“Because in 2 years the value of the product might be higher and we expect to always be paid more, regardless of the current deal we are making today.”
To be fair, those kinds of changes do not usually happen so rapidly after a purchase, and was likely already planned for implementation and started before the sale.
In other words, it is likely EA was already planning to make that change regardless of if the sale went through or not.
Not for modern Xbox titles, because Xbox online connectivity travels through the Xbox Live API, like Steam games often use Steam’s API. PlayStation never really had a central online service, and if they did it was always garbage/insecure.
Sure, developers could try to emulate modern Xbox Live API, but since it is still currently in active use, Microsoft could easily shut it down like Blizzard does with WoW server emulators all the time.
Too bad it doesn’t work for console though. Server emulators are almost always PC only, and in some very extremely rare cases, PC and PS3/Original Xbox.
I tried playing with PS players about 11 times, and every single mission ended with me being team killed and kicked right before extract, but after all the objectives were completed. I’m not giving them another chance.
I don’t really believe this. This just seems like someone lying about the situation after they were caught. He’s still making himself into a victim, rather than just showing the money was donated and moving on, leaving himself out of it.
My biggest issue is that he spends a long time explaining what was going on, but at the time when it was happening, he didn’t mention any of the stuff he brings up now. Its like he is updating the autopsy report after the fact. If he was contacting these charity groups like he says he was, why did he not provide at least his initial contact emails? When it comes to charity, I don’t see why anything would need to be proprietary or secretive, so their response could be included as well. Even including messages about the alleged infighting about who and where to donate to. That would have cleared everything up instantly. But that’s not what happened. He also doesn’t include any proof of this new explanation backstory.
To me, this just sounds like “Sorry I got caught, here is an explanation I came up with later that includes zero proof of any of it happenening so you’ll just have to trust me bro. And I finally donated the money like you all wanted, see? I was actually the Good Guy and Victim all along!”
Maybe I got it all wrong. But this does not seem genuine to me.
Being paid is better. Less cheaters and griefers on new accounts ruining everyone’s game.
There are still plenty of griefers (mostly PlayStation players in my experience, which is why I have crossplay disabled and don’t join randoms anymore), but imagine how many more would be there if they could use bots to keep creating new accounts to claim the game for free.
A game that is technically functional but neither good or bad should be a 5/10, not a 7. Which is my whole point. Access reviewers/ bias reviewers do not use the whole grading scale, they only use a scale of 7-10 which is wholly unhelpful when determining game review scores.
I am highly doubtful the game runs well on a Steam Deck in any mission difficulty above 5. It doesn’t even run well on my gaming rig and frequently dips below 40fps at 1080p in Diff 10 missions. And my hardware vastly outclasses a Steam Deck.
Anyway, the guns had ergonomics nerfed before we got weapon customization. Ergonomics effects how much “lag” the gun has compared to where you are aiming. Worse ergonomics means you have to wait longer for the gun to snap to where you aim before the gun is pointing where your camera is. Weapon customization was added with options to improve ergonomics. Compare the HMG with 0 Ergo (worst in the game BTW) and the Verdict with 100 Ergo (best in the game). Aim each and watch where your circle reticle is.
About 4 months ago, the developers “nerfed” ergonomics on DMRs and other long rifles, including the Anti Materiel Rifle, Adjudicator, and Diligence Counter Sniper. Now, this was acknowledged by Arrowhead at one point as a “bug,” but it was never added to the Known Bug List. It is still present in the game, and has zero priority of being fixed. The way they are treating it, it may as well be an intentional nerf, and I consider it as such. They know about it, and have absolutely no intention of fixing it any time soon.
Honestly, this is exactly what I expected. This is why I can’t trust review sites anymore. They only ever score a game from 7 to 10. I mean, IGN previously scored Concord a 7/10.