AwesomeOcelot

Not really in the original Fallout. Maybe more xp?

It seems up to this point, it's been impossible for game developers to make mini-games that are enjoyable and don't over stay their welcome that are involved in the core gameplay. Very rarely have they been enjoyable, the Deux Ex: Human Revolution hacking was, but there was way too much of it. In my view 10 second engaging minigames don't exist, because they're impossible, just like being invisible and pink at the same time. I don't get engaged by 10 seconds snippets of gameplay, they are worthless to me. In most cases the minigames aren't enjoyable, and that's always a risk when you introduce gameplay that's very different to the core gameplay. I was actually playing Cogs before I played Bioshock, a game that has the same pipe gameplay minus the time limit, and that was only added in to balance other gameplay systems, which is also something that tends to happen, making gameplay suck for balance reasons in minigames. Picking up loot, skill-based lockpicking, and combat aren't minigames, they're part of the core gameplay, and if you find them repetitive and tedious then these games aren't for you. I find the core gameplay of some genres tedious, I don't play them. I don't think, if only they had isolated segments of gameplay I like in them. You also said that adding a lock picking minigame was adding depth to the system, which is absurd, it's one of the most shallow things you can do to a game.

Neither would an invisible pink unicorn. Minigames existed before the Infinity Engine games. Minigames aren't progress, they're a regress.

Fair enough, I actually don't know what a new game at a place like Game (if they're still around) would cost in Sweden either, but I am pretty sure that larger outlets like MediaMarkt or Elgiganten are cheaper than steam, or mail order giants (in Sweden at least) like Webhallen or CDON. And taxes have nothing to do with it, the VAT in Sweden on games is 25%, so I doubt you'll get it any higher anywhere else. But my main point was that it's very easy to get a hold of physical copies cheaper than steam. Pretty much every game sells for less from Amazon.co.uk, which includes free shipping (if the game costs more than £25, which new one typically does). For isntance, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 costs €60 on Steam while you can buy a physical copy for €43 on Amazon. For comparison, Swedish store Webhallen (that has physical stores in some cities as well as mail order) sell it for €52. All those prices are including any taxes. So yeah, Steam is definitely the most expensive option, but also the most convenient. If you restrict it to games over £25, maybe, but that's not the entire market. They're different models, Amazon uses algorithms to adjust prices, so games that are 2 or 3 weeks old are getting adjusted. Steam has sales, not just the 4 seasons, other sales too. Also physical stock is different to a digital service, it has to be stored somewhere. Chivalry and War of the Roses aren't more expensive on Steam compared to Amazon, neither is Sleeping Dogs or Dishonored.

It's not like the people developing Project Eternity are responsible for the entire top 5 greatest RPGs ever made. There's no reason to trust that they can make a good RPG. I know that, I just dont get people slagging the animations on a pre alpha, that happens to be one of the most impressive on kickstarter, when most projects don't even have anything to show Most projects on Kickstarter I've seen, and certainly nearly all the ones I've backed, come from developers who have proven themselves. Project Giana and Grim Dawn, from developers I don't know, showed gameplay that was compelling, the lack of it in respect to the other parts of the game is a serious concern. The only project I've backed where either experience or gameplay is not there is probably Shadowrun Returns, although the team members have credentials in terms of paper RPG and game development. It's concerning that the priority wasn't gameplay systems, when there's so much stuff that's more beta quality than pre alpha. And it's not just that the animations are bad, they're designed to be physics led, which will give you these problems regardless of having an animator. In terms of demos of games that have been on kickstarter, this game has been one of the least impressive, because games are about gameplay.

Lock picking mini-game in FO3 and NV was annoying since the radial control was a bit broken, same with the companion menu, some parts did not select when they should, but apart from that it was so quick and easy I hardly noticed it, which also means it was a completely pointless inclusion. Mini-games are generally a bad idea, because people will be playing games for the core gameplay, so if they're in the game make them completely optional, but don't make not doing the mini-game a disadvantage. Hacking in FO3 and NV is terrible because I'm dyslexic, it wouldn't be so bad if the selected words lined up and the letter-spacing was wider. I enjoyed the hacking mini-game in Deux Ex: Human Revolution, but the game rewards you with xp for doing it, so you're inclined to do it as often as possible, and it gets old. Worst mini-games probably the ones in Bioshock, some were easy and long, some were hard and quick, not really enjoyable but by the end I got really good at them, but I had been playing Cogs. Bioshock 2's were like lock picking in FO3, so quick and easy, didn't notice them.

Cisco did the same with some of their new routers, new firmware required logging into the cloud to use the settings. I think maybe the Linksys branded ones, but I'm not sure. I've been using Logitech mice for about 10 years, Microsoft before that. I have a MX500, MX510, G5v2, and G500, only issues I've had with them were the G5 had terrible drivers and the wheel click was hard because of the lean click being way too loose. Razer make the best hard and soft pads though, I've used most of the gaming brands, and Razer are clearly the best for pads.

It's not like the people developing Project Eternity are responsible for the entire top 5 greatest RPGs ever made. There's no reason to trust that they can make a good RPG.

Yet Steam is often about the only place to have the localised prices- albeit some other places like Impulse/ Gamestop will simply refuse to sell some games at all to certain regions. If steam really wanted to avoid it they almost certainly have the clout to, but it does benefit them, so they won't push it. I'm not in Australia (in NZ, but we tend to get lumped in with them) so I cannot speak directly for Aus, but in the vast majority of cases it is perfectly possible to avoid the localised prices by avoiding steam and using either another DD or a remailer, let alone a key reseller. But a lot of people simply won't do so. That ain't intended to exonerate the publishers though, given that Namco went to court to force regionalisation on TWitcher 2. Of course, I could still buy a non regionalised copy from Gamersgate, even then... What DD don't have regional pricing apart from GOG (with a few exceptions)?

For most of the new games, GMG re-sell steam keys anyway, so they get those keys wholesale somehow, then just resell them. You said Steam is undercutting physical stores in Europe, but I got to say that confuses me, because in my experience buying a digital copy from Steam is always the most expensive version of any given game. Swedish stores tend to be somewhat cheaper, but usually buying a physical copy from Amazon (with free shipping) is the cheapest option. If GMG carries the title and you get your hands on a discount code (which is easy enough to do), buying the steam version from there has become a real alternative though. But still, Steam itself has never been the cheapest option for me. This is for new games by the way, Steam sales are another story entirely. I don't know about Sweden, but I'd be surprised if physical stores cost less than Steam in France, Germany, and the UK. Maybe Sweden has different tax and incentive systems to make this possible, or it's another case like Australia, where Steam for some reason is more expensive. Amazon have a lot of power to negotiate, and their prices are based on algorithms, but in terms of France, Germany, and the UK, it's rare that new games are more costly on Steam.

Apparently you don't know what these words mean. Did I say that there's no future in it, or did I say the opposite? Also, people who work for Valve Software and Epic Games aren't beyond supporting gimmicks. So, what? Illustrating my point that in terms of squad based RPGs, 3D vs 2D doesn't matter for immersion, so your ranting doesn't even apply to this game at all, I'm so glad we agree. It's a bit much to call something primitive when the renderer behind the images is more complex than real-time 3D engines. I also notice how you have completely ignored my point about not knowing what real-time rendering Project Eternity is going to have, including lighting, animation, filters, real time 3D rendering of characters and objects. Can you say that Project Eternity is going to less complex than Half-Life? No. Is Limbo less complex than Descent? I don't even know what basis you're using to judge. That's like saying Limbo is exactly the same as They Bleed Pixels, one is a deliberate throwback to a previous era, one is not.

Valve only set the prices for their own games. Not getting really upset, but it's a fact it's the publisher not Valve. What's the difference in Australia with Valve games? I think GamersGate works the same as Steam, so it's strange how they can negotiate better prices than Steam. I have no idea how Green Man Gaming works.

Nope, we just import or use GMG or Gamersgate. With GMG I got X-com at $40 and Hitman at $34 pre-ordered. Basically cheaper than US prices. Another note as to why games are more expensive at retail, is due to what aussies earn. A EB games retail assistant earns $15phr quite a bit higher than what the US equivalent does, then add more expensive rent, warehousing and power etc, you get the picture that it costs more to do business in Australia than most other countries. As for Steam, it's retail again. Publishers can't undercut stores by selling a title on steam $20-$30 cheaper than stores, if they did that, stores wouldn't stock their product. Of course greed is also a factor, but not the only one. They undercut stores in America and Europe. Retail is going to move to supermarkets, but mostly it'll be done online, already happened with the PC in the UK, retail PC games don't really exist any more, the consoles will be next. Why don't Australians just all use GMG or Gamersgate? Then Steam couldn't possibly keep their prices so high.

Hope you get decent hours for the price, heh. Was fun but kind of brief for me. Generally I am not very good at FPS. I tend to die a lot so the games do take me a longer to finish Sleeping Dogs is not a FPS. It's a 3rd person open world game with beat'um up, shooter, racing, and other forms of gameplay. The main quest line might be short, but a lot of these games are designed to just explore and do the racing and fighting challenges, and of course go on rampages.

Publishers, probably. Also they have to send the games through more, longer tubes. Actually, thinking about it, maybe server costs are higher in Australia or something possibly legit like that. It's not like that's a chilly continent where air conditioners are unnecessary. Probably, but considering what servers cost, it can't possibly justify the price increases per purchase, the difference is probably less than a dollar. My theory is that Australia is isolated and price fixing which is pretty rampant in any digital medium. It's greed like this that will hurt the games industry. Australians won't bother, won't try new or different genres they may love, and some will turn to piracy. I remember Trent Reznor getting angry at seeing his CD in Australia being sold for over double what it would anywhere else. They could do that because shipping it from US or Europe would be pretty expensive and take some time. There was a limited supply of the limited edition CD in Australia. Reznor was pissed because he was using his albums to support his tour, over charging was prohibiting new fans and overcharging wasn't benefiting him in royalties. He later went independent selling his album for $5, and even though he's recently signed to Columbia, his latest EP was distributed in the same way as when he was independent at a reasonable price.

Pan isometric (P:E isn't even isometric) and laud 3D real-time rendered, clearly you're not advocating it, silly me. These new technologies didn't replace old ones. WiiMote, Move, and Kinect exist, but I still choose to use mouse, keyboard, gamepad, and joystick. VR headsets are going to be gimmicks, there might be some games made for them worth playing, but they're not going to replace screens. Are Dungeon Siege, Neverwinter Nights 1 & 2, or Dragon Age: Origins more immersive than their predecessors? I don't think so. Also Obsidian are probably going to be using mental ray to render the backgrounds, so you can't really say the technology behind the game is primitive compared to a real-time engine. We don't know what animation, lighting, or other filters Obsidian are planning. Even if some 3D games will be more complex, it's wrong to say this game will be primitive.

I don't like anything that's been said about Tomb Raider so far. One of the writers is the daughter of my favourite writer, and I think she did some work on Mirror's Edge and Overlord. The original Tomb Raider is still one of my favourite games. Legend was kind of awful, Anniversary and Legend have the worst PC ports I have ever played (clipping bugs constantly in platforming, AI, combat), most of new stuff in Anniversary is bad (adding QTE's to a remake of a classic game should be a hanging offence) but a lot of the great stuff was there. After Squeenix bought Eidos, Crystal Dynamics made an incredible game called Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light, so there's definitely potential for them to make a good game, but interference from the publisher and focusing on narrative could spoil it.

They're definitely trying to encourage more 3rd party developers. Ports with new content, exclusive deals. Out of order execution is going to make development of games easier. It's not that strange when you consider the facts: $349.99 at launch, when cost of production is highest. A GPU that's DirectX 10 comparable. Half the power consumption of a Xbox360. Gamepad with a 6.2 inch touchscreen. Given those features and the cost, more performance was probably impossible at that price. If they wanted to deliver a substantial performance increase, they'd have to raise power consumption by at least 50%, raise the price to $450, and have the touchscreen as an add on or more expensive bundle. To put this in perspective, the high performance Intel Ivy Bridge processors use twice as much power as an entire WiiU by themselves. The WiiU has to use processors that draw as much power as the Intel processors in tablets and thin laptops, and they're not great compared to the desktop versions in terms of performance.

I wouldn't call it 'buggy as hell'... I'm almost through the game and only noticeable bug during the entire game was a guy with jet packs flying up and getting stuck inside the structure of a UFO. It's fun while it lasts, which isn't very long. Probably just as well, as the simplified game mechanics would lead to boredom if it dragged out. Edit: Not sure what qualifies as 'cheap' elsewhere in the world, but Gamersgate currently has it for $35 (which is dirt cheap for Aussies). You haven't been getting bugs such as camera messing up and not targeting the enemy, enemies getting stuck in places you can't get to, crashes, the game getting stuck and not being able to progress, many graphical bugs, or gameplay related bugs? Have you been playing multiplayer? A good portion of the bugs people are complaining about are in multiplayer.

Archaic in the sense that it was common in a previous period. Gaming has been dominated by 3D real-time rendered games for over a decade. It's not archaic in sense of being primitive or antiquated. I think you're not talking about the same thing. Fixed perspective definitely allows for more attention to be paid to what's on the screen at any one time, way, way, more, and objects don't just look good or passable, they can look much much better than real-time rendered. Obviously 3D real-time rendered requires way more developer time to create, so more attention is spent on graphics. Should developers be spending all their time on graphics? No, I'd much rather they spent it on gameplay. Are the benefits of 3D real time rendered worth it? For some games but the reasons you give are pretty terrible, who cares about seeing the sky or objects from multiple angles in a squad based RPG. They've already decided, and it's mostly down to resources available, they don't have the time or team to make a 3D real time rendered game in under 2 years that's as big as they want, or has the amount of features and complexity they want in other areas.

I'm reading similar things but I find them hard to believe. Nintendo might have an approach that goes more towards innovation (or gimmicks) than hardware power but they aren't that thick, to put the equivalent of a 7 year old cpu into a new console. There seems to be a lot of deliberate misinformation around, probably organized by the competition. Specifically, the weak CPU claim came from the developer of Metro: Last Light and here is their clarification: http://gonintendo.co...story&id=191294 Regardless, isn't the Batman game and the new CoD running at 1080p without issues and looking as good or better than the PS3/XB version? I think the WiiU uses half the power of the Xbox360, and that may be why the CPU isn't as powerful as we'd expect, the CPU is also said to be out-of-order, where the Xbox360's is in order execution, which makes it harder to code for, especially in terms of gameplay, but you get better performance in the things that don't need out of order execution. I could find only rumours about 1080p on Arkham City and a few other games. I expect Trine 2 and Rayman Legends to be 1080p. Nintendo games are 720p, and I think that's most telling. Reviewers of the game have said the image they're seeing is not as crisp as 1080p. Eurogamer did comparisons screenshots of WiiU, PS3, Xbox360, and PC, and only the PC was 1080p. I would have expected a console released this year to be 1080p across the board, that's what I assumed it would be early in the year, but now I'll be surprised. Maybe it also has something to do with the tablet that the WiiU has. I'm going to need to see it for myself, or have a trusted source take it apart before I'll be confident it's rendering these games in 1080p and not just upscaling 720p.

I'm going to wait and see how well it's supported, all the reports I've seen is that XCOM: Enemy Unknown is buggy as hell. It looks like a great game, there was a Kickstarter for the more classic XCOM experience which I'm probably going to get around to buying at some point. Don't actually care much about the IP, I think there's a place for a less complicated TBS game with a lot of the elements of the original XCOM games. I think if they'd have shot for an updated version of classic XCOM with fancy graphics it would have been even buggier.

The WiiU's poor performance is meant to be down to the CPU, the GPU is pretty powerful with Shader 4 style graphics, but it's not going to running games you find on the 360 and ps3 at 1080p like it was suggested before. CPU is more important for gameplay, so we might not be seeing any advancement in terms of console gameplay for a while, at least when it relies on performance.

WiiU looks to have some 3rd party titles coming to it e.g. Bayonetta 2, lots of ports of recent multi-format releases like Arkham City and Trine 2, a lot of them with additional content. I'll be interested to compare the ports, because there's been devs grumbling about the performance of it, even questioning whether it's as powerful as the xbox360 or ps3, which are 8 years old now.