Now I’m picturing a video game version of the Disney Vault. “Play now through the end of the year for just $129.99* before GTA 9 goes back in the Vault for another decade! *Not including Microtransactions, Online Pass, BattlePass, Totally-Not-A-Lootboxes, or Megalodon Cards”
If they could, they would. But a lot of the time, they don’t even bother to keep the source code of the games that they make. It’s estimated that more than 50% of all games are lost to history because the companies that made them never kept the source code or a copy.
I remember there being a little scandal a few years ago when a remaster of a game came out and it still had the cracker’s logo in it from the pirated copy they used for the source code.
The analogy makes no sense.
Your pinball machine keeps working until it breaks, relying only on electricity you provide.
A server-based computer game relies on running it on a server you aren’t paying the upkeep on.
If you buy a game that relies on servers that don’t belong to you, you should expect this to be a temporary lease, not something you can expect to use forever.
Of course, the language in the store’s UI needs to match that. You can’t “buy” a server-reliant game.
With games people used to setup their own servers. (And we liked it that way. Way more sense of a community.) So that could be an option. Allow people to run their own servers again.
What you say makes sense for a multiplayer-only game! But the game has a full single player campaign. There is no technical reason to remove access to that part. That part can be kept working without incurring recurring costs.
You’re saying you don’t wanna buy a season pass for your new triple AAA game that costs $50 and gives you a new cosmetic skin every month for the next 2 months?
Turns out that a massive Earth-scale game that requires streaming of gigabytes worth of data every play session for each user and has next to no local storage is a really awful idea.
This is one of the most dumbest Parts of this game, everyone’s complaint of the last iteration was the massive download times, and the inefficiencies in the game causing it to lag even on high end systems. And their solution to that was to increase the specs that it’s required to run the game and require a high speed internet on top of that? They more or less made it so anyone running satellite internet can’t buy their game and anyone that lives in like 70% of the US that still has absolute dog shit internet speeds couldn’t even imagine playing it. My mom still has a 5/5 mbit/s, that’s the fastest anyone offers in her area, even downloading the previous game took ages there’s no way in hell I’m going to recommend her buying this game
After the cluster fuck that was their previous release on top of the mass amount of actual DLC so I can’t just buy the game and run with it, there was no way in hell I would buy this game.
The last flight Sim game that I had was flight simulator x, and honestly even that one if I hadn’t got it as a gift I probably wouldn’t have purchased because even that, the amount of DLC that it had was outrageous, I was lucky enough that I got it on disc so I’m not bombarded with them all the time, but I had looked at the steam page because I was curious about it and man was I in for a shock.
I wish I still had all the discs to my flight simulator 2004, it did basically the same exact thing that X did, and arguably was better than the previous iteration of flight simulator without all of the stupid paywalls. I just threw the disc in and it ran, didn’t have to wait days for it to download, it didn’t monopolize part of my drive and it didn’t need a NASA supercomputer plus Internet to run
Hi res, sure. Make it optional, or let players download the region they like. Or just the airports with much lower res landscapes, etc etc.
Or just, let them have it all and make these choices. Memory is CHEAP nowadays. If you’re a flight sim enthusiast, a few terabytes for the map data is the least expensive part of your setup by far.
Precisely this – I don’t remember anyone complaining that the FS2020 install size was too large, even if its install size was the butt of a few good-natured jokes. They’ve solved a problem that didn’t exist and in doing so have turned FS into an always online internet-connected live service instead of a game. I’m not touching this game with a 40 foot aileron until an offline mode of some quality exists.
Sure, but it had an offline mode and had a base level globe that was downloaded when the game was installed that you could use immediately and didn’t require live cloud connectivity in order for basic functionality to work. Additionally, it allowed you to pre-download large chunks of high detailed land for offline use as well.
All I wanted them to change was the fact that the installer for the game in 2020 would download then decompress one file at a time, so it took forever for the game to install (on top of the fact that it uses an in-game installer in the first place).
I don’t have the new version, but based on what I’ve been reading they sure curled the monkey paw this time.
Supposedly, the full map is measured in petabytes.
This is actually a perfectly reasonable use of streaming assets for full-resolution, since almost no players will ever experience even 1 percent of the map.
Yup. Comcast/Xfinity residential cable. I pay like $80/mo and still have that cap. They also had an outage yesterday for like 5 hours for maintenance that was clearly planned ahead of time, but they never bothered to tell me ahead of time, and when the outage happened, they still gave me a bad estimate of when it would be restored due to “network damage”.
If you want a functional flight simulator that doesn’t require you constantly online , try out XPlane or Aerofly FS4. These games will work even if Microsoft puts out another steaming pile of shit in the next 4 years.
There is a nearly zero percent chance that the game developers are also cloud experts. Having the same parent company means almost nothing, especially when you get to the size of places like Microsoft. The internal bureaucracy can actually make getting things accomplished properly worse. External contracts are usually pretty clear on what’s provided for the payment. Internal processes are often much more blurry, if not completely muddy.
There is a nearly zero percent chance that the game developers are also cloud experts
Well yeah, that’s why you would put some cloud experts on the project besides the game devs if you’re doing things like this. It’s not just game developers working on the game.
Doesn’t even have to be people feom the Azure team. Microsoft has plenty of resources to teach someone to be a cloud expert in other branches, they even offer certifications for outside people, surely they can manage a few of their own.
Reminds me of Amazon Games’ disastrous MMO launches in Europe because they refused to add more server capacity for European players until they left in droves. For comparison the US servers had more than three times as much capacity at launch.
The asset streaming requirements are insane- they recommend having a 150mbps connection for a smooth experience with 50mbps as a minimum. Microsoft says they only planned for 250k players at launch, which is stupid considering FS 2020 had over a million sales at launch…
✋ Hi, person here who bought 2020 but refuses to buy 2024 because they didn't deliver on half their promises for 2020, including that it would be the last sim they sold.
Maybe they were suprised this many people actually signed up for their next level bullshit. 🤷♂️
Yeah, well, they promised Windows 10 would be the “last Windows,” too. We know how their track record goes on that.
I’ve had a very successful lifelong policy of never giving Microsoft any money for anything ever since I was knee high to a grasshopper gnawing on the keyboard of my first 286, and it’s served me pretty damn well so far.
they promised Windows 10 would be the “last Windows,” too.
Iirc, they didn’t. There was one person who didn’t really have the authority to make such claims say something that could have been understood as win 10 is the last windows.
I hate to defend Microsoft, they’re an awful company, but this just was never really true.
Your not wrong. I worked for the company, and we were told that it wasn’t actually true like 6 months after launch. I had been communicating it for .o the to my clients.
Same. I’m still pissed that 2020 was left in the state it is in with tons of its own bugs and missing features that were promised. I remember talking to a friend and saying that MSFS2020 was a cool flight sim but still had the vibe of an early-access game at times… and then they drop an announcement for 2024.
According to Asobo, this issue was caused by a cache that was overloaded and constantly restarting. This was used in part of the authentication process, I believe when they check what content you have. This explains why people had missing content if they were lucky enough to get in. This was my experience - got in after a very long load time and then couldn’t really do anything due to missing content.
This doesn’t seem like it’s a Microsoft cloud issue per se, it seems like Asobo had a single point of failure in the design that didn’t scale well. Today seems like the CDN limits are finally being reached, as it took a while to load up new areas. Getting into the game was no issue, though.
Hey you! You with your logic and reasoning and reading the issue notes from developers. You aren’t a real gamer, get out of here with that! We’re here to dogpile on a new game here!
From the point of view of a customer, the exact failure method is irrelevant.
Microsoft took a lot of money and wasn’t able to deliver what was promised in exchange.
Doesn’t mean I’m not a forgiving person who understands problems happen. At this point, if you expect a game to work perfectly you can’t buy day 1. Software is too complex to not expect any bugs day 1.
I’d say it’s more on how the developers setup their system to utilize (or not utilize) those dynamic capabilities.
The game devs not taking advantage of that properly should be on them. Put the blame where it belongs.Don’t let the devs off the hook just because you want to at least partially blame the MS cloud. Microsoft’s systems CAN handle dynamic loads when setup properly, we see it all the time.
Kinda wild that their previous flight simulator was met with near flawless reviews across the board, then the complete opposite for the immediate successor that probably shares 90% of the same code.
I think the issue was precisely that. They didn’t plan for the surge of users coming in on day one and whatever cloud hybrid system they have for this game got overwhelmed. We’ll get to know about the game’s actual quality a week from now I guess.
They shouldn‘t have added it to GamePass on launch day but wait a few weeks or even months to stretch out the server load.
I bet there are tons of causal and first time players that are already subscribed to gamepass that wanted to try out MSFS24 just because they have access to it. Now those people are pissed off even though they would have waited longer to get a better experience.
I’m sure the Microsoft executive that made the decision is absolutely drenched in the “Azure scales infinitely if you give Microsoft more money” kool-ade.
rockpapershotgun.com
Aktywne