All Things Videogame Related: EXTREME VS!!

[dizman]

Guess it's time to get back into DCS again .

[Gerli]

This is INSANE

 

https://imgur.com/a/nPP6K

 

 

Edited October 28, 2017 by Gerli

[Chronocidal]

Man I hope that gets out for real soon.

[frothymug]

I will eat my own shoes if all that stuff actually makes it into the game and it's a stable and polished release.

After playing a few weeks' worth of Fortnite Battle Royale (and loving it), I decided to fork over some money to try the Save the World PvE campaign. Even in early access, it's very well-polished and has been a lot of fun so far. I have been playing with my gf, but I would love to find two more friends to play with to complete the party. I suggest looking it over and playing it with some friends if you are interested. It's probably not that great by yourself.

[TangledThorns]

On 10/27/2017 at 9:29 PM, Gerli said:

This is INSANE

 

https://imgur.com/a/nPP6K

 

 

What game is that screenshot from?

[Shadow]

Looked like Star Citizen. Sadly, now is not the best time to upgrade the PC with RAM continuing to climb and GPUs still being up there too.

[TangledThorns]

On 10/30/2017 at 9:45 AM, Shadow said:

Looked like Star Citizen. Sadly, now is not the best time to upgrade the PC with RAM continuing to climb and GPUs still being up there too.

Ridiculous, isn't it? The 1060 GTX I bought last year is now a hundred dollars more that what I paid for.

[frothymug]

Chris Roberts is to the gaming industry as Elon Musk is to space exploration and general technology: He's making a lot of promises that he won't be able to keep. And yet people keep d**k riding him like he's some kind of god.

[TangledThorns]

19 minutes ago, frothymug said:

Chris Roberts is to the gaming industry as Elon Musk is to space exploration and general technology: He's making a lot of promises that he won't be able to keep. And yet people keep d**k riding him like he's some kind of god.

Don't get me started on Elon Musk and his self-indulgent ventures. He wants people on Mars and unicorn steaks when he should be working on making his cars affordable for the 99%.

 

Edited October 31, 2017 by TangledThorns

[JB0]

12 hours ago, TangledThorns said:

Don't get me started on Elon Musk and his self-indulgent ventures. He wants people on Mars and unicorn steaks when he should be working on making his cars affordable for the 99%.

Hey, people on Mars is important too. I'm embarrassed that it's taken fifty years and a wealthy billionaire to make any meaningful progress towards it since we set foot on the moon, but... progress is progress. 'Sides, there's plenty of cheap cars.

None affordable for 99% of the population, mind you. I don't think you CAN get 99% coverage with existing regulations and wages.  If you can legally put a new car on the street for a half a grand new, you need to start doing this. You will be rich like Elon Musk.

[Shadow]

22 hours ago, TangledThorns said:

Ridiculous, isn't it? The 1060 GTX I bought last year is now a hundred dollars more that what I paid for.

Yeah. Hoping for a crash in cryptocurrency or the miners just find a better way to mine other than GPUs. Other then that, hopefully they're will be some good deals for Black Friday and Cyber Monday.

I love Chris Roberts' early works in Wing Commander. I still wish they would get back the IP off EA and incorporate into Star Citizen. It's not like they don't have the money now. I sort of stopped following SC though so I don't even know where it is development.

[Chronocidal]

1 hour ago, Shadow said:

I love Chris Roberts' early works in Wing Commander. I still wish they would get back the IP off EA and incorporate into Star Citizen. It's not like they don't have the money now. I sort of stopped following SC though so I don't even know where it is development.

I'm not paying that much attention, but I'm also not really all that interested in the concept of Star Citizen itself.  I just think the gaming community has been in dire need of a new science fiction sim engine to build things in for over a decade.  People have pushed the Freespace II engine to incredible levels, but at some point, you can't upgrade that old jalopy any more.

The "canon" universe they're building is only vaguely interesting, but I want to see every space franchise rendered in that engine, so we can finally get that first person experience of a tube-launch from Galactica, or doing a flyover inspection of the Enterprise before walking to the bridge, or any other countless things that games in the past just haven't been capable of.  The details in some demos make me think it'd be entirely possible to build a completely functional SDF-1, along with every other Macross mech and valkyrie.

Edited November 1, 2017 by Chronocidal

[Focslain]

11 minutes ago, Chronocidal said:

 The details in some demos make me think it'd be entirely possible to build a completely functional SDF-1, along with every other Macross mech and valkyrie.

You mean like what is being done here?

[JB0]

 Thing I don't get about Star Citizen hype is how many OTHER space sims have come and gone since the hype train started that went completely ignored. And not just Elite: Dangerous.

Hell, Starwraith has started, completed, and shipped Evochron Legacy since the Star Citizen kickstarter, and he is ONE PERSON.

 

There's even a new Wing Commander in WC Saga(and how they managed to not get sued by EA I will never know).

[Chronocidal]

13 hours ago, Focslain said:

You mean like what is being done here?

Nah, nothing of the sort, unless they've expanded Homeworld to let you explore and pilot each ship in a first person view.  I want that first person experience.   SC looks like you could literally explore the entire ship, walk right up to a VF-1, get in, launch, and then go flyby the bridge and salute another player sitting there.

So, Elite Dangerous shot itself in the foot when they refused to let people play it offline.  It had a ton of potential, and still has some features I truly enjoy... but it's boring.  It's the Korean MMO of space combat, seriously.  I know that's partly up to what each player makes of it, and it can be relaxing to soar through space looking for random stuff, but I lost all enjoyment for it when I got jumped by a random patrol of stupidly high-leveled NPCs, blasted into oblivion, and lost everything I'd spent the last week grinding to buy.  Open PVP is bad enough, but when you get wiped to lvl1 by random NPCs, with no recovery option?  Nope.

Also, I'm so utterly sick of every single game nickel and diming its players with this or that DLC pack, especially when everything ED sells is things I could have made myself if they had allowed offline modding.

Basically, the only game in the past fifteen years that's actually advertising the key features I'm looking for is Star Citizen.  I don't even care if the actual game ever gets out, I just want a new engine to make fun single player content in that isn't ruled over by some money grubbing DLC factory.

Edited November 2, 2017 by Chronocidal

[Focslain]

9 hours ago, Chronocidal said:

Nah, nothing of the sort, unless they've expanded Homeworld to let you explore and pilot each ship in a first person view.  I want that first person experience.

  SC looks like you could literally explore the entire ship, walk right up to a VF-1, get in, launch, and then go flyby the bridge and salute another player sitting there.

So, Elite Dangerous shot itself in the foot when they refused to let people play it offline.  It had a ton of potential, and still has some features I truly enjoy... but it's boring.  It's the Korean MMO of space combat, seriously.  I know that's partly up to what each player makes of it, and it can be relaxing to soar through space looking for random stuff, but I lost all enjoyment for it when I got jumped by a random patrol of stupidly high-leveled NPCs, blasted into oblivion, and lost everything I'd spent the last week grinding to buy.  Open PVP is bad enough, but when you get wiped to lvl1 by random NPCs, with no recovery option?  Nope.

Also, I'm so utterly sick of every single game nickel and diming its players with this or that DLC pack, especially when everything ED sells is things I could have made myself if they had allowed offline modding.

Basically, the only game in the past fifteen years that's actually advertising the key features I'm looking for is Star Citizen.  I don't even care if the actual game ever gets out, I just want a new engine to make fun single player content in that isn't ruled over by some money grubbing DLC factory.

Ok, so like the old Battlecruiser series. Man that was a fun game, graphics did not age well though.

[frothymug]

I finally kicked in some dough for the PvE co-op version of Fortnite. I haven't gotten far yet, but this game is very well polished for early access. I'd recommend it, but I don't think I've played enough to give a glowing thumbs-up. It's definitely worth a look!

[Gerli]

I only have a basic package for the game, but i'm very grateful to the thousands of people pouring millions of dollars into made this game real... because it's the time to have something EPIC for a Space Game. And I'm talking about Squadron 42... Star Citizen it's too damn ambitious and I think we're gonna wait for it like 3 more years for the full mechanics to be in place.

But Squadron 42 NEEDS to be GOOD, because if he fails delivering a good singleplayer experience, the rest of the project is gonna suffers the backslash too.

 

[azrael]

It will take 4,528 hours of gameplay (or $2100) to unlock all base-game content in star Wars: Battlefront 2

Or about 189 days of 24/7 playing. Though I hear you can jump into a starfighter and really cut that grinding down.

[TangledThorns]

The real problem with the Battlefront games is if you took away it's Star Wars skin would you still play it?

[Tking22]

37 minutes ago, TangledThorns said:

The real problem with the Battlefront games is if you took away it's Star Wars skin would you still play it?

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. If it didn't look like a Star Wars it wouldn't be a Star Wars game? I mean yeah, you're right.

[TangledThorns]

15 minutes ago, Tking22 said:

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. If it didn't look like a Star Wars it wouldn't be a Star Wars game? I mean yeah, you're right.

To clarify my point is that if Battlefront didn't look like Star Wars would you still play it? The gameplay matters. 

[dizman]

I'm not going to play it even with the fancy Star Wars skin and sounds pack. From everything I keep hearing Battlefront is an example of everything wrong with the game industry right now. EA pushed things a bit too far too fast and now they gotta face the backlash, hopefully it will give other developers pause in the loot box craze.

[Tking22]

2 hours ago, TangledThorns said:

To clarify my point is that if Battlefront didn't look like Star Wars would you still play it? The gameplay matters. 

I'm getting you now. I would say no, without the admittedly VERY polished Star Wars skin on it, it would just be another EA Battlefield game, just with awful, predatory/invasive loot boxes. And while I have played every Battlefield game released, most recently Battlefield 1, I wouldn't bother.

[Chronocidal]

A bunch of friends of mine have been hooting and hollering about all the Battlefront hubbub all week, and it's making me smile how much traction the complaints are getting.

The big thing is, EA is digging themselves deeper with every new update on the situation.  One of their announcements changed the total number of achievement points to unlock the high end characters to about a quarter of what they used to be.... but hidden in the fine print was a notice that they similarly reduced the rewards, meaning nothing actually changed.

Also, the entire game runs on a "You've been playing too much, so we're not giving you more loot until tomorrow" system.  I don't know the specifics, but I've seen it mentioned that once you cap out for a day, it might be 14 hours until the game will let you do any more "work" toward unlocking things.

It's really just exemplifying everything wrong with the game industry today, and I'm so happy to see EA taking it directly on the chin.

Blizzard seems to be enjoying the opportunity to capitalize off of EA's stupidity though.

 

Edited November 16, 2017 by Chronocidal

[TangledThorns]

I wonder if anyone lost their job at EA over this.

[mikeszekely]

EA suits seeing what works in the mobile games market and trying to apply it to a $60 AAA retail game for consoles/PC. Of course it's going to blow up in their faces! The mobile market works by giving people simple, addictive gameplay for free and getting a larger market of casual players to spend a buck it two here and there. Trying to nickel and dime a hardcore audience who already dropped $60 on the game and who already have expectations about what that $60 should get you is a recipe for getting your target audience to say, "no thanks, I'll play something else instead."

[kajnrig]

6 hours ago, dizman said:

EA pushed things a bit too far too fast and now they gotta face the backlash, hopefully it will give other developers pause in the loot box craze.

I don't know why you've worded that so gingerly. "A bit" too far? Too fast? They blew past too far from the get-go, all the way back in Dead Space 3. The moment they started giving people the "option" to pay real money for in-game currency, the AAA gaming industry became a perverse joke. Everyone's up in arms about Battlefront, meanwhile I'm here swimming in vindication for having abandoned the industry writ large long ago.

 

[dizman]

EA has been slowly ramping things up over the past few years with more and more microtransactions, it just surprised me that they would go all in with mandatory loot box progression when they have been playing it smart. I guess they figured no one was gonna stop them and Activision was hot on their heels in the scummy business department so might as well go for the goal early. Hell people probably wouldn't have even cared if the EA reddit response wasn't so hilariously out of touch.

[Chronocidal]

The semi-amusing part of this entire debacle to me is that, as the whole lootbox scheme unravels, it's going to reveal just how ridiculously shallow the content in the game might actually be. 

If they're requiring months of playtime to unlock any new features, then the range of what players have access to for several months is going to be almost nil.  Will the game even survive that lack of available content without people jump starting via microtransactions?

Edited November 17, 2017 by Chronocidal

[TangledThorns]

I wonder how much money Wargaming is making with their model? I'm playing World of Warships which is free to play but you can buy stuff to increase XP and special items such as ships and skins without it feeling unfair to those who don't pay. I put a few hundred dollars into this game but I know it goes to making the game better with new updates and content. Plus I love the game so its worth it. Perhaps EA should have thought of this model at first because its hard for a community to complain about a game that is free.

[Focslain]

6 hours ago, TangledThorns said:

I wonder how much money Wargaming is making with their model? I'm playing World of Warships which is free to play but you can buy stuff to increase XP and special items such as ships and skins without it feeling unfair to those who don't pay. I put a few hundred dollars into this game but I know it goes to making the game better with new updates and content. Plus I love the game so its worth it. Perhaps EA should have thought of this model at first because its hard for a community to complain about a game that is free.

Oh they find ways. 

Generally if any content is locked behind a pay-wall, with the exception of cosmetics, I here the cries of p2w. Nothing against Wargaming or your spending habit, just seen some of the darker (stupider) side of the community in recent years. 

I should play a bit more of warship, I enjoyed playing the carriers.

[frothymug]

The same discussion has been going on in the Fortnite forums. The difference here is that BF2 is a AAA title with a $60 up-front cost, coupled with a shitty loot box system with pay-to-win written all over it. Free-to-play games such as World of Warships can get away with this somewhat because there is no initial investment.

Fortnite is in paid early access, but will become free-to-play when it officially releases next year. I am highly tempted to spend money on in-game currency, but the loot system is just good enough for me to not make any additional investment YET.

Is there an example of loot boxes being done right?

[Focslain]

26 minutes ago, frothymug said:

Is there an example of loot boxes being done right?

Closest I've seen are in team shooters, so Overwatch, TF2, and CS:GO. Basically as long as the loot crate is not tied to progression it's not a bad system. The instant progression material is added to the boxes then p2w creeps in, this includes if the boxes can be earned for free but still purchased as well.

Only other games I've seen loot boxes not been hated for p2w is DCUO (cosmetic with some progression mats) and STO (progression, cosmetic and gear). But their loot boxes contain alternate progressions, you can still get top tier without opening a single one.

[anime52k8]

34 minutes ago, frothymug said:

Is there an example of loot boxes being done right?

No.

There will never be a case of loot boxes or even in game loot in general that was "done right" because somebody will inevitably find a reason to complain no matter how you do it. Such is the nature of video game communities and why all game communities are inherently toxic and shite.