All other game developers in the history of games have understood the concept of making the lowest-powered device you’re launching on the baseline for development. We’ve dealt with crippled titles on more powerful consoles for ages, I’m sure Larian’ll figure it out for their next game.
Why should they compromise because Microsoft demanded feature parity between their two consoles? They even had Microsoft engineers try and couldn’t get it to work with splitscreen on the S. If Microsoft wanted the S treated the same as the X they should have included more RAM. Games shouldn’t be held back because Microsoft released a console that’s between generations.
Debit cards use the same PCI DSS backend, which is owned by Visa and Mastercard, both of which were created by banks (I think BofA made Visa)
“ePayment” systems like PayPal, Cashapp, Zelle, etc rely on the same backend, or also publicly owned by several major banks.
Direct bank wire transfers still have a useless transfer fee for literally no reason. I think maybe echecks don’t, but they expose your full bank account numbers (for no good reason), and they’re still controlled by the bank, and they don’t offer it as a solution for rapid payments.
Bitcoin technically solved this problem except the supply system wasn’t designed for stability, so the value is way too volatile. Even though there are better crypto currencies that have solved this problem like XRP, the blockchain hype train crashed so a ton of vendors don’t accept crypto anymore even though they used to (including Steam).
This entire system is nothing but a highly organized and legalized fraudulent scam to ensure banks can rip off vendors and consumers with transaction fees and debt.
The only thing that bypasses this system at the moment is using physical cash, which doesn’t work online.
FedNow is an option within the USA that uses a government-provided system to cheaply transfer money, and a number of banks have signed on. It’s not in use because it’s not as universally available yet.
AAA devs are finding out there’s no such thing as infinite money doesn’t mean there are no good games. Look around and you might just realize they’re actually the least interesting content out there. There are more games coming out per/day than at any other point in history. Take some initiative and you’ll find something great.
I’m fine with a different studio doing every Baldur’s Gate iteration. Bioware, Beamdog, Black Isle, and others have done Baldurs Gate games and I enjoyed them. I see no reason to tether the franchise to a single developer, particularly one whose heart isn’t in it anymore.
Am I wrong or do the 8BitDo controllers almost all have inbuilt batteries of unusual capacities? They could just build them to use standard AAA or AA rechargeables, but instead they do proprietary batteries which 8BitDo happily sell replacements for - sure seems like a path to more e-waste.
Shit no, its a different market. The switch was designed by committee to extract the maximum amount of money possible from the consumer. The Steam Deck is geared toward PC enthusiasts and built and designed by those same people. They aren’t even in the same ball park.
A lot of people are saying they’re not really competition judging off sale numbers but I’d say they are, just PC handhelds aren’t that big of competition. They still are taking away sales as I doubt people with a steam deck are also gonna own a switch or switch 2 unless they already had one before the steam deck came out or are well enough off to afford both and don’t want to deal with emulating. I definitely get Lemmy and myself are a biased audience but I think arguing they’re not competition at all is wrong, they’re just not very big competition compared to Nintendo.
While I agree in principle with the lawsuit, it is interesting that this is the game that people are suing over. I heard the hype and downloaded the crew 2 and it was complete dogshit of a game. I don’t mean from the perspective of finish, just the that the game, as intended, sucked ass. This isn’t the only ubisoft game like this, I don’t know how they manage to generate so much hype and fanfare around these tuberculosis vomit games over and over again.
I’ve never played The Crew nor The Crew 2, but I hate this guilt-by-association type of argument with every fiber of my heart.
Not because it defends Ubisoft (in this case), but because it completely accepts the asshole’s premise that the successor of a product is necessarily a valid substitute for the product itself, and the latter is not worth keeping around - it’s like eating an apple that has been cooked in an oven at 300°C for 5 hours, then arguing that apples are bad for your health.
See:
Overwatch vs Overwatch 2
Halo CE/2/3/W/ODST/R vs Halo 4/5/I (idk about H:W2)
Halo: CE vs Halo: CEA (yes I’m listing Halo twice, sue me)
Risk Of Rain vs Risk Of Rain 2 (both are very good games, but they are completely different from each other)
The quality of the game isn’t why The Crew makes a good target. It’s because it’s made by Ubisoft, which is based in France. And France has some pretty strict consumer protection laws. Were this, say, EA, which is based in the US, the lawsuit would be a non-starter. In adddition to that, France is a part of EU, which means Ubisoft has to comply with EU law in addition to the aforementioned French laws. So if this goes through, they will have to fight this on at least two fronts. The Crew is also a singleplayer game with an online component, which shouldn’t be necessary for the game to function, but here we are.
So to sum up: the lawsuit is not because people are super passionate for The Crew (though some probably are), but because if you’re going to make an example of a game, your best shot is suing a company which is located in a country with good customer protection laws. The Crew just happened to fit that bill.
polygon.com
Ważne