In the wake of Crowdstrike, Microsoft was going to allow for additional avenues for hooks into the OS that don’t reach as deep into the kernel level, but they never said they were removing the hooks that Crowdstrike or anti-cheat use, as far as I can tell. One solution for PC handhelds is to run whatever modified version of Windows that Microsoft is cooking up, so that you get the console-like interface without compromising on the anti-cheat compatibility. The solution Valve is seemingly hoping for is that, by disclosing kernel-level anti-cheat on the store page, such a solution becomes poison in the marketplace and developers choose a different one.
It’s a very recent development, but the consumer actually does have enough information just from the store page these days to know that a game uses kernel level software. The thing that still sucks is that it can be retroactive. In those cases, I suppose we just ask for a refund.
I’m against them being able to ban you from playing online in its entirety, which is something they can do because most online games don’t let you run the servers yourself anymore. Sure, if someone cheats on official servers, ban them from the official servers. They should still be able to play, cheating or not, on the server they run themselves, but that’s not an option we even have most of the time.
I agree that AAA developers are the ones typically not making short games, and I agree that I am well-covered by indies. I didn’t mean to imply otherwise. FPS games are about the only genre I feel like I used to be well-served in that indies haven’t quite picked up yet, so I can’t really just “go elsewhere” these days to scratch that itch (but games like Mouse: P.I. for Hire may be the start). But I was really just arguing against the efficiency part. I don’t think they’ve become less efficient at making content, but they’ve seemingly stayed exactly as efficient and just spent much longer doing it. I don’t find that a big open world makes a game any more memorable, especially when it exhibits the negative trends of filler and bloat I mentioned already.
I do, and I miss it. I’m far more likely to feel these days like they made too much game to its own detriment than to make it a length that felt better for the game’s pacing. Baldur’s Gate 3 was phenomenal from start to finish, but games frequently come in at a third of its length and feel like they were longer than they should have been. Lots of games transitioned to open world that used to be linear, and the open world is little more than a menu that makes it take longer to select your mission, because you have to travel there. They create checklists of busy work to keep you playing worse content between the moments that you actually want to do, like the side missions that litter modern Assassin’s Creed games with progression gates. I didn’t know how good we had it when we got FPS campaigns between 8 and 12 hours in the years following Half-Life 1, because they’ve been so rare since Titanfall 2 came out 8 years ago. Games being longer now is not solving a problem that I had, and I’d argue it’s often creating problems.
Maybe you prefer your games longer, and good on you if you do, but it’s most definitely not due to developers getting more efficient with their content. For one reason or another, because you’re demanding it as the customer or because modern asset pipelines make it make the most fiscal sense, they’re just spending more time making the content.
The only one I’ve played is The Rise of the Golden Idol. If you haven’t played that one or its predecessor, The Case of the Golden Idol, I highly recommend both. They’re very good logic/deduction puzzle games. You basically examine a frozen moment in time and then deduce what happened based on that.
Developers are demonstrably not getting more efficient with their content. More content means more assets, and that’s why development timelines have only gotten longer over the years.
I’m ready to step into VF and hope that it resolves my issues with Tekken. The last time I played a VF game, there was no online mode, and I definitely didn’t understand fighting games like I do now.
As far as I could tell, the “issues” people primarily had with it were that they wanted it to be bigger, but I also really appreciated its scope and how little time they wasted.
I’ve been deterred for so long because Majora’s Mask was perhaps the most violent reaction I had to playing a video game, and Outer Wilds does the Majora’s Mask thing.
I haven’t played Outer Wilds yet, but I loved The Outer Worlds, so I’m all on board for this. I have my doubts that Microsoft will want Obsidian to launch Avowed and Outer Worlds 2 in the same year though.
To answer the OP, it’s an expandalone with flight mechanics and new powers. Regular Elden Ring is also a co-op action adventure game, but more notably in this trailer is that none of the other players are phantoms, meaning that, like they said in a previous interview, the “seamless co-op” mod and its popularity has influenced how they’re handling multiplayer going forward.