The Half Elf wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 17:57:
Not the Marvel/Firaxis game I was hoping for.

I was initially bummed that this wasn't going to be XCOM with superheroes but I understand why they didn't go that route. XCOM is a primarily defensive game where you hide behind cover and slowly inch your way forward while ending each turn with Overwatch. That makes sense for XCOM but wouldn't really make sense for a superhero game. Superheroes are expected to be much more powerful and aggressive. They should be making the enemies hide behind cover, not vice versa. In addition, the RNG-heavy nature of XCOM would be a major turn-off for the mainstream audience that a Marvel game has to appeal to. It makes sense to remove punishing RNG like chance to hit and chance to panic in favor of the more forgiving RNG of card-based gameplay.

I was pretty skeptical of Midnight Suns when they first showed it but the more I've seen of it, the more faith I have in Firaxis to deliver something good. The combat has a lot more depth than is immediately obvious and the versatility of the card-based system helps compensate for the simplistic levels.

It does seem weird that they're releasing this so soon. It would have made more sense to wait for the Steam launch next year but I guess they wanted to get this out in time for the holidays.

"If every developer could accept their own payments and avoid the 30% tax by Apple and Google we could pass the savings along to all our consumers and players would get a better deal on items. And you'd have economic competition," Sweeney said.

Hah, right. History has definitely shown that companies pass down their savings to customers...

Sadly, that is correct. This is going to be a straight port of the Switch version, downgraded assets and all. On top of that, owners of the original will still have to pay full price. Square really dropped the ball on this one.

Interested to see how this turns out. From what I understand, most of the devs who worked on the original game have long since left the studio.

I'm all for it if it means a better game. This is the biggest and most ambitious game DF has made in years.

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Jul 23, 2020, 22:21:
Looks interesting, if light on actual gameplay details obviously. This reminds me though, I need to buy Outer Worlds still... why the hell isn't that on Gog yet??

Also, apparently Obsidian is utterly sick of isometric party based rpgs, oh well.

I don't think this has anything to do with their personal tastes. Both Tyranny and PoE2 sold below expectations and I doubt MS has any interest in funding another CRPG. An 3D action-RPG in the same setting is the best we can hope for. I actually found Tyranny's premise and setting to be way more interesting than PoE's but PoE's was decent enough.

Also, Outer Worlds isn't on GOG or Steam yet because its publisher signed a one-year exclusivity contract with EGS. Thanks Epic!

Acleacius wrote on Jul 23, 2020, 23:38:

Dev wrote on Jul 23, 2020, 22:37:

Beamer wrote on Jul 23, 2020, 22:19:
I may get control.

I had a lot of fun with that. One of the few games I played all the way through. A fun story

From what I can tell, Control is coming to Steam in August and Outer Worlds in September.

Outer Worlds was released in late October 2019 so I think it's more likely to be a November release on Steam. Just in time for the holidays! Control came out late August 2019, so it'll probably be a September release on Steam.

As far as I can tell, GMG only sells Uplay keys for Ubisoft games.

Would love to see their PCCU and MAU once they stop doing giveaways, timed exclusives and $10 coupons.

HoSpanky wrote on Jun 21, 2020, 14:50:
I hope bigger publishers are watching this list, seeing the Index consistently on it. Maybe we'll get some good high-end games on Steam, instead of Facebook buying them all up. Happy to see the new Star Wars game is fully VR capable. Honestly, if your game takes place 99% in a cockpit, it should have VR support. It's the easiest VR conversion possible.

Steam's best-seller charts are based on revenue, not units sold, so it makes sense that the Index would be at the top given that it costs $1000. It's not really indicative of the potential market size for VR-only games.

I wouldn't call it trial and error. These games give you all the information you need. You just need to be patient and observant. These are basically stealth games except you're given way more information than most stealth games offer.

Hah, this is laughable. The entire point of spending millions on giveaways is to take sales from your competitors. Same as timed exclusivity. I'd love to see the data showing giveaways actually increasing sales of the same games on competing platforms.

I wonder when Epic expects EGS to start making money. With all the giveaways, timed exclusives, $10 coupons and reduced cut, they've most definitely not made any profit since launch.

Mr. Tact wrote on Apr 20, 2020, 22:24:
I suspect it is the curmudgeon in me... but I don't get it. Why did anyone think this was a good idea? What am I gaining by playing games off cloud servers? I guess if I traveled a lot it might be okay. But overall the cons seem to out weigh the pros so heavily...

Streaming makes sense for people who don't want to invest in hardware. These people don't care that much about image quality, performance or input lag so the technical downsides of streaming are less relevant to them.

MxxCon wrote on Apr 20, 2020, 22:15:
Fucking greedy publishers.
How is this different from me running my games on a different computer at somebody else's house?!

The difference is that Nvidia makes money from this service and pubs/devs all want a cut, even if they haven't done anything to earn it.

Given Kalypso's track record, I'm a bit skeptical about this. However, the genre can use any support it can get so I'm hoping for the best.

Retired wrote on Apr 2, 2020, 14:48:
I thought I was going to be all in on FO76, but I didn't buy it. After reading a bunch, watching videos, streamers, etc.....I don't feel like I missed anything.

Can someone who is playing and enjoying give some info as to if and why I should jump in?

Thanks.

/edit: Thanks Horrorscope.

Did you enjoy FO4's core gameplay loop? Are you content with exploring, killing, scavenging and crafting? Is interesting lore enough story for you? If so, you'll probably like FO76.

However, if you're looking for a single-player RPG, FO76 is not that. It's a multiplayer game, along with all the restrictions on player agency that come with it.

Beamer wrote on Mar 30, 2020, 07:51:
Epic is curated as a bug. They don't have the ability to add everything, only what they think will sell. That's a nice side effect that will go away. Discoverability still sucks, and one is always better off researching off storefronts than on it.

Nah, it's not even about what's going to sell. Look at their actual selection. Did they really think Omen of Sorrow was going to sell well? Rune II? Bee Simulator? Any of the random, obscure indie games that they've given away for free?

Again, getting on EGS comes down to three things:
1) Timed exclusivity.
2) Giveaways.
3) Highly-anticipated games.

If you aren't doing one of those, you aren't getting on EGS.

Slick wrote on Mar 26, 2020, 19:57:
It's kind of nice to have an actual curated list of high-quality content, as opposed to the Alibaba Warehouse that is Steam.

Ah, yes, high quality content like Omen of Sorrow (64 MC), Sinking City (71 MC), Bee Simulator (58 MC), Mechwarrior 5 (74 MC), Shenmue III (69 MC) and Rune II (47 MC)...

EGS' selection has nothing to do with curation. If you want to get onto EGS, you need to do one of three things:

1) Accept a timed exclusivity deal.
2) Allow your game to be one of the weekly giveaways.
3) Be a highly-anticipated, high-profile AAA game like Cyberpunk or Death Stranding.

Slick wrote on Mar 26, 2020, 19:57:
I like how it's assumed that given the choice, game developers wouldn't want their game on a store that takes 12% instead of 30%. Weather it's exclusive to that store or not, shouldn't they want their games be available to the world and not have to throw stacks of paper at Valve for the privilege?

Not a single publisher or developer has chosen to be EGS-exclusive because of the 88% cut. Those deals are entirely the result of Epic giving them significant lump sum payments. That's why every single EGS exclusive ends up on Steam and other platforms within a year. The larger cut doesn't mean shit when you're selling significantly fewer units.

As you said, publishers and developers should want their games to be as broadly available as possible. That means not being exclusive to EGS.

Slick wrote on Mar 26, 2020, 19:57:
A game which doesn't use Steamworks or SteamVR doesn't need to be on Steam.

A game that doesn't use Steam APIs doesn't need to be exclusive to Steam. Games should be available on as many distribution platforms as possible. Steam, GOG, EGS, Uplay, Origin, Game Pass, Itch.io, etc. However, exclusivity deals (like the ones Epic does) prevent that from happening.

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 26, 2020, 11:31:
Betting it will include restrictions on which platform you can release

No doubt all of these games will be permanent EGS exclusives on PC but also available on consoles despite their tyrannical 30% store "tax."

I'm guessing Epic realized that timed exclusives aren't really working out because people just wait until they're on Steam.