Play as Jade, a young investigative reporter, and expose a terrible government conspiracy. It is up to you and your loyal pig friend Pey'j to save your planet and its inhabitants.
Yeah, cause remasters always go well coughGTAdefinitiveahemWarcraft3cough.
Even then, what motive is there to prevent people from getting the original if they want to? Well, other than being able to charge $20-$40 for a 20 year old game.
Good for you. Does not change that the game will still be playable in some form either for those who already own it or those who want to play it in future. But this is Lemmy so your crusade of course gets upvoted when you’ve provided fuck all to the conversation.
While Denuvo is bad, there’s light on the end, because it will get removed from the game 100% in the future (due to licensing costs).
This can’t be said about Ubisoft shitlauncher on the other hand, unfortunatelly. This sucker is here to stay and ruin games for as long as Ubisoft will care. And once they decide it costs too much, bye bye games…
At least launchers can usually be patched out pretty easily by the community, as they are always hastily and poorly patched in in the first place. And often times aren’t even patched in but just a seperate executable that the shortcut points to instead of the actual game executable, in those instances you just need to make the shortcut go to the game instead.
A remaster is in no way the same as the original. I understand you’re putting forward the business reason for it being delisted, and that is probably the true reason, but that doesn’t make it less scummy.
Remasters can be good, but publishers should always keep the original available. If I really like a remaster, I may be interested in trying the original as well. There’s no downside to listing the old game unless the new one sucks enough to make the old, cheaper version more attractive.
Do a good job and I may buy both. Put a notice on the old one to point users at the new one, and consider offering a bundle of old and new so users can compare.
Steam version was inferior to GOG. It was definitely missing the multi core CPU fix and maybe even still had TAGES protection (not sure about that one).
Take Diablo 2 for example, which is epic level of remaster. The game is virtually identical to the original. It’s just working better on modern hardware and can be played in high resolution with shinier graphics. But you can still turn it to (almost) 1:1 copy of original with single keypress. I’m all for this.
And now take Warcraft 3 remaster from the “same Blizzard”… This is an example of how things should NOT be done.
Given both these coming from the same company, there’s no telling in how any remaster will turn out in the end. Which is… not very reassuring?
Well, I did not even know this. And I’ve played HELL OF A LOT of Diablo 2 over LAN years and years ago. But ever since then I’ve had no use for LAN play… LAN parties were a thing decade and half ago (at least where I live) and playing with my game buddy was simplified over internet (steam, battle.net). I still remember dark days of convincing Hamachi to work…
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
It’s been delisted because a remaster is happening. It was leaked recently. So if you don’t get playing it now then you still can in future.
Yeah, cause remasters always go well coughGTAdefinitive ahemWarcraft3cough.
Even then, what motive is there to prevent people from getting the original if they want to? Well, other than being able to charge $20-$40 for a 20 year old game.
Except it will be infected with a Ubisoft launcher and Denuvo malware and I do not pay for anything with Denuvo filth in it.
Good for you. Does not change that the game will still be playable in some form either for those who already own it or those who want to play it in future. But this is Lemmy so your crusade of course gets upvoted when you’ve provided fuck all to the conversation.
While Denuvo is bad, there’s light on the end, because it will get removed from the game 100% in the future (due to licensing costs).
This can’t be said about Ubisoft shitlauncher on the other hand, unfortunatelly. This sucker is here to stay and ruin games for as long as Ubisoft will care. And once they decide it costs too much, bye bye games…
At least launchers can usually be patched out pretty easily by the community, as they are always hastily and poorly patched in in the first place. And often times aren’t even patched in but just a seperate executable that the shortcut points to instead of the actual game executable, in those instances you just need to make the shortcut go to the game instead.
A remaster is in no way the same as the original. I understand you’re putting forward the business reason for it being delisted, and that is probably the true reason, but that doesn’t make it less scummy.
No, a remaster is not the same. They can be hit or miss. Delisting a game is just another way of erasing history.
Remasters can be good, but publishers should always keep the original available. If I really like a remaster, I may be interested in trying the original as well. There’s no downside to listing the old game unless the new one sucks enough to make the old, cheaper version more attractive.
Do a good job and I may buy both. Put a notice on the old one to point users at the new one, and consider offering a bundle of old and new so users can compare.
Steam version was inferior to GOG. It was definitely missing the multi core CPU fix and maybe even still had TAGES protection (not sure about that one).
I agree remasters are hit or miss.
Take Diablo 2 for example, which is epic level of remaster. The game is virtually identical to the original. It’s just working better on modern hardware and can be played in high resolution with shinier graphics. But you can still turn it to (almost) 1:1 copy of original with single keypress. I’m all for this.
And now take Warcraft 3 remaster from the “same Blizzard”… This is an example of how things should NOT be done.
Given both these coming from the same company, there’s no telling in how any remaster will turn out in the end. Which is… not very reassuring?
Diablo 2 is also a great example because while in general it is a very good remaster it lacks the LAN play of the original. Features were taken away.
Well, I did not even know this. And I’ve played HELL OF A LOT of Diablo 2 over LAN years and years ago. But ever since then I’ve had no use for LAN play… LAN parties were a thing decade and half ago (at least where I live) and playing with my game buddy was simplified over internet (steam, battle.net). I still remember dark days of convincing Hamachi to work…
Only when online and DRM servers are up