On August 17 2016 01:32 CobaltBlu wrote: A lot of people had unreasonable expectations about Elite Dangerous and are pissed about that already. I'm not sure that Star Citizen will ever be properly finished.
People comparing NMS to EVE had a incorrect assumptions already. NMS is a survival game set in space. If you want to play a first person space sim in a giant massively generated universe then you should have been playing Elite.
Nobody compared it to Eve. People said that NMS could benefit from some of the gameplay options in Eve in addition to what is already there....
Eh, I have heard as many reports that it could use less mechanics and just be about traveling. For every person wanting more mechanics, I know one who just wants to fly around and see what it out there.
Well thats fine, but then the game should actually make exploring interesting and not tedious. Exploring is a pain in the ass because of the mechanics (which I get is your point) but also once you've seen about 10 planets you have seen them all.
So they could have either A) gone more mechanics to make the game interesting with more too do B) less mechanics and more about travel and improved the diversification and then gone in and designed some really spectacular settings. Instead everything is the same on every planet.
It fails miserably on both fronts As far as I am concerned.
On August 17 2016 01:32 CobaltBlu wrote: A lot of people had unreasonable expectations about Elite Dangerous and are pissed about that already. I'm not sure that Star Citizen will ever be properly finished.
People comparing NMS to EVE had a incorrect assumptions already. NMS is a survival game set in space. If you want to play a first person space sim in a giant massively generated universe then you should have been playing Elite.
Nobody compared it to Eve. People said that NMS could benefit from some of the gameplay options in Eve in addition to what is already there....
Eh, I have heard as many reports that it could use less mechanics and just be about traveling. For every person wanting more mechanics, I know one who just wants to fly around and see what it out there.
Well thats fine, but then the game should actually make exploring interesting and not tedious. Exploring is a pain in the ass because of the mechanics (which I get is your point) but also once you've seen about 10 planets you have seen them all.
So they could have either A) gone more mechanics to make the game interesting with more too do B) less mechanics and more about travel and improved the diversification and then gone in and designed some really spectacular settings. Instead everything is the same on every planet.
It fails miserably on both fronts As far as I am concerned.
I would like to see the core survival mechanics tweeked. I don't mind them for flying around, but one you are on the ground they are less than fun.
On August 20 2016 23:30 bo1b wrote: Perhaps after years of seeing you hold not a single opinion which goes with or against the grain, or is in fact a deviation from a meaningless platitude apologising for the frankly sorry state of affairs that's befallen the video game industry, people might start noticing trends.
I guess victim blaming is acceptable when people have the temerity to pre-order a game and support an up and coming developer. They should instead be soul less insipid robots who through the no doubt vigorous education they undertook, understand the difference between fraud and what occurred here.
the video games industry and the people who run it partake in the same level of overall dishonesty they did 35+ years ago. things are not getting worse.
there are lots of people who will bullshit in exchange for more money in every industry. including the video game industry. Because the industry has grown by leaps and bounds the dishonesty is merely larger in #s because the pie is bigger. The rate of dishonesty is the same.
i'd say the bullshitters are more skilled and calculated than ever before because there is more money at stake.
Dunno, the PC games market changed a lot over the last 35 years, as the typical consumer changes so does the development/ marketing geared towards said consumer.
In other words, PC gamers got dumber and the market adjusted accordingly
On August 20 2016 23:30 bo1b wrote: Perhaps after years of seeing you hold not a single opinion which goes with or against the grain, or is in fact a deviation from a meaningless platitude apologising for the frankly sorry state of affairs that's befallen the video game industry, people might start noticing trends.
I guess victim blaming is acceptable when people have the temerity to pre-order a game and support an up and coming developer. They should instead be soul less insipid robots who through the no doubt vigorous education they undertook, understand the difference between fraud and what occurred here.
the video games industry and the people who run it partake in the same level of overall dishonesty they did 35+ years ago. things are not getting worse.
there are lots of people who will bullshit in exchange for more money in every industry. including the video game industry. Because the industry has grown by leaps and bounds the dishonesty is merely larger in #s because the pie is bigger. The rate of dishonesty is the same.
i'd say the bullshitters are more skilled and calculated than ever before because there is more money at stake.
Dunno, the PC games market changed a lot over the last 35 years, as the typical consumer changes so does the development/ marketing geared towards said consumer.
In other words, PC gamers got dumber and the market adjusted accordingly
Interesting theory.
The Commodore 64 was is really, really easy to use. I used to play and use my grandfathers C64 when i was 10. less than 10 console level commands and you're good to go. i still remember : LOAD "$",8 ... good times
The group of consumers owning and playing PS4, XB1 and PC are probably more knowledgeable than the consumers owning C64s, Atari 2600s and Intellvisions. But that's just a guess it would probably take a lengthy study to determine this.
On August 20 2016 23:30 bo1b wrote: Perhaps after years of seeing you hold not a single opinion which goes with or against the grain, or is in fact a deviation from a meaningless platitude apologising for the frankly sorry state of affairs that's befallen the video game industry, people might start noticing trends.
I guess victim blaming is acceptable when people have the temerity to pre-order a game and support an up and coming developer. They should instead be soul less insipid robots who through the no doubt vigorous education they undertook, understand the difference between fraud and what occurred here.
the video games industry and the people who run it partake in the same level of overall dishonesty they did 35+ years ago. things are not getting worse.
there are lots of people who will bullshit in exchange for more money in every industry. including the video game industry. Because the industry has grown by leaps and bounds the dishonesty is merely larger in #s because the pie is bigger. The rate of dishonesty is the same.
i'd say the bullshitters are more skilled and calculated than ever before because there is more money at stake.
I'm not saying the level of deceit has increased at all, I'm saying that 99% of AAA games produced today are devoid of any depth.
Empty promises exist in many games, even mgs5 with massive content cut Ubisoft trailers are almost of another game. Even lotv is supposed to have payable skin and voice packs that are still not released (if it will happen at all)
Nothing changed, the most important is to know what you are getting.
The same goes for most consumer industry out there
EA publishing shitty sports games bears no relevance to the fact that all games released in the last 5 years have been arguably complete garbage.
The civ series hit its peak with either alpha centauri or civ 4, broodwar was unarguably a more full game then sc2, wow is now lacking in all depth and complexity, diablo 3 is utter garbage, smash 4 went out of its way to dumb down the game from melee, street fighter 5 did the same thing from sf4 and third strike, fallout which was most played for it's choice lines that would completely change the game now don't even have choices, and the dialogue choices are yes, no, sarcastic.
The modern games that are growing and thriving in the "esports" world (not including hearthstone) are the ones that have copied and pasted a previous formula, or were made 7+ years ago.
Nhl 94 was an aberration compared to black and white, yet there are now more nhl 94 caliber games then the latter being produced today.
I never preorder from an unknown publisher which i don't have a track record with , everything CDR project releases i insta preorder , i did for Blizzard until D3 and now they are on my "no preorder until release" status. The game is shit , thats for sure and the publisher did a good job selling his product to the best of their ability nothing wrong with that , there is a hugh gap between selling something and a big con , this is not a con , just a shit game trying to sell like any other shit game in history. For me preorder is a vote of confidence nothing more.
For me Blizzard also should have got sued for Diablo 3 not having pvp when released. It was a huge part of the game for a lot of people like myself and a main reason to buy it. It was also advertised heavily (arena) and was even printed as a fearure on the pysical copy of the game. Now thats a con.
On August 21 2016 12:08 bo1b wrote: EA publishing shitty sports games bears no relevance to the fact that all games released in the last 5 years have been arguably complete garbage.
The civ series hit its peak with either alpha centauri or civ 4, broodwar was unarguably a more full game then sc2, wow is now lacking in all depth and complexity, diablo 3 is utter garbage, smash 4 went out of its way to dumb down the game from melee, street fighter 5 did the same thing from sf4 and third strike, fallout which was most played for it's choice lines that would completely change the game now don't even have choices, and the dialogue choices are yes, no, sarcastic.
The modern games that are growing and thriving in the "esports" world (not including hearthstone) are the ones that have copied and pasted a previous formula, or were made 7+ years ago.
Nhl 94 was an aberration compared to black and white, yet there are now more nhl 94 caliber games then the latter being produced today.
Witcher 3 is full on upgrade from past games.
Dragon age inquisition is better than predecessors in most of the aspects, i mean do you even remember da2?
gta 5 is better than the old games, rockstar have been consistant with their improvements.
SFV is far better than any other street fighter title ever was 5 months after release. Handcuffs in ww lmao? sf3 new generation nearly killed the whole series, alpha 1 was a pile of steaming shit and sf4 vanilla was utter imbalanced mess with netplay being complete shit tier and release being a year delayed garbage when compared to arcades, which completely busted the competition.
Dragon age inquisition is better than predecessors in most of the aspects, i mean do you even remember da2?
If you only go as far as neverwinter nights 1... yeah, you might be right. And being better than origins... what the hell, they are not even the same genre.
The rest of examples you are talking about are the same pie, with slightly new different topping. Otherwise there is very little in the industry truly inspiring. GTA 5 being the best of the GTAs, doesn't stop it from being just another GTA. Same for the witcher 3.
On August 20 2016 22:09 Plansix wrote: Consensus is overrated, understanding others views is where it is at. I enjoy the game and find people getting super pissed about a game they did not buy to be sort of comical. I have openly expressed that Hello games fucked up, dropped the ball and released a game in a state that did not live up to their promises. But because I do not do it with the level of aggression and demanded for punishment that others do, I am seen as a shill. I cannot both enjoy the game and be slightly disappoint. I can express disapproval of Hello Games action, but also be understanding as to how it happened. Its binary, us vs them options on the internet and you are a shill if you don't have those.
But mostly I see it as people who were excited for the game, but found it out it was a let down and didn't live up to their hopes. But they express that disappointment by being angry that that other people has purchased and are enjoying that same game. Or people who just like to dog pile on or vent all their disappointment in past games into this one. Everyone loves some drama or to watch something crash and burn.
I have no problem calling out shit games that launched as shit. Arkham knight was a nightmare and the publisher, WB games, should have been slapped around a bit for releasing it in that state. I will have to see how Hello Games does, but it sound like they want to make good on some of those promises.
Here is the twist. Whoever you think is angry about a dev company of videogames for a game they didn't buy... is not anger, believe me, noone writing on the internet is as invested as you might think. You are seen as a shill because no matter what a publisher or game developer did wrong, you will downplay it and outright deny it for the most part, which ends up being impossible to discuss anything with you because sooningly enough you will start with one liners, semantics arguments like the one about fraud, or use different versions of you are just a random hater on the internet like you are pretty much doing with Bo1b. With whom i disagree on the tone, but not in the substance with one exception. Or maybe you are right and most people are missrepresenting you (even tho i think in itself that should raise some flags at how you are acting towards others if that translates into a general opinion).
I don't think you do it on purpose, you are just unable to see through that other people's opinion which differs with yours, on a completely subjective subject like this one, can be completely right and acceptable. Which is pretty much, some people don't mind watching a bad business burn. And this does not inherently mean being punished by the goverment, or some dude flailing a whip, but just the expectations from most people, yourself included probably, that bad business practices should result in bad results. Just that you, in this particular case, don't find it enough to warrant yourself for feeling that way, but in no way it means it's not acceptable or even sensible for anybody else.
On August 21 2016 23:40 Godwrath wrote: Here is the twist. Whoever you think is angry about a dev company of videogames for a game they didn't buy... is not anger, believe me, noone writing on the internet is as invested as you might think. You are seen as a shill because no matter what a publisher or game developer did wrong, you will downplay it and outright deny it for the most part,
the behaviour of companies like Hello Games and Artillery Games is theatre of the absurd and great comedy. i hope no one is reading any kind of salt or anger into my posts.
So here's my opinion of the game - it's a great time waster, especially if you have an hour or so to spare and want to listen to a podcast while doing something relaxing and pretty. I put it in the same category as Guild Wars 2 in that respect. They're both aesthetically beautiful games that allow you to explore a lush world without really encountering any true difficulty (unless you want it - the raids in Guild Wars 2 are actually very well designed, and, dare I say - can be quite challenging!).
Now here're the differences between the two - Guild Wars 2 is a game I can also play with friends or strangers, has more interesting content, an actual story, continual updates, and is somehow cheaper. I could literally write paragraphs about each of the items in that list, but seriously, that's it. Guild Wars 2 feels like an actual game whereas NMS is the computer equivalent of Pokemon Go (that is, it's basically a walking simulator except you're not even getting any exercise). So I guess let me be the ten thousandth person to say that NMS would've been great at a fifteen dollar price point.
Unrelated, did anyone else find the review posted in #357 to be the most long-winded thing? I sped it up to 2x and still couldn't sit through it all without closing. Also I find his schtick to be a bit over the top.
On August 22 2016 14:35 Empyrean wrote: Unrelated, did anyone else find the review posted in #357 to be the most long-winded thing? I sped it up to 2x and still couldn't sit through it all without closing. Also I find his schtick to be a bit over the top.
I watched it all myself (even the spoilers about what happens when you reach the core), and I know where you are coming from. Though from having watched one or two Angry Joe reviews in the past I think this is pretty typical from him. I agree his "Angry" shpeal, which really just means he yells quite often, is a tad overdone and was finding myself adjusting the volume a lot.
I wouldn't really say it's long winded though, I felt like he actually did a really gob job trying to explain his views of the game in as complete of detail as possible. It probably feels dragged out since he basically gives video evidence of every point he mentions AFTER he mentions it, rather than it playing in the background while he talks or something. I could have done without some of his live playthrough footage, but I generally understood why he included it.
The part I actually really liked was how he showed all kinds of reference video of press release stuff that showed all the promised content that was obviously lacking in the real release. I had read all the reddit stuff but actually seeing the videos and hearing the devs make their claims first hand is more impactful.
All in all I'd say it was a pretty solid review, and I def agree with the conclusion (well my interpretation) that NMS was simply priced far too high for what is basically a proof-of concept for the tech design and the bare bones of the foundation of a game on top of that, or put more simply basically an Alpha state game.
how is a game that crashes 7 times in a ~12 hour play time a 5/10??? i don't understand his ratings at all, especially because he tore the game up for basically all of the video..
EPT
