Slick wrote on Dec 12, 2017, 12:23:
I remember seeing that game sitting on my local PC shop's shelving growing up... never did get around to playing it.

ItBurn wrote on Dec 8, 2017, 16:03:
Huge Painkiller fan and I also really like Ethan Carter, so I'm pretty excited for this.

As for co-op, the Build engine games had full co-op with absolutely no sacrifices made anywhere. That was a long time ago and it was even harder to do back then because of much greater limitations. The only reason co-op is so rare these days is because of arbitrary decisions made by developers.

I worked for an AAA dev, and in a meeting they told me that they wouldn't do full co-op because it was impossible... I told them that it was possible and that's literally all it took for them to change their mind and implement it.

Edit: by arbitrary choice, I meant choose/build an engine that supports co-op natively, and then actually support it.

Nullity wrote on Dec 8, 2017, 14:09:

Slashman wrote on Dec 8, 2017, 13:41:

Nullity wrote on Dec 8, 2017, 12:45:
Well this is definitely going on my list to check out. Graphically and thematically, that looks amazing.

*crosses fingers for co-op support*

Sure! Let's take a promising atmospheric and dark FPS which would benefit from interesting environmental interactions and effects and fuck it up with co-op support to limit single player possibilities.

I'm in!!!

The presence of co-op does not preclude these possibilities. The fact that some co-op games are lacking in these areas is the fault of the developer, not the concept of co-op itself.

At the very least (given a lazy or unimaginative developer), it could be handled like how Halo did it, where the story, cinematics, interactions, etc behaved as if it were a single player game with only one Master Chief, and the co-op partner is completely ignored.

Games are more fun with a friend. I'm sorry you don't have any friends.

Nullity wrote on Dec 8, 2017, 12:45:
Well this is definitely going on my list to check out. Graphically and thematically, that looks amazing.

*crosses fingers for co-op support*

Tipsy McStagger wrote on Dec 6, 2017, 10:13:

Slashman wrote on Dec 6, 2017, 09:25:
More fodder for the gankers!

I got into eve almost 10 years ago and started from day one helping tackle people. You can be extremely useful from day 1 and have a lot of fun doing so.

As well, I've actually never been ganked in High Security space because I don't fly stupid.. as in put tons of valuables into an easily destroyed ship, which is what high security suicide gankers are looking for.

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Nov 25, 2017, 17:37:

Cutter wrote on Nov 25, 2017, 16:02:
I thought this was supposed to be a different demo with Elfs or somethings. Anyway it's the same one from Steam and it's still locking up my PC when I run it.

AMD issue, right? That sucks. For what it's worth, the game is really good, hopefully AMD CPU people bug them enough so they patch it up.

Xero wrote on Nov 19, 2017, 17:45:
CDPR is just old school. Not too many of those companies left around that put out AAA quality games.

eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 17, 2017, 21:47:
Whenever I see this game in my steam library (all 3 versions of it for some absurd reason) I remember I own Grim Dawn, then I start them both up and remember why I hated Grim Dawn and Titan Quest... Mind you, I actually played Grim Dawn with the "update" only to discover that it's still as meh as usual, I got a level 50 char by the way. That's the furthest I could stomach the game. The loot system still sucks ;( and at 1440p I have to squint to even see my inventory, good to see we live in the year 2017 there!

And I hate Titan Quest as much as Grim Dawn because it's exactly as boring and functionality broken (with bad itemization) that I actually want to reinstall Diablo 3 now...... still haven't installed battle.net since my OS switcheroo....

It's hard to describe what exactly it is, but that 2 different games could entice the same emotion from me is a really bad sign. I won't be buying any expansions for either game obviously, for that I have to actually enjoy playing the dang game first ~.~

Creston wrote on Nov 9, 2017, 19:23:
Typical EA. Kill one studio, buy another. Repeat indefinitely.

Also, queue Respawn owners (or previous owners) bitching about how terrible EA is in roughly two years or so. Devs never fucking learn.

Fletch wrote on Nov 7, 2017, 17:55:

HorrorScope wrote on Nov 6, 2017, 19:54:
Only an idiot thinks their online pc has privacy. And you of all people telling us daily corps and govt's have us by the nuts.

"They're gonna get in anyway" isn't a very compelling argument to "upgrade" to W10 (not that you're trying to convince anyone to do so). Someone said earlier that Microsoft doesn't sell your data. I don't want them to have my data in the first place.

jdreyer wrote on Nov 6, 2017, 14:44:

Beamer wrote on Nov 6, 2017, 13:13:

I don't have a horse in this - I buy the product that is best at the price point I have budgeted. If I want to spend $350 on my GPU I buy the best GPU at that price point. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone does anything else - why people care about the brand rather than the price point. These things are completely commoditized at this point. If you have $200 to spend on a CPU, and Intel offers better performance for that but you buy AMD anyway (or vice versa), you just made a bad purchase.

Human beings are tribal and want to feel part of the "in" group. That often means buying the "winning" product.

Dacote wrote on Nov 6, 2017, 10:26:
Faking Windows 10 activations must be more difficult than sevens. Thanks Microsoft.

Beamer wrote on Nov 3, 2017, 10:43:

The cost of Denuvo to a company like Ubisoft likely isn't huge on a per-product basis. They almost definitely sign a fixed fee for everything they publish, rather than a per-product basis, and it likely ends up a very small figure when averaged out. Then there's the cost to implement, which is probably also not huge, and the cost of sales lost due to having Denuvo, which is also likely not huge.