There cannot and should not be balanced and open discussion on this issue. You cannot “polite” your way into finding a way to say that non-binary people are not legitimate.
This is paradox-of-tolerance stuff. Maintaining an inclusive community requires being intolerant of intolerance.
The existence of non-binary people does not hurt you.
Insisting on finding ways to deny that they exist hurts them.
While the concerns you’ve raised resonate with many, it’s worth remembering JFK’s words, ‘Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.’ As a society, we must consider the nuance that exists in any debate, even one as sensitive as this. Open discussion should serve as a mechanism to understand what defines intolerance and how to appropriately combat it, rather than shutting down dialogue altogether.
MS is in the subscription selling business now. Their entire gaming future hinges on GamePass, and while I like the idea of games on tap (I’ve basically bought BG3 for my PS5 and nothing else in the year since I bought it, enough on PS+ to keep me going and I can barely catch up let alone keep up), I suspect the big devs that spend hundreds of millions on making AAA games are less than enthralled with the idea and if GamePass and day one “free” games win, the outcome will be more games that I’m not really interested in.
PS+ is not as good a product as GamePass, but I believe it’s healthier overall for the gaming industry.
When you say PS Plus, do you mean the Essentials tier which is (was) equivalent to Gold or the other tiers?
For the record, I think PS Plus Premium and Extra are great (until the price hike). The vast majority of time when I want to play a game day-1, it’s not something that’s even on GamePass. So their day-1 stuff means nothing to me.
But also, Essentials has given me enough to play I could just never run out of games.
The higher tiers. Not sure about the top one (Premium) any more. I got it because I thought I might want to play the older games, but it turns out there’s plenty of PS4 and PS5 games to keep me going, and frankly not enough choice of PS1 and 2 games to tempt me. A more complete library would have made sense, but I’ve literally got more on my shelf than they’ve got on PS Plus Premium.
And my internet is too rubbish for me to want to stream the handful of PS3 games either. It hasn’t even got MGS4 which would be the one interesting thing that hasn’t been anywhere else.
The reason it’s not working out is because they had no exclusives, now they do and the people on the platform that always had exclusives are suddenly upset.
It's outselling is what caused Microsoft to not deny it. It originally denied it because they had a rule that games needed feature parity with both Series X and S. BG3 split screen couldn't be done on S. The massive success is what led them to relax the rule. And virtually no one saw this level of success coming from within the gaming industry, including the developers themselves.
Edit: I just realized this is being upset about Starfield.
That is totally the fault of gamers. The biggest reason given for buying a PS5 over Xbox was exclusives. What the fuck did you think was going to happen? Sony started the exclusives battle and continually came out ahead. Obviously MS is going to fight. Making exclusives such an important decision in console purchases drove exclusives to be important overall. There's no sense in being upset that the industrynis literally responded to gamer's actions and stated motivations.
Microsoft would develop their existing first party studios and improve the quality of their first party titles, invest in third parties that they already had exclusive relationships with, or invest in up and coming studios?
Had Bethesda published a Microsoft exclusive since Morrowind?
You don't expect that from Sony so why expect it elsewhere? Sony started this game, gamers lauded them and rewarded them for doing it. Microsoft tried to not do that, and got beat down further than they had when they tried playing that game against Sony. Gamers wanted exclusives. Microsoft is providing that. You voted for the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party and now are surprised leopards are eating your face.
This was a forgone conclusion for awhile now. Folks are just upset because Microsoft has an exclusive that Sony gamers want to play. Boo fucking hoo. I'm pissed it came to this, but gamers did this. I'm angry about it, but I don't feel sorry for gamers as a whole about it.
Did they, though? I think exclusives predate Sony and even the PS1. They’ve been a part of the console space since basically the inception of the medium. Xbox itself launched with an exclusive “killer app” in Halo. Timed third party exclusivity and exclusive Map Packs were very popular with the 360 when it was on top in the seventh generation as well.
I don’t think Sony has ever made an acquisition of the same scope as Zenimax either in price or in how much of the market was fenced off from a studio they previously had access to. That’s not even going into the Activision deal.
Maybe we can now point to Bungie, but that was still half the price. Most of Sony’s acquisitions over its time were studios that were already de facto developing exclusively for their consoles. Even Insomniac. If you look at their history, Sunset Overdrive is a lone anomaly.
Exclusives suck, but I don’t see them going away as long as consoles and capitalism exist. You’re basically throwing shade at Sony for daring to fund the development of critically and commercially acclaimed games that gave them the reputation of having a quality first party library. Starfield on the other hand was developed as cross platform title until Microsoft paid 7.5 billion to acquire a major publisher. Wasn’t this confirmed this week by the document leaks?
Few complain when Halo is released exclusively because no one is being surprised that those games are now exclusive titles. That isn’t the case with the new Bethesda deal.
Sony and Microsoft used to pay for exclusives without buying the studios. So there's no real meat to the argument that "oh, the games were always exclusive because first party" or whatever. The consoles didn't really buy that many game studios until relatively recently in gaming history. They would pay a studio to not release on other platforms. This whole buying studios thing was just cheaper in the long run. So there's no real argument to be made about Sony just making better first party games. That's what they do now given that they own the studios. Both companies are guilty of buying out studios.
Exclusives pre-dating the PS1 was more out of lack of technology. No cross platform tech really existed. There wasn't a lot of crossover. Many platforms didn't last more than a generation or two. There wasn't even much cross over in the kind of games. If you liked fighting games, you bought a Sega over Nintendo for example. With the PlayStation, they competed against Sega first, Nintendo as more an afterthought. Xbox came in later to compete against PlayStation 2. The Nintendo 64 was just a different class, and even later, the GameCube. With Xbox and PlayStation, they had similar amounts of power and restraints (an N64 cartridge could not compete from a technical perspective against the storage of discs, plus multi-disc games could exist, not really feasible with cartridges) plus abstraction technology was more advanced and one could more easily write cross platform code. Now, you either had to pay for an exclusive or simply hope they only had the intent to target one platform (whether through preference or resource limitations). So the console wars really started to heat up after the death of Dreamcast and mainly between Sony and MS. Exclusivity wasn't via first party existed, but not to s great extent beyond their flagship games.
So, tldr, exclusivity has always been acquired via money and buying them. It's easy to say it's about developing better first party once those studios were bought outright to begin with. That's how most first party titles exist now.
No, but Oblivion came to PS3 later and Skyrim was outright broken on PS3, then Sony scuppered their console mod plans by not allowing deep enough system access. Safe to say they probably didn’t have the best relationship.
Sony doesn’t buy IP and deny it to other platforms. Their IP starts on Sony. If Microsoft never wanted to release Halo to Sony, it’s their decision to do so, but buying something that don’t had access to, then denying it is a shit move.
Gaming isn’t bedroom coders knocking out games in basic for microcomputers any more, it’s a huge entertainment industry and that’s how those industries work.
This is no different from Disney pulling Fox properties of other steaming platforms to put them on Disney+ since they brought them out.
Yes they do. They used to buy exclusive rights back during PS2 days but eventually both MS and Sony realized it's cheaper to just buy the studios. Sony has only a small number fewer acquisitions than Microsoft. Both companies have always bought exclusivity.
My reason for buying a PS5 is my Xbone bit the dust, and my Xbox 360 also had issues when I traded it in. My ps2 and ps1 still work. There was also the fact that the only available options were PS5 or Series S. I didn’t buy the console for exclusives, I bought it because it was the better available console and my previous one was dead.
No I didn’t. The announcement of their intentions to fully absorb Bethesda didn’t even come out until around the PS5’s release, and wasn’t completed until like 6 months after. Not everyone pays close attention to gaming news. And if you bought the console early on, there is a chance you never would have even heard about it, let alone completely understood the implications of the purchase.
Ok? But your experience doesn't change what the number one reason given is though? Sure, I don't get Pixel phone anymore either because two in a row failed on me, but I don't go around telling everyone "no one buys pixel phones because they die easily"
Yeah, but MS games aren’t console exclusive. They come out on PC day one two which is a bigger audience than both consoles combined. Given the player numbers Starfield really hasn’t suffered due to not being on PS. In some countries it’s doing exactly what a console exclusive should and getting people to pick up an Xbox.
If you don’t think a company as big as MS did a cost/benefit analysis before they made the decision I don’t know what to tell you. Of course any product available to more people sells better, but MS are playing a longer game. If previous Bethesda games are anything to go on, people will be talking about, modding, posting clips, etc of this game for a while and that’s tons of free advertising for XB and Gamepass.
ROFL… if you don’t think a company as big as Microsoft can’t make mistakes, I don’t know what to tell you.
And talking about a game isn’t selling copies. Nor is modding. People are pirating it and for good reason. It’s not worth the cash spent to donate to a company that thrives based on free labor to fix the bug ladened disasters they release.
How do you think marketing works? Someone posts a cool thing they’ve done in Starfield, and someone else gets some FOMO and decides to buy the game, sub to Gamepass, get an Xbox to play it, etc.
No not everyone is pirating the game, a lot of people on Lemmy may be as this is an echo chamber of techie types, but the general audience don’t even know how to, and if they prefer to play on console, can’t.
Clearly you have beef with Bethesda, and are letting it cloud your judgement here, but the fact of the matter is lots of people are playing and enjoying the game as is, out the box before any mods are officially available.
Over one game? I thought Fallout 4 was a disappointing step back from New Vegas and 76 was a misjudged project that turned up messy and broken and I’ve never even looked at playing. The last game of theirs I truly enjoyed pre Starfield was Skyrim, over a decade ago. I’m not white knighting them, you clearly have an irrational hatred of them and are unable to admit when they do something positive, a common issue today when people turn hating something into their identity and are unable to ever move from the stance. Like most Devs, they’ve had their ups and downs and the ups should be praised and the downs criticised.
Well there’s the fact that you omitted Sony and Nintendo from your criticism entirly, despite the fact that both companies have bought numerous studios and paid other studios to make games exclusively for their respective platforms for decades, thereby reducing their potential revenue for some benefit that’s clearly obvious to those companies.
And yet, when Microsoft does it…they are just limiting their potential market for no reason and it’s obviously a stupid business move. Sure. Seems a little sus, is all.
Either the entire fucking industry is guilty of this “bad business practice” or maybe there’s a calculated reason for it. Pick one.
You don’t see me complaining about Halo, do you? Do you wonder why? It’s because Microsoft did it with an IP that was already widely popular across all platforms, and then pulled it. And if I remember correctly, told everyone they wouldn’t pull it.
Sony hasn’t don’t that. Again, as I’ve said, they begin with their own IP. And that IP from creation is Sony exclusives.
Um…Sony was in talks to pay for Starfield to be a PS exclusive - which would have taken it from PC for a year and from xbox permenantly - until MS bought Beth.
Also, Starfield is a new IP, not an “already existing and widely popular” one…
I’ll also mention that Phil Spencer publically admonished and fought against exclusivity agreements for years. He has said in interviews both private and public that he prefers a world where there are no exclusives. Until the market spoke and declared “exclusives” to be the measuring stick of a platform’s health, thus forcing his hand. And now here we are.
And here we finally have the primary motivation for this comment.
Well we won’t know for sure on those for a few years. All we have are old FTC docs and no public statements. Regardless, existing games aren’t going anywhere. But even if it happens for future games, well, Sony’s been sowing this harvest for some time.
I have no love for this company whatsoever. Most of the their revenue streams should frankly be illegal. But I’m not exactly thrilled about every glorified software repository taking a pound of flesh off all revenue, licit or otherwise.
or the calculated amount based on the number of new people engaging with your game each month. Both of these numbers are self-reported from data you already have available. You will always be billed the lesser amount.
I don't think any of their stuff doesn't work now. Even stuff like Halo with anticheat has been allowed to work via proton already.
This doesn't provide any promise that you can use gamepass or windows store games on Linux, and it doesn't provide any promise that they don't use anticheat in a restrictive way on Linux machines. They can trivially provide a bypass in the cloud environment that doesn't get shipped to end users.
Hopefully they don't do that, but this doesn't really mean a lot to individuals buying their games.
Standard unless there’s and flying involved, either in atmosphere or space, then I invert Y. Can’t imagine ever inverting X, that just blows my kind. Been playing since before WASD was a thing, so I’ve seen most implementations I guess.
I guess I always have it my head I’m the object I’m controlling rather than the camera following, so my brain defaults to more direct control? I do tend to favour “in-cockpit” / first person view.
I guess it depends on what reviews were reading or even if you were reading them. I will give it to you that it rated pretty highly but I'm fairly certain most of the reviews I read at launch talked about the bugs, some even mentioned how pointless the open world was since it was just pointless set dressing.
This guy unabashedly loved the base game when it came out. So yeah, I don’t really trust his opinion, but it’s not inconsistent for him to praise new content for a beloved game.
That’s my thing with RPS. They have extreme opinions and while I do disagree with their statements, they’re always entertaining and I always go, “I see your perspective”.
I like it!
They’re also the very few game sites that give attention to indie games, or write creative pieces about specific elements in games. The author Sin Vega does great long form articles about interesting game mechanics.
Have you played it? Aside from the horrible buggy condition it launched in (most of which is fixed now), it's still an absolutely fantastic game. The story, the music, the character development, are all spectacular, IMO. Honestly, it's in the top 5 for me.
I thought it was really shallow. Nothing seemed to matter, the city was supposed to be one of the main protagonists, but it was just cery shallow, driving is the least fun i've ever had in a game like that, to the point that i never drove anywhere, npc's where a joke, so was the police. Most of the time it was just a Bethesda like "collect garbage and shut up" game. The music and artstyle i found fantastic, the sound design in general was very memeroble, but the game felt shallow and dead.
It feels exactly like Witcher 3 with cars, guns, and less janky combat. There’s a lot of people who think Witcher 3 is the best game ever made. I think CP2077 is better than Witcher 3. Of course, I’m that guy who doesn’t really love Witcher 3.
Of course, my favorite games are Bethesda “collect garbage and shut up” games. I play them for the story (feel like I’m getting judged for reading Playboy now)
I have tried to play Witcher 3 in several different stages but I just get incredibly bored and drop it. I genuinely cannot understand what people see in it.
Good thing I didn’t let that lead me to ignoring CP2077 because I liked it a lot. It does have the pointless crafting grind from Witcher 3 but if I just ignore that it’s fine.
I am just one people, so I only speak for me. What kept me engaged in Witcher 3 was the dark and interesting world and the stories the game tells. I really love that about the game! I recommend playing Witcher 3 and Dragons Dogma back to back: one has this rich and interesting world with so many interesting stories and people in it and the other has this great combat system I’d love if those games had a baby!
Basically me, too. I can do 4 or 5 playthroughs of Skyrim and enjoy the hell out of it and want more, but I only reached “late-ish-game” in Witcher 3 once in 4 or 5 attempts… and even then burn out.
The bugs aren’t even the main problem. The problem was that the game was marketed as “every single decision you make could have massive impacts on the story” and it turns out there’s only one mission near the beginning that can change depending on what you do leading up to it and that’s it. You can make the game completely bug free and it wouldn’t change that the game did not live up to the promises.
That being said, I did enjoy kinda enjoy the game once I accepted it for what it was. Someday, I hope to play the game they were talking about when they were promoting this one.
It is still one of the best games. It didn’t work on outdated consoles, that was the only flaw to complain about. Oh and it wasn’t gta, but that’s a positive in my book.
If they’re going to rework how rails work, wouldn’t it be better to get a bit closer to Transport Tycoon in this aspect? I think that it’s close to perfect: simple but deep. It’s relatively effortless to get a train route done, and you basically only have diagonal and straight rails, but it’s damn hard to make your route efficient.
If I understood the FFF correctly, that is not what they’re doing; they aren’t working with a half dozen straight sections, each fitting a single “square” (in this case a 2x2), and leaving curves up to the player. Instead they’re adding a new curve (the half-S) to be used with the other pieces.
At least Oblivion, unlike Skyrim, had actual classes (let's not talk about the leveling system, shall we?) and spell making. Plus some really, really good questlines (including the main quest, and the whole Shivering Isles expansion was rad AF). The cities also felt larger than in Skyrim and the Arcane University was an actual university, not a random village school with 3 students. Role-play wise Skyrim was the weakest of the three modern ES games.
A few years ago I replayed Oblivion for the first time since it came out. I played a pure spellcaster with no weapons or armor and it was a goddamn blast.
I would just sprint and jump around like a moron while invisible and ignore most threats. Threats I had to deal with got vaporized.
That's a little extreme, here at the fediverse we should strive to do better than reddit, so instead of asking them to delete their account, ask them to defederate. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
It can’t be remaked for many reasons. The best they can do is fund OpenMW or give up their assets. Actually making anything from it is not only rebuilding it, but solving many ways Morrowind is fucking broken.
I think regardless of timeline, Valve accomplished what they wanted which was higher adoption of PC gaming through handheld gaming. There’s been an explosion of PC handhelds in the market after their release and they’re the main storefront for it (even if it’s running windows). Their big picture mode worked extremely well with my Ally. Even though I initially bought the device as an extension for my Xbox with GamePass, I’ve found myself buying a bunch of games on Steam.
games
Aktywne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.