Rumors are that they want to charge $100 and they’re sitting back to see the financial climate with the price increases to see if consumers will bend over and take it without any pushback
Or…switch 2 version taking longer than Expected…
OR. they’re seeing the writing on the wall for the console industry and they’re going to release VI for all platforms (PC included) next year
My guess would be they’ll do some kind of tiered release strucructure, and/or have already finished or mostly finished 2 years+ worth of major updates, including new ‘chapters’ of the main single player story… and basically, you’ll have to subscribe.
Like … $160 for whole game, major expansion 1, 2 and 3, $120 for game + 1st expansion… Or your baseline $100, and then a subscription battlepass mmo monthly charge, or you can pay more for expansions in chunks, seperately.
Speaking out of my ass, I think the majority will take it without pushback.
I’m sure there’s a swath of people with a console just play the yearly COD/FIFA, eagerly waiting for GTA 6 to drop. They’ll buy it without blinking.
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.
That’s the confusing part for me because statements from the design team said they had the very optimistic goal of running most games at 4k 60fps, which is more like $1000 entry level imo.
It’s not a 4K capable graphics card though it’s a 1080p capable graphics card that they’re saying is 4K because of the existence of AI upscaling which I think is a cheat. So you’re already overestimating the cards capability.
I think the problem is Valve lost control of the messaging, which led to bad expectations.
At least in the US, a computer hooked up to a TV to play games means it’s a “console” and not a computer. Maybe we can blame Nintendo back in the 80s for going out of their way to avoid calling the NES a computer (despite it’s name in Japan being Famicom, Family Computer), but the distinction exists today despite technologically no real difference. You know this, I know this, Valve knows this. So Valve wants to make a computer you hook up to your TV so they can get you to use their money printing machine Steam in the living room too.
If you read Valve’s marketing material on the Steam Machine, they don’t use the word “console” once. It’s always either by name or the terms PC, computer, or system. They likely don’t mention the word “console” because to date, video game consoles follow a different business model, one where the model subsidizes the shit out of the hardware and then make money on the back end with game sales/licensing.
Current “console” hardware starts in the <$500 price bracket, and with so much third party media marketing calling the Steam Machine a console, that got people’s mind set on pricing expectations of that market.
My theory and point was that by thinking about that computer as a console, in the average consumer mindset it should be priced like a console. From a pure hardware product perspective there is no difference
Valve is thinking about it as a computer, and has stated they intend to price it like one and not like a traditional console
As someone who has hooked up computers to TVs all his life, I can tell you. Just turning on with a controller directly into game mode is a massive game changer as it is a pain to get it working today. Look for guides about it and see the batshit hacks people have come up with.
That and the overabundance of Bluetooth antennas. Oh, and it also comes with super fast WiFi 7 special connection for the frame inside the box. Also, heat and sound management. Gaming PCs are little space heaters, very efficient during cold weather and a pain in the ass in hot climates. Keeping them cool takes an assortment of turbines and makes the living room sound like an airport. If this thing is as power efficient, quiet and cool as advertised, it will be the gaming enthusiast’s dream.
A console is typically locked down; they can sell them at cost or a loss and make up the money selling games. A computer is typically not locked down, you can install games from wherever on it, so they can’t assume you’ll buy your games from them (even though you will)
I think both of you are right but also wrong. It’s called “whatever you want” and there is no universal name for the practice. If you’re not using your PC for media, it certainly isn’t an HTPC.
If you read Valve’s marketing material on the Steam Machine, they don’t use the word “console” once.
Doesn’t matter at all. Its clearly meant to operate in the position of one. They could have very well avoided that term to avoid implying the lock down that consoles come with.
They can set the asking price to whatever they like but a lot of us cannot justify those amounts for what amounts to a toy. By this stage in a console generation I would expect a lot more games and a lot cheaper hardware. The reasons that haven’t happened aren’t of interest to me as a consumer (they’re of interest to me as a nerd!).
Because hardware, software, culture, incomes, demand, supply, and many, many other factors have all changed since the 1980s. It’s not a straight comparison. Inflation is a factor but it is not the only factor.
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.
If you hate Ubisoft because they put a black person in their game, and not because they are greedy bastards who make utterly vapid slop, then you are an idiot.
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.
videogameschronicle.com
Ważne