I’ll just wait for the Witcher 4 patch 2.0, which will release after 3 years from the original release date and will actually contain the advertised game.
When I first started working it was still back in the days where you were given cash in an envelope. After we were paid we always used to go out to a pub together for a few rounds, I rarely used to get through all of the change I’d been given, I never got into the paper money.
You used to be able to get a pint for silvers, these days you need to give them folding money for a bag of peanuts.
They the. Said nothing for half a decade. Now starfield is coming out and is shipped from their perspective so he’s on to his next sale. Simple as that. See you in another 5+ years
Skyrim with actually good melee combat, much greater magic variety, companions who are smarter and not suicidal, horses who can move around with logical sense, more biome variety as much as I love what's already there, factions that don't end in you ruling all of them at once...
Turns out Skyrim gets a lot right but there are tons of things that could be much better.
I just wanted Skyrim where I could invite a few friends to come along for dungeons. Then they made Elder Scrolls Online as though that was at all the same thing.
That would indeed be pretty cool, I'd love to see if they go that route for TES 6. Clearly the FO76/ESO routes are not what that same customer base wants, for different reasons.
ESO is a fine MMO, but it's absolutely an MMO and not a multiplayer TES game. FO76 is a skeleton of a Bethesda RPG but isn't formatted at all how what the average Bethesda fan would want to play. It's strange they went both of these routes before attempting what people have been asking for and even trying to make themselves for so long.
It's a bit of a shame Starfield won't include multiplayer either, but it's hard for me to complain since I don't have friends anyway.
Tell me you played 30 minutes of 76 on launch and never touched it again without telling me you played 30 minutes of 76 on launch and never touched it again
Yeah 76 is pretty rad and based now. There was an actual dialog I had with an NPC who wanted me to go find gold and I was telling them this unquenchable lust for money caused the whole damn apocalypse in the first place.
I actually have not even played it, but I've heard it's been much improved, correct me if I'm wrong though it's still different from literally Fallout 4 with other players. For example, are there multiple long faction storylines, large populated cities with many side quests, a few radio stations, caravans, morality or faction reputation, bobbleheads, basically every major and minor feature in a standard Bethesda Fallout.
If it's been updated enough times and in the right directions to include all that stuff, then awesome. I was by no means saying it was a bad game, I just want to know if it's seamlessly a Bethesda title through and through with other players or if it's still Fallout in a different direction.
Are you able to enjoy the world privately with only players you choose without any DLC or microtransactions based restrictions on construction or storage, mod support so long as each player maintain the same modlist, etc.?
I played it recently and it is still a clunky half broken mess with friends. Setting up three camps was a pain and the one quest we tried to do failed to spawn the final objective except for the party leader, and none of the rest of us were able to complete it.
I played around 20 hours of it at launch, and it was bad. Not just in all the hilariously broken things that were memed all over the place back then, but the fundamental concept of the game just didn’t quite work.
Even if a game is protected against piracy on its PC version, the version released on Nintendo Switch can be emulated from day one and played on PC, therefore bypassing the strong protections offered on the PC version,”
Are there that many multi-platform games that have denuvo and a switch version too?
I’d think most games “big enough” for denuvo wouldn’t have a switch port anyway.
That was my thought. Most games that are on both PC and Switch are not big enough to want to pay Denuvo for their services. Any game that is big enough to care probably also can’t afford to take the Denuvo performance hit (that they claim doesn’t exist) on the under-powered Switch.
There are a surprising amount of pc games on switch. I’m not sure if all these titles have denuvo on PC but as an example.
Dragon Quest 11 Doom Eternal Divinity original sin 2 Disco Elysium Most resident Evil games There are a lot of other games that have a switch port, but I’m too tired to think about it further.
Absolutely amazing decision. Difficulty settings make games more accessible - period. And gating accessibility behind “artistic intent” and “vision” is just stupid. Sure, not every game has to meet everyone’s idea of a good time, but come on - it can’t be that hard, and it would only be a net positive for everyone.
I wonder if any of the people who worked on the Arkham games are even still at the company. Nowadays it seems like all these beloved studios have none of the people that made the games we love, and are just riding off the coattails of the popularity given to them that they clearly do not deserve.
I’ll bet that number is significantly higher than zero, but as per reporting some months ago, much like with Redfall, Rocksteady saw a significant exodus during Suicide Squad, since the studio was tasked with building a game they did not want to make.
For Naughty Dog? They have a solid track record of great games. I’m more enthusiastic than pessimistic, but it sucks it’ll likely be a PlayStation exclusive for a while.
I’m mixed on it. They just cancelled their multiplayer game because it wasn’t their ballpark, now they want a studio known for linear story-driven experiences to make an open world game (I assume). Could go either way.
Counter point: it’s a studio who made a groundbreaking open world series (jak and daxter) who only later became known for linear games returning to their roots
I feel like when developers have a good pedigree, they can apply their concepts elsewhere.
Blizzard hadn’t made a shooter before Overwatch, but definitely got it right in so many respects. Bloober team had some mediocre horror games, but was steadily getting better before they made the Silent Hill 2 remake. Valve made just shooters before Portal and then DOTA 2. Heck, easy to forget The Talos Principle, an existential puzzle game is made by the people who made “Uber DUMB MACHO SHOOTER Serious Sam”.
Oh yeah, and survival horror team Tango Gameworks making cartoon rhythm combat game Hi-Fi Rush.
Player freedom doesn’t mean open world. Crysis for example spoke a lot about player freedom because it gave you a ton of different tools to go through the levels as you wanted. But it was still a linear single player game
Edit: I just remembered that even Windows was externally acquired, so I believe, it would be more correct to say that Microsoft has basically never innovated something themselves.
Yeah, it started its life as “Quick And Dirty Operating System” (don’t know, why they renamed it) and even that was basically a ripoff of CP/M: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86-DOS
I guess, you can say that they did put in own effort into developing the windowing system. I wouldn’t want to call that “innovating”, since they were late to the party, but I guess, that would be moving the goal posts here…
videogameschronicle.com
Ważne