Results 576 to 597 of 597

  1. Post
    this was confirmed yonks ago, does not worry me in the least as I already have a bunch of different launchers and steam gets used the least these days.

    you could argue that them having more revenue results in them having more cash which means more money to support the game

  2. Post
    yeahboiwahoo wrote:
    this was confirmed yonks ago, does not worry me in the least as I already have a bunch of different launchers and steam gets used the least these days.

    you could argue that them having more revenue results in them having more cash which means more money to support the game
    Did you not read my post at all? The game will not being sold on Steam is old news and your personal opinion of the decision is not relevant. My discussion point is the weak, patronising excuse that they're giving. Just be transparent with your customers.
    Last edited by EvaUnit02; 18th October 2018 at 4:36 pm.

  3. Post
    EvaUnit02 wrote:
    Did you not read my post at all? The game will not be Steam is old news and your personal opinion of the decision is not relevant. My discussion point is the weak, patronising excuse that they're giving. Just be transparent with your customers.
    Your personal opinion that it is weak and patronising is not relevant.

    See I can also play this game

  4. Post
    yeahboiwahoo wrote:
    Your personal opinion that it is weak and patronising is not relevant.

    See I can also play this game
    This is a games discussion forum. Eva's point is valid. I don't think he's being patronising and you know I call him out when he is.
    Personal opinions are kind of the point here. They are relevant regardless of who agrees or disagrees with them. IMO if you can defend your opinion it is just as valid as anyone elses.

  5. Post
    yeahboiwahoo wrote:
    Your personal opinion that it is weak and patronising is not relevant.

    See I can also play this game
    Do you have anything to add to the discussion of their PR excuse or not?

  6. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    This is a games discussion forum. Eva's point is valid. I don't think he's being patronising and you know I call him out when he is.
    Personal opinions are kind of the point here. They are relevant regardless of who agrees or disagrees with them. IMO if you can defend your opinion it is just as valid as anyone elses.
    Am I allowed to have my opinion that it does not matter to me as the consumer? Because eva told me that was irrelevant.

    I personally dont see what I gain out of it being on steam vs bethesdas own launcher. I still have to open a launcher to play the game. So the gain of it being on steam is precislely 0. If they want to say its because of direct interaction with the customer instead of saying "steam takes too much money" I personally dont care. Maybe they will interact more directly as old matey specifically says being able to email customers, I have nfi if they can do that via steam as it is.

  7. Post
    EvaUnit02 wrote:
    Do you have anything to add to the discussion of their PR excuse or not?
    Yeah its weak, I dont expect him to just upfront say steam takes too much of a hit so they can gtfo. Has any of the pr blokes when they shifted off said anything close like that? Do you really expect a PR bloke to publicly trash (in effect) what will remain as a current seller for their historical games?

    I remember rabble about similar things when BF3 went on origin but I dont recall the cut coming up other than everyone saying it was the real reason. Patrick Sutherland wins the weakest PR this year by a mile but eh thats a different kettle of fish.

  8. Post
    yeahboiwahoo wrote:
    Am I allowed to have my opinion that it does not matter to me as the consumer? Because eva told me that was irrelevant.
    Of course you are, and I don't think he said anything about your opinion be irrelevant. Only that your point was not relevant to what he was saying (i.e. you're talking about different things).

  9. Post
    yeahboiwahoo wrote:
    I remember rabble about similar things when BF3 went on origin but I dont recall the cut coming up other than everyone saying it was the real reason.
    https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2011/...s-good-reason/
    Reading between the lines, it sounds like EA wants to offer patches as well as for-pay content directly to gamers through the games itself. Valve seems to have rules in place that state such content must be sent through the Steam servers.
    This sounds more plausible to me. IIRC Dragon Age 2 and Crysis 2 were pulled from sale on Steam as soon as premium DLCs for those games was released. Crysis 2 later returned to Steam store as the "Maximum Edition" with all of the DLC bundled. The evidence lines up.

  10. Post
    "We are intent on providing Battlefield 3 players with the best possible experience no matter where they purchase or play the game, and are happy to partner with any download service that does not restrict our ability to connect directly with consumers."
    this sounds awfully familiar to what pete said and the title of the article.

    Fallout 76 Will Not Hit Steam To Provide Customers "The Best Experience Possible
    “It’s an online, always-on game, and is a service. That was also based on our experiences with other online games as well. We felt that having a direct relationship with our customers was super important to us. And so doing it through Bethesda.net exclusively allows us to have that one-to-one relationship with customers, that quite honestly you don’t always have when you go through another third party where they might own the relationship with the customer in terms of being able to email them or to reach out directly and contact them.”

    hmmhmm

    from EA
    "When a download service forbids publishers from contacting players with patches, new levels, items and other services—it disrupts our ability to provide the ongoing support players expect from us," EA said. "At present, this is the case with only one download service. While EA offers its entire portfolio to this site, they have elected to not post many of our games."
    I wonder if anything has changed on this front? I'm expecting fo76 to be more frequently updated than the single player titles and they have talked about being able to change stuff on the fly.

    edit - the ironing being bf3 had some bloody awful patch cycles and huge bugs that were unfixed for over a month

  11. Post
    I watched the 51 minutes of gameplay video - looks like a snore-fest - wasn't what I expected at all.

    Is anyone highly excited about this?

  12. Post
    I'm tentatively* highly excited, the gameplay I watched looked interesting enough. The gameplay from the pc blokes trying to use a controller made me want to vomit.

    Exploring the map and finding stuff to shoot it was I liked doing in 3 and new vegas, I didn't think 4 lent itself to that at all tbh so most of my time was base building

    *the performance and lag/hit detection is so mainging right now, stress test was the same hopefully its fixed on launch..

  13. Post
    Oh yeah, I totally forgot they were not going to use steam for this

    I was iffy on it anyway, but Im pretty much at burnout from all these different propietary content delivery systems, I think that might actually break it for me rather than the game itself

  14. Post
    Eldon wrote:
    I watched the 51 minutes of gameplay video - looks like a snore-fest - wasn't what I expected at all.

    Is anyone highly excited about this?
    Nah I haven't even watched any of the videos or really know what the actual point of the game is. Multiplayer, no npcs, pvp is not a big factor?

    And to top it off this thread is not really helping when there's way too many ChrisB and EvaUnit02 posts for it to be readable.

  15. Post
    Completely lost interest in Fallout, which is sad because i really liked FO 1 and 2.

  16. Post
    First Xbox b.e.t.a session is midday to 3pm on the 24th. It's on the official fallout Twitter.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Fallout/s...08593804591104

  17. Post
    Bethesda is hiring a quest designer for fallout 76, you fellas can go and show them whats what

  18. Post
    yeahboiwahoo wrote:
    Bethesda is hiring a quest designer for fallout 76, you fellas can go and show them whats what
    Game comes out in a few weeks. Why are they hiring one now?

  19. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    Game comes out in a few weeks. Why are they hiring one now?
    I am guessing it would be for dlc

    I will wait for the full version release and reviews before making a final decision about this game but at this stage from what I have seen looks like a no buy for me

  20. Post
    ChrisB wrote:
    Game comes out in a few weeks. Why are they hiring one now?
    toddo mate said they would keep supporting the game and expanding it

  21. Post
    Maybe future updates will include npcs.

  22. Post
    I would like an expansion out to that at some point as part of the world evolving of some sort. It is possible for no human npcs to work (see old world blues for an example, yes I know it wasn't bethesda etc but it is possible)


    main quest spoilers ahead







    there is a whole bunch of dead former factions all over the map which I'm assuming the main quest is going to explain why/how/what