The extreme is already a hard sell over the deck. It is barely more powerful for much larger price, and it is considerably less frame-time consistent than the deck. Buying anything less powerful is a waste.
So, do people actually play Pay Day? All I know is that it’s a game. Haven’t seen trailers, haven’t seen anyone play it on Twitch, it’s like a “fake” game that’s a joke that’s been going on for a really long time
I mean the last one was released in 2013, it’s not exactly super relevant but if you’re that unaware of it I assume you were playing habbo hotel or whatever little kids played 10 years ago.
Holy shitballs. It feels like just yesterday we were firing up payday 2 on release day with a bunch of friends and risking having a seizure at any moment on the “start heist” page.
I figured yeah payday 2 was like 5 years ago, time for a new one. 10 fucking years… i need a drink!
Oh man, I feel old now. It was so fun when it came out. I remember the first time I solo stealthwd the nightclub. I kinda got burnt out when it went more absurd. Like after John wick.
Some people, like me, are probably just waiting to see what happens. Payday 2 was awesome, but after release it got microtransactioned and piecemeal DLC'd to high fucking heaven. I don't care if the beta is good, I want to see what it'll become before I get invested.
I’ll be honest, I had never even heard the name. Neither of the company, nor of any of their products. Still sucks for the employees of course, the current downturn is huge and as it accelerates and more and more investors pull out, the money the C-suites care about disappears and they panic even more about their bonuses so they fire and shutter even harder.
The made-up money that is the stock market can sadly have very real effects on employees’ livelihoods. :( But of course not on the CEOs who happily cash their 6-/7-digit base salary and then just fuck off to the next company they can drive into the ground.
The thing about video games is that they’re a multivariate equation. Fun is a variable, and so is realism. Depending on how much realism there already is, and the nature of it, adding more can also increase the fun but it can also take away from the fun. There’s a reason that even the hardcore simmers who do things like drive pretend trucks across Europe in real time or run pretend air traffic control at pretend airports pay to pretend to do those things instead of getting paid to do them for real.
Yeah, fun should always come before realism. If you can do fun and realism then do both otherwise do fun. Unfortunately realismcucks are a very loud minority.
The author’s arguing that BG3 makes Starfield look like a shallow RPG by comparison. Their broader point is that Starfield is behind the times compared to most RPGs released in the last couple decades, even compared to something like Fallout 3.
It's even better when Bethesda themselves describes Starfield as the "next-generation of RPGs". It's the same type of Bethesda game that I've been playing for 15+ years just with a new coat of paint. If this is the next-generation, then the future has no ambition whatsoever.
The game seems (to me) to essentially be FPS, Sci-Fi Skyrim, with some space fight minigames. There’s a lot of stuff you can do, but the main storyline is pretty short, the AI sucks, and most of the appeal is side content and looks.
That’s what I expect from Bethesda, and that’s what they delivered. It’s only really “next gen” in the procedural generation department, so it’s basically a regular Bethesda game, with a little bit of experimentation thrown in. That’s what Bethesda delivers, and they deliver pretty consistently.
I’m guessing there will be a ton of cool mods in the next few years for a deeper story, interesting space combat, etc.
For sure. That’s just how articles have to be titled to get clicks unfortunately. It can be annoying, but it helps keep journalism alive, so you take the good with the bad.
I had been planning to play as a bard (I’m normally a rogue in RPGs, but we’ve got one in the party), then watched part of a Let’s Play where someone did, and the sight of the bard pulling out a violin in the middle of a battle was so ridiculous I immediately dismissed the idea because I knew I went be able to take my character seriously 🤣
I just finished downloading it and am playing as a ranger, and I’m not quite far into it enough to see how I like it, but I picked it because another Let’s Play I watched (I watched the first hour of several to see what it was like before I decided to get it) played as a ranger and it seemed interesting.
Maybe next playthrough I’ll give bard a go, just because I know they’re a good class.
Thing with bard is you do not get a bard companion at least in the beginning (I have only played so far into it). You get a cleric, thief, fighter, and wizard pretty early. Granted you can respec anyone to whatever you want but bardic inspiration combined with guidance from the cleric is pretty nice for the various non combat rolls and then it gives you two sources of healing word and bardic inspiration is pretty nice in combat as well. The biggest annoyance factor is the bard can't inspire themselves.
Two roll buffs and healing word is tempting. Good to know you get a thief early, although there’s also the question of whether to do one of the origin characters or not…
I couldn't get in to this game, myself. Granted, due to that, I've only played about an hour of it but this game felt much more like a Visual Novel than an RPG, to me. Stats seemed to have no bearing on anything other than what the narrative decided they have a bearing on. It was therefore, very difficult to figure out who my character was. Otherwise, you're just clicking on things and reading reams of text.
I get that they were trying to go for a more tabletop version of an RPG but without a DM, I find that near impossible to translate 1:1. I would have preferred a more Baldur's Gate approach to the game.
It’s more akin to Planescape: Torment than something like Baldur’s Gate. The game is dense with writing and dialogue, and the majority of it is derived from your stats. Granted, there are a couple of skill checks that you can’t fail due to being story important, but it’s only those two specific instances - everything else is heavily stat-based. There’s also ideologies that the game tracks, so you can be an egotistic superstar cop, a doomsaying apocalypse cop, a normal cop, or even a super-political cop that becomes more drilled down if you want to engage in the fascist, communist, moderate, and/or liberal aspects of the game - and the game does respond to that, including noting how you can be both a communist and a fascist, or some other combination of ideologies.
To help put it in perspective, your stats are, quite literally, your character’s brain. Having low stats doesn’t really impact the game, but you also can become sort of neurotic with high stats - which does have its upsides and downsides (except Encyclopedia, it will drown you in world-building exposition that doesn’t really help and drags out conversations at the higher levels). It’s much more “role-playing” and less “game”.
Stormlight Archive could be turned into such a good Dynasty Warriors style game.
Story-mode is literally just playing differing characters in each of the fights of the story, you could do at least 10-12 fights.
Campaign mode could be picking one of the 10 warcamps, each with different starting strengths, and racing, done via a base building / management interspersed with combat levels, to claim the most wealth.
@Pheonixdown@alyaza I had alot of fun doing a bares bones prototype of gravity lashing in 2d. Storm light is just ripe for all sorts of video game adaptations.
pcgamer.com
Ważne