It's a shame that it's even considered "radical" since it's basically a copyright holder upholding their end of the bargain in the promise behind the origin of copyright. To incentivize creative content, a creator is given sole ability to monetize it for a fixed period of time. In return for that protection, the public gets it at the end of the term. Today's copyright is so far off course that it defeats the intent. There's no incentive to create anything new if you can keep milking existing content. And the public never gets a return for offering that protection.
Pretty radical for a dude who throws his conservative believes into everything?
The author of Fables is very conservative in his political beliefs. He has written anti-abortion and pro-Isreal material into the Fables comics themselves.
They’re still exploiting their customers who’ve been developing products based on a completely different fiscal agreement; you can’t just change engines after years of work.
The worst isn’t even people currently developing things - it’s developers who already have released products. Imagine if you released something like, over the summer, for example. You’ve been paying the current revenue share, and will continue to do so until Jan. 1, then you’ll start paying the per-install fee. So you’re paying twice for the same customers’ purchases.
I really feel like they're going to lose a lawsuit on that.
Unilateral contracts don't have unlimited power and "we can blanket change what we want to charge you on games already made" doesn't seem like it's going to be enforceable.
That’s the point. Denuvo states that their goal is to prevent piracy the first couple of months while the game is hot, so people cave into buying more. Then after a certain amount of time they remove it because it’s not longer needed and will get cracked at that point.
That's how denuvo is supposed to be used, doesn't mean it is how publishers do use it. The moment the game is cracked denuvo stops being useful. Doom Eternal actually launched with a drm free exe as mistake in the first place so it's never been very useful :p
Doom Eternal did release two major DLCs though, which might explain why they’re keeping denuvo for so long. I’m going to try the game again later to see if it’s running even smoother without denuvo.
DRM is what keeps me from buying. And makes we want to wait until there are significant discounts, to not do too much to help them pay for the implementation of DRM.
what the DRM’s typical pricing structure looks like. It calls for a flat protection fee of 126,000-140,000 Euros for the first 12 months, 2,000 Euros each month following the first 12 months, an additional 60,000€ flat fee in case the game sees more than 500,000 activations in 30 days, a 0.40€ surcharge on activations on the WeGame platform, and 10,000€ for each additional storefront (if the game is being sold in more than one online storefront platform).
I mean if its just playing it normally and not proper testing (run there and jump while spamming the inventory key until the game breaks kind of testing) then that’s a pretty sweet deal
As student with nothing better to do and in a time of better EA games yes, nowadays? I wouldn’t recommend it. I heard people played deadspace 1 to the end and got like 8 games back in the day.
Even playing it normally should earn you more. It’s EA, they have a lot of money. And the most common bugs and ux problems can be noticed by playing a game normally. If Blizzard made Diablo 4 to be tested normally, most of the things people complained about wouldn’t have been there from the start.
There’s anti-union busting laws that are supposed to disallow a company from blatantly targeting unionized employees. But they’re worthless if not used to take the company to court. Starbucks has been up to the same thing: when a store unionizes they mysteriously select it to close.
I meant … it’s not. There have been 3 larian games in the last 9 years, and all 3 have been great. And they’re not the only good games or RPGs. So the title is just the usual click bait crap
I played Divine Divinity some when it was released. It was interesting but clunky. It was no Neverwinter Nights.
I want to see us as gamers get away from sequelitis and get full games again without lock boxes or cash shops or battle passes. The excitement of Doom or Battlefield 2 or Elden Ring.
Wont happen. Average consumer consumes without thought for the larger picture, theres a reason we got to this point, people are suckers and buy it all, the most recent trap they willingly jump into is "pre order for X days early access", I will never understand.
Early access as in still in development, sure some are, but that is not what I was talking about. It's preorder our finished game (and/or buy a 'deluxe' edition) and get the game 'early' before its release date. Reality is, its just a delayed release for smarter consumers.
How is that not bad? It's preying on people to soak up more money. If you cant understand the difference between buying a game in development vs spending extra to play a game a few days early, then the sun might as well be the moon.
I wouldnt recommend buying games in early access either, especially if they are not discounted. If done properly theres no malice in a company asking for funds as you join the development process of a game. Whereas asking for more money to simply play a game 3 days before its official release with no other differences to the game is just predatory, abusing people excitement and hype to squeeze every last penny out where they can. Keep in mind its the multimillion or multibillion dollar companies pulling this, not your indie studios who are the ones who usually use the in dev early access program.
If you cant understand the difference between buying a game in development
I didn’t say anything about development.
If people want to spend money to play a game early that’s their choice. Just because it’s not something you wouldn’t do doesn’t mean it has no value to anyone. If anything it provides value to the people who aren’t going to buy the game blind on release date (unless the company postpones the release date to make room for early access I guess). Plus the dev has a chance to find and fix bugs before most people start playing.
Also is there a specific game you’re talking about? I’ve only seen games get more expensive after early access, not less.
I imagine the term Early Access is causing confusion here.
I am not talking about the Steam Early Access program, where developers can get some early funding of their game and community feedback on the game during development. I have no issue with this program if it used correctly, which it is mostly. Games generally do get more expensive when leaving yes, as most developers recognise that charging people full price for an unfinished game is unfair.
What I was referring to is different, the early access I am referring to is a recent marketing strategy, generally used to make people spend more money on 'deluxe' editions of video games.
The most recent example would be Starfield, Bethesda are offering a 'Premium Edition' which costs almost 50% more than the base game, it contains some art and soundtrack along with some skins (I won't rant about that right now, but come on...), but it's main selling point being the '5 days early access' to the game. The game releases officially on 6th September, but if you purchase this 'Premium Edition' you can play the game on the 1st September instead.
This is what I have issue with and it is a horrible new practice that many of these multi-billion dollar companies are pulling to try and get more money from people. I understand it's ultimately the choice of the consumer to buy this, but it is preying on their hype and excitement for a game to make them fork over more money that they otherwise would not do.
It's sad to see. Games used to just have a standard price, you paid it got a full game and off you went, now there's all these special editions with extra bullshit attached in an attempt to milk consumers. You should absolutely be against these practices.
They’re good at that. I remember trying Skyrim when it was new and we all didn’t know there would be like 15 rereleases and it felt weirdly dated. I couldn’t really put my finger on why, it just felt old.
So make something new. Microsoft is in desperate need of defining series rather than Halo and Gears of War, both of which are the types of games he’s criticizing here.
Almost definitely true. The type of games that devolver publishes are often fantastic, but they are smaller experiences that a subscription pay model would nigh certainly never pay for fairly.
They obliterated most of the goodwill they had and long term this stupid greedy move probably will have cost them more than the change could ever have gotten them. This is what quick buck exec’s van do to a company
Cost them more? I don’t think people realize Unity’s been working at a loss every year since the beginning, burning investor money. Just shutting down is quite frankly more profitable than continuing as is.
Almost every tech company functions in this manner today.
Modern tech cycle is basically keep operating at a loss to increase userbase. And then one of the 3 scenarios happen. 1. Most obvious, they run out of investor money and make drastic unpopular changes to make profit as seen here. 2. Sell company to an even bigger tech company, who will then most likely kill it too. 3. Become google/meta/etc. themselves, which is the least likely scenario.
It would have been perfectly fine if they did it this way to start. Tie the new licensing costs to a future engine version, give lead time before you start collecting data, and have the number be manageable.
But trust in such an absolutely critical vendor that your entire business relies on, and they told you they're perfectly fine trying to retroactively change contracts. The uncertainty of legal costs to protect your rights is a huge concern.
Every time it looks like it’s starting to calm down the idiot CEO comes out and makes a bunch of inflammatory comments and tells everybody it’s their fault for being confused or somebody actually asks for an exemption and they deny it on made up grounds.
It would actually be better if they just fired the CEO and try to blame everything on him. That is literally their only move at this point.
Is he the same guy who trash talk the employee a while back?
In 2019, he said:
“Ferrari and some of the other high-end car manufacturers still use clay and carving knives. It’s a very small portion of the gaming industry that works that way, and some of these people are my favourite people in the world to fight with – they’re the most beautiful and pure, brilliant people. They’re also some of the biggest f*cking idiots,” Riccitiello told PG in the interview."
I’d move the fuck away from Unity even if they did roll back all their latest bullshit.
It’s only a matter of time before they pull another stunt like that.
Remember, their shitstain of a CEO, surrounded by his troupe of yesmen, all thought this was the best idea ever.
He’s right, a product like that would have failed dramatically. At this point I just want them to release a dumb AF, streaming-only, inside-out tracking VR headset that connects to PCs. Forget trying to cram an expensive Qualcomm or AMD chip in there, it will never give you the ideal VR experience. Make something that’s $200 bucks, connects to any PC running SteamVR, and just does extremely well with streaming and low-latency. Both Airlink and VRDesktop have already shown that its possible to get extremely close to a cabled experience. All that’s left is some polish.
I just want to be able to buy something like an Oculus CV1 without Oculus software/proprietary hardware and a nicer screen. I’m still rocking the same unit I got several years ago and it’s still plenty fine for most things.
All of the fancy things like wireless and no-tower tracking are nice, but I imagine a lot of players are going to be seated and just want the immersion. Why not have a $300-400 offering that does this?
I could be wrong on this since I have no source but I always assumed that Oculus headsets were cheap because they’re a Meta product and you’re actually paying for it with your data/telemetry.
Like, the ungodly amount they spent on VR R&D is absolutely not being made up for by the few hundred dollar price tag on their headsets — I bet that barely covers the cost of materials. That must be for a reason.
I think having base stations not only increases price but also makes it unapproachable for a vast majority of people. Personally, I didn’t even consider the CV1 or the Index because I just didn’t have a room that could properly accommodate them. For the sitting use case, no-tower tracking is actually very suitable and probably works better.
even at ideal condition there is about 1~2ms latency(streaming 1080p game), while hitting 90hz requires 11ms frame time. so you are asking the game to at least perform at 111fps or above to function under said ideal condition. I think if some manufacturer can put together a chip set where they do the frame gen tech on the head set side, so the game just need to run at 60fps it would be a better option.(like PS VR ) Frame gen does require some other buffers to generate the in between frames, so that’s more info to stream over the bandwidth.
That’s basically what I got. Xreal Air (formerly Nreal until a C&D from Epic). 1080p per eye and something like 49PPD with a 45° FOV. Tracking is 6DOF and requires software on the host (only complaint) and connectivity is via a USB-C cable (uses DP alt mode).
It’s nearly as “dumb” as an HMD can get. From the teardowns that I’ve seen, it’s really just got an MCU, a GPIO expander, a 6DOF chip, and the displays + drivers. And I love that about it. No batteries or anything to worry about.
It is pretty narrow but also what makes it work, IMO. I don’t have them for immersion but for display replacement. The narrow field of view lets the 1080p display have nearly 0 screen door effect. Plus, the birdbath optics are really cheap compared to waveguides or fancy lenses in VR headsets.
This has been on my radar for a while to compliment my steam deck. But I believe it doesn’t do head tracking with the steam deck or does it? I just want a floating screen in front of me that stays still when moving my head around, otherwise I’m gonna hurl!
I think it’s great for my Deck but, that will indeed be a problem. The headset contains only the sensors and display systems but, none of the logic circuitry to “pin” displays. Including that would increase the price a good deal.
Understood thanks for the feedback. After posting you reignited my interest and I found out that they also have their product called beam which would do the trick to make a spatial display… if you’re willing to cough up another 120 for it!
Yeah… I’m not :P But, I am plotting a DIY solution. A solution that will probably cost more than $120 on components but, I think it will still be worth it.
So, I’ve got one for my steam deck and it’s less an issue than you might think, in my opinion.
When you’re focused on the screen, it doesn’t create too much incongruity when the background shifts, and it’s easy to just let you brain parse the screen as something that just floats in front of you.
It’s not immersive enough to get the inner ear involved and confused. It’s a lot closer to holding a phone sideways about six inches from your face and moving your head around.
The only time it felt weird was when I was using it in a well lit room, and I shifted my focus to something not on the screen, that was closer than the apparent distance to the floating display. It was weird feeling my vision try to reconcile that the nearer thing was moving behind the far thing.
games
Ważne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.