I heard that inventory management and transferring items between party members is a chore, which is a shame since it's something that PF games have already solved - shared inventory space for all party members. It makes it so much more convenient and fun to use than the mess DOS games had.
I haven’t noticed it being an issue. When you loot an item you can send it to a specific character and if you want to move lots of things you can hit tab, see the whole party and drag and drop items from inventory to inventory. Maybe it gets worse later on, I’m only 20 hours in.
I’ve been playing on “console” (SteamDeck) so I know the UI is different but the issue I’ve found is that there are three different “inventory” options and two different “loot” options, and each behaves a little differently.
For example if I loot a corpse, you’re right I can send to a specific party member. However if I loot a chest, that has to go to me.
Similarly when I the character sheet inventory view I can sort by certain methods and then L3(?) to exit that menu. If I’m selling something it’s still (L3?) to open that menu, but B to exit it. Also the sorting options aren’t the same. Also switching between characters during a trade event is one button. However switching on the character sheet is three buttons. There is also a third lesser used “put in device” menu with even fewer sorting options and you can’t switch characters.
The game is excellent and you can get used to these things but I do sometimes have to spend time just sorting things.
Let’s say that’s something Microsoft would even allow, it diminishes the ability to compete with the PS5. Why would I get a Series X if there’s a chance that some big game launches will have less features than other current gen platforms?
Microsoft really hamstrung this generation of consoles by releasing the S and demanding it runs feature parity with the X.
Hey guys, you should get a Series X because BG3 is coming out. Sure it will be missing features that you’ll get on the PS5 like split screen, but you guys understand we need to support the Series S and have parity between our two consoles.
So even though you spent more money on a Series X, that’s capable of running the full game that the PS5 is getting, you should just be happy that you’re getting the game at all. Don’t worry about having paid for a console that’s capable of more.
Your comment makes zero sense. The decision not to release on Xbox at all is not Microsoft’s. It’s Larian who rather sacrifice an entire hardware base for a niche feature. You obviously didn’t read the article. It’s spelled out there.
While there would be some variance in technical capabilities between consoles, feature parity between the two would remain the same. It would remain the same because Microsoft would demand it remain the same, from both its own studios and third parties.
Wow, I’m amazed on how bad you’re at grasping the basics of what I wrote.
I 👏 DID 👏 NOT 👏 WRITE 👏 ABOUT 👏 CUTTING 👏 SPLIT SCREEN 👏 FROM 👏 SERIES S 👏 ONLY 👏 BUT 👏 ALL 👏 XBOX 👏 VARIANTS 👏 SO 👏 THE 👏 GAME 👏 CAN 👏 LAUNCH 👏 AND 👏 NOT 👏 LEAVE 👏 XBOX 👏 USERS 👏 IN 👏 THE 👏 RAIN!
The article is about feature parity between Series S and Series X and not about how all Xbox variants can’t have feature disparity with PlayStation. If Larian were to cut split screen for all Xbox versions, the game could launch just fine.
Where did Microsoft or Larian say that was an option? Where did Microsoft say that they would be happy to have features cut from the X to keep parity with the S?
I pointed out how poor a business decision this would be if Microsoft would allow it. It ruins their offering for the Series X. How can it compete with the PS5 if they start allowing developers to drop features from Xbox games? The entire point of the article is that Microsoft has boxed themselves into this corner. And your suggestion isn’t a good solution.
Where did Microsoft or Larian say that was an option?
That is an option because exclusive features come to one brand all the time. Everyone with even minor insight in video game business knows that.
Where did Microsoft say that they would be happy to have features cut from the X to keep parity with the S?
It’s not about happiness, it’s about what the rules allow and since there are exclusive features on other consoles all the time, it’s obviously allowed. That’s how the Spider-Man character ended up being exclusive on the PlayStation version of Marvel’s Avengers. Golden Eye 007 has online multiplayer exclusive to Nintendo Switch. Those are well-known facts and if you don’t know them: That’s on you.
I pointed out how poor a business decision this would be if Microsoft would allow it. It ruins their offering for the Series X. How can it compete with the PS5 if they start allowing developers to drop features from Xbox games?
Yeah, you’re such a great business genius, you think not launching a game at all is better than cutting a niche feature barely anyone cares about. Yes, you totally convinced me.
I guess you gonna vote me down again because you cannot stomach that I’m right and you’re wrong.
I think you are misreading, they are refusing to launch because of the feature parity but, that’s because they are consciously deciding that split screen is a hard requirement for the game to launch, whereas with other consoles(steam deck) they just removed split screen and called it good.
I just hope they've put in a testing procedure.
i don't understand how they can be releasing updates so frequently.
the game wont get less bugged if they're just playing whack-a-mole.
relying on user testing is okay when its in pre-release. but by now they should be testing properly before releasing updates.
or they could offer people a discount to sign up to use an 'unstable' branch, release stuff there for a couple of weeks to prove it before inflicting untested updates on the unsuspecting full price customers.
Wouldn’t that make McDonald’s happy meals also gambling? If not explain the franchises that will absolutely refuse to swap toys during certain promotions (Bionics and TY I can think of off the top of my head).
I don’t think people buy happy meals for the toys. You know what you’re getting to eat, which is the purpose of the chain. It is a food service company, not a toy manufacturing company and the toys are only tokens of appreciation for the customer.
EA is a video game company and your experience and ability to play the game basically depends on these loot boxes. In fact, you play or pay to increase the chances to get a good deck, but nothing is guaranteed. It is random or perhaps even more perverse, it is programmed to deny or condition good players on your decks to keep you playing for the next loot box.
The only way this is not gambling, is that you don’t win money at the end of the day. Just satisfaction.
Fifa loot boxes contain different players, so you could either get Messi or a 3rd grade soccer player, with the 3rd grader being weighted more heavily in terms of being acquired.
Those cards still hold value and the game is made to be played with multiple of the same cards. But you’re right, trading cards are a gamble.
You pay for a mystery pack
You either get good or bad cards
You’ll keep buying to get better stuff
It has all the checks.
But I think it’s important you don’t need to buy booster packs to enjoy the game. I can buy multiple pre-made decks and I know exactly what I get and still can enjoy the game.
Some games (now not talking about FIFA) even rely on loot boxes to make the game more enjoyable. You even can get timed stuff you can only use an X amount of days and poof… it’s gone.
Also digital purchases might be considered “too easy”. With cards you at least get something physical.
Not sure though… all I personally think is that micro transactions and loot boxes are killing the fun and quality of games.
lol, I lost nothing because the release/roll back happened during work hour yesterday, then before I even get to play again the fixed update rolled out. XD
Really sad. GTA Online in principle sounds so cool, but it's such a shitty execution. I'm sure if modded servers were encouraged I'd find something to my liking but the way this rotten piece of shit company treats modders is just despicable, and always has been.
A lot of stuff is Iike that. Ultimate Team in Madden or FIFA, without the monetization, could potentially be one hell of a game mode (though also maybe hard to balance). The idea of being able to build out a team to your personal preferences and play style and match up against others head to head is awesome.
But "fuck you, we want users dropping $10k on their team", so we can't have nice things.
I believe my last time playing FIFA was on the PSX. I vaguely heard something about loot box style booster packs to get players I think? Imagine Nintendo would do that with Pokemon, and all the good & rare ones would be super rare, but you could of course buy packs for real money. 🎰
That's basically what ultimate team is in practice.
If it had no cash involved and was either tuned to a level where a normal person could build a team that was competitive at the high end in a month or so (since it is, ultimately, an annual game) or you just had a budget and could sign who you wanted (based on "market value" that was set based on overall rating and position or that fluctuated with how many people had a guy on their roster), it could be awesome.
But yeah, it's basically a card game (that I think also has cards expire, though I don't play it at all) that's designed to milk whales for cash. And they replaced a lot of the normal Madden tournaments you could win money playing to use this nonsense mode instead.
The only semi-saving grace is that it's mostly self contained. There are obnoxious ads for it, and other game modes haven't seen the development work they should because they spend most of the non-engine work on that nonsense, but you can still just play online head to head of a great football sim if you tune out the nonsense.
It's super scummy and I would love to see legal involvement shut it all down. Lootboxes are unregulated gambling and in sports games specifically they're very obviously targeting kids.
Yeah. I already don't do trading card games because of this. Having an expiration date on the cards sounds even dumber. Kinda sad how everything nowadays has to get milked into oblivion. Really kills the fun of many games, but unfortunately people still buy into it. Reminds me also how "micro" transactions ended up ruining the mmorpg genre. Everything is just so over-commercialized nowadays (same for the internet).
So I think it was "games played" "contracts" and there were ways to earn extensions through normal play when I briefly played the single player part a while back. I recognized the giant trap for what it was and bailed and am not sure the current state, but if it did exist and is scummy and makes them more money, I'd be surprised if they walked it back.
Loving the game, do agree though that it starts to get a bit muddled and confusing - at times it feels like I’m not really sure which quests I’m doing, why I’m doing it or what I’m trying to achieve – very realistic to real life in that regard but it can feel a bit of a chore
I kind of stopped paying attention to side quests. In a lot of RPGs, I feel like they’re discrete, separate errands, and usually contained within the area where they’re given. BG3 side quests seem a lot more integrated, in the sense that I’ll often just happen along the next step in one as I pursue main quest. If not, then it may be because the next step is in the next Act. And some of them seem to be mutually exclusive.
Maybe because it’s my first play through, but I’m now in ‘if it happens, it happens’ mode, and I’m confident that there are enough opportunities for me to make different choices to have a substantially different experience next time.
Looks like Gamepass gets to play Sep 6, so it isn’t the “premium” edition that lets you play Sep 1. Oh well another 5 days won’t kill me.
ETA: Microsoft continues to do dumb things with pricing. Standard edition is $70, Premium edition is $100. Yikes, but ok. However, they sell a Premium edition upgrade for $35. Why does Standard + Premium upgrade cost more than Premium?
Likely they think that the upgrade is mainly (maybe exclusively) for people playing via game pass. The $5 more is because you didn’t buy the game to start with. They did the same with FH5 when that launched I believe.
I’m with you on pre-ordering but GTA and Elder Scrolls games are my two exceptions. Not sure how I feel about Starfield, should be similar to an Elder Scrolls game since there is no online stuff to go wrong.
My whole hearted advice is to wait for reviews before ever buying a game. Therenis really absolutely zero reason to ever pre order. The pre order bonus skins or whatever are playing on your emotions. People need to resist!
Haven’t preordered a game in at least 15 years. I preordered this one. I want that juicy September 1st playtime. Haven’t been this excited for a game since I don’t know when.
The developer worked designing slots for the gambling industry before.
Part his game mechanics are really addictive as they are similar to how people gets addicted to gambling (lootboxes, coins, spins, colorful lights, win animations, sounds similar to slots machines).
One QoL improvement I’ve not seen here is a better journal system. When I can’t further a quest line even something vague like ‘Continue your journey so learn more’ would be great. I have spent time on some quests hunting down a person to discover the quest can only be completed in the next act multiple times now.
This was an issue I had with DOS2 as well. It was at the point I literally wrote stuff down in a notebook so that I could keep track of the side quests and what the last step was. Eventually they did overhaul the journal in that game to be a lot more useful though.
games
Aktywne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.