Solemn-Philosopher wrote on Sep 26, 2020, 17:28:
It is a legitimate criticism that the ending was mediocre and your choices didn't make a huge difference (though they still affect some things). However, dismissing the entire game (or series) on its concluding chapter is silly to me. It is more about the journey than the final destination (which also wasn't that terrible, especially with the later update).

Didn't work out to well for Game of Thrones, having a lackluster finish, wiped out everything.

I played it, I don't know if I was a fan or not. I find myself indifferent. I am excited for Evil Genius 2 if we are talking about old sims.

I have bought and played OW, I'll likely wait until it's all available.

Having bought 3 gangs (50 each) and the boxed set (300), I threw money at this too. I'll get to play it tonight.

I imagine every developer is looking at GTA 5 and seeing the hundreds of millions in online sales after the single player experience is over. I don't blame them for trying to carve a slice - if the result is CDPR spending more money to develop the world as a foundation, by all means!

On the other hand we have RSI who have inexplicably managed to collect money by releasing the idea of new vehicles without actually producing a single player game at all. They have captured the spirit of the GTA5 content releases somehow - it's quite peculiar.

Quinn wrote on Aug 31, 2020, 10:24:
Still waiting for an explanation. Very curious.

I reported your post, someone must have agreed with the option I selected. I will not engage in conversation with a malicious actor who has no interest in discourse, other than to further illustrated and discuss their own position.

D-Rock wrote on Jun 13, 2020, 10:59:

opie wrote on Jun 12, 2020, 22:50:
it will be on rails, but shitty.... why is it so hard to get another Xwing or Tie fighter or Xwing vs Tie fighter...

Because the largest target market doesn't have the patience for the difficulty level or complexities of another X-Wing. They want to maximize profit.

Google "XWVM" if you want the next X-Wing.

As much as I enjoyed the original X-wing and especially Tie Fighter - ultimately Xwing vs Tie Fighter involved flipping toggles to make the tightest spin to shoot the other ship. which got easier when the odds weren't even; The only exception was whether or not you got splashed or splashed someone with a missle before you started spinning around each other.

The single player games were special, and could likely be remake and done even better - but not if it's being built with multiplayer in mind. I enjoyed the Battlefield space combat, but that was because the scenarios helped to get away from spinning.

Slick wrote on Mar 26, 2020, 12:33:
So I don't know much about the economics of this, and you might very well have a good point here. All I can say is when I've gone into business with people, this is the idea that I came up with on my own. I have the idea and the manpower, they have the money to fund it. All income goes towards paying off the initial debt incurred, and then we split everything from there 50/50. In theory it sounds fair to me. The project would never become a reality without the ideas and the funding, you need both equally.

\

The economics are clear: get 50% of the money after we decide how much it costs to make - the costs likely include any on-going technology costs to support the game, and likely a moving target if the game is successful - they likely have a number of bulk licenses from different vendors they can hand out - and add to your bill. You don't run a business to be fair, you run it to make money: Epic wants to lock themselves into any runaway successes in the small dev market by incentivizing their platform to do so. Exclusivity would be taken for granted - what I would want more details on - would be how much money or share of profits they'd expect if a title gets ported to another market: I would expect Epic to keep taking 50% even if the costs were already covered.

This scenario reminds me of time Interplay was reduced down to the owners of the name, and lawyers - existing solely to litigate to pay themselves: namely trying to get their hands on the Fallout money when Beth released FO3 (specially when Beth starting selling the original games, and their 'attempt' to make a Fallout Online, before the rights went to Beth).

Crytek is a slightly better position, but more or less the same thing - frivolous lawsuits in a pathetic attempt for an out of court settlement to shut-up.

I suspect that Disney has their feet over the fire - having totally bungled SWBF2 with their pay-to-win greed. Combined with the fact that Disney has done a great job of tarnishing the Star Wars rep - there probably very little fire burning for this title, with the earlier negative reviews. I can imagine pre-orders are waydown and projections are another failed game. Disney is demanding they get their numbers up, so they are going to Valve to scrap a 15% increase in projections.

Or CJ is really interested in fat men working poles for some reason.

Cutter wrote on Oct 29, 2019, 15:10:
Can't wait until they announce the monthly "access" fees - which of course will be tiered too.

They have a concierge service that is monthly, might be tiered - I'm not sure. I'll make sure my SC assets are in my will or filed under hubris.

mxmissile wrote on Oct 4, 2019, 10:17:
Entitlement rears it's ugly head, then goes into full blown SJW mode. Internet 2019.

Thank you for pushing your narrative comment-bot, your free market crumbs are next to the trough by the pig sty.

SabreT wrote on Sep 23, 2019, 17:24:

ExGemini wrote on Sep 23, 2019, 16:51:

SabreT wrote on Sep 23, 2019, 10:46:
glad to see the anti-epic store cult boycott went well. lol

Please shit in your hands and slap yourself.

That’s oddly specific… Is that the circle jerk ritual you guys do before climbing on the hate train ?

Which train is that? the irrational hatred for Steam train? The delighting in frustratingly empty friends-list in a game built for co-op train? Or the Fortnite money train buying exclusivity in lieu of having a competing platform train?

Please be specific.

I think the EGS is a bonerparty for everyone that has a hateon for Steam. For gamers, it's annoying because BL3 is unable to benefit from well-aged and developed friend lists.

CJ_Parker wrote on Sep 13, 2019, 14:19:

Citizen P wrote on Sep 13, 2019, 13:36:

CJ_Parker wrote on Sep 13, 2019, 13:28:

Why? No one mentions it explicitly when a game is only available on Steam either. Why should EGS be any different?

I would say, because EGS is not engaging in practices that are of any benefit to the consumer and that a conscientious gamer might prefer snubbing them at release and buying a GOTY edition later to dissuade bother developer and publisher from engaging in such practices. So please, dont pretend that the reason this was mentioned by a previous poster was some unusual statement, it is disingenuous.

If some gamers really care that much about "snubbing" then it's on them to do the research which games to snub.

Besides, for the umpteenth time: The anti-consumer decision is always made by the publisher. Only the publisher decides when, where, why, how or even IF a game of theirs gets published. Epic is making them an offer to exclusively put the game on the EGS for 12 months. The publisher can accept this offer or deny it. If they accept it then the decision to limit gamer choice is made by them, not Epic.

Finally, I'd say no PC game review is complete without a short paragraph on DRM, i.e. mentioning which launcher the game requires, whether it is protected by Denuvo yada yada.
However, as for review sites that generally don't do this, I don't see a reason why they should be obliged to make a fuss over the EGS exclusivity. Just so the Steam fanbois can feel all tingly inside? Puuuhlease... grow the fuck up y'all!

So your intention was to be facetious so you could tell everyone else to go fuck themselves for pointing out what an obtuse comment you made - good for you, I suppose. Happy Friday and all that, twat.

CJ_Parker wrote on Sep 13, 2019, 13:28:

Why? No one mentions it explicitly when a game is only available on Steam either. Why should EGS be any different?

I would say, because EGS is not engaging in practices that are of any benefit to the consumer and that a conscientious gamer might prefer snubbing them at release and buying a GOTY edition later to dissuade bother developer and publisher from engaging in such practices. So please, dont pretend that the reason this was mentioned by a previous poster was some unusual statement, it is disingenuous.

Drath71 wrote on Sep 7, 2019, 09:06:

I had to go look up what you mean by the toy story 2 scene. Ridiculous. But if leftists ever get control, get ready for a way of life straight out of George Orwell's nightmares.

Ah yes, that crazy left-wing cabal that runs Disney trying to sneak granola into everything. GTFO you fruitloop.

Cutter wrote on Jun 11, 2019, 11:39:
Yeah, the audience shills just make it nauseating. If any of those people were actual gamers they'd have all been sitting there in stony silence, arms crossed and looking angry.

I dunno, not so much shills I think - as much as low-rent YouTube streamers that will debase themselves publically for the hope of free swag; they're already doing anything they can for views.

jdreyer wrote on May 1, 2019, 14:47:
How is the game at this point? Worth a 53GB download to try out?

If you have unlimited downloading, sure why not? It's pretty and boring. I updated just laat week and did what I did last time: Grabbed my ship and flew to a planet, flew around until I blew up. I noticed that it was running much better than before on my 980ti - but has the appeal of one of those really in-depth flight sims that I don't care for.

Rilcon wrote on Apr 16, 2019, 14:50:
You can buy it off Ubi's store, if Epic offends you so. It's not like Ubi games on Steam don't just launch Ubi's launcher on top.

Absolutely, and if this was a day 1 for me, I would do so. As it stands, my interest is subsided because, shady business is shady.