Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)PU
Posts
5
Comments
383
Joined
11 mo. ago

  • Of course, yet another controversial decision by the FIA, when the red flag is being pulled out after keeping it yellow until after Norris set a new time and Max just started on his lap.

    How obvious does it need to get?

  • Ridiculous.

    They're excusing the penalty because Max was "gaining an advantage", the fucking audacity on these guys.

    After they conveniently called VSC so late and shortly after Norris swapped positions, and then greenlight it in the last lap in the shittiest of places on the track.

    The WDC is just being manipulated at this point.

  • It feels very manipulated, I'm not sure what changed when it was yellow flag for like 3 laps and then they change to VSC seconds after Norris overtakes. It's not even about the points, it just took out all the action.

  • Well I got the game back when it came out. I did not know the game would be leaning so heavily on paid content after that, so it often felt like missing out on new stuff. It was the same with Elite Dangerous, I backed that from Kickstarter, and then they pull shit like that paid early access content.

    I'd say I easily got my money's worth out of both games for what I paid at the time. But it still feels like being screwed over when they start putting price tags on all new content. And it's often not even a lot of content that justifies the price tag. Compare this to games like No Man's Sky, that get free updates quite often.

    I think this would've bothered me far less had the base games been free to play games, and then charge for DLC. To me Frontier turned into a greedy company so fast, it's really up there with EA, Blizzard Activision and Epic.

  • I don't know, it just looks like a €50 stand-alone expansion that could've been DLC for the first game. But now they get to sell it for more, and add new/more individual smaller DLC for this one.

    Not been much of a fan of Frontier ever since Braben left. They started focusing very heavily on paid DLC since, especially back when for Elite Dangerous it was first just cosmetics, but they got greedy and now have paid early access for new ships, after the game was content starved for years. And before that instead of focusing on new content there was a long period where the only thing that got updated was a new microstransaction currency and raised prices of the DLC.

    Doesn't feel much different with the Planet Coaster and Zoo games. They get littered with paid DLC, and it's almost taking The Sims forms of additional paid content.

  • Of course they're not doing it on Spotify, and instead choose to lock it behind their own subscription service.

    Nintendo is such a greedy shitty corporation. I wouldn't even be surprised if now they are gonna go after people that posted their music elsewhere.

    This would've actually been a perfect to be included with the alarm clock they recently released.

  • Would be interesting to know what positions they're firing.

    I bet it's yet again none of the project and management level staff. Since they're talking about "saying goodbye to a number of incredibly talented and dedicated team members", after they said "we made the difficult decision to restructure our studio to ensure our long-term sustainability".

    So you have to fire people, but you fire the "incredibly talented and dedicated" employees. All this tells me is that projects they're working on aren't going to improve, if they ever get wrapped up even.

  • What annoys me about Reddit-like communities (yes including Lemmy) is that there's this downvote feature.

    The whole idea of these discussion boards is to have.. discussions. Well, perhaps not so much this particular sub lol. So it's annoying when you make a post or reply to someone with a constructive reply or argument, and then people can't be arsed to actually reply, they just downvote to disagree and move on. It's like the equivalent of people just going like "lol no" and then walk away.

    Frankly it's a feature that feels like it completely contradicts the point of online forums.

  • There are plenty of games that don't do high-end graphics and are still very good, even games that look intentionally low res/quality like Valheim did very well.

    Graphics are only really a thing for games that aim for realistic visuals in the first place, but even then it doesn't need to be so overly high in visual fidelity and pushing better graphics every time. The average gamer isn't going to care about being able to see reflected objects in windows that you can see in the reflections of puddles, or that a leaf from a tree has a diffused shadow 300 meters away. Yet a lot of these big studios are pushing this tech and stuffing it in their games.

    Not saying that's a bad development, but they're creating a lot of these budget problems for themselves by setting bars so insanely high and focusing on side-stuff that only increase the scope of the project. Where small indi developers create masterpieces on a budget barely a percentage of what those corporations are throwing at their projects.

  • As long as the delayed time is actually enough to fix fundamental issues, usually a short time of a few weeks, or even months, is hardly enough to fix core issues with a game.

    The article says it's about the network infrastructure. Which frankly seems like something pretty significant for this kind of game. The 3 weeks delay makes it sound like it's not an easy "just upscale the server capacity" fix, so hopefully it's nothing too complicated that cannot be fixed within that time.

    That said, I would rather that studios would just stop publishing release dates if they don't even know if they can uphold the deadlines. I know it's become part of the hype culture and pre-sales and everything else pre-release, but I had much preferred that games would only get announced when they've practically gone gold, and worst they'd need to do is to iron out some imperfections.

    It's like moving release dates has become part of the project development and PR in the past decade, just to hit players with that "We wish to deliver the best experience possible, so we decided.." yadda yadda. Some might be genuine, but a lot of games still release in an absolutely garbage state after being delayed (multiple times even). It just gives the impression they do it to drive up pre-orders and hype. Like I wouldn't be surprised if Rockstar would hit us with that crap sometime next year, and move GTA6 to late 2025 or somewhere 2026 or something.

  • Just watched the first part of his video. It seems to line up perfectly with what I was expecting based on the gameplay we were shown so far, it's just outright boring. The amount of criticism and the footage in his review does not line up with the high ratings this game got.

    Looks llike it's gonna be a skip. Shame, because visually it looks nice to me and I kinda dig the art style (except for the Qunari), but if story, animations and gameplay are bad and boring it's gonna be a no from me.

  • I'm still gonna wait and see, I think user reviews might turn out very mixed in contrast to the critics reviews. Not that I value user reviews all that much, but I'd like to see a bit more from the game before deciding anyway.

    What really put me off from this game was the insanely boring dragon fight they recently showed in the PlayStation presentation, it dragged out so long too and nothing really interesting seemed to happen, it felt like a really outdated kind of boss battle, especially after games like God of War and Horizon. It just did not look that fun honestly, but perhaps story and other parts of the game are more entertaining.