I already mod the hell out of Stellaris to have all the cool Star Trek races (at least, the portraits and styles and ships to create them with the already robust civ creation system) and treat it like a Star Trek 4X, so I don’t know if I want to really get this or not.
As far as I’m concerned, it’s just going to be a Stellaris mod with more targeted flavour and a preset starting position, like CK or various other PDX games. I see this as an absolute win. It’s not like it will invalidate Stellaris, it’s building upon it.
I guess I don’t care because I never traded in this game, but this seems like a major step backwards after 7 years. For many people I used to play with trading was a major part of their gameplay loop, I used to give my loot boxes to my friends routinely because I was too lazy to do it. I will hazard a guess that this is purposefully pissing off remaining fans and a sequel will be announced soon.
Yea, I was never that into trading.
I made a car that looked nice to me and I kept that with the stuff I already had unlocked.
Sometimes I’d unlock something new and try it out.
I never really got too involved in the cosmetics, but had some friends who played this like it was day trading or something.
I remember some new car decals being almost the opposite team color which I thought was a terrible design choice.
It’s been a while, but soon after Epic bought them out it started lagging and rubber banding like shit for me, which got old quick.
I must have had hundreds of crates when I stopped playing.
That has got to be one of the most miserable jobs you can do with a white collar. Imagine trying to asspull Watsonian explanations for questions that only have Doylist answers to people who will mail you anthrax if you just tell them the truth, which is that Nintendo doesn’t give a shit about lore.
Yup. I’m a fan of lore in a lot of series, but that’s not why I play Zelda.
I play Zelda because it’s fun. I like the creative puzzles that aren’t super hard, but hard enough to require a little bit of thinking. I like that there’s progression, but no leveling system, so a lot of the progression is learning to use new tools. I like the silly side quests.
I’ve never really been interested in Zelda lore, so I’m honestly okay with things not quite lining up. I guess I see each entry as a separate universe where Link saves Zelda in a different way each time. Zelda games rarely have direct sequels, and I think that was the real mistake this time around. Just let me fight Ganon or whatever in a new cycle every time, I don’t need any kind of story coherency.
Lore has always been on the back burner when it comes to the Zelda franchise, and I imagine is a major part of why Nintendo so rarely makes any direct sequels to Zelda games in the first place, because they really don't seem to like continuity when it comes to Zelda. The only reason Nintendo even wrote Hyrule Historia and established an "official" timeline for the series (which didn't even make sense at the time, and makes even less sense with the games released after) is because fans wouldn't shut up about it.
Didn't Disney drop out of gaming during Iger's first run as CEO? He seemed pretty disinterested in gaming outside of licensing IPs. Then again his opinions may have changed over the years. Not sure how I feel about EA being bought up by Disney. On the one hand, Disney gets one step closer to being an all-consuming pop culture monopoly. On the other hand, at least Disney doesn't have a console or platform to make EA games exclusive to. Well at least not yet.
I’m all for unions. But I’m not sure how it translates to good for players. Unions exist for fair wages and working environment, not direction of how games should be made.
Edit: People sure seem to get the wrong impression with my question. As I said in the very first line, I am for unions. They’re great and we should strive for fair working wages and hours, especially in 2023 where wages are stagnating while having massive inflation. We should have happy employees and I prefer my games made by happy employees. Failure to keep the wages up is creating shit ton of societal problems.
Issue is the delusion people are presenting here. Unions are not magic. It doesn’t automatically improve unrelated things. What people are missing is that there is no evidence the union has ever advocated for a better product. If one exists, despite my desperate attempt to find one, then it’s clearly a fringe case. All the replies are making a huge logical leap of simply saying happy worker produces better product with no reasoning behind it. Unions never argue for better product. That’s just not what unions do. It argues for the betterment of workers.
Unionizing increases productivity for some sectors. But they’re usually rare and only seen in specific industries. They generally have no significant impact on productivity based on research. If it straight up increased productivity and made better products, every company would love it. The argument is counter-logical. Companies do what is efficient. Even if we assumed individual productivity is increased, there’s still no evidence that these individuals would have the capacity to change the direction in which the product is being made in the upper tier.
No, it doesn’t. Pushing people to burn out doesn’t make more or better products, it just burns people out. People are more productive when they have work life balance
As someone in the industry I feel the opposite. A lot of features that are almost finished but cut despite being integral to the experience come from higher up pressure. The expectation to always overwork leaves no room to commit a little bit extra when it’s necessary because you’re always drained to begin with. There is also no room for creativity, playing around, or polish, because the deadlines are based on the bare minimum that will sell.
Of course unions can and do have more power in the direction of the game. Employees can also voice concerns to managers and owners without the fear of a bullshit termination. They’re pretty awesome for everyone.
Seems like people who are being fairly compensated in a comfortable work environment will make a better game than people being underpaid and overworked?
I don’t think that’s necessarily true. The reason wages are low is because the games industry attracts a lot of talent, so companies can get good talent for less. So I don’t expect unionizing to help in terms of quality of work produced, but it should improve wages and working conditions.
Quality of a product is not just a result of quality of talent (see: “I hate sand.”). Management, direction, and quality of life of the talent has a profound impact. If you want the highest quality product, especially in an industry that requires collaboration, you want your talent to be happy.
Maybe, but I feel like any quality gains would be minimal since people are already passionate about their roles (else why would those roles be so desired?). Then again, the Valve model really works, so it really depends on whether unions can change company culture, or if they’ll just secure better working hours and pay. The culture is the problem, and I’m not convinced a union can fix that.
Huh, well fear is a very different thing than stress. Once your stress turns into fear, you’re no longer personally invested in the project and are merely concerned about your own survival.
The video games industry definitely comes with a lot of stress, but they rely on passion to get value out of those long hours. This sounds like a situation of completely awful management, which won’t be fixed with a union (at least not immediately), since a bad manager can make life suck even if you have decent benefits, reasonable work hours, etc.
Then again, I don’t have a lot of details to go on, just that there’s allegations of “fear” at Daedelic.
With or without a union, improving wages and working conditions will improve productivity and the quality of the products being produced. This is an almost universal truth in research on the topic.
would you prefer games to be made by shareholders and execs or people who are passionate about making games and telling stories? when decisions are unilaterally made from the top down the quality of the product suffers, just look at nearly every AAA release from the last decade that have half-baked stories and enough bugs to make me start singing Hakuna Matata.
I love how this thread grouping is essentially argueing that the ends justify the means. Yeah, lets give a pass to companies in the name of capitalism.
Somehow they think less work means more game. I dunno, we’re way too deep into a circle jerk to hear any other opinions. Good for you to actually speak the obvious. Unions actually cure cancer too.
Still looks like an air purifier / conditioner unfortunately.
I was holding off with upgrading my PS4 Pro with SSD but when I saw new PS5 leaks I went with XSX. Sorry, that thing has no place in an adult living room lol.
Yeah, why they have to make it so curvy in the first place? And then they have to add a stupid extra base just to get it to not roll around. Too many designers in the kitchen IMHO.
I’ll take the bait. I consider both consoles evenly matched but from the perspective of Sony diehard it’s quite attractive value proposition:
I don’t care about first party exclusives because I’ve played enough Naughty Dog games by now. Third party ones will come eventually as always.
I didn’t own any Xbox consoles up until now so it’s a treasure trove thanks to backwards compatibility. Especially when plenty of X360 games run 4k60.
Game Pass is cool although new Microsoft games seem to be released in quite barebone state.
The console itself can be quite cheap where I live, got an XSX bundle with Diablo 4 for ~$450. Game Pass Ultimate with Live Gold tricks is like ~$70 for 2 years. If you want to get really cheap, region change to Turkey, buy rechargeable Visa and enjoy everything being -50% off all the time.
I just looked it up, and they even have full audio in French, for anyone who grew up with Goldorak in the ‘80s! 😀 (italian too, for anyone interested).
Honestly I like the look of the consoles however the pricing is incredibly stupid imo. 450 for diskless is pointless when the disked model is 500. 50$ doesn’t seem like much of an incentive to save by going diskless. The better option would’ve been to charge 400 for diskless and then 100 for the drive rather than 80.
Unfortunate for them d3 was so devoid of creativity and hungry for money, d4 doesn’t get a glance of interest from me. RIP bliz your corpse survived long enough to become the villain.
games
Aktywne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.