Why? They do that pretty much with every major release, especially for demanding titles. People tend to build PCs specifically for a specific game, so the major GPU vendors want to fill that high end need.
The character models seemed pretty simple for such a demanding game. I was hoping at least major characters would be a little more detailed. Then again, this was from watching a stream on my phone, so maybe it looks better in person.
Aside from looks, the voice acting I saw seemed a little odd. It could also just be a poor script, but it just didn’t seem all that great.
But overall, the game seemed pretty good, but not something I’m dying to run out and buy. I’ll have some more time this fall, so I’ll probably wait for a few patches to land.
No, for releasing a solid game and following it up with a solid performance patch. If the game sucked at launch, I would understand criticism, but it didn’t.
The most recent comment that claims it works is from 3 days ago, and it seems you need a startup command. So it seems to have been completely broken as of a week or two ago, but potentially there’s a workaround on the latest Proton experimental.
So your experience from a couple months ago may no longer apply.
Yeah, PC games were more rough, but they also often had a mechanism for updates. Sometimes it was a physical expansion pack (I think Warcraft 2 and StarCraft expansions were distributed that way, I forget though), and some had an online updater (I had dialup for most of my childhood so I am very aware of how much that sucked).
However, since I mostly played larger titles, I didn’t have to deal with that. Some games I loved as a kid:
Dark Forces
Lords of the Realm 2
Command and Conquer - most titles
Warcraft - 1&2
Age of Empires
Rainbow Six: Rogue Spear
I don’t remember any kind of patching needed for those games, and these were all mid to late 90s games, and I also played a lot of older floppy games, like ZZT and Scorched Earth, though the latter saw plenty of updates (I think my brother downloaded them at school or something).
Sometime after 2000 or so games started relying on downloading updates on PC, and with the PS3 and Xbox 360, that moved to consoles as well.
Lol, some games were certainly buggy, but most games I played as a kid on my NES, SNES, Sega Genesis, N64, and Xbox worked pretty well. I remember by siblings being games testers as high school and college students, but that seems to no longer be a thing.
These days, only indie games seem to work okay day 1, and that’s not even a guarantee. Ever since WiFi became standard on consoles, it seems developers ship games way too early since they know they can patch it later.
Which is really dumb. I wish they would just wait to release until the game is done instead of sending a bunch of patches over the first few months after release. It’s that kind of crap that makes me not want to buy games at release or even for the first few months because I know if I wait, I’ll get a better product.
Before digital was a thing, game companies had to fully test their games before releasing because there was no way to patch it later. I wish we would’ve kept the same mindset today, but with the ability to patch in case they missed something.
I’m talking about GamePass, not Starfield. Gamepass only works on Microsoft OSes AFAIK, so you won’t be able to use it on anything it doesn’t control (i.e. macOS or Linux).
If you only ever play games or watch movies/shows once regardless, it’s just a cheaper way to get content. The only reason I don’t use Gamepass is because it doesn’t work on Linux. That’s it.
I have Netflix and Disney+ because it’s way cheaper than buying the movies and shows I watch on it, movies and shows that I’ll only ever watch once.