LMFAO, a lot of you guys sound so fucking bitter and I don’t understand. I used a Vive years ago and it was so much fun, zero nausea the very first time I played it and I played it for hours. The tech has only gotten better and better. Stay mad. 😂
Edit: Accidentally said Rift when I actually meant the HTC Vive. It was awesome.
I wonder if this 40-70% demographic has actively tried to play it a couple times? My first experience with VR was incredibly disorienting, and yes, made me feel nauseated. But after playing for 2-3 hours across a handful of 15-20 minute sessions (passing it around a few friends for an evening) that just went away. Once the body uses it a bit and learns, even high-movement non-teleport movement games stop being an issue.
I wonder if I happen to be in that upper percent, or if the numbers in question are a matter of people who tried it once in their life and felt sick. Clearly the author has put real time into trying to move past it, but that doesn’t say anything for the study he quotes the “40-70% of players are 15 minutes” numbers from.
I played VR and had a blast. It was usually the ones that were mounted to the ceiling at a mall arcades. I could play no big deal for hours. My brother in law got a vr headset for Christmas and I tried to use it and got unbelievably sick after 20 minutes of playing it.
I played super hot, some moving zombie game, and that plank game on thw vr headsets at mall arcades with no problem moving around, twisting, and moving fast. I played a stationary puzzle game on my bil’s. I dont know what causes the sickness but it was veey bad on his unit. I womder if the suspension at the mall arcades made the difference, rather than having a free roaming headset.
Heard somewhere that it can get worse if you try to power through the nausea and sickness. Like your body remembers that it made you sick before and wants to actively avoid going through that experience again. So if you start feeling sick, especially when you first start out, stop playing.
Since you’re asking for anecdotes: my VR headset consistently made me sick following 30 min to an hour at the absolute max. I still played dozens of times for short spurts, but it never got better for me.
He’s said that way before 2020, also. Publicly. It seems that has not changed. Most in that kind of position would come to the same conclusions of buying up the competition and making money off their products. It’s cheaper, it’s easier, you already get the infrastructure and customer base, etc. What capitalist wouldn’t try to go that route?
The timing on these comments reads to me like: “I sure am sad EA made us dilute Dragon Age into a third-person action game and chase trends, now that BG3 proved CRPGs can still sell”.
Though TBF, the genre went on life support for a reason. It will be interesting to see if we get more CRPG mainstream hits going forward.
I’m loving BG3, but DA is honestly not that far off the mark. It’s missing crunchy, turn-based combat, and the sprawling story, but they probably have the tech and writing chops to pull that off, too.
I believe 2008 Bioware had the chops for it, Post-Anthem Bioware gives me such doubt. I think EA has made it impossible for them to make a game like that again.
Why did the genre go on life support? I have been missing a couch co-op game since the days of PS2, my wife and I used to love playing together. Speaking of old RPGs, anyone know if there are any plans to reboot Champions of Norath? That used to be our favorite game.
I also get confused by all these RPG prefixes, probably too old. In my day I would walk into the gamestop or Babbages and just say “got any new good RPG games” then they would point me to one of the Final Fantasy games, and then I would say “actually I mean, do you have any new hack and slash RPG games?” Then they would say “no, but you can pre-order Call of Duty” and then I would rifle through the bargain bin, and then leave. Good times.
Which means I have essentially been asking for Baldurs Gate 3 for 18 years now (Champions 2 was released in 2005, a year after BG2).
The golden age isometric RPGs (BG1 & 2, NN, Fallout, etc) were dubbed Computer RPGs, because the idea of translating a pen & paper roleplaying game to the computer was novel. But as the 2000’s marched forward and 3D graphics became an expectation - and video game budgets ballooned - simulation and writing took a backseat to visual spectacle, action gameplay, and set-pieces. Niche CRPGs became too expensive to be worth the risk, leading to KOTOR, Fallout 3, Mass Effect, etc; which would have more mass appeal.
As Larian has been showing, the ability to pack all that story and character moments, and present it with a cinematic look and feel is becoming increasingly possible (with years of hard work). Larian and Obisidian have been whetting everyone’s appetites for the CRPG format, and now BG3 seems to be reaping the rewards.
I’m not sure the article convinces me this’ll be more than a reskin of stellaris, which is my most played game of all time, but given that this is my favourite IP of all time…? Can’t say I won’t buy it on launch day.
HG just kept duct taping more crap to the game without adding any depth or integrating their crap together. It’s still an incredibly shallow game where you’ve seen all that there’s worth seeing on the first day of playing.
TL;DR They included battle passes to a game you already have to pay for monthly. People didn’t like it. They went the classic corporate route of empty phrases while including a subtle poke at the people who now boycott it, which made them like it even less (seriously, did this ever de-escalate things?).
Playing the matches is fun, since it is just Overwatch. Literally the same gameplay as Overwatch, but with 5 per team instead of 6.
In between is an assault of micro transaction manipulation bullshit that ruins the experience. PvE is hidden behind a paywall, except for the free stuff that is a retread of the seasonal PvE from Overwatch. I know this because I gave it some hours to see if it was as bad as people were saying.
People hate it because it was supposed to be an improvement but instead it was just another attempt to bleed the players dry. It might be the only game I have reviewed negatively on steam because the monetization really is that bad that it ruins the whole game.
Star citizen isn’t an example of an open beta that got stretched out. It’s an example of a scam.
A game of similar scope to star citizen is starship simulator, except that isn’t a scam and, oh look, it’s making surprisingly better progress (there still isn’t anything to actually do in it yet but it’s much further along in much shorter period of time). You can tell it isn’t a scam because people aren’t being asked to pay extra to access some more unfinished content.
It really depends on the kind of shooter and the average caffeine intake of the people playing it. Works great in Titanfall but doesn’t make sense for Battlefield.
It feels like an additional layer of mechanics that I didn't sign up for. I used it as necessary when playing Titanfall 2 but didn't care for it there either!
Good, the game needs some fresh leadership. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that on the same day they announced this, Bungie also announced that all previous season passes will soon return to a kiosk in-game and you can finish them at any time (yes like the Helldivers model). Plus, players who never got the pass before will be able to buy them for a pretty reasonable price (around $6 USD I believe).
Does this mean that sunsetted content can be played again (ie the original campaign)? If so I would mayhe consider getting back into it. Otherwise I still have no interest in returning
No, I think Forsaken (Dreaming City) is the oldest content still in the game. If you want to see the old campaign I’m sure there are playthroughs on YouTube you could watch.
Considering I payed to play those campaigns, not watch them on YouTube, I’ll just save my time. Warframe has scratched the Destiny itch for me in recent years while also respecting me as a customer
pcgamer.com
Ważne