Horrible news. Joystiq are having a hell of week.
conmulligan's forum posts
The multiplayer has been pretty much rock solid for me for the past 6 months or so, but there's still an issue where campaign progress is reset, seemingly at random. If that's not deal breaker, or you plan on completing the campaign in one or two sittings, then go for it.
That's really unfortunate, but not too surprising. It seems like they've had fuck all support from AOL ever since Grant and company left to found Polygon, and they probably didn't have the resources to adapt to the changing landscape.
I'm not a huge fan of Borderlands, particularly the second one, but there are a couple of things they could do to rope me all the way in:
- Improve the shooting model. I especially hate how swimmy the aiming feels, even with guns that have high accuracy stats. Say what you will about Destiny, but the shooting always feels great no matter how crappy the weapons you're using are, and this is one thing that Gearbox absolutely needs to ape.
- A steadier curve of loot you'd actually want to equip. The randomised weapons are cool on paper, but I found myself using the same gun for huge stretches of both Borderlands 1 & 2 simply because I wasn't getting anything worth equipping regularly enough.
- This ties in with my previous point, but they should open up the crazy weapon variability to players and allow you to craft and customise your guns. Hiding all that behind a random-number generator is a gigantic waste of a pretty cool system.
- Drop the predefined characters for a traditional RPG class system and character creator.
That is the most realistic forest I have ever seen in a video game. Holy shit. Even if there have been graphically impressive games with forests before, they still looked "video-gamey" to me but this looks like a real forest near the arctic circle.
You should play The Vanishing of Ethan Carter.
I see equal value in homogeneity as I do in diversity; the former is getting unfairly ignored for the latter in discussions like these
Could you elaborate on that? I'm not sure you what you mean.
@fisk0: Sure, but I still think it's super weird that they didn't give some kind of update on Shipbreakers at their PAX panel today, even if it was just a "hey, we'll have more to share at GDC or PAX East".
The remastered versions of Homeworld 1 & 2 became available for pre-order on Steam today, which reminded me of Homeworld: Shipbreakers. For those who don't remember, the game was originally announced as Hardware: Shipbreakers, and pitched as a planet-based RTS that would be tonally similar to the Homeworld series. It got a decent amount of attention because some of the developers were ex-Relic, lending it a degree of credibility, and who doesn't want a game that evokes the spirit of Homeworld, right? After Gearbox somewhat inexplicably acquired the Homeworld IP from THQ, they quickly picked up the rights to publish Hardware too and rebranded it as a prequel to the original Homeworld.
Anyway, I had a quick look around to see if there was any new information on it, but it seems to have dropped off the face of the Earth after the initial acquisition announcement in September 2013. Details were already fairly sparse back when it was still Hardware, and the radio silence since makes me think it's been significantly retooled or mothballed entirely. Any ideas?
I'm still incredibly skeptical about The Witcher 3. CD Projekt haven't made a compelling argument for why they went all-in on an open world design, and they've been making some alarmingly bold claims about how dynamic the game is. It seems like there's a very real chance the game gets crushed under the weight of their ambition.
I gave up on the original version after about an hour because I'm not a survival horror guy at all and couldn't get a firm handle on the controls, but I'm interested in checking this out. It seems like a blind spot worth filling in.