tds418's forum posts

Avatar image for tds418
#1 Posted by tds418 (450 posts) -

@humanity: I tried to give Andromeda an honest shot but I fell off after maybe 4-5 hours. The thing that bummed me out the most was that it felt like they were just re-telling the ME story in a different universe instead of trying something new. The first few hours were literally just: (1) hey, an unknown artifact from an ancient civilization; and (2) hey, a mysterious, malevolent force that is maybe related to said ancient civilization disappearing! I wonder how that will play out? The characters also seemed less interesting and the first world was large but kind of empty feeling.

I'd be interested to hear from someone that played further but man that first impression is a stinker.

Avatar image for tds418
#2 Posted by tds418 (450 posts) -

Idk, even as someone who plays only on console I feel a remaster is largely unnecessary. ME2+3 still look and play fine. ME1 is a little janky but runs better than it originally did through Xbox BC. Maybe I would feel differently if I had a 4K TV.

Avatar image for tds418
#3 Posted by tds418 (450 posts) -

Emerson, Lake & Palmer - Karn Evil 9!

Loading Video...

The Mars Volta - Cassandra Gemini (and all of Frances the Mute, honestly)

Loading Video...

Avatar image for tds418
#4 Posted by tds418 (450 posts) -

@wolfstein_3d Yeah that's...not enough for me. You would think the one lesson developers would have learned from Destiny 2 is to launch with more of an endgame, not less. I'll be watching how they support this but 3 dungeons/strikes and some public events/bosses is not enough of an endgame for me to be interested at launch. Unless the story turns out to be amazing, but I'm not holding my breath.

Avatar image for tds418
#5 Posted by tds418 (450 posts) -

I never play games on my phone, but between Abby and Vinny's enthusiasm for the game I'm definitely going to check it out next time I'm stuck on a plane or train.

Avatar image for tds418
#6 Edited by tds418 (450 posts) -

Yeah ME2 is one of my favorite games, but the ending is stupid. It's only saved by the fact that the whole "suicide mission" up to that point is awesome and very dramatic.

Also FWIW I also remember there being a "turn off helmet during cutscenes" option being in the standard (un-modded) game. I'm guessing after watching the video that it was in ME3 only.

Avatar image for tds418
#7 Posted by tds418 (450 posts) -

@deathstriker said:

Once Anthem is launched, stable, and the endgame is added I don't see what all those artists, level designers, programmers, etc are going to do.

I think you may be surprised how quickly the dedicated/hardcore players roll through the endgame content and then start asking for more. This is why, as others have said, I'm also concerned that Bioware is saying there will not be paid expansions for Anthem. How are they going to pay for the large amount of new content the players will be demanding if they won't be charging for it? Exploitative microtransactions? For example, it's obvious that a lot of artwork/programming/level designing goes into creating new Destiny raids.

Avatar image for tds418
#8 Posted by tds418 (450 posts) -

Same, most recent version of Firefox on macOS Mojave 10.14.2.

Avatar image for tds418
#9 Edited by tds418 (450 posts) -

@carlthenimrod Mainly this. "The organizers of the Game Developers Conference released the results of their annual State of the Game Industry survey today, showing that just 6% of nearly 4,000 respondents believe that Steam justifies the 30% cut it takes from developers. That's compared to 32% who said "No" when asked if it does enough to earn that share, and 27% who said "Probably not." 17% answered "Maybe," with another 17% in the "Not sure / don't know" category." This stat combined with Epic taking a lower cut and the "what has Valve done recently" stuff I was talking about on the last page.

Obviously it's hard to know for sure without knowing Valve's internal financials. Given their market dominance, however, it's not hard to see how they would have the incentive and power to squeeze publishers/devs as much as possible.

Avatar image for tds418
#10 Edited by tds418 (450 posts) -

As I said above, I think exclusivity (paid or otherwise) is necessary for there to be viable competition to Steam, otherwise people will just stay with the platform they feel locked into and no one will get the revenue needed to develop a feature-comparable competitor. But your other points and people pointing to feature differences are of course making valid arguments. That's why I'm not defending the Epic store itself, just the notion that competition would overall be a good thing.

Monopolies create market inefficiencies - that's what makes them monopolies. In this case, the main inefficiency is Valve taking a larger cut than they should be able to from publishers/developers. Since publishers/developers are the main parties being harmed here, of course they are the ones that are going to be supporting other stores at the expense of Steam. If that forces Steam to lower their cut and otherwise invest in their platform, the market will be more efficient and everyone except those working at Valve (including, at least indirectly, consumers) will benefit.