I loved that game, despite its flaws. I played it about a year ago, but it was still quite buggy. The world really sucked me in though, I don’t think a game managed to ever get me that emotionally involved for so long. I think it had the right balance of V being both controlled by me, but also a fictional character with their own life. I also ended up playing it twice with different builds, which was a lot of fun
A stellar game bogged down by over promises in marketing. It's a fantastic game and I played it at launch, 100%ing it with a total number of bugs under the number of fingers (both hands!). When it tried, it has some of the coolest cyberpunk concepts I've seen, not even in the main quest.
For me I think the saddest part about the game is how modding brought some of the lost vertical slice content back to the game and how some of the early game content fades throughout the game. All the passenger seat riding is quest-only, by the end of the game you can only be the driver. Wall climbing wasn't critical, but it was a very popular part of the E3 showing.
Overall though it's still la solid gamem I'm glad that mods brought in a metro system and Spider-Man swinging and pole vaulting :D
Me too. If the sales aren't high enough, Microsoft may reconsider and decide to sell it on the PS5 (probably with some DLC included) a year later or so. It cost them a whole lot of money to buy all those companies, including Bethesda, and they're going to eventually have to recoup a profit from those purchases.
If that means releasing on Playstation again, I think they'll do it rather than risk losing money. Even Disney has learned with Disney+ that having your own exclusive platform and not sharing isn't great business sense. It costs them a lot of money every month to host everything and produce content, and if they don't license out that content to competitors, they can't make their money back.
I can see Microsoft learning the same lesson. Especially given that Disney+ hasn't been profitable ever, and now the red ink is starting to catch up with Disney. If keeping big games from big studios starts losing Microsoft a lot of money, I think they'll fold, at least partially.
What do you mean? I thought the first one was one of the most "grounded" city builders ever made. Do you mean specific mechanics or maybe visual styles?
They've got that this time, and it is modeled, at least a little bit, off of real world things like people deciding to go somewhere based on parking availability and such.
irl when you make an apartment building the ground floor is used for commercial purposes (you can have banks, restaurants, clothes stores, butchers, surpermarkets, whatever...) as you can see in the photos I linked.
Even more, you can buy (or rent) an appartment and make it an office for your business, so, appart from industrial zones, everything is mixed irl
The developer is European idk why the game focuses only in american style city planning that are highly inefficient and car-centric. You barelly need a car when you have access to all kind of services at 10 or 15 minutes walking
The ingame "High density residential zones" should include some type of commercial activity in the city to be more realistic
Right off the top of my head is Abzu. Not a hard game, simple puzzles, but really nicely crafted environments and experience. It's a bit short but it was well worth the experience. It's quite an old game by now so probably not hard to get it on sale.
Funny you mention it, I just finished the 4th and final weekly for Origins this morning. Though after 110 hours to 100% it, not sure I'll be moving on to Odyssey too soon.
Journey looks really special, thank you for the tip! I've played plenty of Minecraft many years ago - I should have mentioned that in my post. I even ran a server for my family for a while. I'm just looking at Subnautica now to see what the creative mode is like, thank you!
Fucking hell this is super weird. I was going through my comments history, and one of them was "what's a boomer shooter?"in reply to someone who mentioned the term a few weeks ago.
Since it wasn't replied I looked it up like a minute ago, and came across this very article.
The very first thread I clicked on after I came back to my feed was this one :0
I mean, the article specifically states that, as high-budget games, Doom 2016/Eternal don’t really fit into the category:
While they aren’t necessarily boomer shooters due to their higher production values, faster-paced first-person shooters like Titanfall 2, Doom Eternal, and Halo Infinite are earning more goodwill than the latest Call of Duty and Battlefield games, proving that a faster-paced and more fantastical FPS still appeals to mainstream audiences.
I don't know, you may as well say the same thing about the Switch and every port it gets. The S has its strengths and shockingly few weaknesses given those strengths.
The switch is a handheld and the ports it gets are for that reason. It wouldn't have sold enough to get basically anything third party if it was the same device without portability (see BOTW as a system seller when it literally already existed), and it still doesn't really get that many current gen demanding ports.
The fact that there's a worse Xbox you're required to support when the Xbox already lacks some of the asset loading tricks of the PS5 and has less units sold on top of it isn't something developers can just ignore. BG3 really isn't all that demanding for a next gen open world game, and compromising your vision to force it onto a worse console isn't something people want to do.
The Xbox Series S is a cheap lower-resolution Xbox, and the ports it gets are for that reason. The parity scales well for most games and reduces consumer confusion.
BG3 really isn't all that demanding for a next gen open world game
Most games these days, regrettably, don't bother with split-screen multiplayer, and definitely not with the worst-case scenarios of how far apart the two players can be in that world, which is their hurdle right now.
Parity here isn't on a scale. It's a binary trait. Either they are the same or one is worse than the other. The shitty XBOX does not have CPU parity with the real one, and it's a serious limitation that effectively means that the "good" Xbox also has that worse CPU in terms of game design. It will obviously still get some games, but it's losing games that it would otherwise get because it has nothing in common with a next gen system.
Split screen being the specific thing that BG3 is struggling to do isn't the point. It's merely a symptom. For a next gen open world game, split screen BG3 is still not that demanding. The fact that all the real action is turn based makes it far easier to make run than a similarly dense real time game with real time physics demands, and the fact that the Xbox S can't handle it is a very strong example that it's a piece of shit.
Microsoft wouldn't have nearly the install base without the Series S, and developers can either target that platform or not, just like the Switch, because people bought it for its own strengths. If they want to scale their games up to a spec such that it runs on PlayStation but not Xbox, they're welcome to, but they lose access to a large pool of customers, like those who can stomach paying $300 for a console but not $500. There are plenty of other next gen open world games that work on Xbox.
Also, your analysis on how it should perform isn't really based in reality. We can go to interviews where the Swen Vincke calls out the way their game does split-screen specifically. And besides, at this point, Xbox engineers are involved, and BG3 will run on Xbox, though likely just next year.
It has no strengths, and the install base is shit.
The switch only gets away with being a last gen console because it's a handheld. The Series S has all the performance benefits of a last gen console with the install base of one that released 5 minutes ago.
There is no "the way they do split screen". BG3 while running split screen is not a game that should make a current gen console struggle in any way. It makes the S struggle because it's not a current gen worth of hardware.
Its not the CPU that is the issue anyway. Its the memory both size and bandwidth. Microsoft addressed the size somewhat by making some more RAM available but that doesn't address the bandwidth. The issue is developers are hitting limits in shifting assets around as compared to the X. Its why you see significant texture differences and skipped RT in titles.
I don't have a crystal ball for how it will play out in the second half of the generation but you would have to think it is more likely to become a bigger issue than not. Its also imho another reason why there won't be a Pro series console. More likely they sunset the generation faster instead and just go with a whole new generation that trumps the PS5 pro. Because at least they know that the existence of a PS5 pro extends out the Sony generation enough to give them a window to do this. Or, and this would be a massive shame, this is the last Xbox hardware generation. I don't think its likely but maybe enough generations of trailing marketshare means the bean counters give up on that aspect of it.
We already saw through court documents that Pro-or-similar consoles are expected. The difference with Microsoft is if they stick to generations like they implied they wouldn't. You could get creative with you how you count Xbox consoles and say, "Here's the Xbox 6X and Xbox 6S", where 6 is a larger number than the PlayStation's 5, which we know is a strategy that works. Out of the gate, very few games would require that larger hardware, and unlike PlayStation, purchasing an Xbox game once gets you the upgraded version on new hardware. I imagined this is the direction they were headed in when this generation was designed, but 2020 sure did change the trajectory of all sorts of things even if I'm right. I also seriously doubt they're interested in leaving the console space given the acquisitions they've made in the past few years.
maybe enough generations of trailing marketshare
The 360/PS3 generation was extremely close, and they had the lead for most of it.
I’m not touching that game until they go and take the cowboy out of the game. We’re not fools Blizzard, that rename was just a cheap way to put things under the rug and we know already who’s that guy based on
But like...the real guy isn't a cowboy. They renamed him. You'd remove an entire character from the game? Renaming him seems like the appropriate response.
I agree removing the character entirely seems too far. The characters are designed differently enough that you would be leaving a reasonable number of people without their favorite playstyle entirely without a suitable replacement.
I get people not being able to look past the history, but I'm not sure there's any more reasonable course of action that can be taken. The name was the homage, not the kit, art, or lines. And now that name is gone.
I think those who are still upset about it would have to accept they fall under "Don't like? Don't engage" rather than calling for further action.
gaming
Ważne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.