Page 2 of 2 First 12
Results 26 to 39 of 39

  1. Post
    #26
    Have always used the in game chat in Fortnite as usually we play with 2 PC and 2 PS4 or Xbox players. It works great other than not being able to talk during loading screens.

  2. Post
    #27
    Epic Games has seemingly given up on trying to make the playing field level in Fortnite across all platforms, with the recent discovery version 8.10 no longer matches Switch users with Xbox One and PlayStation 4 cross-play parties.

    Prior to this update, solo Switch players were able to play with and against users on rival platforms and now owners of Nintendo's hybrid device will be limited to the mobile pool, fighting to the end for a battle royale victory against iOS and Android users. According to Epic, it'll be a better experience for everyone this way.
    Now all epic has to do is stop cross-play between switch and mobile phone users & stop console users versing PC players for a better experience for everyone. Idiots who believe in this stupid cross-play between all platforms, at least Epic starting to realizing its a shit move on a competitive game like this.

    well from the sounds of it you can still versus PC players in the likes IF you join on a person who's playing on ps4/xbox/pc but if your in a switch only party you'll be versing only mobile / switch users. Its still for the better

  3. Post
    #28
    EvaUnit02 wrote:
    Fortnite has in-game platform agnostic party system with chat . If you're playing the game with someone then in-game options should be sweet.

    Also Discord is really easy to use. Stop assuming that everybody is a Boomer just because you are.
    You said people would be happy talking on their phones. No, they won't be, it's a stupid setup.

    I use Discord. I wouldn't use it on my phone for cross-platform games if there was a native solution.
    Last edited by KevinL; 14th March 2019 at 6:16 pm. Reason: Language

  4. Post
    #29
    XSpike wrote:
    Now all epic has to do is stop cross-play between switch and mobile phone users & stop console users versing PC players for a better experience for everyone. Idiots who believe in this stupid cross-play between all platforms, at least Epic starting to realizing its a shit move on a competitive game like this.
    Cross-progression and cross-platform MP is the future, this is the norm for zoomers and they will expect those features in future games. The gaming market is changing Grandpa, get used to it.

    If many customers hugely demand a certain feature then someone will cater to them. If it starts eating into Company A's bottomline then they'll quickly adjust their policies to be competitive.

    Ard Righ wrote:
    You said people would be happy talking on their phones. No, they won't be, it's a stupid setup.

    I use Discord. I wouldn't use it on my phone for cross-platform games if there was a native solution.
    No real argument, use ad hominem.

    "I personally wouldn't do it" is a piss weak argument. You don't speak for anyone else.

    In the situation where people want to chat with their friends outside of playing the same game there are again, many solutions and they're all easy to deal with.

  5. Post
    #30
    A gentle reminder to keep the discussion clean and the insults elsewhere

  6. Post
    #31
    No doubt it's the future but at least the future has the controllers to match. Get with the times and play VR / AR titles with motion controllers. In the future, play with glasses / contact lenses that do VR / AR / everything. PC's / consoles / cellphones, what's that ancient technology? Nobody plays on on those relics.

    Still awhile off, so yeah.. I'll be a grandpa till the tech arrives and I can finally be young again. MGGA.

  7. Post
    #32
    We should disable wheels for racing game online PvP and arcade sticks in fighting game online PvP, they give significant advantages to competition after all... right?

    More options is better/pro-consumer, they shouldn't be reduced. Play in lobbies locked to specific input devices if it's an issue. If people want to play shooter PvP against others and handicap themselves with inferior input devices then it's their choice. Screw that mollycoddling BS, the majority of gamers are adults.
    XSpike wrote:
    No doubt it's the future but at least the future has the controllers to match. Get with the times and play VR / AR titles with motion controllers. In the future, play with glasses / contact lenses that do VR / AR / everything. PC's / consoles / cellphones, what's that ancient technology? Nobody plays on on those relics.

    Still awhile off, so yeah.. I'll be a grandpa till the tech arrives and I can finally be young again. MGGA.
    Trying to argue a point with input device fads which have all already failed multiple times? Nice try, no cigar.

    Motion controls require the use of your whole arm(s) vs. just your hands with gamepad and KB+M. Shit that's less convenient and efficient than existing solutions isn't going to take off. As long as VR/AR require headsets they aren't going to ever become mainstream.

    Cross-progression and cross-play MP have been here for years, in fact they're very much mainstream now. Multiple developers have claimed that they're very easy to implement and the experience is seamless for the end user in most cases. I take back what I said in a prior reply:- it's not the future, it's the present. The clock isn't turning back.

  8. Post
    #33
    Can't even get into / see where the future is heading with motion controllers. Sure Kinect and motion controllers were a fad last gen but its not a fad on VR or AR, holding a conventional controller / K&M isn't the future.



    Chunky headsets are only the start, tech evolves and peoples opinion changes with time. They'll view TV screens and monitors as relics of a barbarian age of tech.

    wifi will die, lifi will take over. Holograms will come even holograms that you can feel and can change as you touch them. Get out of the past grandpa the future is coming.

  9. Post
    #34
    Rift, HTC Vive, PSVR have all been around for years yet they're still niche products for enthusiasts. VR failed once or twice in the 1990s prior to that.

    It would need to be a fully blown holodeck or direct feed to brain. Plain Jane wearable input devices are NEVER going to be mainstream. There has to be little to no inconvenience otherwise normies aren't going to touch them.

  10. Post
    #35
    "Back in my days....." at least these normies will also age & have to get with the times or just die out being stubborn old people.

  11. Post
    #36
    EvaUnit02 wrote:
    It would need to be a fully blown holodeck or direct feed to brain. Plain Jane wearable input devices are NEVER going to be mainstream. There has to be little to no inconvenience otherwise normies aren't going to touch them.
    I honestly don't think we're far off - there are a bunch of devices slated for release this year with inside-out tracking, and at least some of these (e.g. Oculus Quest, and possibly the HTC Vive Cosmos) have a fully untethered experience (i.e. are self contained and don't require a PC).

    I have an Oculus Go and it's pretty sweet eh (but only 3DOF so less useful for gaming).

  12. Post
    #37
    KevinL wrote:
    I honestly don't think we're far off - there are a bunch of devices slated for release this year with inside-out tracking, and at least some of these (e.g. Oculus Quest, and possibly the HTC Vive Cosmos) have a fully untethered experience (i.e. are self contained and don't require a PC).

    I have an Oculus Go and it's pretty sweet eh (but only 3DOF so less useful for gaming).
    If we can get devices untethered devices which don't cost an arm and a leg for the Average Joe to buy then it'd be fantastic. We still need "proper" games though, not just arcade titles like rail shooters and glorified tech demos.

    Solving the motion sickness dilemma needs to happen, having to work around it greatly limits game design and potential player actions. Stop to shoot and/or having to teleport to move greatly limits general appeal to many gamers, I'd wager.

  13. Post
    #38
    Yeah fair, the Oculus Go is <$300 - the Quest is expected to be more expensive, but consistent with console pricing - at that sort of price point mass market adoption is much more feasible. Not needing location beacons/towers or being tethered will make a big difference, although I suspect what they really need to do is pull the room-mapping tech from glass/kinect so that the device knows when you're about to run into a couch/wall/significant other.

    Motion sickness is significantly reduced with higher resolution, better tracking and anti-screen door effect on modern devices

    The future is now man

  14. Post
    #39
    some people get motion sickness from FPS games, you will never solve it for everyone.