- 0 Posts
- 1.77K Comments
I’d rather get whatever the newest/best I can afford when I need to upgrade. The 1080 Ti is tired but it still works well, so I don’t feel enough pressure to spend the money yet. Ive been looking at the 5070 Ti, but the price is still too high having only just dropped to MSRP in my area.
Also, I never trust second-hand GPUs like I never trust second-hand hard drives. Too much money in it for someone to lie about the condition, or whether they smoke or not, etc. Less hassle when I buy new, especially if I need to RMA, even if it is a higher initial cost.
Breath of the Wild was a mid game, and a bad Zelda game outright. It ditched nearly everything that players had come to expect from a Zelda game. Tears was way better, but still lacked the feeling of being a Zelda game. If you removed all the Zelda assets, would anyone be able to truly call it a Zelda game? With Link to the Past all the way to even Skyward Sword I certainly could.
But the effect the games financial success has had on Nintendo as a whole has been devastating. Nintendo is the kind of company that will learn all the wrong lessons and none of the right ones. They are literal Monkey Paw thinkers. They saw the PS1 outpace the N64 and thought “people want disks, okay lets pick this really odd format disk with a tiny storage limit instead of using normal ones.” And then when the Gamecube failed they said “oh, people must not want powerful hardware I guess, lets just sell people the same hardware again so its underpowered this time but add a motion control gimmick.”
So when BotW was a financial success, they immediately believe that all of their big games need an open world, or need to be vast departures from what players expect from each series. It is truly tragic.
Okay, but if we take care of the problem that people have, legal regulation would not be necessary. We wouldn’t have to have a trillion laws stipulating all the various minutae of what we should or shouldn’t do because of how harmful it is or isn’t, people would be able to figure this out on their own. Less laws in general is better, when the population is intelligent enough to understand that you don’t drink bleach because a computer screen showed those words to you in that order.
Opiates wouldn’t need to be illegal because people would be intelligent enough to know how harmful it is and thus wouldn’t use it. A law wouldn’t need to be created listing every known or unknown opiate derivative that is banned or for whatever use. People would just be smart enough to know.
Basically, too many people aren’t using their own brain. AI is definitely a helpful tool, but not if you’re an idiot and believe it to have any actual intelligence. Its not there to replace your doctor or teacher, it is there to help you with word processing, pattern recognition, or other such language based tasks. AI used as a tool is queried for things like “check this passage for overly repetitive terms and suggest improvements that keep the same meaning.” AI used by an idiot is queried for things like “what do my lab results say about my health?”
I suppose this is too far advanced for humanity at this point. Laws are important, but too many laws begins to speak about a general decline in intelligence.
To be fair, much of the memetic hazard posed by various technologies is not actually the fault of the technologies, but a fault of the person having no self-control, no accountability for their own actions, or having some form of undiagnosed medical issue they are unaware of.
Its like saying video games cause school shootings: the problem isnt the video games, its the person. The video games are an excuse to shift blame and accountability away from the person.
Honestly this list reads like the person who picked the games doesn’t actually play games and just listed the most popular/ most talked about games, but to make it not that obvious they asked that one “weird” person groupchat they were invited to once that is full of actual gamers to provide like 3 games for the list lol
I only preorder a game if I know I want to play it right when it comes out and want to be able to preload the game, and if it comes from a developer I know will not disappoint me (FromSoftware, Kojima Productions, anything from Yoko Taro, etc.).
In the past I used to preorder to reserve a physical copy as soon as it was released, but there is generally no need for that anymore. This makes me both happy and sad, because for all the hassle it was, I kinda miss some aspects of the simpler times. In some ways, I do wish the world could rewind to the 2000s.
Early Access is different from preordering because you gain access to the product instantly, and generally can influence the direction of the game in a hopefully positive way. Providing feedback on what works and what doesn’t is an important part of playing and early access game. A lot of people seem to ignore this.
Of course there are always exceptions, but I don’t count on news like this to mean that this project will be the exception.
Metroid Prime and Halo 2 both had excessive crunch and both turned out great, obviously. In Metroid Prime’s case, a management change seemed to fix it in the long term. In Halo’s case, Bungie just embraced the suck I guess, since they still wanted to make Halo 3.
Regardless, these were exceptions to the rule, and I would never expect a project to be an exception, personally.
IMO, any time a game repeatedly fails to meet deadlines, especially so early on in its development, that usually indicates the game isn’t likely to launch in a healthy state. Either the scope is way too big, or the narrative is receiving major changes and reworks, or the people working on the game just wish they weren’t working on that project and taking longer as a result. This kind of situation is rarely good, and even more rarely ends up with a good launched product.
Cyberpunk 2077, Anthem, Mass Effect Andromeda, Halo Infinite, Duke Nukem Forever, John Romero’s Daikatana (although I personally am a bit charmed by this one despite it being undoubtedly bad), and other games are examples of this. Repeated failure to meet production deadlines, lots of crunch forced on the developers, and all for what? The launch product for all of these games was horrendously bad. Some for technical reasons, some for narrative reasons, and some for both.
When I first saw the trailer for Intergalactic, I had mixed feelings. I liked the intended graphics/art style and retro styled tech, the Porsche was a little weird product placement but fine I guess, but the characters and dialogue I personally found both unappealing. The obvious Snake Plissken rip-off woman the main character talked to (blonde with an eyepatch, I can only assume she is some sort of merc job handler) seemed maybe interesting but then she spoke and the writing lost my interest. Upon learning the game is likely to follow some sort of religious theming, I lost all interest in the game. Its not what I want from a video game. So this was pretty disappointing to learn. But now seeing the game is in such a state doesn’t give me great confidence that the final product will be even decent when it launches.
What’s the matter? I thought they were super confident this was going to do really well. Are they getting cold feet and deciding to make changes for fear of bad reception when they don’t quite have enough time, leading to forced overtime?
EDIT: Wait. All of this was for a DEMO? How bad was the game that they needed to work 60 hours a week mandatory overtime just to finish a demo of the game??
I’m not saying E33 didn’t deserve to win anything, but I don’t believe it deserved to dominate like that. No single game should be allowed to do this, ever.
I mean, of the 6 nominees for Best Performance, 3 of them (50%) were from E33. That shouldn’t be allowed, IMO. Pick the single best performance from one game, then you can have more variety to pick from. Also, the winner of Best Indie Game should automatically be disqualified from also winning Best Indie Debut game.
In my opinion: KCD2 snubbed for Best RPG, Silksong snubbed for best Action Adventure, and Half-Life 3 snubbed for Most Anticipated Game (is it disqualified – no professionals allowed?).
I won’t say E33 didn’t deserve to win an award, it definitely did. But I will absolutely say with certainty it did not deserve to be nominated in so many categories and proceed to win basically every category.
Having an award show give awards to only one nominee feels bad for everyone except the show runners, that one nominee, and their fans. Lots of games deserved to be there that simply weren’t, and lots of nominees deserved to win but didn’t simply because E33 won this year’s popularity contest.
For example, Best Performance should not have been allowed to have 50% of the nominees be from the same game (E33, in this case).
It was good, but Episode 1 Racer was better, IMO. It still holds the world record for best selling sci-fi racing game, beating out even F-Zero and Wipeout.
Also, Episode 1 Racer appeals to people that may not really care too much about Star Wars by being a good racing game regardless. Jedi Power Battles though, relies more on the Star Wars IP, IMO. Especially the PS1 and GBA ports, which honestly weren’t that great in comparison to the Dreamcast version.
I don’t see why people are calling this Concord 2. The art and character designs were actually good, and the gameplay looked even better. Despite my disdain for Apex Legends, I have to admit that the game feels good to play when you are doing well, and Titanfall obviously felt even better. I don’t see this game doing horribly as long as they don’t try to monetize character abilities or weapons or anything Pay2Win.
I am disappointed seeing that the Need for Speed developers are from Criterion, and not former Black Box. Criterion’s NFS games have been trash compared to Black Box, particularly the handling. They fall feel like mobile games thanks to their B2D mechanic, rather than the more predictable handling model from older titles.
I am still interested, of course. Episode 1 Racer was the best thing to come out of Episode 1. Hopefully this one is good and has active multiplayer.
I’ll be real, it was good that they showed this trailer first. Because Legacy of Atlantis is going to be way more popular. Catalyst looks like a game the executives demanded, and the developers said “Okay, we will make that if you let us make Legacy of Atlantis.”
I have not interest in Catalyst, but Legacy of Atlantis had me. Especially at the dinosaurs.
I dont know, I felt like it was more fitting for Diablo. Watching this trailer I thought:
-
Wow I can’t believe they were actually allowed to show that on YouTube.
-
It seems like Larian is making a lot of changes with the tone of Divinity.
Its interesting, but was definitely not what I would personally expect from Divinity.
Well at least Sam Maggs isn’t on this one.
Hopefully it’s a step in the right direction for Star Wars?
EDIT: Before you riot, my distaste with her has nothing to do with her being a woman, and everything to do with her being needlessly antagonistic to people and her being a writer on such “banger” games as Anthem and Call of Duty Vanguard.
I do find it perplexing that other companies can also release a game like this, fix it, and then everyone basically forgets and treats the developers like buddies again (like CDPR did with Witcher and Cyberpunk, or Obsidian with KotOR2, or Hello Games with No Man’s Sky).
Bethesdas original release of Skyrim was exactly the same, and then they fixed it. Same.with Fallout 76, Elder Scrolls Online, etc. The difference is that it just seems like people really love to hate on Bethesda more than other studios when they don’t really do anything that different.
I mean, The Witcher 3 on Switch had a lot of bugs that “shouldn’t have been there” because the game was already in a good state on other platforms. But that isn’t how game development works because porting to a different console isn’t as simple as clicking one button, especially not for something like the Witcher that runs in a proprietary game engine. Shipping with bugs is bad, but Bethesda isn’t any better or worse than other beloved studios. They do seem to be publicly hated more than other studios, though.
I hate Ubisoft, but I actually do think this was decided to happen before they unionized and is just bad timing.
Decisions to close studios like this never happen so quickly and usually take multiple months between the time the decision is made to the time the actual closure takes place.
It is possible that the studio caught wind that they were being closed and decided to unionize in order to capitalize on the bad PR. But this is all speculation since we don’t know every detail, and both sides will leave out various details to give themselves an advantageous position in the conversation.