It’d be really cool if developers would stop remaking old shit and instead, start creating new shit. But I get it- remaking old stuff is cheap and people eat it up. I mean, look at Hollywood. Same thing. And gaming is all about cash cows now.
Once you turn what you love doing into a business, there’s no going back. There are still people deeply passionate about making games, but that’s just not the reality of these massive studios. They’re in for the money, and the leadership aren’t even… gamers themselves, somehow
Start playing more indie games with passion behind them and less AAA money grabbing half polished turds they keep pumping out. It’s the only way out of this mess.
That’s basically all I do at this point, and it’s been really nice. A lot of genuinely fantastic experiences. Always labor of love, a game they’d love to play themselves
I personally don’t mind remakes as long as they’re well done. The thing is one the greater horror films of all time, it also happens to be a remake. The Departed is a great cops and robbers movie, it’s also a remake. Oceans eleven, Casino Royale, magnificent seven are all remakes. But people don’t remember the good example of remakes, only the bad ones.
And also in gaming. System Shock remake is great. Residential evil remake, great. Demons souls, great. There’s nothing wrong with getting good remakes, there are plenty of games that absolutely could have a remake. Like I would 100% want a New Vegas remake, one that does Vegas (freeside and strip) and Legion justice. After all the remake doesn’t need to be 1 to 1 with the original
When it comes to Max Payne I’m not sure how they could make it better than the original, but I’m not going to instantly write it off.
you’re complaining about Remedy remaking one of their older and most famous games when their last three releases have all been new IP, so i feel your criticism is misplaced. this isn’t coming at the expense of anything “new”.
If the opt for adding a GM mode and level editor they may just have the ultimate digital tabletop for D&D. Not only would it instantly be better than every other implementation I tried, the basegame additionally also managed to improve upon the D&D ruleset by adding Weapon skills for martial classes. They would not even need to add more content. There are already mods that add the missing spells, feats and subclasses.
This is exciting of course, but alas, I haven’t touched my switch since I got a steam deck. There’s a few Nintendo games I would want to play but I’m not sure I’ll buy a new console for them.
Pikmin 4 just dropped. Super fun! I don’t know where else you’d play that. I haven’t even had time to touch LOZ TOTK, but that’s life stuff. There’s plenty to play on Switch. And there’s reason to play on the lighter package as well.
We’ve gotta figure out some rules for what “indie” means. E33 is a great game, but that budget is estimated to be least $20 million. How many small teams are not being honored because a spot is being taken up by a game that has the same budget as a small AAA project?
Indie has always been a way to define a category for creators without access to the same amount of money that publishers had historically provided. Now publishers are both no longer needed to release a game and are very rarely taking chances on original games from first time developers.
A small AAA production in 2000, maybe. E33’s was only a fraction of a small AAA budget today.
TGA calls it “a game made outside the traditional publisher system,” which fits. I’d agree that we’re looking at wildly different scales of production in the same category, though.
Do we think it’ll be ready when they can give it specs to match the steam machine so there’s a single target for developers, or the more exciting option of building something arm-based using whatever fex wizardry is going on in the frame?
i think they mean more in terms of relative performance, so that “Steam Machine Verified” also means “Steam Deck 2 verified”. But I guess from a dev perspective, that is not exactly a “single target”, as diff hw means diff optimizations are required.
My guess is, they want it to use ARM processors for better battery life. They might be using Frame as a kind of test platform for that, and when FEX is good enough, they can go ahead with Deck 2.
Do you even what to be able to game on the thing? AMD cpus have come a long way with battery life. And Linux amd64 support is at this point at 20years, arm is at 5y if you’re lucky, usually 2-0y.
It’s not necessarily about ARM. Based on their statements, they’re looking for >75% performance increase at similar power levels and cost. That spec doesn’t exist today and going forward, ARM will probably have a better shot at meeting that spec than AMD (depending on continued development of FEX).
I’m not so concerned with the instruction set. The differences are generally overrated.
I’m concerned about monopoly power. Out of three companies that can legally make modern x86-64 processors, AMD is the only one worth talking about anymore. Unless China wants to throw some major weight into restarting VIA’s x86 line, that’s not likely to change. China seems fine with ARM and RISC-V, and ignoring x86.
The competition on the horizon is no longer AMD vs Intel. It’s AMD vs ARM vs RISC-V.
If Apple licensed their optimised variant of ARM to third parties, Steam would probably jump right on it, along with other hardware manufacturers. The performance Apple Silicon got over the x86 machines it replaced was game-changing, along with the improved battery life. And other ARM vendors, whilst behind Apple (who do have excellent CPU engineers), are catching up.
Unfortunate, but sometimes you need to cut support for 12 year old hardware in order to do more with your game. I come from MMOs, and this sort of thing would regularly happen when a new expansion would be announced. Minimum specs rise, and support for old stuff gets cut.
yeahhhh it makes sense, just kind of wild because live service games THRIVE on old hardware. Stuff like Fortnite and Overwatch has kept the PS4 platform pretty damn lively, and i’m sure it accounts for a significant chunk of sales, so seeing a live service game cut off that revenue stream is interesting. The hardware may be 12 years old, but the new hardware has sat in a pretty steep price point for its entire history so far, so somehow this still feels premature.
Yeah, I’m sure they ran the numbers and a decision like this didn’t come lightly. Also, since this is a multiplatform game, there’s a good chance the displaced ps4 users already have another device they can play the game on. Ultimately though, if the devs want to grow the game, then these decisions have to be made. Back when I played, after every major patch, you were guaranteed to see people lamenting that they could no longer play the game because their device no longer had enough storage.
While I understand it’s not a 1:1 comparison, Final Fantasy 14 dropped support for PS3 in 2017, and the console was only 11 years old at the time.
While I understand it’s not a 1:1 comparison, Final Fantasy 14 dropped support for PS3 in 2017, and the console was only 11 years old at the time.
I don’t want to say too much bc you acknowledged the apples to oranges comparison, but I’ll say the quiet part out loud for others: technology advanced way more in those 11 years than it has in the last 12 since the PS4 launch. The only conceivable limiting factor at this phase is storage speed, and as others have pointed out, Genshin on PS4 is currently MISERABLE with load times. So like, it makes sense, but still feels wrong.
It is. But if you read interviews and watch the podcasts where they talk about it they seemed pretty confident they could make it look just as good. I’m skeptical but hopeful.
i think the article specifies that this is a new forecast based upon the Trump admin solidifying the final shape of the tariffs. So it seems unlikely at this phase that they will fold the current numbers, but we all know how smooth and predictable the Trump admin is.
Alright, can’t really get hyped without anything else to go on.
I was pretty fine with the way Last of Us 1 and 2 were handled, did a pretty good job at telling a story, without making it feeling like a linear corridor game. More freedom in a similar type of game would be nice, but generally it just seems to mean more downtime traveling between objectives occasionally interrupted by random encounters. If that is what they mean with more freedom, and not something else like character creation or branching storylines or whatever.
Reading the article, he refers to Elden Ring. I personally hate that kind of story telling though. I know a lot of people are absolutely lyrical about the game, but that’s probably more thanks to the gameplay. The story in that game is just being dripfed without much context and they are being intentionally vague about so many things. It’s more like a passive way of revealing little bits of the world without ever fully explaining anything.
There are certainly people that specifically like that kind of storytelling that puts the onus on the audience to do some digging. It’s why Malazan Book of the Fallen is popular, for example.
It didn’t do as much for me in Elden Ring, but I enjoyed it in Dark Souls 3 and it’s why Demon’s Souls has one of my favorite moments in gaming. Wouldn’t have worked with more explicit narrative.
videogameschronicle.com
Ważne