In my opinion, the fact that so many of these competing devices run windows just ruins them out of the gate. The fact that you can cleanly suspend and resume games on the Deck is its best feature by a mile, and I’ve yet to see any windows-based device manage to even come close to doing that reliably.
As great as these competitors seem to be, I can’t help but feel that SteamOS (which valve still hasn’t released) continues to be a defining feature of the Steam Deck - its… really a joy to use.
I hope they do release it. I was looking into getting the Legion Go back when it launched but all the reviews between it and the Ally made me realize how much I rely on SteamOS-specific features.
Don't have a SD and haven't really looked to hard into the experience. What are the SteamOS specific features you mention? As a gamer on Linux who is eventually looking to get a SD I'm curious.
Game suspension in sleep mode is the big one. I don't know how, but it seems like they've perfected a way to suspend any game when the system goes to sleep and then pick right back up where you left off when you wake it again without any hitches. It works just like the Switch or any other handheld, except it's a PC and it's doing it with games that aren't made to be suspended like that.
I think The Last of Us is the only truly new, groundbreaking achievement the article lists. And by groundbreaking, I mean it managed to both carve out a space artistically in the “prestige TV” category, while also breaking into the pop-culture zeitgeist, as the article notes.
You’re right that Arcane was amazing, but it mainly caught the attention of game and animation fans. The Last of Us may be the property that finally convinced studios to take video game adaptations seriously and stop giving them out to commercially promising but artistically bereft filmmakers like Paul Anderson.
When Brandon Sanderson has talked about possible screen adaptations of his books, he’s started to hear people talking about an Arcane-style animated adaptation as an option they’d like. He’s mentioned that the unfortunate reality of it is that Arcane’s budget ($10 million an episode) does not match its audience - the large majority of Arcane viewers are existing League fans, and it doesn’t get the new/outside-viewer audience that a lot of producers would want to see.
Recency bias. There’s always been good video game movies and shows, mixed in with bad ones. Most basic example: the Tomb Raider movies were pretty great (for their time). Pokemon has been running so long that people have forgotten it was created as a cross marketing opportunity to sell the game. Mortal Combat and Resident Evil are always overlooked. Hell, even the super campy Street Fighter movie is fun.
I agree on the recency bias. We tend to forget about older series and films, or watch them without considering the context of their time. This article even mentions Castlevania: Nocturne, but not the other great Castlevania series.
Was MK a dud? Maybe. But I saw that in cinema and owned it on VHS and had the soundtrack on cassette. It was a little bit of a phenomenon, same goes for the SF movie.
What I think has changed is that now they have decided to throw a little more money at these productions (actors, sets, etc.) and do the right thing by hiring consultants that know the franchise. Give the audience a little more of what they expect. Like with the NieR séries. It is essentially a walkthrough of the game and it is lovely.
“Entertaining” and “high quality” are meaningfully distinct characteristics. Mortal Kombat came out in the same year as Forrest Gump, Pulp Fiction, and Shawshank Redemption. Tomb Raider came out with Gladiator, Crouching Tiger, and Chocolat. Resident Evil was the same year as Fellowship of the Ring.
None of your examples compare, even for their time, with the higher echelons of what is considered (by general critical consensus rather than personal preference) artistic achievement in their medium. That’s what “good” means in the context of the article. That being said, the article points to the Mario movie as evidence of its claim, and my personal preference would consider that movie cheaply derivative (sprinkled with passion for its source material as it may be).
As a Calgarian, it was a joy to watch the Last of Us. After years of stumbling across the sets throughout the city, the anticipation was something else (plus I really love the game). It somehow exceeded all expectations. Bummer about it going to Vancouver for season 2 though #vancouversoft
Well, if he doesn't care, then I just might bother the time and effort to pirate it. But then again, a dismissive creator who's working with Markiplier isn't someone I'm really keen on supporting in the first place. I wish him luck, and that he is approximately as successful as I am in financial terms.
While this is not a nice, I don't understand why this is a big deal? And why anyone would pirate the game as a result of this 2 Dollars increase (which in percentage as ~33% increase sounds worse than it is). Others are doing this too, adjust the price after long period of supporting it. And for such a low price and as an indie developer, I think it's only fair. Also for anyone thinking of pirating the game out of principle, rethink it again. Game gets deals over time and at some point it was available for ~4 Euros (which should be more like 3.79 Dollars or whatever it might be).
The game in question is https://store.steampowered.com/app/1846170/Iron_Lung/ BTW. It has Very Positive reviews on Steam and is a horror themed short game. And the dev doesn't even come up with fake excuses or anything like that, it's straight honest about making more money. Which is fair to me! And before anyone accuses me, I am not affiliated with the dev or game, never purchased or received anything; it's the first time I hear about the game. Just mentioning it, because of my positive words defending the price increase. This is a rare situation where I am fine with it.
This is exactly how things should be done. If anything, him doing it this way succeeds at making me overrated interested in the game, which isn’t one I’d usually go for. Just because he’s doing it the right way.
Nothing significant has changed since the original modern warfare. At this point they’re bringing back “classic” maps from like 4 years ago? They’re clutching at straws.
Don’t get me wrong; it’s a fun game. It’s probably the best multiplayer shooter out there, but it’s wrapped up in many, many layers of turds and disappointment.
The launcher
I hope the Microsoft acquisition means they do away with it and go back to a regular launcher.
The battlepass
I wish games stopped treating me as a product and made games that were just fun, like Baldurs Gate 3 did. I shouldn’t have a battlepass that prioritises player engagement and forces me to be connected to the game season after season as if I’m on some sort of life support machine. Just let me unlock some cool skins and let me go and play some of the other games without feeling like I’m missing out.
Annual releases
When Warzone came out, and they had their first iteration of the new kind of Call of Duty games (with battlepasses), I won’t lie, it was some of the most fun I’d had since the original Modern Warfare games. Why throw it away and abandon that game for another one that comes out a year later and just sucks? Yes, it makes them more money but it fragments the player base and forces you to abandon all the perks you’ve spent ages unlocking through the battlepass.
This is such a great reply filled with disappointment. I did play MW2 quite a bit. DMZ was fun. My wife and I played MP a lot too. I bought her the battle pass one time and she was able to get it again multiple times just from the coins obtained from completing it.
It doesn’t scratch the same itch though. Battlebit is more for larger scale battles like Battlefield the game it was inspired from. Cod is significantly more arcadey, smaller scale and faster paced.
gamespot.com
Gorące