Epic Game Store is focused so hard on making it good for devs but they have also intentionally neutered it for gamers. Does it even run on Linux yet? We all know that’s the direction Valve is taking things and it’s why Microsoft is starting to panic.
It kinda does? You have to use a third party app like lutris/heroic.
You could argue that steam doesn't fully work on linux either (multiple windows like chat, friendslist or library opened on the same workspace regularly crash on Wayland and I havent had the steam overlay working on any non linux native game) but these features arent even part of the epic launcher
Huh, I’ve never used chat, I rarely use the friends list, and I think I’ve intentionally used the overlay maybe a handful of times. So I don’t think that’s a big loss.
However, they did work fine on xorg (I haven’t used any of them since switching a few months ago).
Regardless, the launcher works for the primary use cases: buying, organizing, installing, and playing games. So I think that qualifies as supporting Linux, even if there are some bugs here and there.
It’s (relatively, don’t use the embedded browser) pure Python and runs anywhere. I also use it on my Win7 retro machine because the Epic Launcher sucks. It also supports epic DRM and can log the game in.
I don’t think current Respawn could pull it off, Titanfall 2 was lightning in a bottle with them begging EA to not have any DLC and Apex plays like shit compared to it with a predatory battle pass.
Been playing apex since launch. I've bought a total of 3 battle passes with actual money, it's super easy to just continue buying the battle pass off of the previous pass rewards. I have no love for the battle pass market but the apex one isn't one I'd call predatory. Game is free, battle pass is purely cosmetics you aren't forced into in any way. Aside from persistent audio issues apex plays really well for me.
Bethesda, everything doesn’t need to have the biggest map ever, it just needs to have good writing and replayability.
Like New Vegas has a map 3 times smaller than fallout 4 & 76 and I’m still enjoying it almost 15 years later. (I’m not knocking those other games, I’m just saying map and game hugeness isn’t what matters.)
You don’t need the biggest map ever to make a good game. You do, however, need the biggest map ever to make a good Elder Scrolls game. People referring to BG3 don’t really understand the essence of the Elder Scrolls, a vision the series has pursued all the way back to Arena.
…well when you put it that way you are right. Elder scrolls games are known for having enormous expansive maps, criticizing that is like criticizing mario for having too many coins or something haha
You don’t need the biggest map ever to make a good game. You do, however, need the biggest map ever to make a good Elder Scrolls game.
No you don’t. The evolution of the Elder Scrolls series proves that, as the map size has been massively reduced. The Skyrim map is extremely tiny compared to Daggerfall.
As much as I dislike Nintendo, the Switch is an excellent console despite its hardware. It’s no surprise that it’s been as popular as it has been for so long. These days though, there are a lot of competitors in the handheld space that have much better hardware, so it really maintains its position due to a combination of branding and the game exclusivity.
I’m curious what their next console will be. I probably won’t buy it, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was also a huge success.
The Switch really isn’t that good. It’s just the competition is so bad right now. Nintendo sells so good because they keep making good games and knows how to appeal to the mass market, not just to a specific core audience. I don’t like many things about the Switch and that includes its hardware, software and the shop. But I’m not the core audience of this system either, so fair enough I guess.
I don’t think it’s a death, it’s more of a transition. Firstly, a lot of XBox games have been coming to PC, intentionally, because Microsoft basically own the market*. They’ve also created XCloud + Game pass, possibly the most convenient way to play games, and you don’t need an XBox.
The real people who’ve turned on the device itself has been devs. Some of the stuff they’ve been saying at GDC have been at the same level as the stuff they say about Linux as a target. Like your game shouldn’t be that dependent on platform, it hurts things like archival.
You have to ask yourself why. Devs are professionals by definition, for them the context is ease of developing along with potential to make a return on investment. Xbox (console) is now a problem on both those metrics. Simple as that, no fanboying or villifying required.
Its just not a big enough market and a good portion of the market is GP'ified and doesn't spend outside of it. Couple that with dual SKU targets with real challenges working around the S memory constraints and here we are.
But I agree that its a transition. Away from the current hardware model.
I can imagine them carrying on making consoles this generation but long-term Microsoft is a services company and over successive generations they have failed to recapture the lead from Sony since the 360. Ultimately, they just want to make more money and struggling in the hardware business is not an exciting place for them to be in.
I say this as a Series S owner: the writing is on the wall. I will likely not be purchasing another Microsoft console after this, though I’m not sure they’d be interested in releasing one. I want to buy and own games I can play locally on a piece of hardware, which probably means I have to return to Sony or go back to the humble PC. For anyone currently on the fence seeing this news, I don’t know why they’d consider buying into the Xbox platform and tying in all their gaming purchases.
I mean…I’ve had every one up to S series. I just don’t see any groundbreaking whatever to make me go beyond X since most of what is being produced is getting either the microtransaction treatment or becoming a subscription based game.
I want to buy a game and play it. period. Very few choices and I will probably get a steam deck at some point.
Hogwarts Legacy is a 7.5 of 10. It’s a fun game. But it’s not revolutionary or break new ground. I hadn’t played Tears of the Kingdom.
The two things the boycott did is to make the trans community look bad and made people hate them. The final thing was to give the game free advertising.
If you hated trans people because some people online told you to boycott the product of a piece of shit celeb, not gonna lie dude you were a shit person and it had nothing to do with seeing the backlash to the game.
No joke, if this drama in any way altered your opinion of “trans folk” as a concept, you need to sit yourself down in front of a mirror and not get back up until youve fixed the rot in your personality. Utterly brainless take.
If some completely anonymous random strangers doxxing people you dont know made you hate trans folk as a concept, it had literally nothing to do with the doxxing and you know it.
What a stupid thing to say. Invest in therapy asap.
When did I say I hate trans people? All I did is to point out an problem with the boycott. You had a group of people who harass and dox people. That group made trans people look bad. Keep on looking the other way. That will totally help the trans community. /s
Honestly surprised that people seem to have forgotten about the harassment. It was really bad for some streamers and was inexcusable. It’s like how gamingcirclejerk tried to deny that the harassment even happened.
If you are WB, I can't see how you compare the performance of this game vs the performance of Suicide Squad (which had similar development time) and not rethink your approach to future licensed titles
videogameschronicle.com
Ważne