Jonjonz wrote on Sep 25, 2021, 06:32:
It never ceases to amaze me how people can make RTS games and not follow the basic formation, movement and control methods the Total War series has perfected over the years. Those controls are not patented. They are just common sense, intuitive controls. From the reviews the RTS controls in this game are even worse than Ultimate General Civil War's munged up control scheme.

It is unfortunate that Civil War junkies will put up with the crappiest low effort RTS controls just to have a Civil War RTS. Civil War junkies seem to care more about the grognard side of the game over the actual battle controls.

I don't know the specifics of this game, but control schemes should always be based on the goals of the game itself.

If you want realistic, time-based communication that isn't always guaranteed to work, something that is hugely important in civil war games, Total War is a terrible game to copy.

Context ALWAYS matters.

Cutter wrote on Sep 23, 2021, 12:52:
I'd like to get this but many of the reviews I've read state this company has a history of abandoning games on release and moving on to a new project.

That's literally 98% of single player games that have ever been made.
That's the entire point of releasing a game.
... Cuz it's done. It's ready to make money. Money to fund new games.

Leahi84 wrote on Sep 10, 2021, 21:32:

Cutter wrote on Sep 10, 2021, 20:27:
Given the conservative bent of the SCOTUS I can foresee this going there and Apple prevailing in the current political client. Beyond that Epic lost everything else. So Apple lost one thing and that probably won't stand either. Sounds like a win for them to me.

Who says this is going to the supreme court? I don't know if they'd even take a case like this. Also it depends on how the Supreme court views apple, if they are seen as a left leaning company at all they might lose. Either way, it's rather presumptuous of you to assume Apple will ultimately win out.

There's no reason SCOTUS would listen to this

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Sep 6, 2021, 15:21:
Not too surprising, given Paradox's upper management directive to DLC the shit out of every game beyond all sense of decency or even shame.

Yes, because using non-required DLC to fund free updates for years upon years always directly correlates to sexual misbehavior.

Man... I was I was capable of being this simplistic. Life must be much easier that way.

I used to engage people who shared this idiotic perspective on PDX's DLC policy and, almost without fail, helped them understand why it's a great way to do business.

But I'm just mentally exhausted and, if someone STILL has this opinion after all these years, they're either incredibly defense or they just get off on blind hatred.

Either way, pity is the only reaction they get from me anymore.

Literally 100% of the people who bought a MP-only EA game and DIDN'T expect this to happen (and, to be honest, happen sooner) has no one to blame but their own intentionally-uneducated butts.
I'm *ALL* for protesting EA, but there are appropriate ways to protest. Like, y'know, NOT BUYING ANY OF THEIR GAMES.

God *DAMN* I hate gamers (as a unified group, many of us are great as individuals).

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Jun 28, 2021, 17:53:

yonder wrote on Jun 28, 2021, 17:46:

bhcompy wrote on Jun 28, 2021, 14:22:
Probably play it, but I'm really disappointed with Rockstar for not supporting GTA5 or RDR2 with single player expansions, so I'm not really excited about it like I was for GTA5

You're disappointed that you got dozens and dozens of hours of SP content in the base game and didn't have to pay extra to get a little bit more?

*Disappointed*?

And they say gamers are overly entitled...

I don't think one is entitled by having an opinion of Rockstar's business model.

"really disappointed with Rockstar" is an opinion that reflects a sense of entitlement.

bhcompy wrote on Jun 28, 2021, 14:22:
Probably play it, but I'm really disappointed with Rockstar for not supporting GTA5 or RDR2 with single player expansions, so I'm not really excited about it like I was for GTA5

You're disappointed that you got dozens and dozens of hours of SP content in the base game and didn't have to pay extra to get a little bit more?

*Disappointed*?

And they say gamers are overly entitled...

The game is free. The skin doesn't give any advantage.
It's a tip, so that you can throw money at the devs. Literally nothing else.
There's nothing wrong here, nothing to defend.

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Apr 17, 2021, 15:05:
Catering to streamers is just extra bullshit icing on the bullshit cake that PoE has become. That alone would make any sane person boycott PoE now.

You either don't know how marketing works or you are against the concept of marketing.

Let me make a different analogy.

If you have a huge crowd at the door and you had an actor who was paid to be in a commercial and who had it in their contract that they only had to be there from 3 to 5, and that whatever footage you got was all you got... would you make them wait in line?

No... because that's obscenely stupid

These streamers setup a contract to do marketing for them and only had to be there for a set amount of time, and, based on what I'm reading, if they spent two hours in the queue that counted.

Criticize them for not saying "two hour of actual in-game gameplay" and that's fair. But this ain't that.

It's fun to see who here remembers the "Scrolls" lawsuit, or any of the many, many previous ones, and thus already knows about the annoying realities of trademark law

Bludd wrote on Mar 19, 2021, 12:29:
they must have really objected to the start where you argue with the fan (or was it the tie)

I won't lie, in my last playthrough that actually killed my character.

Love this game.

"it’s a massively successful game for Activision"

Pretty sure you answered your own question there.

Also... please learn how up use commas properly. Thank you.

Epic Games Exclusives are like Adam Sandler Sony movies. They're so whored out that they're complete profitable before release. To the developers at least.

eRe4s3r wrote on Jan 15, 2021, 23:59:
What is this marketing? Do they intentionally want to sabotage their own game release?

Accusations based on baseless speculation are my FAVORITE.

I love pessimism as much as the next old fart but I also live facts and track records.

Anyone wanna share those?

HorrorScope wrote on Dec 9, 2020, 21:23:
Might be handing out donuts.

I haven't made it outside, but here is my performance:

2060, 1440P, 8 year old i7. (Massive change coming once inventories of the latest greatest are in place)

With DLSS off and with their given settings for my system which is a combo of med-high, with high be a max setting in many important things, aka looks good.
55 Frames.

With DLSS at Quality, the best setting of 4 it goes to 75 solid and that is what I have my system locked to, so I'll need to turn that off to see what it pulls in full, that said I'm at 98% GPU usage and 85% CPU usage. So it's running pretty efficient. My memory is crap so it holds me back some as well.

So far so good, couple very minor keybind nitpicks.

My ole man 1060 1050P same settings no DLSS on that, he's pegged at his locked 60 at least indoors.
My son in the same boat 1070, 1080P, newer i5, unsure what he's getting but at least 60...

I took Corpo, ole man took Street Punk and we have totally different starts, that's good.

EDIT:
Keybinds O=Inventory and J=Quest Log and can't be remapped.
Going outside, oh yeah hit. went from 35 to 55 fps using DLSS Balanced mode, lifesaver.

You also can't rebind F.

O, F, and J.

Meaning anyone who despises the "as far away from the center of the keyboard as possible" WASD basically has no realistic option.

ALSO... I've experienced the "controller rumble doesn't turn off" bug more than once.

I'd like to personally send a death glare to EVERY individual who angrily demanded that CDPR push this out with bugs cuz WE WANT OUR TOYS NOW DAMMIT WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

"It's done when it's done" should be the mantra every developer is comfortable with.

Cutter wrote on Nov 7, 2020, 23:19:

Fion wrote on Nov 7, 2020, 22:12:

Cutter wrote on Nov 7, 2020, 18:15:
Eh, I never thought the originals were anything beyond okay. Zero interest in this even if it was free.

Never change, Cutter.

Go fuck yourself. There's zero shortage of games that I love and get excited about personally or around here, asshole.

Never change, Cutter

Ubisoft saw HBO's naming clusterfuck and announced HOLD MY BEER!

As if I needed more reason to bed so cynical about humanity... there are Bluesnews viewers who, even at this stage, clearly understand neither the point or benefit of Early Access.

If you play a STORY based game in EA and get sick if the story once full release comes out... that's on you.

If you don't understand why, in SOME cases, having thousands of paying beta-testers is better than paying for dozens of beta testers... I don't know what to tell you, that's beyond me.

As for the whole "rambling blah blah" whatever... You've clearly not beta tested in your life. Any remotely competent developer will use trello and a well-moderated discord.

And plenty of people enjoy INTERACTING with the developers. I'm one of them.

And... by supporting the devs by paying for something early, I not only get to interact with the developers (I've legit made close friendships this way), I usually get the game for less than if I waited.

I sincerely am floored by the fact that there are people HERE that don't understand such a basic, common gaming reality.

I'm exhausted

Cutter wrote on Oct 10, 2020, 17:57:

ed Dead Redemption 2, Last of US 2 and now Cyberpunk have all taken a lot longer than originally communicated

Uh, no they have not. And 6 years past target with no end in sight isn't just "unpredictability", that's either a scam or piss poor management. And those games got made for a 1/3rd, or even less, and that's the entire production and a massive marketing budget to boot. The guy should be selling manure instead because he sure is full of it.

Absolutely NO game on that list was anywhere near the "past original promise date" that SC has reached.

You might wanna work on your phrasing OP

Kxmode wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 02:19:

RedEye9 wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 02:01:

jdreyer wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 01:38:

Kxmode wrote on Sep 16, 2020, 22:35:

jdreyer wrote on Sep 16, 2020, 22:22:
Meanwhile, Apple continues to abuse it's monopoly position.

Just hours after the reveal of Apple’s new services bundles, the tech giant has already taken criticism for evidently favoring its own apps over those with which it directly competes in its App Store.
Spotify, which has been feuding with the tech giant for years now over its hefty App Store fees, quickly seized on the opportunity to raise Apple antitrust concerns.

But is it illegal? Meh. It's WRONG, no doubt. But Illegal, I don't think so. Apple owns the operating system and hardware. Like any platform, they create and govern the rules; rules companies agree to when they sign up for an account. So it is less a monopoly and more like a massive and unethical conflict of interest.

It's textbook anti-trust. It's why the studio system was dismantled in the 1950s. Just because the Trump JD doesn't prosecute doesn't mean it's not illegal.

As long as Billy Barr is at the helm don't expect nuthin to change. Shit, they might even get immunity from prosecution and a preemptive pardon.

This thread couldn't go more than 20 comments before it derailed into political things. I'm done.

It's almost like discussing what constitutes monopolies, trusts, and cartels is... somehow... a political topic!!!