Jerykk wrote on Aug 17, 2017, 00:41:
They're not objectively worse at all. Dishonored 2 and DX:MD both expanded and improved upon their predecessors in numerous ways. Stealth was better, combat better and level design was at least on par. Writing was inferior, true, but that's just one part of the game. Taken as a whole, both games were improvements.

While it's true that mechanically they were a bit better, I had more fun and felt more satisfied with the first installment of both games and I think that most people would agree. Dishonored 2 is so... bland. Deus Ex was great, but it's just too damn short and the ending suuuuucks.

jdreyer wrote on Aug 16, 2017, 20:15:
Love me some Notepad++. Interesting about the plug-in manager. Ima throw this guy some money.

Notepad++'s search functionality suuuucks. I don't understand what they were thinking. UltraEdit's is so much better.

I think that the real problem with Prey, Dishonored 2 and Deus Ex : MD is that the games failed to generate excitement. It's mostly the way they were marketed. There was a lot of it, but it was rather bland and boring. I also found that the games themselves were a bit generic or too similar to the previous entries who already saturated us. Dishonored 2 and Deus Ex were definitely marketed as more of the same and I didn't feel that Prey really had a unique identity. I know Prey is probably a good game, and it's a type of game I usually love, but I have zero excitement for it.

Maybe when it's 15$.

jdreyer wrote on Aug 10, 2017, 13:42:

RedEye9 wrote on Aug 10, 2017, 13:26:

ForgedReality wrote on Aug 10, 2017, 11:13:
On a positive note, I just picked up Prey 2017 for thirty bucks. Holy shit it's totally worth it. ... it's pretty much proven it's worth the $30.

Glad to hear it, it gets a solid 80% from the people who count.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/prey

Also "Very Positive" on Steam, with thousands of reviews.

edit: precision
Steam reviews are just "liked" or "didn't like". So, the numbers by themselves don't mean much. The most mediocre game ever would get 100%. I'm not saying that reviews aren't useful. I didn't play Prey, and I will play it one day, but I definitely feel like it's just OK.

aka_STEVE wrote on Aug 10, 2017, 14:34:
sorry Cliffy , us PC guys remember you and what you did & said about us.

I remember. But honestly, did he look at his own game? It just couldn't do good. edit: talking about it having a small audience.

This comment was edited on Aug 10, 2017, 16:14.

Parallax Abstraction wrote on Aug 9, 2017, 08:47:

Gadzooks wrote on Aug 9, 2017, 00:51:
Takes over failed game project - Duke Nukem... game bombs

You're not wrong about Gearbox in general but as depressing as it is, Duke Nukem Forever sold well and made money for both Gearbox and 2K.

I liked Duke Forever... It was one of the best shooters released that year. It was a slow year though...

Gadzooks wrote on Aug 9, 2017, 00:51:
Typically, companies stick to what they are good at (ie: borderlands)

Not gearbox.

Takes over failed game project - Duke Nukem... game bombs
Takes over failed game project Aliens Col Mariness... game bombs
Tries to jump into the moba and FPS genre at the same time with Battleborn... cant compete with the bigger games and bombs
Having not learned their lesson with Battleborn... they try again with their 1v1 project.

Meanwhile... Borderlands fans are like, "Um, gearbox, we have money, if you want it... just sayin"

To be fair, they've probably been also seriously working on Borderlands 3 for a year or two.

I don't need the stress of 1v1 in my life. I also don't have much faith in Gearbox.

Muscular Beaver wrote on Aug 7, 2017, 08:23:

ItBurn wrote on Aug 6, 2017, 11:10:
Here's a video of Mack, which like you guys, thinks that the game is P2W, but has no idea what he's talking about: Mack's vid

It's one of his worse videos ever. Comments are blocked.

Here's a response video which makes a detailed case on why he's factually wrong: response video

I couldnt care less about the opinion of fanboys. Of course they will defend their game, no matter what and ignore facts and make crap up.
Im too old and too experienced to fall for shit like that. Ive seen even much more obvious P2W games being defended by people like you as "not P2W", so I know how you guys tick.
Regrettably for you, I played it myself. Ive seen it. Sorry, dude.

Im no fanboy and like most people here, I'm also experienced... The game has a lot of flaws and I don't like microtransactions, but I don't like false info being passed around more. Your discourse is exactly like Mack's, and I feel, misinformed. I explained my points and you disagree and that's fine...

Here's a video of Mack, which like you guys, thinks that the game is P2W, but has no idea what he's talking about: Mack's vid

It's one of his worse videos ever. Comments are blocked.

Here's a response video which makes a detailed case on why he's factually wrong: response video

Muscular Beaver wrote on Aug 6, 2017, 05:49:

ItBurn wrote on Aug 5, 2017, 17:39:

Muscular Beaver wrote on Aug 5, 2017, 12:54:

Hornet303 wrote on Aug 5, 2017, 12:46:

Muscular Beaver wrote on Aug 5, 2017, 11:58:
I would actually play that game, if it wasnt such a grind/p2w.

Have you done any research? How are considering it P2W? I bought the game in December 2015 and never paid a dime. The grind? If you want new operators and dont want to pay for them, the grind is real.

I've unlocked all but 1 operator by grinding. Honestly, there are operators that I've never played that I unlocked. People having new operators do not have any advantage over the people who have the stock OPs. I personally really like this model. The game gets supported by skins and season passes, but the maps and operators are obtainable for playing a game that I really enjoy. All new maps are playable by everyone.

Well you said it yourself. The operators. Thats why I used a slash.
Some are so good, they are better than the others and make you win more easily. Some are so bad that you dont even want to play them ever, but you have to sometimes if someone else takes your favorites and you only have a very limited selection anyway. So its good to have that buffer. Thats P2W, if you dont want to grind like a madman (and really get crazy in the process, because of what I said).
I actually played it on free weekends.

Siege isn't pay to win. It's just not. Is it grindy? If you want to unlock everything, absolutely, but you really don't need to.

Easy way to find out if a game is P2W or not.
You and your opponent just got the game. You have no money, your opponent has all the money he likes. He buys everything this game offers to buy. You cant buy anything. Who has an advantage?
Its simple really. The things you can buy arent only cosmetic, or are comfort options, like in games like Guild Wars 2 or CSGO. They are making you better at this game, because you buy things that are easier to play, are stronger, give you advantages, while your opponents have to unlock those things one by one for months or even years, depending on how much they play. Period.

It's true that you can buy things that affect gameplay. If this is your definition of P2W, I can't really discuss this with you, but here's where you go wrong: "you buy things that ... are stronger, give you advantages". This is false. Every operator has strengths and weaknesses. You absolutely don't need to unlock them all. I personally only use 3-4 of them in defend and attack scenarios. The starting operators are extremely solid. It's like buying heroes in mobas, you don't need them all. You need to know their strengths and weaknesses, and this comes with experience in the game, the only real thing that affects your performance.

CJ_Parker wrote on Aug 5, 2017, 14:57:
Depends on how they count. I also played the game way back in beta, hated the casual POS and what they did to the R6 franchise with this garbage and never looked back. Am I a "registered" player? Probably since you had to play the beta via uPlay, of course.

They also had a few free weekends etc. so I would take any such boasting claims with truckloads of salt.

One thing never changes anyway: The game is a complete POS, especially when you think about under which -originally great- franchise it was filed.

It's definitely not like the older rainbow six games, but it's not a POS. It's simply the best shooter of that type on the market and their destruction engine is the best one there ever was.

Muscular Beaver wrote on Aug 5, 2017, 12:54:

Hornet303 wrote on Aug 5, 2017, 12:46:

Muscular Beaver wrote on Aug 5, 2017, 11:58:
I would actually play that game, if it wasnt such a grind/p2w.

Have you done any research? How are considering it P2W? I bought the game in December 2015 and never paid a dime. The grind? If you want new operators and dont want to pay for them, the grind is real.

I've unlocked all but 1 operator by grinding. Honestly, there are operators that I've never played that I unlocked. People having new operators do not have any advantage over the people who have the stock OPs. I personally really like this model. The game gets supported by skins and season passes, but the maps and operators are obtainable for playing a game that I really enjoy. All new maps are playable by everyone.

Well you said it yourself. The operators. Thats why I used a slash.
Some are so good, they are better than the others and make you win more easily. Some are so bad that you dont even want to play them ever, but you have to sometimes if someone else takes your favorites and you only have a very limited selection anyway. So its good to have that buffer. Thats P2W, if you dont want to grind like a madman (and really get crazy in the process, because of what I said).
I actually played it on free weekends.

Siege isn't pay to win. It's just not. Is it grindy? If you want to unlock everything, absolutely, but you really don't need to.

I just completed new order and old blood. They're good shooters. New order is way better than old Blood. The texture streaming is horrible though. It's the worst I've seen... ever. I put the game at max details and as soon as you move your mouse, it streams new textures in and unloads the old ones. You see it happening very clearly. Other than that, there's many things that are really frustrating and the gameplay mechanics are inconsistent. One minute there's stealth mechanics, the other they're removed from the game for no reason. You also constantly lose all your weapons for no reason. The whole game quality worsens after the first half. I also hate the linearity of the levels. They're good games like I said, but they're far from being perfect. With that said, it's not like we've got tons of options nowadays, so I'm still interested in new colossus. It's not the new Doom or new Shadow Warrior.

The Half Elf wrote on Jul 31, 2017, 11:36:
Anyone who puts the last Indiana Jones movie in the top three, let alone the top two needs to... fuck it this is the guy who let Michael Bay fuck up Transformers.

Yeah, Spielberg has lost it years ago. I'm going to blame the arrival of his kids. I read an interview a while ago that he said that having kids changed how he makes movies. His last truly great movie was Saving Private Ryan in my opinion. That was in 98! All his others are generally "meh" for me.

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Jul 29, 2017, 15:09:

ItBurn wrote on Jul 29, 2017, 12:58:
I find it weird that GoG tries to encourage pre-ordering. They're try to put out this image that they're pro-consumer, but this is clearly against consumer interest.

Well, it's clearly a sales tactic, I agree, but clearly against consumer interest? I'd argue that's not so cut and dry. If you're already leaning towards buying a particular, already released game, and are interested in one of the upcoming titles, and those two happen to intersect in one of these sales, then you're saving money. (not counting some larger percentage sales months/years from now)

If you're on the fence, then maybe it's not so appealing, sure. Obviously if you hate one of the games in the combo, then it'd be a pure turnoff.

I wish they had that Absolver/Furi deal up during the Steam sale though, I probably would have picked it up.

There's definitely some value here, but I feel that pre-orders with incentives are fundamentally a way to trick you into shelling money for a product when you don't know everything you should about it. It's deceptive and shady. And if you think that it's just like early access(you probably don't), I disagree, because you can play early access games immediately and it's understood that they're unfinished and will change significantly.

I find it weird that GoG tries to encourage pre-ordering. They're try to put out this image that they're pro-consumer, but this is clearly against consumer interest.

I haven't bought an EA game since 2014, and it was Dragon Age Inquisition, which I didn't like.

Every year since the xbox has been introduced, Microsoft has vomited these lies while consistently doings things that are against the interest of PC gamers. I've seen it happen and I remember.