Chailles @ Chailles @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

196

Joined

2 yr. ago

There's a couple issues with it. I mean, it's simple for games where you're not using a bunch of mods, but at some point it just becomes excessive. Not to mention that when a mod updates, the mod will automatically update breaking your game sometimes, or when you're trying to play a game, a mod just doesn't update causing it to break the game that way too. There's just a lack of control that's often necessary when modding.

Most of the people whinging about censorship

To further add on that, to complain about censorship for a mod that LITERALLY censors the game.

An uninstallation fee for users to prevent them from defrauding devs by repeatedly reinstalling.

I'm not super familiar with the WH40K franchise and what other games are out for it, but what genre of games would you have preferred they do? I suppose a straight up action shooter would work, but isn't there a Space Marine sequel coming soon that's for WH40K? Plus there's also Darktide (the futuristic counterpart to Vermintide).

I think people really overstate Todd Howard lying to compare it Peter Molyneux's shit. Like we're looking at Molyneux who said you could plant a tree and have it grow in real time or whatever. The same Molyneux who promised a "life-changing" award for winning a P2W clicker game (the award was royalties and early access to Godus, a game which they abandoned for what was essentially Godus: Subtitle, which was promptly abandoned soon after). And now his most recent game being something that involves "blockchain technology" where you can make money in real life by making money in game.

I think people really overstate Todd Howard lying to compare it Peter Molyneux's shit. Like we're looking at Molyneux who said you could plant a tree and have it grow in real time or whatever. The same Molyneux who promised a "life-changing" award for winning a P2W clicker game (the award was royalties and early access to Godus, a game which they abandoned for what was essentially Godus: Subtitle, which was promptly abandoned soon after). And now his most recent game being something that involves "blockchain technology" where you can make money in real life by making money in game.

Those random YouTubers make those ecologies with the explicit purpose of simulating an ecology in a totally closed environment, not as an additional side piece to a game.

Not even to mention how a functioning ecology can never properly exist where a player is involved. Players will just kill things without any rhyme or reason to.

Not to mention that it's such a sudden announcement. I mean, sure, they gave people 3 months notice in advance, but when you consider the scale of many games probably take longer than 3 months to make the decision AND actually make the switch (or make up for the switch), it's cause for quite a bit of harm.

Granted, the majority of people may not be affected by it due to needing to meet a requirement of like earning $200,000 and 200,000 installs at a minimum, but I feel like the once you reach that, it's just downhill from there.

In addition to your example of costing the devs for reinstalling the game, you now have to consider the possibility of a user (or group of users) maliciously reinstalling their games to financially damage the developer. Sure, Unity says they'll have fraud detection for stuff like that, but then it's literally up to the people you owe money to decide whether you should pay more or less money to them.

If you just ignore a score of 0, then why even have it and conversely, why not show the same treatment towards the equally as ridiculous score of a 10?

The tools are usually stripped down versions of their internal kits. At least, that's what I've read on the topic. I don't actually know whether that's entirely true or to what extent if it is.

The other reason may also have to do with console modding. Getting that set up or whatever.

Modders aren't single minded collectives. A modder who wants to make a quest mod will make a quest regardless of the inconveniences a QoL mod they could have made would have fixed.

But I mean, this isn't just for Vanilla New Vegas, is it? Plus New Vegas is known for being particularly unstable.

I think Steam's Yes/No system is the best option we've got for user review scores. As you said yourself, for most people, it's either 0 or a 10. And while granularity can help, it's worthless when it differs on a user to user basis. One users 5 is another users 7. And is the difference between a 1 and a 2 even remotely the same between a 9 and a 10? Probably not.

The biggest argument I could see is that "Mixed" option where it's neither option, but I feel like that doesn't really help anyone overall and is just indecisive.

Rank 3. You only Rank 3 to unlock Master-level locks. Rank 4 is for like making it easier or something.

Okay, but from my understanding, in order to change galaxies, I have to find a portal, figure however to use the portal, and then switch galaxies.

For someone whose put in a few hours into the game multiple times as the game has been steadily updated, I didn't know about portals or even that switching galaxies was even a thing. So telling me I'm incorrect because it's NG+ COULD have fixed it for me is pretty disingenuous. How am I suppose to know that after going through 6 more galaxies that I can get what I wanted from the start?

Bethesda has been lowering the base carrying capacity for a while now. It was 300 in Skyrim. 200 in Fallout 4 I think. Around 100-150ish in 76. I can see why it's impacting people so much. Even more so when your ships carrying capacity is also limited.

Yeah! They make good for cleaning out NPCs who don't have enough credits to buy the expensive stuff but enough credits to be the useless junk.

You have no idea how long I kept rope in my inventory in BG3 thinking it'd actually be of use one day.

Look at this way, you've got everything you needed to fix complete. The game is uploaded the the storefront database. It's now a week before release. There will always be bugs to fix and no game will ever be completely bugfree (especially not games at this scale). At some point you have to release the game, so why not just release what you've been working on since when the game launches?

That's not an answer that people would have accepted either and no matter what answer was said, it would have been dissected and criticized by the syllable.

The point I'm trying to make here is that "optimize your game" doesn't help anybody. Especially not as an interview question. You might as well have asked "why didn't you make your game fun?"