Have CoD MW2 on steam because it is one of the few games that I can do cross play with a friend who only plays on consoles and I'm on PC. They changed the steam launcher with CoD MW3 to some combined thing that launches, then I pick MW2 and the new launcher closes and then starts MW2 from scratch.
Yes, the launcher launches so that it can close and open MW2 like it used to.
But the best part is that CoD on PC does the thing where the game loads, tells you it has and update and requires a restart, Then when it restarts it has to update shaders. The best part is that both the stupid launcher and MW2 have separate updates and shaders. So the worst one was launcher has an update and has to load twice and complete shaders. Then MW2 starts and then requires an update, restarts and then shaders.
That's right, one time it took launching FOUR times and two sets of shaders just to start playing.
It is now uninstalled and is one of the few games on steam that I reviewed just so I could complain about this stupid design. Feels good to vent again because I had a ton of fun that made restarting twice annoying but tolerable, but always launching twice and sometimes more is just ridiculous.
You should clarify that whenever there’s an update, you update the game through Steam like normal, then when the update is complete, you load the game up only to see a pop-up that “Update requires restart” that forces you to close the game and restart it. Why does it need to start and then restart after an update? The game isn’t started when you update it, why do we have to start it after the patch just to have to immediately close it and start it again?
I would bet the main launcher's shaders that then closes to launch MW2 is doing the Warzone shaders. Before MW3 came out it would just do shaders once for both Warzone and MW2.
Even most console games run at 60 now, with an option to turn on some RT graphical wankery and run at 30.
I often turn it on to see what it looks like, and then decide it’s not worth it. Ratchet and Clank actually played decently at 30, and one of the Ghostwire Tokyo options allowed you to have RT and decent framerates with a minor hit to resolution.
Gsync/Freesync/VRR is a game changer for lower end hardware, because then all those dips below 60 get smoothed out to an even 45 or so. I’ve spent a lot less time fucking about with setting on PC since getting a monitor that supports that.
I had legit expected it to win, just because it was bethesda and was ready to rage because baldurs gate was so good. Yet, here we were, without starfield.
That poor game belongs in the ditch where it is right now imo
I will say that I’ll take the lesser evil of having an unintrusive launcher for a game that pops up after I select play in Steam (Creative Assembly, Larian, etc.) which can then be closed after the game starts than go back to when everyone wanted you to install a bloated distribution platform to play their specific game (Looking at you Stardock, Uplay, etc.).
Kinda a nice example why it is bullshit to rate stuff on a one-dimensional scale. Given the right point in my life, I too would like the calculator app more than Elden Ring, for example during a math exam back when +/-/*// were all the operations I needed. Good times.
Playing devil’s advocate, I can understand the point because I already think in terms of value per hour.
That’s why I can justify buying a less critically acclaimed game with more replayability than I can justify one that you realistically can only play once (starfield vs latest COD). And why I generally don’t play mmo’s because I can get a new game each month for $10, or play a $60 for a year straight. The total number of hours I have in a game like Red Dead Redemption 2 or GTA 5 is crazy compared to how many hours I had in the last battlefield.
But it’s not just about total hours. My first playthrough of Outer Wilds, Subnautica, and BioShock, were each more “valuable” than the time I spent in GTA, even though I’ve spent 10-100x the time in GTA. Then you’ve got games like Prey and Minecraft that have high replayability that is consistently high “value” time.
Games currently have an insane value/cost ratio. When compared to a theatre movie that costs ~$10/h, you’d have to have a phenomenal time. Especially compared with the cost per hour of a game like Skyrim or Baldur’s Gate where you have to spend like a thousand hours just to get the whole story of the game.
This is a bit off topic, but there are some first-playthrough experiences that are truly magical, and you’ve named several of the games that did that for me. Subnautica, Outer Wilds, RDR2, Stardew Valley, Horizon Zero Dawn. I’m sure there are more (and older ones too like KOTOR and Paper Mario). Replayability is great, but I love those first playthroughs.
You gotta hand it to them, it’s mind blowing how abysmal the PvE experience is. I have seen inexperienced indie devs make so many amazing games that I can’t comprehend what the hell Blizzard is doing with their talents. I couldn’t even justify spending the time to finish the first mission.
They cancelled the major PvE part they were apparently working on, but they’ve had small PvE game modes that are mostly just wave defense. There’s a Halloween one called Junkenstein’s revenge, this season has one called Trials of Sanctuary, last season had one whose name I can’t remember. None of them are near the scope of the cancelled PvE, though.
startrek.website
Ważne