DeadSlash

17 hours ago, downzy said:

Possibly.  They do give a little gushy when it comes to all things GTA/RDR.  

Then again, they had wall to wall advertisements for Fall Out 76 but their review gave it a 5/10.  

I've been going to that site since '98 or '99 so I suppose I'm just use to their coverage and reviews.  Not too often do I find a lot of space between their assessment and my own.  

I just want to be super clear, this is skepticism on my part.  It is probably (and I hope is) an awesome game.  I just feel like a good "fucking" is coming and so all data I see, I think the worst. eg "IGN said it was good? They probably got bought."

17 hours ago, OmarBradley said:

Is it because game development rigs are super powerful and they then have to tone it down for release builds (even for PCs)? The Witcher 3 had a pretty notable "downgrade" as well.

While it's true that the rigs they have are ridiculous, that isn't the reason for the bullshot.  A lot of times the screens are just airbrushed, or completely false (EA got busted because they f'd up the airbrush and left like 2 basketballs in an NBA live bullsot (or something like that.)  Since the games are in early stages, but have been planned, they know what they "want" the end game to look like, and they render a game to look like that.  Most times they fall way short of that goal.  No Man's Sky is a good example.  They just ran out of time to implement all of the things they wanted to implement, but they keep working on it, and it's 1000% closer to what they promised.  Sadly, this kind of follow up is very rare.     Essentially, early release trailers are a "guess" as to what the final product should look like, almost an artists interpretation.  (Think Atari 2600 game cover art)  They often justify it as showing "what the engine can do" but some companies like EA or Gearbox just lie for the sake of selling more games.  Aliens Colonial Marines is a perfect example of a lie, because the demo was rendered on a DX11 engine, and the game was built on a DX9 engine.  The released product never had a chance at looking like the demo and GBX knew that.

1 minute ago, Oldest Goat said:

A tragic example of pre-release vs released product is BioShock Infinite. Just look at the early trailers. It was going to be a wonderfully dark BioShock in the clouds focusing on criticizing religion and American exceptionalism. Instead we got dumbed down design and gameplay, extreme linearity, cut content and one of the most fucking uninspired, pretentious stories I've ever witnessed. 

I actually hate BioShock Infinite a lot for a bunch of reasons. The way the included examples of racism were said absolutely nothing apart from a kind of desperately cheap reveling #Deep beating over the head. 

It's actually funny, and I thought about making a thread on bullshots.  EVERY company does them, and people generally don't give a shit or ever talk about it if the game is good.  FarCry is a great example.  If you look at ANY of the pre-release or reveal screen caps or videos of ANY FC title, they are 100% bullshit, but the game still looked great, so nobody cared.  I was only half aware of BioShock doing that, nobody talks about this stuff.  Well, a few exceptions, like:

1 hour ago, Draguns said:

Wow! So many keyboard warriors tonight.  

This is coming from Slash. I can understand the cynicism if it was Fortus, but Slash! Just wow! This forum is always complaining about something. 

Yeah, this is a tough one.  Based on history, you can't blame people for being skeptical, but I think 2 things that are important are:

1. This is Slash, not DJ Ashba or <insert any former nuguns member name here>  We don't have the same mile long line of broken promises of new material from Slash.

2. Something has changed with Axl.  He's doing songs on cartoons, reunited with Slash, Just jumped into a tour with AC/DC and hasn't been late to a show, and generally well behaved for years now.  

I'm not saying "AFDII Starts now!!!"  I'm just saying this isn't "more of the same bullshit."  If it turns out to be bullshit, it's new bullshit.  This isn't Bach or Fink or Ashba, or some fucking "industry insider" This is Slash. 

Cautiously Optimistic is the word.

13 minutes ago, OmarBradley said:

Have tried to avoid reviews to go in 100% blind, but I've seen a few positive mentions. As DeadSlash said, I wouldn't trust IGN as the be-all-end-all. Lots of speculation that gaming journalism is quid pro quo/bought & paid for. I generally look at what the players are saying on forums and Steam reviews, in addition to publication reviews. I definitely expect this to be the best Metro game yet - it's miles ahead of the previous two in terms of versatility. The first two look excellent and have pretty good shooting mechanics, but that's about the extent of what they offer aside from an intriguing story and a few minor interesting game mechanics. I'd say both are worth playing though, especially since they're cheap and can be done in about 12 hours each.

That was the 2017 reveal, right? In 2018 what they showed (as far as I'm aware) was in game, and it looked very good.

Speaking of reveals vs. releases though, I just watched a comparison video from Anthem's 2017 demo vs. the 2019 public demo (of roughly the same game sequence/content) and holy hell, the 2017 build looked WAY better - notably in lighting, texture fidelity, and NPC design. And it wasn't pre-rendered, as it was a live demonstration of the game. I guess I'll blame this on console optimization? 

Yeah, I think it was 2017, it was the very first video of it, the player is moving super slow, and when he loots ammo, it's like a whole long animation, with dust falling off the ammo box and he's like shaking it off.  Another part where they shoot a wolf with an arrow, retrieving the arrow after the kill is fully animated with your player bending over and yanking the arrow out of the wolf.  I got into a huge flame war on the Steam forums over it because I made the point that it was scripted, and not gameplay.  I got my ass handed to me.  This was long before Steam decided Metro was the devil because of the Epic store.

I wasn't saying the game would be bad, I wasn't saying even saying negative shit like "this reveal is a lie!" I was just pointing out it wasn't actual gameplay.  It's a good thing it WASN'T gameplay. If they had those animations, the game would be boring af.  It took like 3-4 seconds to pick up ammo.  30% of your game would have been watching the "picking up ammo" animations.  Those parts might even still be in the game, but it would be a scripted bit at the beginning, not gameplay.  I've seen the final product, and you loot like you did in the old ones, you click the loot button and it shows what you looted on the right hand of the screen.  Sometimes the corpse rolls, but it doesn't slow you down.

10 minutes ago, downzy said:

Have fun.  Reviews so far look positive.  IGN rates it as the best Metro game yet.  

The industry has ruined me.  I approach it with the same level of skepticism I do positive GnR news about an album. Everything points to this being a good game, and all I can think is  "IGN has been bought before."

I have a bad feeling about the game ever since the bullshot reveal where it was the pre-rendered demonstration of the game, but it was presented as "actual game play."  Every company does bullshots, and they walked it back later revealing it wasn't actual gameplay, but there is such a high level of sketch, really interested in how it is, let us know Omar. 

I feel like a dick for saying this, but why do I feel like this will be terrible?  These are riffs that have been kicking around since 2003, and weren't used.  That can't be that good.  Trying to crowbar an album out of riffs you saw no value in for 16 years seems like a recipe for disaster.  It reminds me of when the Beetles made a song around A voice mail Jon Lennon recorded once.  It sounds great on paper, but it wasn't used for a reason.

7 hours ago, MillionsOfSpiders said:

Kingdom Hearts 3. 

The game is a big disappointment for me. It hasn’t really been any fun to play and seems to lack the charm of the other games. 

Really?  I'm not a fan, but my dad, (who is 79!) really liked the series.  He doesn't even know there is a 3, only plays what I get him, but that's a disappointment.

On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 3:49 PM, OmarBradley said:

I'm replaying Dragon Age: Origins and I was enjoying it quite a bit, but for some reason I haven't loaded it up in about a week and I don't really feel compelled to do so. I've played through several times before, and while I tried to shake things up with a lot of mods, I'm finding myself doing a pretty similar playthrough (in regards to choices/factions) that I do every time.

I know of the Gothic series, and I am thinking of getting Gothic 3 and modding it to make it a bit more modern. Anyone play those games?

I did try ELEX (same studio as Gothic, I believe) and I did not like it at all, but I didn't give it that fair of a chance either and my expectations weren't aligned with what the game turned out to be.

I loved the Gothic series when it was new.  Not sure I could play it now, even with updated visuals, I remember it as really true open world where there were not a lot of hints or any guide, just go do wtf ever you want.  I find those games overwhelming in my gaming twilight years.  Good, underrated series though.

5 hours ago, OmarBradley said:

With Anthem and Metro just around the corner, I've just realized this will be the first time in several years I'm not able to play the newest games on completely maxed out settings.

I could use 1080p instead of 1440p, but I think pixels are more important and most of the changeable settings in a game. Will be interesting to see how these run on my system. I expect fairly decent performance and to be using a mix of medium/high settings, but probably not ultra/very high.

Think I'll do a new build in the spring. Question is, do I sell my 1080 and get a 2080, or do I get a second 1080 for SLI? I'm leaning the former. Rest of the build I pretty much know what I'd want, but if anyone has recommendations on anything, feel free to mention.

I wouldn't do either a 2080 upgrade, or a second 1080 card.

The 2080 is an underwhelming card and it really doesn't do much.   

SLI is just going out of style or some such, because most games don't launch with SLI support, and some never get it (although AAA titles usually do)  SLI just isn't worth it anymore.  I'm kind of happy, because 10 years ago, I anticipated needed quad SLI by now.  I'm super glad that was wrong.

When the 30 series comes out, I think the 2080 will be garbage.  I concur with Oldest Goat, wait for the 30 series.  The 20 series is a generation to be skipped.

On ‎4‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 1:53 PM, Dazey said:

Recently I bought a cheap Alienware X51. It's only running a GTX 960 so I bought a 1080 with an external card housing because the card won't fit in the X51 case.

Problem is the card is so big it won't even fit in the external housing so I was stuck with a £600 graphics card I couldn't use and a pretty pricey web browsing box. 

I've decided to basically strip the X51 for parts and build a proper gaming rig and I was wondering if anybody on here has any experience in building from scratch and could offer me any advice?

 

I used to build from scratch all the way, and frequently.  As I got older, lazier and richer, I began buying premade builds and modifying/upgrading them.  The reason I'm telling you this is because there was a time when I could tell you exactly what to get, and how to build it, now I can't BUT - between how to videos on Ytube, and forums like https://forums.guru3d.com/

and surprisingly Steams hardware discussion forum https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/11  I can get all the info I need when it's time for an upgrade.  Most of Steam is a mess, here I consistently get good info on how to, tips and tricks.

Another must use site imo is although it doesn't sound like you would need this because all you are really adding in is the case and not new hardware   https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-RTX-2080-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1080-Ti/4026vs3918 Here you can compare any hardware you want and get math results instead of opinion.  This particular link is for you too Omar, this compares the benchmark of a 2080 to a 1080ti.

5 hours ago, OmarBradley said:

PC. I'm annoyed. I don't like these dedicated launchers. Uplay is the only one that runs OK. Origin is a bloated mess and Bethesda's is a joke (unsurprisingly). I guess I'll have to download the Epic Games launcher for Metro. 

Yeah I heard bad things about the demo and the gameplay I saw didn't look like what I thought it would be. It looks like a combination of ME:A and DA:I with the shooting mechanics of the former and the cacophony of colors and button mashing of the latter. Not sure that's going to be a formula for success, for me at least. I'd have preferred something with a heavier and more impactful feel for combat (like Metro actually), but I haven't played yet myself, so we'll see.

I agree the reaction is perhaps a bit disproportional - but gamers are so sick of MTX and launchers and shitty practices that anything controversial blows up pretty rapidly. Can't say I have too much sympathy tbh.

From what I've heard, Steam's revenue model is pretty fair - they take 30% of sales. I read that retail stores take around 47%. I see from a business sense it makes sense to try to capture that 30%, but is the bad press worth it? We'll find out I guess.

EDIT: Although, 4A Games is not providing the launcher... Epic is, so Epic must be taking a cut of sales too. It makes sense to me to have your own launcher if you're publishing the game yourself, but what's the point if someone else is publishing and taking a cut anyway? Feels like I'm missing a piece of the puzzle.

As I understand it, Epic's storefront takes less, and this apparently makes it very attractive.  The flip-side seems to be that people hate the Epic launcher because it's 40% owned by tencent, and tencent is apparently the devil.  Hard to get solid info on it though.

3 hours ago, OmarBradley said:

Just a few weeks until both Metro and Anthem drop. Very excited for the former, cautiously optimistic for the latter.

Do you play on a console?  Anyone following the drama surrounding Metro being moved off Steam?

34 minutes ago, HollyWoodRose84 said:

Ya do realize they are ALWAYS working on GnR material in the studio right? It’s been that way since 1999. 

Earlier than that!  I have every show I ever did recorded, and I was playing one for a friend that wanted to hear and during a show I did in Feb of 97, I quoted an article that said they were working on tracks and the next GnR would be "Late 97, early 98 at the latest."

1 minute ago, DeadSlash said:

 

4 hours ago, Old_school_gnr_fan said:

Totally incorrect, but whatever. It's like one other poster and myself actually supporting the band/management/record company's decision to take down videos and disable "fan channels".

Without the internet, Guns N' Roses would have sold every one of the 10,000 editions of the Locked N' Loaded set within weeks, at full price. They would have sold many more copies of the Super Deluxe. They would have sold probably a few million copies of the vinyl and CD editions. It would have been in the top 40 in sales, obviously, just as it was for three years in the late 1980's.

If Guns N' Roses were a brand new band in 2019, and the original 'Appetite' was being sold this year, how many copies do you think it would sell? 

500,000?

750,000? 

1,000,000?

One thing that cannot be disputed is that 'Appetite For Destruction', possibly the greatest rock album of all-time, would sell nowhere near the 19,000,000 units that have sold in the US since 1987, if it was a brand new album today. The internet has ruined any opportunity for any artist to sell 10 million hard copy albums in this era, no matter what goodies are thrown in as a bonus.

People want to bitch about high ticket prices? Bands have to make a profit somehow, and if the "fans" aren't buying hard copies of the album---either buying songs from Itunes at a significantly lower royalty rate, or just stealing the music outright--they're going to rape your wallet if you want to see them live. But then, THAT isn't good enough either. people want to pull out their smartphones and record the whole show as a souvenir, a souvenir not authorized by most bands/artists.

Guns N' Roses are holding the cards here. They can make a new album to satisfy old and new fans alike, but they have to be thinking what the fuck for, if no one's going to pay for the end product?

 

Not for nothing, but if it wasn't for the internet, there would be no box, no tour, no reunion.  The internet kept the pilot light on for a band that went dark for decades.  

Besides, by your logic, there would be no new music from anyone, it would only be an endless parade of artists that established a catalogue prior to limewire, touring their hits.  But that isn't the case.

Maybe he really, really liked it.

1 minute ago, UsedYourIllusion said:

Too broad of a thing to speculate.

Agreed.  If just looking at it as a fun exercise, it's really hard to do knowing what we do about the band members.

Slash wrote a lot

Izzy wrote a lot

Duff wrote a good amount

If Axl wasn't on board, no matter how much they write, it's not going anywhere.

My final answer would be it couldn't have happened, the band member were not compatible at the time.  My suspending disbelief answer would be the 3 albums would consist Axl's vocals on the 36 "best" songs from the catalogues of Slash, Izzy, Duff and VR.

3 minutes ago, downzy said:

Unfortunately the ending of Far Cry 5 has already been ruined for me.  I was watching a recap of the new games announced a month or two ago on IGN and they explained what the expansion is about without any spoiler warning.  They said that if you haven't played FC5 yet then it's on you for having the ending spoiled.  Which is pretty fucking terrible as not all of us have a million free hours to play video games and only get to play one to three games a year.

----------------------

Back on topic.  The headshot issue of RE4 never bothered me other than it made the game harder.  And personally, I thought R4 was a tad scarier than the previous games, especially the first part of the game.  That chainsaw guy really scared the shit out of me the first few times I played it through.  Being besieged by pseudo-zombie townspeople felt more mysterious than zombies and it wasn't evidently clear how the Umbrella Corp played a role.  Again, to each their own, but RE4 felt like a revolution in gaming at the time in a way that previous games did not (outside of introducing a horror component to video games).   

I just want to clarify so as to not mislead on RE:2, my gripe wasn't that head shots didn't kill the enemy in RE:4, in fact, they do not always kill the enemies in reRE:2, either (unless you get a randomly awarded critical.) and I'm fine with that.   I just meant that they were like pod/plant people and not zombies anymore.  I used the headshot thing as an example because it was a literal plant vine shooting out of their neck hole.  RE:4 was a great game, but for me it was like a really amazing Avengers movie that didn't have any superheroes in it.  It could be the movie of the decade, but it would still be a let down for me that an Avengers movie had no Avengers in it.  RE:4 was Resident Evil without Zombies in it.  That made me sad  :/

I actually wanted Fergie, may god have mercy on my soul.

8 hours ago, downzy said:

RE4 is still one of my favourite games of all time.  I think it comes down to whether you were into the series prior or you were late to the party.  I tried earlier RE games but couldn't accept the wacky controls.  I even gave RE1 a chance when it was remastered on the GameCube.  But it was RE4 with the new control mechanisms and that opening scene with the chainsaw that made me take notice and enjoy the hell out of the game.  

Funny enough, as much as I enjoyed 4, I never went back to the series.  Friends bought RE5 and the response wasn't great.  RE6 was panned by nearly every living person on the planet.  I'm not that into horror/survival games which seems to incapsulate RE7 so waiting for my brother in-law to finish his copy.  Willing to give it a shot but not going to pay for it.  

RE2 looks like the first RE game I'm actually interested in for a very long time.  Glad to hear Capcom hit it out of the park.  Likely won't get around to playing it until it goes on sale this spring.  Still have Far Cry 5 and COD - BO IV that are still in the shrink wrap.   

Yes, when you got into the series is a huge factor on how you feel about the modern titles.  I will say though, even as someone who played the originals when they first came out, the old control scheme is impossible for me to go back to.  It's kind of a bummer, because I'd like to play RE:0 or the remaster, but I just can't do those controls.

I think one of the main reasons this remake is such a hit is because the most common gripe from the "old" RE fans isn't the new controls, it's the move away from zombies and horror and replacing it with action and pod people who grow vines from their head after head shots.  Initially, the old school crowd HATED the new controls RE4 introduced, but we're all used to them now.  The most common gripe about the old games from the "new" fans was the awful controls on the originals.  reRE:2 addresses both issues and is a rare win/win where everyone is happy.

I think RE:7 was a pleasant surprise.  Not a true "zombie game" but was still awesome.  It was nothing like prior titles.

Side note, did you see they are putting out another FC in a few weeks?  I forget what it is called (Not Far Cry 6) it's a direct sequel to 5, and is taking a lot of heat for looking like a glorified $40 expansion.  If you haven't finished FC5 yet, and hate spoilers, I wouldn't recommend looking it up because the basic story is kind of a giant spoiler as it happens as a result of FC5's ending.

Resident Evil 2 is getting free DLC, starting 2/15 (not sure if that is an official date)  3 new short scenarios.

It is the game that keeps on giving.

Like I said, the rumors of 3make already being in the works are pretty heavy.

I did like 7, but I agree that there was some magic in 1-3 and Code Veronica that was lost starting with 4.  RE0 was borderline, but there is a clear delineation between 1-3 and Code Veronica vs. 4 forward, and I don't just mean the camera work.  The transition from Zombies to pod people sprouting Venus fly traps from their necks after a head shot really kicked the series in the balls.  I think RE:2 was greenlit because of RE:7's success, and I think RE:3 is a LOCK with the smashing success of RE:2boot.

I'm going back and forth in my head about if I'd rather RE:2v2.0 style remakes of 3, 1 and Veronica, or a whole new title altogether.  If it goes back to zombies, I'd love a new title, but if they keep going in a different direction, I'd rather the REmakes.

FYI, I'm shocked I didn't know this already being that I am an RE freak, but Code Veronica is the true RE:3, and RE:3 Nemesis was the one slated to be a spinoff, but they flip flopped because of some licensing deal with Sony.  I literally have a hardbound book from Capcom with a summary of all the lore (up to 4, I think.)

13 hours ago, appetite4illusions said:

I remember when I was a teenager and I was obsessed with Resident Evil.

I played them endlessly, 1 through Code Veronica, my favorite being 3. 

 

I became bored and frustrated when I realized that the "story" wasn't going anywhere...that there wasn't going to be a real conclusion. They were just going to keep churning out sequels (just like the films) like a dance that goes on and on. It's like a television show that goes on too long or loses the plot. I wanted a real ending.

Code Veronica was the main reason I bought a Dream Cast.

FYI, the persistent rumor is that they have already started working on the RE:3 remake.

Came out last night at midnight, played until 4AM with 1 pee break.

The game is fucking AWESOME.  The original is on my personal Mt Rushmore of games, so there was a high probability of disappointment.  None found.

1. It runs like butter

2. Audio and Visual atmosphere are amazing

3. Visuals are amazing

4. Different enough from the original plot to keep it unpredictable, close enough to pay proper homage to the original.

5. Modern controls  (RE:1 remake was near unplayable because it kept the original controls.)

RE:2.0 is now on my Rushmore of remade videogames.

Less than 48 hours to Resident Evil 2!!!!!

13 hours ago, AxlIsGod. said:

what a weird metric for a chart. Top facebook live video? like, sure. Congrats I guess 

It's like sports stats now, like how they track everything, so that there is always something "special" going on...  "Wow, this is pretty incredible, this is the first time since 2006 that a blonde quarterback has thrown for 400 yards in a night game after week 13.  This really says a lot about the coaching staff and their preparation..."