... proceeds with another yearly installment of game X that could have been released as DLC, but instead built it as "a new game", selling at 1 cent per bug.
I can think of a few reasons as to why a website would run ads. I can think of a few reasons as to why a website would limit download speeds
I cannot fathom for any non greed-ridden reason as to why a website would make you wait five seconds before downloading a mod. It’s an inconvenience for the sake of an inconvenience, a problem they made to sell the solution
Of course, we need to keep in mind that they don’t make the mods, they merely host them. Compare the amount of bloat on their website to other, less funded ones such as lovers lab and gamebanana, and it becomes apparent that there’s a money sink somewhere
I don’t know that I can handle more immersion in the Portal universe, I kinda like being reminded that a 4th wall separates me from murderous unscrupulous AIs.
Just in case no one knows this, you can absolutely play multiplayer in Subnautica 1. Takes a tiny bit of work and a mod, but doable.
Of course it’s not official, and may be bugs, but doable.
I’m curious what is going to be new in 2, thought the water genre had maxed out before doing deep and making it a horror game. Feel like anything else would just be DLC or a mod.
Below zero was such a disappointment overall. I liked the characters and some of the story but… The vibe was totally off. I liked exploring islands and alien bases in the 1st one but spending the entire latter half in an icy wasteland just had me feeling sour. If I wanted Antarctica I’d play that, I want to be UNDERWATER dammit. Here’s to hoping they learned their lessons and make it closer to subnautica but bigger.
You so absolutely nailed my feelings on it. I was really excited for BZ and it fell pretty flat for me. The extra time out of the water just felt so forced and unnatural to me. I was moderately excited by the big ice worm until I actually played and just found it to be a nuisance. I couldn’t get finished with the ice shelf soon enough.
Also, why is everything so much smaller in BZ? It’s THE OCEAN. It’s supposed to be huge. If anything it should be bigger than the first game. Anyways I agree I hope they learned.
Imo below Zero has the same problem that subnautica 2 will have aswell. Our stupid pattern seeking brain i so good at its job the enviroment will matches to existing experinces and therefore loose its intended alien nature. Just having some meta knowledge with how the game handle difficulty and depth and how a lush biome is more or less save with just a minor predator is working against the intended alien nature. Below Zero had some incredible bioms with mayor layers of depth like the lilypads islands with surfacing, floating and growing lilypads. But most of the bioms had some subtle telling of how the are intended in their color Palette or choice of Vegetation where i knew how the biome will be before i went info it.
Alien nature or not, the fact that BZ limited the ocean experience both depth, length, and breadth-wise and forced way more gameplay above water was a mistake in my eyes which is why it was never truly a sequel.
I did the same thing. I liked the first one so much I want to go back and finish BZ just for completion sake. Maybe I’ll start a new game without survival mode and just breeze through hopefully.
I played the whole game through with multiplayer between me and my partner. It might be better now, but at the time, all of the danger squids were completely inert, so it made it much easier to get deeper and progress further without fear.
Otherwise, it was a total blast and a great time. Excellent game.
While I’m not defending the price point ($80 is $80, JFC), after watching Nintendo Life’s hands on play of the game… I can see why Nintendo decided to have that as the price.
I’m definitely going for the bundle so I can avoid that price, however.
It is the fundamental problem with anything with “realistic” “raster” lighting. Visually you want it to look like what a city street actually looks like. Lamp post there with a nice bright bulb in it. But the actual lighting needs to look like it was filmed on a sound stage with a blue filter because THAT is “realistic”. So you have a lot of lighting trickery and so forth. The texture of the light source/bulb might be super bright but it is actually three invisible light sources that project the light that was baked into that scene.
When you switch that over to RTX? Maybe you hand tweak it so you actually get light from that street light. And, as anyone who has actually walked around a city at night can tell you, that shit is bright as hell… which makes all the areas where a street light isn’t REALLY dark and kind of creepy. Or maybe it is the phantom light sources that made things look nice that now make things look wrong.
We ran into this a lot at the start of the RT generation. Some parts of Control looked AMAZING and other parts look like… an office building. Some parts of Cyberpunk 2077 looked gorgeous and straight out of a Nicolas Refn film and others looked shiny and splotchy.
And its why one of the best demonstrations of ray tracing is… still kind of Quake 2. Because that is a game that was designed around the concepts behind ray tracing (dynamic lighting from real light sources) but also looks alien enough that our brains won’t say “That cave full of aliens looks wrong”
Its why I am so excited that the new DOOM is going to require Ray Tracing. That is gonna REALLY suck since I am “Team AMD” but it also means that level designers will be targeting one lighting scheme and can design around that.
I’ve been saying for some time that the biggest reason ray tracing looks lackluster is because it’s being held back by games needing to support rasterization. We’ve mastered rasterization which means any scene you can rasterize will look almost identical to a ray traced scene. And you don’t see scenes where ray tracing would blow your mind because those scenes most likely can’t be rasterized, which means they don’t added to the game. So for the end user ray tracing looks kinda meh because you don’t really get any significant benefits and the marginal differences between ray traced and rasterized scenes are not worth the performance cost.
It’s like having a 3D engine but you can only use it for 2D games.
you perfectly nailed the reason i don’t even use rtx. the side by sides just arent good enough, in the actual games. I can’t justify the additional performance hit when i literally cannot tell the difference in reflections when swapping between the two on a real gameplay setting. sure it looks different, but better? more often than not, no. obviously this all varies in degree game to game depending how it was designed. Hogwarts Legacy rtx DID look better, but it wasnt enough to justify it. the baked scenes were great looking too.
I’d say mid too about Outer Worlds, but the first half is above average IMHO. It’s the second half which felt half baked and lowered my appreciation.
I’d prefer some developers set their mind on a good/great 20h experience if they don’t have the budget for more, instead of trying to align themselves with the big players.
I didn’t get that far to be honest, the first world felt so by the numbers that I just kinda never picked it back up and looked up the rest of the story online.
I can’t say I missed much and my expectations for the next one are about as low as they can get at this point.
Loved the trailer, even though the first game was “only” a 7/10 for me. Regardless looking forward to this, Obsidian is making great games consistently.
If the main menu music will be only half as good as the original Im sold :D
Obsidian has always cranked out a banger when they’re making the second game, so I expect this one to be better than the last due to Obsidian’s excellent track record of making the second game in a series. The first one was only mid because it would have made making a sequel that’s better much harder. ^/s^
(I love how even they recognize this in the trailer for the game lol)
youtube.com
Ważne