yeaaaa no thanks. They are about 2 or 3 generations too late for that. After what they have tried to pull with the ps5, plus the price point and the fact that it would be a worse more restricted system than the steam deck. I’ll keep my deck where I get an overall better experience + no monthly sub fee.
my fav one recently has been ftb: skies, but that’s a skyblock , I’m going to try the decursio project soon though, it’s supposed to be an rlcraft/sevtech style mod pack, so I’m excited for it , I just haven’t have free time to play it yet.
This is one of the most dumbest Parts of this game, everyone’s complaint of the last iteration was the massive download times, and the inefficiencies in the game causing it to lag even on high end systems. And their solution to that was to increase the specs that it’s required to run the game and require a high speed internet on top of that? They more or less made it so anyone running satellite internet can’t buy their game and anyone that lives in like 70% of the US that still has absolute dog shit internet speeds couldn’t even imagine playing it. My mom still has a 5/5 mbit/s, that’s the fastest anyone offers in her area, even downloading the previous game took ages there’s no way in hell I’m going to recommend her buying this game
After the cluster fuck that was their previous release on top of the mass amount of actual DLC so I can’t just buy the game and run with it, there was no way in hell I would buy this game.
The last flight Sim game that I had was flight simulator x, and honestly even that one if I hadn’t got it as a gift I probably wouldn’t have purchased because even that, the amount of DLC that it had was outrageous, I was lucky enough that I got it on disc so I’m not bombarded with them all the time, but I had looked at the steam page because I was curious about it and man was I in for a shock.
I wish I still had all the discs to my flight simulator 2004, it did basically the same exact thing that X did, and arguably was better than the previous iteration of flight simulator without all of the stupid paywalls. I just threw the disc in and it ran, didn’t have to wait days for it to download, it didn’t monopolize part of my drive and it didn’t need a NASA supercomputer plus Internet to run
mine as well, mine was off so long I needed to manually update it via flash drive to connect to the internet for some reason, I just haven’t felt the need to use it
that would be a trademark or copyright suit not a patent suit. Patents are strictly mechanics, they didn’t sue on design, I agree I think they had a better case on that, but the Nintendo lawyers decided otherwise
the problem is, palworld isn’t “pokemon with guns”, they used that slogan originally sure, but palworld 100% shows more similar mechanics and concepts to ark then pokemon, it’s a mix of pokemon style mechanics and Arks RPG mechanics. I would say they had a stronger suit against trademark than they did mechanics side.
The only game mechanic similarity between the two is the ball capture system and the fact that it’s called a trainer/leader when you battle the NPC’s anything else is already present in other games.
By this logic, any game that features the ability to tame or capture monsters would be a pokemon clone. That’s far too broad of a category to allow as a patent if challenged. I personally believe it will result in them losing the patent as a whole if it is that patent they are fighting with.
paralives is so slow development though, and the lack of teaser releases concerns me about the quality. I have high expectations for it as well but starting to grow concerned
Yet another reason that copyright really needs to be revamped hardcore. You should not be able to retroactively revoke a license in that way and the entire idea of yeah I license you to be able to use this for x amount of years is ridiculous to me either you can use the Media or you can’t.
It’s monopolistic practice is soley due to its market share, that alone is enough to. It’s a monopoly that isn’t anti-competitive, it’s inherently not bad, as long as it isn’t being Abused, many misconstrue anti-competitive as monopolistic, the term doesn’t go hand and hand. Monopolistic competition exists when many companies offer competing products or services that are similar, but not perfect substitutes. This is valve at the moment with steam. Alternatives exist but none come even close to being a full substitute. but that’s OK it isn’t a bad thing, but it doesn’t change the fact it’s monopolistic.
As for the gog thing, maybe it is easier than I thought, if so I’m surprised that no other game store has done so, steam dedicated an entire division to it and it still has a lot of issues with functionality and usage.
I agree with almost all of your viewpoints , however I believe that steam has engaged in monopolistic practices. The difference in market share between Steam and any other game launcher is night and day, it is the online game store. That being said that’s not always a bad thing as they have shown
They have a higher than average fees that is for sure, but they also have a significantly bigger feature set than any other store out there. Like when you launch a game on Steam you have a game publishing with built-in DLC support, you have a built-in mod Workshop, you have the review system, you have a built-in DRM if that’s something that you wanted to do, you also have access to a community forum for bug reporting and discussions, not to mention you have the entire steam proton system and the VR system at your disposal both of which are Super complicated to set up stand alone.
Their Workshop, while it takes a 75% cut, is mostly for the Cosmetic items or the trading items were steam does almost exclusively all of the work for it. Basically the only thing the dev team has to do for it is upload the image for the item and the cost that it thinks that item is worth and then steam does the rest. At that point the 75% cut while steep, makes sense to me
Every other reason that they provided in that video, seemed to either hyperbolize the impact of it or disregard what is concidered standard. like for example pricing parity that’s an industry standard, any reputable shop has the same system, and if there is any place that’s different, they actively try to have similar pricing. Hell Walmart hires people strictly to go to their competitors to make sure that their pricing is the same as their competitors. The attribution agreement while I don’t believe should be legal, isn’t anti-competitive, it is anti-consumer but not anti-competitive. I am also super against the fact that technically every game is a license but again that’s not anti-competitive that’s anti-consumer.
I firmly believe that if a game competitor decided to have an equal feature set to the steam launcher, eventually they would be able to give steam a run for their money. Which is not something I can say the same of with companies such as Google which has been proven to actively manipulate the market and use their position of power as a way to keep competitors out, be it by making it so third-party browsers can’t use DRM, or doing things such as manipulating your web results that way your competitors do not appear. I have never seen steam do this