Shagger

Weird, I thought they had scrapped that a while ago. Still, it is a shady move, but not a surprising one.

I'm trying to get my Gamepass subscription sorted before Starfield launches. For a big, money hungry cooperation, I'm finding it surprisingly difficult to actually give them money. I'm cautiously optimistic, though. I love the look of the starship customisation and the story has potential. Sa with any Bethesda game, my biggest concern is if it will work at launch, but heard no horror stories from those who are playing it early so far, so fingers crossed.

I know there was no ill intent here, so don't worry about it. We're glad to have you here.

It might not have been the first, but the first I remember was a game called Screamer. It was a great looking game for it's time with a vibrant colour pallet and an impressive level of detail, even if as you can see in the video that the draw distance was pretty terrible. It wasn't exactly the most fun to control either with the cars feeling very stiff when turning slowly to then breaking loose big time and slide all over the place. And of cause, you had to use the keyboard, which made the idea of trying to use the manual versions of the cars to scary to even to try for me. Don't get me wrong, I loved it as a kid, but I know that would have pretty poorly. There wasn't much in terms of a verity of tracks and cars, but for 1995 I suppose it was acceptable and cars did feel district and the tracks had verity with very different demands and driving styles required to get the best out of them. There was one thing, though, that it did brilliantly. If you could set the sound up to use the CD tracks instead of the default sound font for the music (Oh yes, GONFIG and SETUP programmes for games, gotta love the 90's), what you would get is one of the best game soundtracks ever.

I actually can see the point to this. As @The Blackangel touched on, these old consoles can have reliably issues because of thier age, not to mention compatibility issues, especially with modern TV's. So if people want to play their old Atari games in a way that feels authentic without having to deal with the real world troubles of using original hardware, I can understand that. I will agree it's a little pricy, though.

Honestly, there's too little here to really generate much to say. I will say that I am a little concerned with the way this game looks. There's a difference between retro and dated, and this digital FMV stuff from the late 90's into the 2000's I'd definitely describe as dated because back then it was never a stylistic choice, that was thier best attempt to make a game look realistic. It's not the same thing as, let's say, pixel graphics because even though it was a style through necessity as the tech was limited, it was style none the less. The last few seconds in particular with the girl struggling with her lighter really do look like shit.

I'm suprised to find Sega were still making new games for Mega Drive/Genesis as late as 1995. The Saturn was already out. It's not like this is even Mega CD/Sega CD or 32X Game either. Anyway, the game looks cool. I like it's graphics and colourful design. I can see the Sonic DNA, so I do wonder how much effort really went to this. I mean, is it a game Sega really cared about, or was it something they quicky botched together to squeeze that little bit more money out of thier aging console?

@Shortie I've merged these two topics together as I feel that the topics are similar enough that were is no need to have two separate threads for responses. People can easily say that they've played the new season of Fortnite and share thier thoughts on it within the same post. I've also move the thread to the "Video Games" sub-forum as this is about a specific game instead of gaming in a more general sense.

In that case, they really do need to take some cues from Saints Row. You customised and collected vehicles and then called somebody to bring that vehicle to you whenever and wherever you wanted. Even Farcry 5 had a similar mechanic, so there really in no excuse Rockstar.

@Debashis Thank you for sharing this offer, but I must ask you to refer to the Deals Sub-Forum Guidelines and Rules whare it says you must include a start date (if known) and an end date for the offer. It's one of several security measures we enforce to prevent unwanted SSP and affiliate links. Don't worry, I'll edit you original post for you, but please bear that in mind in future.

I thought they did have that in the GTA games since San Andreas? They had a kind of system in place for Vice City, but it didn't work that well.

First off, welcome to VGR. The short answer is, it's pretty much essential. The storytelling elements of a video game are no less important than they are in a movie or TV these days. True, video game are more than that with gameplay elements such as tests of reflexes, strategy, teamwork and so on, but a poor storytelling experience can easily nullify all that. I'm temoted to say that because of that active element and direct connection you have through the gameplay, that games may have more potential than a movie or TV show. Of course there are game with no active storytelling elements like competitive online games, but very often even those have lore, characters and things to learn about the worlds they are set in. I'm not gonna say a game needs a good story to matter (Although I will say that about single player games), but exploring and discovering new worlds and following, or even role playing, the characters through those works is my favourite thing about games.

Starfield will be a big deal, but not much after that.

This is a game that has blown up, big time. Praised universally for it's wealth of content, it's lack of microtransactions, being hailed as a new bar for RPG's. It's a game that's so good, that even other developers are feeling compelled to point out to the public that they shouldn't expect the same quality from them going forward. OK.. wait, what? OK, I want to first make what every other news outlet and the "Court of Public Opinion" has made clear. That is bullshit. A new yard stick in the gaming industry is a new standard to adhere to, and people comparing future games to that games is both fair an inevitable. Even if it is "lightning in a bottle", it's still totally fair. It happened with Skyrim, it happened with Goldeneye on N64, it happened with Super Mario, Zelda and so many others throughout history. A new game setting a new slandered to meet, or better yet, try to surpass. Then somebody did, and the cycle begins again. However, these "complaints" mostly came from indie dev's terrified of feeling forced to meet a new slandered with limited resources, and and I get that. Technically, Baldur's Gate 3 is an indie game. However, far too few people understand this, but an "indie" game is one that is independently published. This could mean a single nerd working in a basement with no money, as is the cliché, but it can also mean Skyrim, Oblivion, the earlier GTA games, Fallout 4, The Witcher Series, Cyberpunk 2077, The Assassin's Creed series and even the The FIFA franchise because "indie" means independent, as in independently published, as in being published by the same company who developed the game. The scale of the game in question is irrelevant, but unfortunately most people see it's an "indie" game, they see an underdog, like that one guy in a basement somewhere. That is not Larian Studios. They are more akin to a Bethesda or an Ubisoft in this scenario. They have hundreds of employees, several cooperate holdings and many, many millions of dollars to play with. So instead of berating actual small, limited developers for realistically saying they cant do what Larian did, encourage them to lean from what the did and whilst not expect the same level of scale, pursue the level of fun? What those dev's did, who I wont name, was stupid, I won't deny that, but people shouldn't feel the need to suffer to produce something at an unrealistic standard just to avoid being berated online. And before anyone says it, I do own this game. In fact, thanks to @DC and "Bid for Rewards", I owned the game two and a half years ago as it was going into Early Access on Steam. Here's a screenshot as proof I did own and try it back then; And if you need more, here is the post I made on this very forum (as one is required to do in the "Bid for Rewards "My Confirmation Post"), and I don't get it... And honestly, I'm struggling to get into it. Even now that it's out of early access. It's a tactical, turn based RPG, something that's not really ben my thing in the past. I wasn't a fan of XCom, so.... yeah. This, however, may be more annoying because chance has a role. Now, I get, It's very faithfully based on Dungeons and Dragons and the mechanisms that exist in the tabletop game, but I don't think I'm being a bitch by saying that in a video game having your fate decided by chance in certain moments as being a little unfair. I get t, I do, and I am loving the combat. I also love how that "narrator" explains the upcoming situations, choices and consequences like an actual DM, but I just don't know if I could bear it. This makes sense in actual D&D, but in a video game, I'm not so sure...

GTA RP is essentially a mod, and given the sudden exception to mods Take Two expressed out of nowhere a few years ago, it's unlikely they'll embrace GTA RP. Knowing TT, the likely see GTA RP as something that deflects players away from the standard GTA Online, so will probably throw down the ban hammer and try to shut it down.

I know I'm not exactly neutral on this topic nor do I claim to be an expert, so don't take my word for it. That's why I would encourage @Empire Of Sight to get involved again in this discussion as he recently launched an NFT based game himself and could offer the "other" perspective. I did post a metaphor in another thread ages ago about the basics of what an NFT is, and here it is... Check out the other responses in that thread as well as other did go into some more detail. The longer version is, an NFT is a Non-Fungible Token. It's a kind of receipt for a digital asset, usually a piece of artwork, tied to a market revolving around a kind of cryptocurrency encoded into a blockchain. A blockchain is essentially a market management system that facilitates trading on this system. If you imagine cryptocurrency being to stocks what the stock market is to a blockchain, and that's the basic idea. Unlike the stock market though, profits can be made simply through interaction, like through a video game. The more people interface with it, the values of a blockchain and cryptocurrency increase as that value is determined by the size of the digital space that blockchain influences, and thus the assets held within it. Again, kind of like the stock market whare shares can go up of down based upon the economic conditions, the value of a blockchain and cryptocurrency can change based of the state of the digital landscape. The short version is, it's an unstable investment at best and a scam at worst. It's people who run those blockchains and own the cryptocurrency who are the only ones likely to make any money because the have thier own digital assets grow the more people feed into thier blockchain, it's basically a pyramid scheme for the 21st century.

I like those buttons too, but hate with a fiery passion when I can't reassign them. Especially when they're attached to what's supposed to me a gaming mouse.

I know it's a classic, but it's not something I've ever really enjoyed that much. Combat, Space Invaders, Missile Command and even Basketball fill more of my fond Atari memories.

Quite honestly, the biggest uproars I've seen about video games have come form gamers themselves, and with far more frequency. Some of what you described was back in the 80's and early 90's honestly was kind of justified back then because the ratings system didn't exist and video games were still marketed as kid's toys, not the age-rated, entertainment medium that they are today. If today something was marketed as a family film, TV show or why not, a game that featured the kind of violence Mortal Kombat had, I think parents would be justified in being upset and angry about it. As people who grew up with it, we know it was harmless fun, but the concerns expressed at the time, whilst extreme, I'd say were mostly fair. Now though, with the ratings systems and regulation in place, if Mummy Karen was to notice little Jimmy getting a lapdance or blowing somebody's head off while playing GTA5, she has nobody to blame but herself. I will agree with you the whole devil worship thing was complete nonsense. Onto the uproars from games. Sometimes they are justified, like the backlash that faced Battlefront 2 and it's horrendous monetisation or companies like Ubisoft and Activision/Blizzard have got over the abuse suffered buy thier employees. Destroying fun for greed or producing games at he expernce of the physical and metal health of employees is never justified. I would burn all of my favourite games out of existence, like The Last of Us, Horizon Zero Dawn/Forbidden West, C&C Red Alert 2, Dungeon Keeper, Skyrim, Fallout, Final Fantasy, Tales of Berseria, all of then if people didn't have to suffer to make them. Expecting people to work hard and be productive and dedicated is one thing, but abuse is quite another. Other times they are at least as ridiculous as some of the things you described. Like the TLOU2 when people who choose to view the leaks, and thus likely had no intention of playing the game anyway, review bombed the game for having "trans" in it. Or Battlefield V. LOTS of good reasons to hate on that franchise and the companies behind it, but putting a woman on the cover because "Woman didn't fight in WW2" (When they did) whilst ignoring the fact that same woman was wearing a prosthetic limb well beyond 1940's technology was apparently OK. In the end, uproars are mass expressions of an extreme point of view, and extremes in points of view rarely represent the logical truth and the approach to a beneficial outcome. They can draw attention to something wrong and even start progress towards something better, but without filtering them though a process of rational, impartial discussion and civilised debate, it is likely to just make a problem worse.

I'd like think that now EA can't use the FIFA name and it's copyright protected assets that they might actually put some damb effort into this franchise for a change, but until another company starts making the official FIFA games, EA FC remains as the mainstream monopoly of these genre, so it's going to be the same shit. The best I'll expect from EA on this game is them actually changing the all the logos and banners that appear in the game and nit show the ones from last year because they were either too lazy or incompetent to change them. I'm not joking, that has happened in the past. But back to the point, it'll be the same half-assed, copy-paste, reheated leftovers from last year with the same egregious microtransactions and monotisation.

They are both fantastic games, you're in for a treat.

Have you posted this somewhare before? I swear I've seen this before... Regardless, looks interesting but a concept/idea is one thing, what actually comes out of it if the idea is developed into an actual game can change considerably for a number of reasons, and in this case I do see difficulty balance being a big potential issue.

Gravity Rush 2 and Sunset Overdrive are both phenomenal games that deserved way more success than they got. Gravity Rush 2 in particular is one of my favourite games on PS4. I've always been interested in Enslaved: Odyssey to the West, but never got round to buying. Maybe I need to change that...