D-Lyrium Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Just throwing in my two cents on a few topics I missed recently: Angry Joe: Eh. As a person he's great. But his videos tend to involve him making 2 or 3 good points and then stretching them out for the next 20 minutes, sometimes contradicting himself, and then ranting at a developer as if he's their CEO and knows better than them. And the Angry Young Man gimmick is stale and needs freshening up. I don't mind him at all when he collaborates with other guys, but I hardly ever watch his own stuff any more. DLC: The way I see it, there are several types of DLC. - 'Cheap' DLC that just adds mainly art assets that the art team came up with in the last few months when they had nothing else to do. Paradox do this a lot with extra unit models and such, and as long as it actually IS cheap, then it's fine IMO. Better that than they fire the art team when their job is done and then rehire them for the next project. This is often where most emergency services calls are made requiring a waaaahmbulance for "Day 1 DLC". If you look at most Day 1 DLC - and I recognise there are several exceptions and they're all evil etc - it'll be stuff like extra weapons, extra tracks/cars/etc whatever the genre has along this line of thinking. This is because, as I said above, the art guys have bugger all to do during the final few months of testing and bugfixing. So why not work on some extra stuff? And having done that extra work, why not get paid for it? I know it's not as if the DLC profit goes into their own back pocket, but the company as paid the art guys, so it's only fair that we pay the company if we want to use the pretty things. Extra factions in RTS games shouldn't be day one, because (unless they're really weaksauce) they will involve additional gameplay mechanics and features that have to be programmed into the game itself, and therefore aren't just an art team job. - Expansion packs, as they used to be known in the good old days. This is what Blizzard were unequalled kings of. Additional content for an existing game, providing either new areas or a new storyline in the existing area, and basically being a new game except shorter and using a lot of existing assets. I'm all for this type of thing as long as it's reasonably priced. "Why don't they just make a new game?" Why should they?! The old one still has so much to offer, and only came out relatively recently. What the hell is people's obsession with everything being brand spanking new? That's like buying a new car, denting the bumper a month later and thinking "screw it, I'll get a brand new car". Blizzard were SO good at ex-packs (and Paradox are mighty fine at it these days too). You pour all the effort into making one great game (or, y'know, 3), then keep it going with expansions until the technology has moved on enough to allow you to make a sequel that's actually a significant improvement, rather than "why wasn't this just DLC?". Even Diablo 3 has some pretty excellent expansions. Honorable mention to Gearbox here, because Borderlands had some excellent DLC. Then Borderlands 2 came out and confused us as to what the difference was. But they tried, I guess. So yeah, I'm totally fine with DLC as a concept. Some of it is bad, but some games are bad too. It's not like it's essential. At the end of the day, companies need to stay in business somehow. DLC is cheaper to make than a whole new game. So if it's good content, I see no problem. The only type of DLC I'm not a fan of is paid-for map packs in online multiplayer games. I'm ok with paid-for extra characters or weapons in these games (as long as they're not objectively better than existing ones), but it does piss me off a bit when companies bring out map packs that you have to pay for. Because then you just get progressively more and more people who are happily playing along, when suddenly the map changes to one they haven't bought, and they're kicked off. It's shitty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 @Evolve issue: I don't see the problem? The 'cheapest' price results in the same amount of character diversity. Unless the skins are made of iron and grant invulnerability, this wouldn't result in P2Win. Or are you referring to the diverse amount of formula's? Anyhow, made Skyrim work on my new rig, which has a gtx970 (despite a few setbacks) and it works like a charm. I can finally get ENB's and the whole thing looks amazing, with little slowdowns. Unfortunately the game remains stuck in the loading screen if I try to play it through my TV by way of HDMI. If it doesn't crash when I start the Civil War storyline, I'll be a happy man (I better be, for the bucks I shelled out just to play Skyrim better, as I generally don't play gfx-heavy games). Even on my screen of just 22", it looks much better than vanilla with the mods. I wouldn't be able to play on console anymore. @D-Lyrium: Paradox does indeed offer the 'cheap' DLC (in every sense of the word) but I'm still happy to fling my money at it because the game was so awesome (and mods make use of it). Even though I barely notice as I almost never zoom in during CKII-play. And I'm sure many feel the same way. Sometimes you buy no matter what just to support the devs, as to hint "here's money: make this game better or make a similar one". Kickstarter top tiers are an excellent example of this (giving 3000€ for a paid dinner isn't rational behavior). If I like the base game, I tend to buy everything. Did it with Mass Effect, did it with CKII, did it with Dragon Age 1., that is unless the content is ridiculous of course, like Resident Evil: Rev's weapons, which you just pick up in-game (and I still bought one ). As for good practices of DLC: how about Thrones of Bhaal? CKII's 'big' DLC's were still quite lackluster imo: it was the patches that did most of the work imo. Sims 3 DLC's were also a little limited in scope. But that's ok for most people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celuwyn Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I don't see the problem? The 'cheapest' price results in the same amount of character diversity. Unless the skins are made of iron and grant invulnerability, this wouldn't result in P2Win. Or are you referring to the diverse amount of formula's? Anyhow, made Skyrim work on my new rig, which has a gtx970 (despite a few setbacks) and it works like a charm. I can finally get ENB's and the whole thing looks amazing, with little slowdowns. Unfortunately the game remains stuck in the loading screen if I try to play it through my TV by way of HDMI. If it doesn't crash when I start the Civil War storyline, I'll be a happy man (I better be, for the bucks I shelled out just to play Skyrim better, as I generally don't play gfx-heavy games). You should download the mod for the Civil War, much better ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You should download the mod for the Civil War, much better ! CWO's what I was talking about. It's improved much for v4, but the previous version resulted in lots of FPS drops and crashed for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celuwyn Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 CWO's what I was talking about. It's improved much for v4, but the previous version resulted in lots of FPS drops and crashed for me. I haven't tested much the mod to be honest Some people think that Bethesda screwed that part of the game, but the reality is that most PC don't support it. Can't wait for Fallout4. We might have info on the E3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Normally the hardware I got now will support it, but people running mods with 4K-texture armor and skins and shiny weapons will overload many a system. So I think most people must choose for the gameplay mods, or for the gfx boost ones. But most ones opt for a combination of both. EGO is the only real gameplaymod I run. I shy away from most other scripted stuff as that blasted my pc in the past. If it's scripted, it better be damn impressive or it's simply not worth the hassle. Skyrim is scripted enough as it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celuwyn Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Haven't tested EGO. It's the compilation of mods from the author of The civil war ? I'm pleased in Risen. The combat mechanics are strange, but the rest is good Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Yes is it. Truly an Epic collection of mods. The lasting fires are quite fun if you're besieged by a dragon in a tower. Risen wasn't bad (I liked the voice acting), but that game - together with TwoWorldsII and even KingdomsOfAmalur - just felt like worse versions of Skyrim, even though KoA actually had much better combat. So I never played them for long. I imagine someone who has played Skyrim too much might enjoy them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarity Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Well it appears Maxis is going the way of the Dodo. Really not sure how I feel about this. The youth in me is sad that the studio that made SimCity 2000 and Spore is going, but the older me was burnt by SimCity and The Sims 4 and doesn't care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaysin Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I loved Kingdoms of Amalur. It was like God of War and Elder Scrolls had a love child. It could have been better, but oh well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Swanton825 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I loved Kingdoms of Amalur. It was like God of War and Elder Scrolls had a love child. It could have been better, but oh well. And if Curt Schilling wasn't an idiot, we'd have had more than one Amalur game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moon_lit_tears Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 I loved Kingdoms of Amalur. It was like God of War and Elder Scrolls had a love child. It could have been better, but oh well. I didn't get to play much of it, but I'd love to get this game for myself again. ;0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crychon Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 Excited for Rock Band 4, but I really wish I bought a PS3 back in the day rather than a 360. I'm going to lose so much DLC, as I have no desire to buy an XBOne. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 KoA was good, but the element I lacked was roaming/sandbox: the path was so lineair I quit. RA Salvatore wrote it ffs: it must be good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaysin Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 Started playing Star Trek Online again and Leonard Nimoy started narrating a part and I got all depressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hive Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 DLC: The way I see it, there are several types of DLC. - 'Cheap' DLC that just adds mainly art assets that the art team came up with in the last few months when they had nothing else to do. Paradox do this a lot with extra unit models and such, and as long as it actually IS cheap, then it's fine IMO. Better that than they fire the art team when their job is done and then rehire them for the next project. Paradox is an examplary company; alongside their many DLCs, they also always offer up a completely free patch with tons of features for everyone to enjoy. If more companies were like this, we'd be in for a real treat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Lyrium Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 If anyone's not getting in on the Cities:Skylines hype yet, you're missing out. This thing looks AMAZING. It's like SimCity, except it works. And is much better. The level of detail is incredible. And it's so big! The original plot area is about the size of the SimCity area, but you can eventually have 9 additional areas of the same size (well, you CAN have up to 25, with a mod, but the developers have basically said "if you go above 10 and your PC melts, it's not our fault" ¬_¬). Just looks so much more fun than SimCity. I didn't buy SimCity, because it just didn't look that interesting. But Cities:Skylines looks awesome. Oh, and guess who publishes it? ¬_¬ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarity Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Cities does look really good, however it looks scarily similar to Simcity (with the whiteout effect when in other modes) I think it's going to wind up being a purchase, but I'm waiting until it actually releases to see how it then fairs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denzil85 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 If anyone's not getting in on the Cities:Skylines hype yet, you're missing out. This thing looks AMAZING. It's like SimCity, except it works. And is much better. The level of detail is incredible. And it's so big! The original plot area is about the size of the SimCity area, but you can eventually have 9 additional areas of the same size (well, you CAN have up to 25, with a mod, but the developers have basically said "if you go above 10 and your PC melts, it's not our fault" ¬_¬). Just looks so much more fun than SimCity. I didn't buy SimCity, because it just didn't look that interesting. But Cities:Skylines looks awesome. Oh, and guess who publishes it? ¬_¬ My laptop melted just looking at the minimum specs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 Already preordered the damn thing (through GMG btw, it's pretty cheap there: 20€?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarity Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 You got a link for that price. I can only see it for €27.65 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 It's their VIP thing. You get the mail if you've bought something in the past I reckon, or simply have an account? I'm not a frequent customer there (just got South Park,Resi HD & PES I think). You just put /vip after the url to get the deals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarity Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 Bloody exchange rates €20 when converted equals £14.42 however its cheapest at £17.71 with a 23% off voucher code found online. As much as im starting to want the game, I think im going to leave it a while until its in a sale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 Excited for Rock Band 4, but I really wish I bought a PS3 back in the day rather than a 360. I'm going to lose so much DLC, as I have no desire to buy an XBOne. What do you mean with this? Not used to Rock Band games, so I have no idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moon_lit_tears Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 What do you mean with this? Not used to Rock Band games, so I have no idea. Basically I believe he means that he's got his old Rock Band stuff on his Microsoft account, but is getting RB 4 for PS4, and while they allow you to bring your stuff from 3 to 4 There is no cross platform forward comparability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.