waltc

I'm playing at 3840x2160--PC, of course--and everything is readable--don't even have to strain with the large fonts enabled. I've read a few earlier posts that looked like people were sitting 10-15 feet back from the screen, maybe playing on a large-screen TV or something--but complaining about the size of the fonts. My monitor, a BenQ-EW-3270U, is fantastic--32" diagonally, with an .18 dot pitch--meaning you can't see the space between pixels no matter how close you get to the screen!) I play upright in a cushy leather chair at my computer desk (the mode chosen by more civilized people 5-1 over all other positions combined*) and that puts me at a very comfortable 18-24" from the screen at all times. The screen takes up between 70%-80% of my entire visual field, which is likely better than what you get with a much larger TV screen sitting 10-15 feet back, I'll wager. And as I said, no problem with the large fonts at all. I have my Windows desktop (Win10x64, v1909 build 18363.535) @ 3840x2160 set to 175% through Windows Display Options , and I further set the Font size to 132% via Settings/Ease of Access. But I run the game with the shortcut properties set to: Compatibility tab, Change High DPI settings/ Application--but the game handles its own scaling apparently, and that switch seems to do nothing, actually, checked or unchecked. Hopefully, this will generate some positive ideas... *Global Computer Seating Statistics, Winter 2019. Facts assembled by: Facetious Malarkey Jr.

I just downloaded (12/27) and installed the full game from the EGS. Not a single hitch. Runs fine.

No problem, 213374U --I can at last run the game from its executable! No game folders from the EGS were so festooned with layers of copy protection that I couldn't even open the folders--had to actually take possession of the directories just to open them in the Microsoft store version--and several of the files therein are locked up so tight that you can't take possession of them--and all of this *after* I bought my copy and reinstalled the game from the Microsoft Store. I have deleted all traces of the Microsoft Store version from my drives! Evidently, the Microsoft Store is treating its software purchases just like its Game Pass for PC games! As I mentioned, it's understandable for Game Pass PC--I have no problems with it there, because users aren't actually buying their own copies (licenses, etc. But a "license" isn't much good without a copy of the software, is it?) You have to sample the game bought from the Microsoft store to really appreciate how draconian the copy protection is--I've left a lot on the table in my description. Should serve as a warning for buying PC customers, however. I know that for me, once bitten is twice shy. Thanks so much for your input! Here I was thinking either Obsidian or more likely Private Division had ensnared the game in this prison cell--now I know it was Microsoft Store's doing all along. Seriously, this kind of information needs to circulate widely for people when a game is released--it would have saved me all of this hassle. I think the game developer has a duty to make these facts known--I had no idea of the UWP restrictions! What was Microsoft thinking? Anyway--I love the game--the 1.2 patch is fantastic and cured a couple of minor problems I had noticed the first time. I really thought the game was extremely well done even in the original version. And now--thankfully--I'll be able to play it and enjoy it fully. Thanks for the advice--I had been thinking about the issue all wrong! (No need to reply unless you want to.) Thanks again!

Final Update! The Epic store version is fine--none of the draconian DRM Microsoft has apparently chained the game into! I wish Microsoft luck in selling their PC games that cannot be modded and that are copy-protected to the hilt--so that you cannot even create a folder in their game directories! That sort of thing may be fine for console users--but it is wholly unsatisfactory for people playing their games in an x86 PC environment!

I'm now downloading the game from EPIC--but I feel confident because of the fact that a Nexus mod group exists for The Outer Worlds. I'll come back when it's finished with the final word on the subject. Almost forgot to mention that I bought the game from EPIC for $34.99...! Not bad--now it it will let me mod, we'll be cooking with gas....;)

Update: Got a Microsoft tech on the line in a chat--and he couldn't help me, either--He thinks it's the fault of "the developer" which he said was privatedivision, and so mixed up his "developers" with his "publishers," if the guy even knows the difference...;) Anyway, he was nice enough and polite and I put in a refund request. So we shall see. Since you've been so helpful so far, 213374U, can you tell me if the Epic Store version allows for mods? With the UWP version of the game, I can't even put an empty folder in either the root directory of the game or even in its parent directory, so it's a cinch it's not modable in that form. I think I'll ask about mods in the General forum just to make sure before I pull the trigger on the Epic site. Thanks again. Maybe if you don't know you could ask a friend or associate?

Thanks for the reply!.....I'm going to check into this....it could have something to do with my msft account & the temporary Game Pass PC authorization (Good to 1/20/20)--got it with my 5700XT but didn't want to use it until TOW was released on the service--may be commingled somehow--if I can't mod the game later it's not something I want to keep! I may refund on the MSFT store and pick it up from Epic--ah, really do loathe this "exclusive" crap. Why do developers want to see the people who buy their software jump through hoops? It make no sense to me.

So, does the Epic store version of the game do the same thing? Or is all of that just Microsoft? --what copy protection is found in the EPIC store version of the game? Maybe I should refund the Microsoft copy and purchase from Epic.... As I say, that sort of copy protection is fine for the Game Pass--but not for purchased copies. I should've looked into this more carefully before I pulled the trigger.

...and I am seriously considering a refund, unless some kind soul(s) can help me out here....;) I had planned to buy the game when the selling price dropped below $60, anyway, and so when the game went on sale the other day for $44.99, I decided to go ahead and jump in. I had played the game on the Xbox Game Pass for PC, and I made certain assumptions about a couple of things that would and should change after I bought and paid for my own copy: 1) That I wouldn't have to worry about the "always online" requirement... 2) That I'd be able to unlock the game completely from the copy-protection the whole game is wrapped in, and run the game direct from the executable. 3) Even decided to forego my own rule about not buying a game which didn't give me my own installable copy to archive--I have several drives that Archive my games. Doesn't seem like either 1) or 2) is true for my paid-for copy. I can understand trussing the game up like a Christmas hen for Game Pass users--that made perfect sense. But hey, I don't like being treated like a crook after I bought my own copy. --The one bright spot I found so far is that even after changing the ownership of the privatedivision.theouterworldsWindows10xxxxx folder--I can still play the game. But I still cannot run the game from its executable even though I can now see it! When I took ownership of the folder in Game Pass PC the copy protection kicked and wouldn't let me even play--would begin downloading another game install, instead. I could see that for Game Pass PC, certainly. So why does the game insist on going around its elbow to spite its face with all of the copy protection applied to people who own the game and paid for it and can prove it? It attempts to synchronize with the Microsoft cloud even when I have turned off the cloud in the game. I downloaded and installed the game anew after I purchased it, but the game calls home and labels the game on the loading screen with my Game Pass PC handle--and then "synchronizes" with the Microsoft cloud to access all the pre-1.2 saves I had made--locally, or so I thought. Is there a doctor in the house?...:D --who knows how to disable the "phone home" requirement and how to play the game from its own executable? I want to play the game *my way*--not anyone else's way. I don't think that is an unreasonable expectation at all.

Have to say with my hardware (see below) I've not had that happen even once. Only advice I can give you is to say that if you have overclocked anything at all, no matter whether you think it shouldn't be a problem because "other games" work fine with the same settings, set all clocks back to default and try again. What isn't well understood about 3d acceleration is that no matter the GPU you own, different games exercise different transistors in the GPU and can also access the same transistors in a different way--eg, not all game engines are alike, etc. So, for overclocking anything at all in a system, the "works fine in other games but not this one" rule doesn't necessarily apply. Can't know until you test everything at default clock--CPU, GPU, system ram, BCLK and even FCLK. Windows10x64 v1909, build 18363.535 Latest Adrenalins--19.12.3 AMD 50th Anniversary 5700XT Aorus Master x570 UEFI bios F11 Corsair HX-850 PSU (72a x1 12v rail) AMD Ryzen 5 3600X @ 3.8Ghz & boost RAM 16GB 2x8GB, Patriot Viper Elite PV416G320C6K @3200mhz 16 16 16 36 1T @ 3733Mhz 18-19-19-19-38-68 1T @ 1.35v LG MultiDrive DVD writer SATA Boot: Samsung 960 EVO NVMe 250GB (UEFI boot partition) 2x 1TB WD Blue 7200 rpm S3 ST2000DM S3 2TB ST4000DM004 S3 4TB BenQ EW-3270U 4k, HDR10 monitor * note: my ram overclock is 100% stable, tested overnight with P95. Everything else is running stock clocks.

If you have more than a single possible sound source, make sure to disable the sound devices you aren't using in the device manager to prevent the sound device driver from slipping back to the device you aren't using--for instance, my 5700XT has a sound device which I don't use at all because the sound on this x570 Aorus Master is so much better--RT1220 but with the big difference of a Sabre hardware DAC and a 3-position headphone amp that is actually the best I've ever heard. So, I always disable the AMD GPU sound device in the Device Manager. If I didn't do that, then every time I updated a driver I found the system sound device would slip back to the GPU sound--and I'd get no sound at all. You've likely already checked this, but thought I'd mention it.

Evidence? If there were such evidence it wouldn't matter at all since the publisher entered into a contractual exclusive agreement with Epic for a certain period--in exchange for whatever money Epic promised them to do that--so unless there's a specific clause stating otherwise, if Epic sold a single copy a week--just one--it would have to pay the publisher the promised amount, and the publisher would have to take it. Such is the nature of this kind of nutty agreement. I could see a publisher taking this agreement if he had little to no confidence in the game selling well--but I think it would be a mistake in the case of a really good game that should sell well everywhere. In the case of a good game, then, ideally the developer would want to see it sold by as many reputable game vendors as possible, which would easily overcome being paid by Epic to sell from a single source, regardless of what Epic paid them to do that. People who buy games know these things--and are automatically suspect of any game Epic would have to finance partially, otherwise the publisher was running scared of it. One month's exclusive for a game like RDR2 PC is OK and understandable because it gives them a month to "beta test" the game with Epic PC customers and whip it into shape for the general release 30 days later. But a *year's* exclusive? Holy cow, Batman, that's cra-zee...;) That means that neither the developer or the publisher has much of an expectation of profit for that game--a year--man, that's almost too much dumbness to wrap your head around....;) Ok, quickly, let's look at it another way: Pillars of Eternity II. Feargus has been quoted complaining that the game didn't sell very well so he doubts anyone would want to publish a sequel. There's just one problem with that, though. PoE II, in the end, after a solid year of development after the first installment of the game shipped, when all installments were complete and the turn-based mode was also complete--was and is a truly excellent game. I think it's first-rate--better than the original in many ways. However...it was the release strategy of the developer, Obsidian, that killed the sequel, in my estimation. What they did wrong: 1) Took almost a year to actually complete the game so that a player could play it through from start to conclusion--ie, the second and third installments of the game should have been finished before the the first installment shipped. People don't much like serial movies anymore--same with serial games. 2) Turn-based mode--was great--had been asked for often for PoE. Should have been planned from the start. Game should never have been released without it. It took almost a year post release to get the game ship-shape. Simply put, the game was released far too early. People like me bought and liked PoE OK, but I didn't like the episodic drip-drip-drip release schedule for the game--I honestly would not have bought the first installment of PoE when I did--but would have waited until they'd gotten it all finished and reasonably patched before buying it--would have enjoyed it a lot more! So when PoE II was announced--no way was I buying into it early again! I waited until 5.0, almost, was out--hence my very high opinion of the game. But if Feargus and the guys aren't going to understand that PoE II was shipwrecked from the start because of the premature, unfinished release schedule of the game--then they clearly aren't going to address this kind of thing and may make these same mistakes in the future. Challenge for Obsidian: For God's sake do a PoE III--and bring the series back to the continent, please! The ships were a nice diversion--let's not get lost in them, however...;) This time, though, include turn based from the start and include all of the planned episodes in the first release of the game--all of them! Then later, if you want, do a worthy expansion--in a year or two...;) I'll bet it would be a walk-away best seller *everywhere* and not just from the Epic store--just putting it there is kind of insulting to some of us. *I love Outer Worlds, btw. Am playing via the Xbox PC thing through the Microsoft Store. It's on sale now for a price I agree with with--~$45...so I will probably buy it tomorrow for Christmas!* Would love to see a PoE III--but only if it's done right as mentioned above............!

OK, just updated from the Windows Store for Game Pass for PC, and the version reports after the patch that I am on 1.1.387.0. Is this correct? Thanks for the answers!

With my 32-inch, 4k RGB monitor, and seated in a chair with my eyes ~18-24 inches away, the fonts are fine....;) You're sitting ~10 feet away from a screen that is only 8" larger (diagonally) than mine. You could try a pair of magnifying glasses I suppose, or else move in closer to the monitor...? Or you could try lowering your game resolution which will automatically enlarge the text display.

Hopefully, people reading this will know this isn't a criticism of the game--I think the game is very nice, actually. It is a criticism of the game's publisher because I think these exclusive deals like with the EGS likely hurt the bottom line--but, hey, that's not my problem. Microsoft gamepass (I'm using that right now for Outer Worlds) has some major disadvantages--they don't even allow you to browse the game directories to see what's installed, and if you change permissions on the directories to get in to look at the game files--then the next time you try and run the game--you can't, and you have to redownload the entire hidden file game--all 37.12 GBs of it. Of course this restriction means no mods, either. You no changee anything with GamePass! I don't game on consoles at all and never have, so obviously that kind of thing seems downright barbaric to my sensibilities...;) Basically, as I see it, Game Pass for PC is a "try before you buy" service and not much else. If you want to own the games then you have to buy them straight up at the standard MSRPs, even from Game Pass--that sometimes does discount--but rarely right away when a game first ships. Also, it doesn't make any difference to me how much $$$ a given publisher/dev makes on a given type of game. What matters to me is the deal I get--not the deal they get....;) That's just common sense. It's like people who pre-order games from an online distributor at full pop--why? It's not like the publisher is going to run out of copies to sell, it it? Now, if the publisher says--20% off for pre-order, then maybe I'll bite. But at full MSRP I've got no incentive to pre-order. I've always known that games like The Sims and Fortnite make fortunes, but I've never even looked at them twice--not interested. They just don't appeal at any price. But if you couldn't buy anything in Fortnite, how much $$ would Epic & Ten Cent make from it? Nothing...;) He might have huge numbers of concurrent online users but without sales it wouldn't mean a thing (of course.) So sales are still at the hub of everything, etc. He seeds the copies and then he gets the sales later. Again--The game publishers aren't giving me a reason to buy from the EGS. Knock 10% off and maybe I'm there--but MSRP? I can get that anywhere, and suddenly I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better to wait a while before buying. And to tell you the truth I've never known a time when it *wasn't* better to wait a while before buying, both for pricing reasons and code-patching reasons, etc. I've never felt that game publishers use good judgment in these matters--even for the ridiculous ~$60 MSRPs that have barely changed in decades, even though the total market for games these days is exponentially greater than it was in 1990, for instance. Today, a good game can sell 5 million copies in a week--in 1990, if all the PC gamers on Earth bought (most with Amigas at that time) there weren't enough of them to buy 5 million copies. For me--the sweet-spot MSRP for new AAA games should be ~$44.95 or less these days. And if the publishers really thought about it, selling more copies is a surefire way to move beyond what his distributor (Gog/Steam/EGS) is charging him to host his software and his *customers*, too. If you'll notice, most software devs dislike selling their own software direct themselves--some of them do, but they put little effort into and almost never offer discounts--which tells me they'd prefer it if I bought their software somewhere else...;) Ironic. I'm sure this is in vain--they won't listen, they never have. But unless they give me a reason to buy the game from an exclusive source, I won't.

About sales: there's no data with which to compare current Microsoft/Epic-only sales to GOG/Steam/Epic/Microsoft, etc., sales. No way to know what the sales might've been had they made the game available everywhere at once. But most importantly to me--how does buying the game from Epic/Microsoft advantage me as a customer? True, Epic is undercutting the commissions it keeps on game sales compared to Steam/GOG--but I note that the savings in price is *not* being passed on to me or you--the customers. Indeed--we are being charged full boat regardless. This cozy little deal between Epic and the bean-counter publishers suits their purposes but does nothing for me as a paying customer. Hence, I feel no need to rush over to Epic and breathlessly purchase the game--nope, I'll just wait. So, how about a 10% discount for your customers, Private Division? You remember who "customers" are and what they mean to the bottom line, I certainly hope...;) IMO, in today's huge game-software market it isn't unheard of for popular titles to sell literally millions of copies in the first week! Talking about "We can afford to miss a lot of sales for what Epic is saving us" has to be just about the dumbest remark I've ever heard from a game publisher...;) No kidding--the name of the game is to sell, sell, sell--not to focus on the unknown, hypothetical number of sales you think you will miss! That's just rationalization. A little common sense is all that's required--don't leave the customer out of these calculations. And it isn't even the customer pricing that is all-important here, it's also the fact that some people have a "favorite" software distribution site for reasons they can easily enumerate. For instance, I like GOG because of its no-DRM position--paying customers should not be punished by having to jump through hoops to run the games they buy; and I also like GOG because the service provides me with my own installable backup game copy to keep--I got used to that in the 1980's when I first began buying Amiga computer games. Steam doesn't as policy do either of those things--some Steam developers use DRM and some don't--with GOG it's universal: no DRM. Steam does not provide its customers with installable backup copies of their games. The Steam forums, however, are marginally better than GOG's--and I haven't heard that Epic even supports a forum for its customers. Or other services like that which cost money to implement. I'm waiting on Epic to give me some material reasons to shop there...;) Game exclusivity is not one of those reasons. It's just common sense.

I bought PoE1 and PoE2 on GOG--and here I find out that this game is on the Epic and the Microsoft Stores, only, and man, am I disappointed. I gotta' tell you--I don't understand why game devs don't want to make their games available through every major distribution House on the planet...although it's not the same, this reminds me of "trying to suck up the Mississippi through a straw." If you catch my drift. Come on, Obsidian--you have such little confidence in this game release that you want to go with Epic's cheesy deal? That smacks of pure desperation. Gawd, it's horrible when bean-counters make these kinds of short-sighted, dumb decisions. OK, well I'll just wait for it on GOG and if it doesn't come then I'll struggle with it on this terrible xBox Game Pass for PC--that worked great yesterday but today it's telling me to reinstall--and then it won't let me play! Hot dog--Obsidian--just what I like to see, paying customers being treated like crap! Jeez--let me guess--it's your publisher who has no confidence in the game, right? What a way to kill a game right out of the chute! Bravo! Obsidian had given certain assurances that little would change with Microsoft buying up the company, but it's easy to see that's not exactly true, is it? This is a great game and you guys are restricting its sales right off! Incredible. You didn't put it on Steam, even--I wouldn't have bought it there, most likely, although I have a Steam account, because I don't like the Steam DRM (although you guys were great about that with PoE!) and I like having my own backup copy of my games--it's habit I picked up in the 1980's when I started buying computer games...;) If it gets to GOG I'll buy it then. If not, I'll just forget about it--how long has the xBox game pass for PC been in beta now--6, 8 months or longer?

The only overt graphical bug I've seen--graphics are very nice @ 4k--is a filtering line of demarcation that moves ahead of the player as he progresses. It reminds me of bilinear filtering lines we'd see many years ago--I have a suspicion that this is an artifact relating to console optimization. Increasing the draw distance to Ultra doesn't help. Just want to report it, but I'm sure they've seen it and know exactly what it is--it's very noticeable. EDIT: Playing with a 5700XT and the 19.11.1 Adrenalins, and it's possible this may be an AMD driver issue--as the 19.9.x Adrenalins do not have that particular bug--However, the 19.11.1 drivers are so much better in this game than the 19.9.x in every way except for this particular bug, that it's much better to keep on playing with the 19.11.1...;) Comments: Playing on a Zen 2 desktop system, I get no stutters and no crashes at all, but I have installed no mods as of yet, either. Probably won't be able to do that until I buy the game--playing now on my xBox Game Pass for PC. I can play for hours @ 4k full screen, all settings @ Ultra, save for motion blur (I turn it off), without a single crash. Frame-rate is more than adequate and varies from a low of 35 fps to a high of ~70 fps--smooth sailing.

Even at the beginning of the game, you look off towards the horizon and the ship or structure you are headed towards looks far away--but you traverse maybe 50 feet in the game down the path and look up and suddenly you are right on it as it looms gigantic! It was bit shocking...;)

Thanks for the info Crimson--that is somewhat of a relief, actually....;)

For PC games in 2019, especially the big ones in terms of the body of code--tens of gigabytes, etc.--there is pretty much always going to be patching after the shipping date. It's inevitable because of the sheer number of possible hardware combinations that Windows supports...;) Then there are Linux distros, new APIs like Vulkan--it's a dizzying array. The only thing I've seen is that the game looks to have a visible line graphically that looks uncannily like the old bilinear filtering lines used to look years ago--as you move forward you could see the line move with you where the filtering ended....;) I don't think you need worry about patches...;)

This game is better than anything Obsidian's ever done in terms of the artwork, imo. That artist knows his business. It's really very good so far and graphically speaking they should feel very good about it. I'm still at the beginning so can't comment on the game itself, however...looks promising!

Fine on my PC @ 4k.

I haven't run into the quest yet as I just succeeded in getting the xbox game pass for PC to allow me to play the game--after several days of trying....;) But if that's a mandatory quest--gay "love stories" sort of make me rather nauseated generally...;) However, maybe it's not explicit--let's hope so. If it's not explicit then maybe I can get by with considering them just friends--not , uh, whatever. Frankly, I don't much care for "romance" in an RPG at all--I've had plenty of the real thing in my life and let me tell you--game "romances" do not compare....!....;) But, mainly, trying to force this stuff on the 98% of the population (and game market) that isn't homosexual and has no desire to ever be homosexual--well, it seems to me a dead-end street; a sure-fire way to lose customers instead of gaining them. Better by far to leave all romance--homo and hetero--out of our games...! Sorry to hear about this, though. I would have no problem with it if the game let you choose your companions among possibles you would feel more comfortable with.

Well, sure they think you are an idiot, why wouldn't they? (j/k--I couldn't resist...;))