I do feel like even if they skipped Clair Obscur because of recent controversies, the author should have addressed it. I think it’s certainly deserving of being in the list, so saying nothing kinda seems contrarian at best.
I played Clair Obscur, liked it, and it’s in my top 10 for the year out of about 18 games. But man, the reception of that game in the Game Awards and such is wildly out of sync with what I thought of it, and it makes perfect sense to me that it wouldn’t end up in an outlet’s top 20.
It has some really strong moments and a very powerful ending that means it leaves a very strong lasting impression in a lot of people. Also the music really carries it. I still think it’s a good game, but I was definitely a victim of this too and have found that my esteem of it has fallen a little bit as the “dust has settled” so to speak.
It’s still a great game, and I’d recommend people playing it but I don’t think I’d rank it as highly on my all-time list now as I would have when I sat and watched the credits roll the first time.
So all the big names plus a tohou style arknoid and a geometry wars meets robotron type deal.
I personally wasn’t awwed by avowed like some others were. But putting assassin’s creed at number one seems, well lazy. I kinda get why they didn’t include Claire obscura, given the recent backlash, but it was at least a better game than assassin’s creed. And ghosts of yontei being in the middle? Yeah, sorry ars. Gunna hard disagree with ya.
(I know you’re not the author, I’m just screaming into the ether )
That makes no sense. Both of those are just arcade twin-stick shooters, and Sektori is no more Robotron than Geometry Wars was. Also, while Sektori very obviously draws a lot on Geometry Wars, it’s an amazingly good arcade twin-stick that improves so much on what GW did, and really deserves recognition. It’s niche, but it’s genuinely a top game in that niche, and I mean best in ten years top game.
Glad to see Tribes get a mention. I spent a hell of a lot of time in that game. learning how to ski was mini game in itself. It was a great feeling when you mailed it When you nailed it.
2000 was the direct successor to NT4 and was specifically targeting the business market. It was available in Pro, Server, Adv Server, and Datacenter editions. I would not call it a consumer Windows OS.
That‘s interesting because I remember our home computer ran on it for a while. I guess that was only because my father was friends with a PC shop owner who knew about it.
ME was basically 98 but much less stable, so a lot of people grabbed a copy of 2000 one way or another to run it at home. XP came out in 2001, bringing an end to DOS based kernels in the Microsoft lineup.
Windows was built on IBM compatible MS-DOS, not regular DOS. The term “DOS” was so ubiquitous with IBM compatibility specifically, that it almost exclusively referred to MS-DOS, and not any other variant. Windows 95 does not run on top of Atari DOS, for example, and therefore trying to run any Windows 95 application in Atari DOS would not be possible.
Software natively compiled for Windows 95 will not usually run in any other variant of DOS than MS-DOS, and in some cases, even MS-DOS itself.
Quake II released in 1997 natively for Windows 95, but was not compatible with other DOS based operating systems at the time. Over the years, fans have tried to “backport” it to other variants of DOS, most notably Q2DOS. But its original PC release does not natively support any OS other than Windows 95. Many games of this era are like this, and a game released in this era usually said it was compatible with “Windows 95/98/ME,” not “DOS.”
I distinctly remember running most, if not all, of my games on Windows 2000 (not ME). I mean, yeah, NT 4 was pretty hopeless for gaming, but 2000 was better.
I never encountered a single Windows 9x game that wouldn’t run on Windows 2000 Pro. It was my primary OS in 2003 or so, having moved from Windows 98 SE.
I definitely own Diablo and I definitely used Win2K, but I didn’t go out of my way to buy a weird special version of it. This leads me to believe the normal Windows 95 version would work on NT as well.
So he couldn’t have been younger than 15 at the game’s release (and could have been as old as 25).
That being said, that game came out a quarter-century ago, and there are people in the workforce who won’t have been born when it was released. Can’t just assume any more.
I think they have the knowledge, but write only about what brings views.
From how often they write about Elon Musk, you’d think they are his promotion department.
Like a Stadium for games? That’s a really cool idea, I mean they already have the streaming tech, they only have to get their business model right. Easy, right?
It's basically an infinite money glitch! All Google has to do is make sure not to have the project run by the guy who botched the Xbox 360 launch and it'll be unstoppable!
On one hand I’m happy its dead because paradox deserves this. But on the other hand I spent $80 on this and I really thought it had the base to be an amazing game.
Wow this is terrible news. Basically Paradox owns the IP to Cities Skylines and Colossal Order seemingly want out.
I'd say a large reason CS2 has been such a mess is because it was rushed out, the paradox mod system is just not fit for purpose and there remains a ridiculous focus on getting the console version released + move on to DLCs rather than fixing the main game. I'd put most of the blame on Paradox's shoulders to be honest.
It'll be interesting to see what CO does next. CS1 was a great game, CS2 could have been a great game. Will they do another city sim or more onto something else? Seems a shame if they move on as they have grown so much expertise in the genre. I'm hoping they're cutting free to do a game with their own vision, which was how CS1 came to be.
Apropos of nothing more than my idle speculation, I’d guess they will return to the transport tycoon genre if they are able to do so. Before Skylines took the crown from SimCity as the preeminent example of the genre, they made the Cities in Motion games, which were narrowly focused on improving the mass transit of existing cities (as opposed to building the city itself). I know the second CiM game had some interaction between the city and your efforts as transportation czar (in the same way you could indirectly influence a citiy’s development in, say Railroad Tycoon), but the emphasis was always on transit. I imagine the newly independent team will want to keep their focus narrow, unless another publisher swoops in to replace the safety net.
Huge player of Cities in Motion 1/2. I still play both of them to this day.
Cities in Motion 2's city building elements were basically a prototype for Cities Skylines. The look and feel are very similar (of course CiM2 didn't really have city-building management layer, just public transit).
arstechnica.com
Gorące