I just came off a bipolar induced manic phase. I hyper focused on eve and played it literally 8-12 hours a day for a few weeks.
The game is fun. It’s a slow burn and a lot of the allure comes from the setting itself. I don’t have nearly enough time to play anymore. Getting your ship into the pvp zone, finding a group, and finding a fight can easily take an hour.
I also never really got into it because it is pretty boring. Another reason is the time sink / grindfest this game is. If I want a job I will get one that pays me and not the other way around. That is ofc just my opinion and I send a glhf to everyone who enjoys playing EVE!
I am not unfamiliar with what you are describing. Games can be of help in certain situations and as long as we don’t get too lost in them and don’t neglect our real life there is nothing wrong with it.
None of my friends have a Meta Quest (or any VR headsets for that matter). On the extremely few occasions the headsets are brought up, all the conversations are the same; “it’s kind of cool but it’s made by Facebook”.
I wonder how many people would be in the market for a relatively cheaper headset like the Meta Quest if it wasn’t a Mark Zuckerberg project
Its a mixed bag. The Pico headsets are around the same price point but at that price point, you are typically paying with your user data as well. Its just a question of who you are giving it to facebook or some random ass Chinese company. While Facebook trying to own "VR" for itself is bad I will at least thank them for making headsets that make it more likely people are willing to dip their feet into VR. While facebook sucks, only having to pay 300 to 400 to get into something you may absolutely hate. They make for great "starter" headsets that you can probably easily find on the 2nd hand market for sub 200. Try out VR on a quest and if you like the concept and feelings of it probably invest more on a better headset. Hopefully we will hear more about Valve's Deckard soon.
Edit: I almost forgot to mention PSVR 2 which is pretty damn good but for 550, I don't think it will have a massive appeal to console games seeing as they are gaming on something funnily worth less than that headset. It being locked to only the PS5 is also a massive penalty against it and there is no news of a fan made driver for it on pc.
They’re not just entry level headsets. You can link them to a powerful gaming computer through Steam Link and then they’re the equivalent of a $1200 headset from Valve or HTC.
100% not equivalent. I said entry since it gets the job done but it has a ton of limitations. The biggest one is it having to compress the video via the link cable and it having to decode on its own cpu. So this can lead to a some artificating and some stuttering issues. This is a problem that can be solved if Meta chooses to use DP over usb via the displayport protocol but that makes engineering a bit harder and it runs counter to their whole point of the device being a standalone unit, this isn't even an unrealistic ask since this is how the PSVR2 works.
2nd one and this is only a partial issue but its still worth mentioning battery life. For many people having a link cable will extend the life of your quest 2 but it won't keep the same charge level so a session will probably stop after 2 or 3 hours. Which is fine for a single person but if you are doing this for a party or something, may not be enough time to let everyone have a go with the thing. So a standard headset will just have a dedicated power cable and can go for as long as you want it to. Like said I'm hesitant to put too much faith on meta since they can easily drop support for these headsets. To my knowledge the quest 1 still works with a link cable but how long do we expect that to be the case, maybe one day a software update with their oculus platform basically makes it impossible to use it.
If your computer has USB-C 3.2 v2 then you can play for infinite time over the charge cable. I have a couple on my MOBO and as soon as I switched to those ports I never had charging issues. I think that resolves the video compression issue too. I’m not certain about the video issue but the bandwidth of 3.2 v2 is double what the display port is. I’ve never had any issues anyway. I’m sure there are other benefits to the pricier headsets too, like not having to deal with Facebook, and possibly better interfaces and stuff, but for the money the Quest v2 is pretty awesome.
I’m sure they’re waiting for the price tag of a device with the features you describe to be more in line with current steam deck prices before doing that. They probably don’t want to annoy early adopters either.
Thats the main goal imo. Theyre not teying to compete with the high end devices, all of them will likely download steam and give Valve money anyways. Valve always targets on expanding the market, with vr and such. The Steam Deck exists to expand the market to budget pc console like gaming, and it would not make sense to replace it now.
Valve I dont believe sees it like a cellphone where theyre trying to make more money by doing yearly releases. They arent a hardware company fundamentally. They only develop hardware as a means to expand market, not to make profit directly off of.
Its why virtually none of their hardware projects are bog standard, be it steam machine/deck(Linux market), index/vive (VR), Controller (touchpad, HD Rumble), Link(local streaming) as each project was designed to introduce pc gaming to a new market, or expand pc gaming by adding new features
Valve is also a privately owned company, meaning that every decision they make will always affect Gabe, and not someone different every week like most other companies. Valve needs to think long term while their competitors need immediate effects.
This article is absurd. Corridor made a tech demo to show what's possible with AI. They weren't suggesting that it should or shouldn't be how things are done in the gaming industry, just how it could be done. What sort of smoothbrain neanderthals take issue with a tech demo?
The series died with Desmond. They were building up to something in the present day and then just fucked it all off with no payoff. And then proceeded to not replace it with anything. Where’s the ongoing storyline to hook me in to continue playing? 4’s playtester double agent was cool for a little bit but not enough to keep me interested and they never got it to a point where I wanted to know more after the credits rolled. The series ended for me there, when they confirmed Desmond was just a brain in a jar now, fuelling abstergo’s games.
It was the same with lies of P… I think it’s becoming a trend and someone needs to stop it, it’s false advertising. None of the reviews are credible, they’re not reviewing the same game
Nah, they don’t need to stop this at all. This basically lets people pirate games all they want so long as the devs don’t intentionally throw in a game breaking bug on the review version.
This game really was the buy of the century. It just keeps getting free updates. 8 player multiplayer sounds great but it seems a stretch to hope for couch coop for 8 players.
I saw an interesting comment today regarding Halo Infinite and it’s lack of couch co-op, the user was basically saying it doesn’t matter as much as it used to and I guess it’s true. Even if he got 8 player local co-op working, how many people would get 7 other people to come round and play? It’s hard to essentially do a LAN party these days when you can play the same game online together from the comfort of your own home.
I really wanted at least 2 player splitscreen to work on both mcc and infinite on pc, I’d love to play it with my girlfriend but it’s dumb if she has to not only buy the game again and play on a tiny screen next to me while i play on the big screen (i use my pc a HTPC in a gaming room, more like a console than a PC)
Does split screen still not work? I’m pretty sure it doesn’t for MCC at least, and you can use the home console trick to give two accounts access. That’s how I played MCC on Xbox with my fiancé so I know you can do it, but I don’t know how it would work if you don’t use a console at all.
Well me and my three kids play Stardew Valley. My wife and I take turns, but if we can see what’s happening on 5 player couch coop we would probably play it like that.
Honestly, I doubt it would be a large demographic. It’s hard to get people to even play something splitscreen, why would a bunch of friends huddle around a TV so they can see their small section of screen when they could just play on laptops together even.
I got Minecraft for $10 during I think alpha. I downloaded the demo, spent several hours playing it, then bought it. As someone who never makes decisions that quickly it was a great impulse buy that I used for years.
Almost. Don't get me wrong, I FUCKING LOVE Stardew Valley, got 300+ hours in it, but Terraria was like $2 for ages and it's every bit as good and still getting updates as well
I will always support valve because of their amazing Linux support but if GOG finally made a client for Linux then I would try to use that more. I wish Epic would also support Linux but with massive douchebag Tim Sweeney running the company, that will never happen.
If these platforms supported Linux, they’d be able to compete with Steam… 15 years ago.
Nowadays Steam offers so many solutions to PC gaming that other clients simply would take ages to copy. Steam Input, cloud saves that actually work, Steam Link, Remote Play Together, etc
Even if the sickness issue is solved at some point I just don’t ever see VR become a dominant way to game. There are just too many downsides.
Story-focussed games can not direct you where to look. You are completely cut off from the world so you can’t e.g. watch a child or elderly relative while you use it or chat with friends while you work using it. Environments need a lot more work for a smaller market share if you can look at them from any angle. Hardware is much more expensive (and always will be) compared to a system that just needs to render a screenful of content at the same quality level. Your UI options are more limited if you want to keep things immersive.
Exactly, and that’s why we don’t have one. Maybe I’ll get one when my kids are a little older, but for now, it’s a lot more fun to experience things together than to have someone completely closed off in a VR world.
Even if I didn’t have kids, I still probably wouldn’t want it because I’d like to spend that time with my spouse, and looking at an avatar just isn’t the same.
I think the entire line of thinking that you need a first person perspective to be immersed in a game or virtual world is also flawed. As someone who has been on Second Life for more than 16 years now which uses neither VR equipment nor a first person camera 90% of the time I can certainly “feel like I am there” despite all of those factors and in the presence of many other factors that do not exist in RL like teleporting and camming through walls just fine.
Is that ever claimed anywhere? AFAIK, VR has just been marketed as a new way to experience a virtual world, not as the only way to be immersed in a virtual world.
I think VR would be really cool, but it just doesn’t seem to fit with my lifestyle at this point. And I’m not sure if I would be able to handle it since I and my spouse get motion sick quite easily.
I personally get most of my games from GOG and itch.io these days. And I’ve never bought anything from the Epic store whatsoever.
I will say though that I find it kind of weird how much hate Epic gets for their store. Like, I understand that someone prefers Steam, or doesn’t want to buy stuff from Epic etc. - but what we see goes way beyond that. Epic has people actively campaigning against it, as if its mere existence is insulting. I don’t really get why.
As for the 30% cut… Developers will try to price their games competitively, and within customer expectations. So with or without Steam’s 30% cut, you can expect games to be similarly priced. The large 30% cut from Steam is basically coming out of the developer’s revenue rather than from your pocket. (I’m under the impression that GOG also has a similar 30% fee. Epic has a lower fee. And on itch.io the seller gets to choose how money goes to itch.io anywhere from 0% to 100%. So itch.io is the best deal for developers in terms of fees.)
The reason people hate Epic is fairly obvious – they don’t give a shit about the gaming industry nor about players. At some point their client contained literal spyware, they tried to brute force market share via sleazy exclusivity contracts, their software doesn’t have one tenth of the features Steam has, their CEO is a piece of shit, etc.
The reason people hate Epic is fairly obvious – they don’t give a shit about the gaming industry nor about players.
What do you mean by that? For developers, they take a much smaller fee than Steam or GOG, and for players they’re constantly giving away free games.
At some point their client contained literal spyware.
That sounds like a decent reason to campaign against them. I haven’t heard anything about that before. What was the story behind that? (As in, when / why / how / what? Perhaps you have a link or something.)
brute force market share via sleazy exclusivity contracts
I’ve heard people talk a lot about exclusivity contracts… but can you name even a single game that has such a contract? When people have discussed this the past, the relevant developers basically said “there is no contract”. But maybe there is some different case I don’t know about. In any case, that personally doesn’t bother me anyway. If some developer wants to take money to be on one store rather than another, they can do that at their own peril. As for customers, we’re only talking about a store. It’s not like anyone is in danger of not being able to buy / play their favourite games. So it seems like a bit of a nothing-burger to me. Like, is there actually something bad happening here? Or are people just speculating that something bad might one-day happen if Epic got bigger?
their software doesn’t have one tenth of the features Steam has,
Steam has more features, yeah. Steam is very good. But Steam has been around for some 20 years. It’s hard to catch up with that so quickly. In any case, although missing features is a good reason to prefer Steam, it certainly isn’t a reason to campaign against Epic.
… So from your list, I’ll keep the spyware thing and the CEO complaint. I don’t know enough about either of those to say much though. I don’t recall who the CEO of Epic is right now, so I won’t say whether or not I think that’s a good reason. And the spyware… I take that kind of stuff seriously. Right now I’m posting this from Linux - because I’m fed-up with Windows spyware. But as I said, I’ve not heard any details about any Epic spyware thing.
Incidentally, I’ve found that Steam is very good for Linux gaming. … But obviously that doesn’t mean that I’m going to start making posts trash-talking Epic. I don’t find it weird that people prefer Steam. I just find it weird that people put so much energy into attacking Epic.
As for the games that were Epic exclusive for a year: Borderlands 3, Satisfactory, Darksiders 3, Hitman 3, Dead Island 2, Borderlands TTW to name a few. They have a year exclusivity deal with Epic - we know how annoying exclusivity deals are on consoles.
About the features, it’s quite tricky. Epic rather spends thousands on exclusivity deals rather than invest into a launcher to have a working basket.
It’s super obvious where Epic’s priorities are, and it’s not the gamers. How are they able to dedicate so much work on Unreal, but now on a launcher? They try to substitute a half-assed launcher with exclusivity deals, because they know nobody would use it willingly.
It takes quite a lot of time to repeat all the wrong doings of Epic and it’s CEO Tim.
Thus, I can only relay to the collected information of bad old Reddit, if you want to (I’m intentionally not linking, you can search it up easily). r/fuckepic has a lot of collected information on their side page.
In short, biggest issue for me exclusivity contracts with games advertised on Steam, then as a bait and switch removed from the store page and their physical copies getting a sticker on top of the Steam logo, so a last minute deal, for Metro Exodus. And then they continued their exclusivity hunt for games, they didn’t even helped to develop. Nothing against self-made or published games to be limited time exclusive in my perspective, but not second hand bought (out).
The other about their CEO, r/timcritizisestim He’s… a douche. Using kids with the free games to bait them to his store, using them against Apple’s store rules like a little army… he is a bad person with too much money and luck to have build the Epic engine with Fortnite…
Also adding to other people, they “poached” games from other platforms.
eg they wanted Rocket League, which I have on Steam and am happy to continue using there, to be completely removed from my account and available through the epic launcher some 3(?) years after I first bought it. Eventually they backpedaled, only due to community backlash, people that owned it on steam can still play it there.
Are you saying that Rocket League was removed from the Steam accounts of the people who already owned it? That sounds like a big deal, and surely must be illegal. But I didn’t see mention of that in the link you posted. Most of the things in the list seemed to be just saying that they didn’t think the Epic store is high quality. (eg. prices too high, not enough features, difficult to use return policy, etc.) Those are all fair complaints, and good reasons to not use the store - but again, they are only good reasons to not use the store. They aren’t really good reasons to crusade against it. There are heaps of crap online stores, and generally people just ignore them.
The Rocket League thing you mentioned would be a good reason to get upset at Epic beyond just not wanting to buy from them. So I’m kind of surprised to see it missing from such a comprehensive list of grievances.
Others have mentioned spyware, and like I said, I care about that. That’s a big red flag. But I looked at the links in the post you gave, and as far as I could tell they were all speculation. Things like Tencent owns 40% of Epic, and Tencent is bad - so Epic is probably bad. … Which is quite possibly true! I certainly wouldn’t want to trust Epic with my personal info. But it’s still a big step away from them having spyware built in.
I personally think that many gamers put up with too much privacy invasion and ‘telemetry’ in the form of online accounts and especially ‘anti-cheat’ software. The “anti cheat” software that some games require explicitly demand access to see every program you have installed, every program you have running, and in some cases even read RAM outside of what the game is allocated. That’s an enormous security risk and privacy breach… but people install that crap all the time with barely a whisper - but then complain about the risk the Epic will share its telemetry data with Tencent. I’m certain that some of Epic’s online games have software like that, but that wasn’t mentioned in thread you linked to.
Maybe I just don’t care about the same things that other people care about. Like, if Epic has a crap store… I just don’t care. It makes no difference to me how crap it is. It makes to difference if they say it is going to be great, and it falls short of what they said. I’m not going to go around telling people how crap it is, because I don’t think it matters. I don’t intend to use the store anyway; and if other people like the store for some reason, then fine. I don’t think it matters. They can like it, and I won’t try to convince them otherwise. But if they are somehow removing games you’ve already bought elsewhere - then that’s a big deal. That would be worth telling people about. I hope you can see what I mean.
Anno 1800 was available for purchase on Steam prior to release but at some point they made a deal with Epic to sell it there for a year. Then it was removed from Steam. If you already bought it you could use it on Steam but everyone else had to wait. You could also directly buy it from Ubisoft’s own store Uplay so in the most strict sense it was not an exclusive contract but pretty damn close. Also it wasn’t a secret. The company talked about it. They had to, because it was literally available for pre purchase on Steam and then suddenly wasn’t.
For developers, they take a much smaller fee than Steam or GOG, and for players they’re constantly giving away free games.
“Free stuff, pl0x” isn’t an indicator of supporting the industry or players. That’s a business tactic for clawing market share away from their competitors by attracting people without the means to buy games and devs desperate for funding. Also, if parity is your worry, many games on Steam go free or effectively free (<1 USD) all the time.
That sounds like a decent reason to campaign against them. I haven’t heard anything about that before. What was the story behind that? (As in, when / why / how / what? Perhaps you have a link or something.)
With Reddit going tits up and a coverup operation by Epic throwing a bunch of garbage info around, it’s been difficult to find the exact sources (why I’ve been taking so long to reply). If I find the actual articles/posts I’ll link them, but in summary:
EGS bypassed many APIs, such as Steam’s API, to data mine your usage statistics of their competitors, including friends and games played - they didn’t ask for your consent nor Steam’s.
Some major red flags with memory manipulation and internet traffic obfuscation.
They “apologized” about it, citing some bullshit reasons for that behavior. Suspiciously, behavior changed.
I’ve heard people talk a lot about exclusivity contracts… but can you name even a single game that has such a contract? […] Like, is there actually something bad happening here? Or are people just speculating that something bad might one-day happen if Epic got bigger?
There are loads of games in my “do not buy unless heavily discounted” list precisely for taking exclusivity deals. Hitman 3, Darkest Dungeon 2, Hades, Satisfactory, among others. The danger, beyond rewarding shitty behavior, shutting out large portions of the community, and limiting consumers’ options, is the same as always - you’re effectively telling companies that whoever has the biggest pocket gets to dictate what the entire industry has to do.
But Steam has been around for some 20 years. It’s hard to catch up with that so quickly. In any case, although missing features is a good reason to prefer Steam, it certainly isn’t a reason to campaign against Epic.
It wouldn’t be if Epic had shown any intention of eventually having parity. It’s been however many years since they released, with the immense advantage of seeing what works for Steam so they could copy it, and yet their client remains just as bad. It clearly shows that their focus in on getting market share to exploit gamers and devs, not on making the best platform possible.
Steam can also leverage their insanely huge userbase. Even with the 30% cut, a company will probably see more profits if they use steam and give up 30% than trying to launch it outside.
At this point. The 30% is just the cost of doing business
I remember Scott Manley asked someone important on the dev team of ksp2 how they approached the 2 body problem. They guy gave a vague answer that they had solved it. If that were true they would have a Nobel Prize but they don't. So then and there I decided that KSP2 will not get my money. Which sucks because I have put a little over 2000 hours into KSP1.
I don't think that was the way he portrayed it. He made it seem like they really solved the 2 body problem. Scott Manley even made a comment about how grand that was. I really wish I could find the video to better show what I mean.
Funnily enough, there is an n-body mod for ksp1, which makes interplanet interactions more realistic (in fact, the mod has to slightly change the default system to stop the moons of Jool from slingshotting each other out) and allows advanced maneuvers like ballistic capture and lagrange points
And as someone who couldn’t even land on the Mun without crashing, I downloaded that mod and unsurprisingly found things even harder since it disables the standard maneuvers.
games
Ważne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.