Jivaro wrote on Aug 28, 2020, 16:10:A turn-based, fictional sports game seemed pretty foreign to me too...when I first played Blood Bowl 1 about four years ago. It didn't take long before I was really into it though. The way I play, the matches can take an hour to two hours, so I can only imagine how long the table top version would be (5 hours per match??)
I play sports games all the time and am an admitted Maddenaholic, I know nothing of Warhammer. Two of my friends played 1 and 2 and on their recommendation (and a great sale) I bought the GOTY editions of both. I haven't gotten particularly far in either but I tried each and I have to say I feel like I missed out on something. Looking forward to 3.
Slashman wrote on Apr 20, 2020, 18:32:There's a difference between creative, boundary pushing, easy to market ideas and ideas that are those things while also being reasonably doable. If the latter aren't in short supply in the games industry, then it's the only entertainment industry that can say that, and devs should spend their days appreciating what an amazing time it is to be making games.Cutter wrote on Apr 20, 2020, 18:03:This is actually true. I have heard several developers say this. Ideas aren't in short supply in the game industry...but they are not where the real work begins.
People forget - or didn't know to begin with - that WC games got made in spite of CR, not because of him. He was a shitty producer from day one. Anyone can come up with wild ideas, it's another thing to deliver them on scope, on time, and on budget. He's never been able to do that and he still can't.
eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 16, 2019, 16:59:Okay, thanks for the info. The savefile bug, hopefully fixed now, explains the complaints. Otherwise, it sounds like it's exactly what you'd get if you bought just the base game.selection7 wrote on Nov 16, 2019, 14:59:eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 16, 2019, 04:22:Acleacius wrote on Nov 15, 2019, 21:09:
Don't think I've ever played any of this series, but if it's free might check it out.
Anyone who has played this know what this review comment means?It says its free, but its not , you have to pay to play it.
Thanks
It means nearly everything aside from the most mundane base game is behind a paywall.
The game has a lot of DLC. Of course that's not free. But can you play the entire single player campaign for free? There are Steam reviews making it sound like this is some kind of scam, and I can't tell from your reply if there's any truth to that. The "mundane base" game is the most important part.
The SP campaign is free and that's literally the only thing you can access without paying. Well, at least now you can, because when I wrote that you couldn't because of a "bug" that locked your savefiles of the campaign behind a paywall. And no, that is not a joke.
eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 16, 2019, 04:22:Acleacius wrote on Nov 15, 2019, 21:09:
Don't think I've ever played any of this series, but if it's free might check it out.
Anyone who has played this know what this review comment means?It says its free, but its not , you have to pay to play it.
Thanks
It means nearly everything aside from the most mundane base game is behind a paywall.
Verno wrote on Apr 3, 2012, 08:43:You're fighting a losing war, just like the record companies of the late 90's and early new millenium were. Now even music and movies are trying to move towards no-physical media so they can make resales, rentals, and piracy obsolete. Throwing around all the tough talk about how you're not going to accept it and you'll go indpendent only underscores your denial.selection7 wrote on Apr 3, 2012, 02:12:
Here's the thing...
This is a really silly and dismissive post. First off, you're a Bluesnews reader smart guy. Second, "You'll do it because you'll do it" isn't logical. You're assuming that the gaming industry itself will just uniformly adopt whatever the big companies do when history has shown that is NOT the case. In fact right now there is a massive independent resurgence on digital platforms, the likes of which we haven't seen before. People won't just adopt whatever the industry tells them to, particularly when its inconvenient and detrimental to a platform that is supposed to be all about making things easy and convenient.
Finally, people are ok with internet functionality as it provides them benefits. Using that functionality to restrict you with no upside is a whole different matter. People will not be fine with functionality that is solely for the benefit of Microsoft that has little to no upside for the user. I have no idea why you thought mp3s were a good example either, they were widely adopted because of convenience and that industries inability to accept change and give people what they want.
Dades wrote on Dec 14, 2011, 07:09:
Microsoft made it one of their little exclusives as they have done with many other games, it was completely unnecessary. Saying I didn't buy Alan Wake PC because his facial animations are dumb is no less emotional and arbitrary than not buying it because it was out on the consoles first. Of course people should threaten not to buy it if something upset them, that's a big part of how the consumer and corporation feedback process works. Were they supposed to fill out surveys and send flowers instead with a little card saying oh poor Remedy, you took a sack full of microsoft money to not release the game but we understand! Maybe in your world everyone is a robot who doesn't let anything affect their incredibly objective world view but the rest of us live somewhere else.