.
If Blizzard does get a cut then GOG should give a rather hefty discount as a final “fuck you” to Blizzard. Because that’s all they deserve.
you could group multiple in W1. you could only build buildings adjacent to your road though, I remember making a road right to the enemy and putting the barracks in their camp lol
He should make a meta verse. I still won’t buy it, but having 2 of them completely fall flat because a billionaire thought they knew what entertainment was would almost be as funny as that time Sony re-released Morbius in theaters.
Obviously that steam guy was probably coming from a place of bad faith, but the response is maybe imperfect no? This would look pretty bad if the roles were reversed I think. (genuine question I am hoping I am told why this may not be the case; I have nowhere else to ask)
Yeah the history of oppression is definitely reason to dislike those that support it, but it seems ill-fitting to have this affect all people who identify as straight no? (Not just cis straight people who don’t support that oppression but also trans straight people and other exceptions, as another commenter pointed out)
It’s okay to take context into account and not just look at it as a math problem. Targeting a minority isn’t the same as doing it to people who make up 90% of society but are whiny.
I totally agree that an unacceptable proportion of straight people are whiny about any manner of minority representation, but doesn’t this also affect straight people who are normal about this? Maybe it’d be more fitting to give a demeaning title to homophobes, eg. the steam complainer, but provide regular title to everyone else somehow? Thanks for taking the time!
I mean, are straight people who are normal about it clamoring for the title to begin with? This seems like a problem invented basically entirely by the whiners. You could just as easily say it affects gay people who want an ironic title, or straight trans people, but for obvious reasons the whiners don’t really care about that.
All that said I have no idea what the price tag means in terms of gameplay time to acquire it. If it’s unachievable without 10 hours of grinding or something that’s a little mean, but not enough that I really care.
I haven’t played the game for very long, but from what I’ve seen it would take a few hours to get to the point that you can just get a thousand bucks and blow them on a title, but it’s entirely doable. You would have to focus on upgrades anyways to start with just to get a proper income up and running, and then once you can fish with greater speed and with a greater success rate it should be fairly trivial.
Yeah a title in some fishing game definitely seems like a really strange thing to be upset about (and yeah you’re totally right that this doesn’t just affect cis straight people). I’m just saying that the presence of only that title for people who would like a regular version or don’t care about titles and just see it in passing might feel unwelcome through no fault of their own y’know? (Though obviously feeling unwelcome would be a little ironic)
I’m just saying that the presence of only that title for people who would like a regular version or don’t care about titles and just see it in passing might feel unwelcome through no fault of their own y’know?
I completely agree with this. For example, they don’t currently have a gender fluid title. Most gender fluid folks may not be clamoring for them to add the title but if they joined the game and saw that the gender fluid tag was harder to obtain for no discernible reason, was in air quotes, and had the description “mhm” I think they would feel pretty unwelcome. Also - a lot of people won’t know the context that there were people complaining about the lack of the title.
I’m sort of the opposite. Give characters sexualities! Make them people! Give them criteria by which they will or won’t find my character attractive! I feel gross when every NPC is pansexual and aggressively attracted to the main character for no reason. Then again, I’m acespec, so.
If it were me, I’d do something like not really focus on what their actual “real” sexuality is unless it is somehow relevant to the plot. Then if it is so something like make them a 1 or a 5 on the Kinsey scale instead of a 0 or a 6.
I don’t think games should be required to do, I’m not trying to force some sort of universal bi/pan agenda. I’m just saying it personally annoys me when I am locked out of pursuing a character just because of the gender I happen to be playing as because I typically don’t play games multiple times. It also annoys me when games don’t allow you to pursue all characters. Like in BG3, as far as I know, all characters are bi/pan but not all are poly. The game forced me to pick between Astarion and Karlach, for example. I put 100 hours or so into the game before I quit. I’m not willing to put over 100 more hours into it just to see what would’ve been different. It’s just a waste of my time.
An alternative approach is only having “sex scene” type content gated behind gender, but everything else can still be seen by friends. E.g., anything a character would eventually tell a lover they still tell close friends. Which is still sort of annoying but not really as bad because you can easily just look up a sex scene, but experiencing things like dialogue and special quests in game isn’t comparable to looking it up on YouTube.
I understand your perspective but I guess I just fundamentally disagree. I’d be annoyed, in the same vein as you, if every character was poly (unless they were actually poly and they had other lovers and referenced your other lovers and it was genuinely part of their identity) or if a relationship with them wasn’t different from a close friendship, besides having sex (because sex isn’t the only thing separating a close friendship from a relationship).
I guess, the way I approach the kind of game that we’re both talking about is just different. I’m not interested in exploring 100% of all the content possible, but rather having a rich experience in the content that I do explore. I’ll take an authentically written gay man and an authentically written straight girl who both won’t explore a relationship with me, over the opportunity to have more content that’s shallower. But yeah, again, thats just a different approach we both have to games.
I’m not interested in exploring 100% of content either, but I hate when games artificially block content off. For narrative reasons, I don’t care. I don’t mind the idea of mutually exclusive companions based on choices in game. But something as minor as gender at character creation? Come on now!
Obviously that steam guy was probably coming from a place of bad faith
The Steam forums actively encourage this kind of bad faith behavior:
when a post gets a new reply it’s moved to the top of the forums. So as long as people are engaging with a post, even if it’s just to make fun of a bigot, it keeps getting pushed back to the top.
Users can “award” posts for various things (helpfull, cool, funny, etc) and users have taken to giving ‘Clown’ awards as a way of making fun of posts. Whenever one of your posts gets an award, you are given Steampoints you can use in the Steam cosmetics store.
This results in every game having bad faith posts “complaining” about wokeness so that people will make fun of them with Clown awards as a way to farm Steampoints. The developer bringing attention to it just helps them get more.
I understand that half of the world is currently healing psychological trauma from the US election results but Atlus has been commenting on politics in their games for much longer.
Pcgamer sure is putting a lot of words and intentions onto people.
Edit: I have now read Firewalks wiki and I’m starting to see a picture. Just seeing the words “Sony”, “Bungie” and “Activision” repeated everywhere does kinda give an impression of what the hopes for the game were.
Marty Stratton of id Software tries to throw Mick Gordon and his entire music production career in front of a bus over the Doom Eternal OST issues:www.reddit.com/r/…/doom_eternal_ost_open_letter/
The money is in the users not selling the hardware. As long as Playstation has hundreds of million daily users they will continue to make insane profit. The people will move up a generation eventually.
Focusing on PC more than ever isn’t exactly a high bar. Consoles (maybe not xbox) are still doing extremely well and consoles are more popular than PC by quite a big margin. I expect Sony and Nintendo to continue to grow their userbase even if the sales on the latest platform drop a bit.
consoles are more popular than PC by quite a big margin.
How do you measure this? Steam alone has 130 to 150 million active users, more than Switch customers at a whole. And that does not even include some of the most popular PC games at all. I also expect PC user base to grow, it has more potential than consoles.
So yes, its a big deal for companies like Sony to open up this big to PC and to be that successful. They don’t even need to sell a console to sell games. Off course consoles will remain popular and for good reason. But most popular games are mulitsystem games and not specific to consoles anyway. In my opinion it is remarkable how much Sony focuses on PC now. I hope they keep doing it; its only beneficial for the players, the publishers and for Sony.
The stats I could find compared pc and current and last gen consoles so ps4 and ps5 era and the split was basically 50/50. But if you think about it that’s not a fair comparison because pc has people who running on hardware worse than a ps3.
I mostly take issue with the smug tone of the article acting like it’s over for consoles just because they didn’t meet expectations and decided to bring some games to pc. Consoles are still extremely popular and far more powerful than the average pc according to steam hardware survey. They will still be around and successful no doubt about it.
that’s not a fair comparison because pc has people who running on hardware worse than a ps3.
This is a benefit of using PC, not a downside. Unlike consoles, you aren’t forced to upgrade every few years and you actually have the ability to change graphics settings. Even if you want to upgrade your PC, you don’t need to get an entirely new build.
That’s also missing the fact that plenty of people don’t need or want to play the latest AAA title.
I mostly take issue with the smug tone of the article acting like it’s over for consoles just because they didn’t meet expectations and decided to bring some games to pc. Consoles are still extremely popular and far more powerful than the average pc according to steam hardware survey. They will still be around and successful no doubt about it.
I agree with you here. These articles are stupid telling people it would be over for consoles. It’s just clickbait or they are uninformed. Maybe besides your point that the “average pc” is that weak as you say. Most are at a level of PS4 or stronger. But that is not all you need to compare if you want to an analysis. This topic is extremely complicated. You can’t just take the average. There are far more PC users than console players. Its like taking the Game Boy into account and saying that the average game consoles is weak. That’s not the full story.
In example most monthly active users on consoles play games that could be played on a potato PC or last gen consoles too and these people probably do not buy newest games. Similar to the situation on PC.
Yea because ps4 is still getting all the releases and ps5 is really expensive. I have friends who still play on ps4 and I went to their house and they’re playing games on like 20fps having a blast. It was kinda wholesome I just wish they weren’t getting scammed by Sony and chose pc so they could play games that actually run on their hardware.
I wonder what games would take up that much space for save files. I mean if a game is autosaving frequently sure but I feel like you’d need a decent amount of them
I got this email a few days ago. It’s definitely CP2077. Their example even shows like 5 titles in a sample account and that game is far and away using the most space. As to why, I have no idea.
Also to answer the “how do you know”, it’s the only GOG game I play that has a decent amount of playtime. Everything else is in the single digits. I assume lots of others are in a similar situation.
E: and the pedestrian, but I finished that in one sitting, and it’s in double digits because I let others try it out. I think there are a whopping 2 saves for that game for me.
It’s easier to make small saves for games like The Pedestrian, because essentially all you have to track is which puzzles you’ve solved.
Whereas in an RPG with a persistent world like Cyberpunk or Skyrim, you have to save the state of every single object and mechanic the player has interacted with during their run, and there are usually a whole lot of those.
If the cause of this is because of Cyberpunk then that’s ridiculous. It’d be like Steam deleting cloud saves because someone’s Half Life save file got too big… It’s their own game, marketplace and ecosystem.
Yeah, back when the game came out, I made a point to buy it on GOG so that they would get all the money for their game. I have only regretted that decision since.
As everyone knows, the game was an unfinished mess at launch, so after ~20h of play I put it down to wait for them to finish it. In the meantime, I have switched all my gaming to Linux, but GOG (the platform that prides itself on open access to gaming) still doesn’t support Linux, so I have to jump through hoops to get the game running (vs just clicking Play if I had a steam copy). Which was a main reason I didn’t double down on my GOG purchase and buy the expansion. Now that the game is in better shape, as soon as I can reliably play my GOG copy on Linux I want to go back and play my save. But now they’re threatening to delete it? Just…wild.
I don’t like how dependent PC gaming is on valve, but…for the time being I’m grateful that they seem to pretty consistently just make a good gaming experience for the players.
The Fallout fandom can be divided into two camps, Fallout fans and Bethesda fans. I don’t like Bethesda Fallout and from the little I watched of the show it wasn’t anything for me. 5/10 at best. I don’t care about ”the lore” or any discrepancies, I just thought it wasn’t very good.
pcgamer.com
Ważne