Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Games Discussion/What Are You Playing?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Gears of War 5 has a 3-player mode, the new Rainbow Six is a three-player co-op, and Outriders is 1-3 players. I can't help but think this is a a weird effort to encourage people who wouldn't be able or want to get 4+ people together, while still not letting them (god forbid) support couch co-op.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by nofather View Post
      Gears of War 5 has a 3-player mode, the new Rainbow Six is a three-player co-op, and Outriders is 1-3 players. I can't help but think this is a a weird effort to encourage people who wouldn't be able or want to get 4+ people together, while still not letting them (god forbid) support couch co-op.
      Honestly? I don't think there's THAT much of a conspiracy behind the loss of couch co-op in AAA games.

      As mentioned before, the tech behind games have become increasingly more advanced and complex. Aiming for higher fidelity and more systems running at the same time.

      Because of that, any co-op beyond 2 players are getting harder to run.

      Having more then one instance of a player character running around on top of running AIs and whatever scripted sequences in non is going to tank the performance and framerate on a single console, and HARD. It's why when you do see it, it's restricted to lower graphical fidelity games (like Smash Bros) because not as much needs to run. I've seen it myself when, years ago, tried to run 4-player local co-op on CoD Zombies, and on a PS4; that match was almost unplayable.

      So from my perspective, it's not because devs/publishers want to remove couch co-op...it's because they can't.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by tasti man LH View Post

        Honestly? I don't think there's THAT much of a conspiracy behind the loss of couch co-op in AAA games.

        As mentioned before, the tech behind games have become increasingly more advanced and complex. Aiming for higher fidelity and more systems running at the same time.

        Because of that, any co-op beyond 2 players are getting harder to run.

        Having more then one instance of a player character running around on top of running AIs and whatever scripted sequences in non is going to tank the performance and framerate on a single console, and HARD. It's why when you do see it, it's restricted to lower graphical fidelity games (like Smash Bros) because not as much needs to run. I've seen it myself when, years ago, tried to run 4-player local co-op on CoD Zombies, and on a PS4; that match was almost unplayable.

        So from my perspective, it's not because devs/publishers want to remove couch co-op...it's because they can't.
        Well... they only can’t include couch co-op if you take it as a given that they have to push the graphical fidelity to the maximum the hardware can manage. You certainly could optimize a game to support 4-player local co-op, if you were willing to make a lot of sacrifices in the graphics department. So, It’s not really a question of necessity, it’s a question of priorities. The original Halo could probably have looked better if it hadn’t had local multiplayer, but at the time multiplayer was a higher priority. Understandably, because online multiplayer wasn’t really a thing yet (on console, anyway). Now that online multiplayer is the standard, graphics are a higher priority than local multiplayer in the AAA space.

        And as long as better graphics continue to have a strong correlation to better sales, that will continue to be the priority.
        Last edited by Charlaquin; 06-11-2019, 09:25 PM.


        Going by Willow now, or Wil for short. She/Her/Hers.

        Comment


        • Soooo... I know I'm highly biased, but I'm going to go ahead and say it (IMO at least).

          Nintendo won E3 again.


          Freelancer (He/His Pronouns): CofD - Dark Eras 2, Kith and Kin, Mummy 2e, Oak Ash and Thorn; Scion - Mysteries of the World

          CofD booklists: Beast I Changeling | Demon | Deviant (TBA) | Geist l Hunter l Mage | Mummy | Promethean | Vampire | Werewolf (WIP)

          Comment


          • I don't think it's really a 'conspiracy' so much as a 'this makes money, so if we want to maximize profits, we should do this.' There doesn't really need to be a secret organization about it, so much as not making it public; similarly to how McDonalds commercials don't show how their meat and chicken gets made, or games not being up front about lootbox drop rates until legally forced.

            Basically if you're selling a single player or couch co-op game, you're selling one game. If we're buddies I can go over to your house and we can play together. If you're selling a multiplayer game, you're selling one game per person. Now if I want to play with you, we both have to buy the game. Then there's further social pressures, and competitive ones if they want some esports.

            Smash Bros and Call of Duty aren't just different due to quality of graphics. Nintendo seems like it's always had a sort of different outlook on games than Sony or Microsoft, though I'd hesitate to get into that because I haven't paid much attention to Nintendo until fairly recently and Microsoft for a while.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Second Chances View Post
              Soooo... I know I'm highly biased, but I'm going to go ahead and say it (IMO at least).

              Nintendo won E3 again.
              Oh, absolutely! Everyone else is busy talking about cloud gaming and how “innovative” and “immersive” their new tech is. Meanwhile Nintendo’s just like “Uhh... Our console is already mobile, here’s a bunch of games!”


              Going by Willow now, or Wil for short. She/Her/Hers.

              Comment


              • Meanwhile I'm still like:

                "Did they say anything about Metroid Prime 4 or Pikmin 4? If no, no fucks are given!!!" lol

                (yes I'm aware of the development reboot of MP4, don't @ me)

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Charlaquin View Post

                  Well... they only can’t include couch co-op if you take it as a given that they have to push the graphical fidelity to the maximum the hardware can manage. You certainly could optimize a game to support 4-player local co-op, if you were willing to make a lot of sacrifices in the graphics department. So, It’s not really a question of necessity, it’s a question of priorities. The original Halo could probably have looked better if it hadn’t had local multiplayer, but at the time multiplayer was a higher priority. Understandably, because online multiplayer wasn’t really a thing yet (on console, anyway). Now that online multiplayer is the standard, graphics are a higher priority than local multiplayer in the AAA space.

                  And as long as better graphics continue to have a strong correlation to better sales, that will continue to be the priority.
                  ...ok, just to clarify:

                  I meant couch co-op as a feature, not the feature.

                  Where the idea of couch co-op is just one of many features that a single game has, but not necessarily the focus. Just one of many gameplay modes that a game has. Since in that regard...yeah if a game is trying to be a bunch of things, a couple of them are going to fall to the wayside.

                  Because yes, of course if the game was designed with couch co-op in mind, a lot more focus would be given to polish it up to make sure it was running smoothly.

                  Originally posted by nofather View Post
                  I don't think it's really a 'conspiracy' so much as a 'this makes money, so if we want to maximize profits, we should do this.
                  ...that's the conspiracy I was referring to.

                  Comment


                  • Cyberpunk being /more/ transphobic, this time in the game. This shit is intentional, and fuck anyone who’s told me to look past it.

                    https://twitter.com/acegiak/status/1...997119494?s=21


                    Remi. she/her. game designer.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by atamajakki View Post
                      Cyberpunk being /more/ transphobic, this time in the game. This shit is intentional, and fuck anyone who’s told me to look past it.

                      https://twitter.com/acegiak/status/1...997119494?s=21
                      Yeah, that game is a hard, hard pass for me.


                      Freelancer (He/His Pronouns): CofD - Dark Eras 2, Kith and Kin, Mummy 2e, Oak Ash and Thorn; Scion - Mysteries of the World

                      CofD booklists: Beast I Changeling | Demon | Deviant (TBA) | Geist l Hunter l Mage | Mummy | Promethean | Vampire | Werewolf (WIP)

                      Comment


                      • I feel dirty saying this, but my favorite announcement this E3 was a mobile game: War of the Visions is the first Final Fantasy Tactics game we’ve gotten since the original DS.


                        Remi. she/her. game designer.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by atamajakki View Post
                          Cyberpunk being /more/ transphobic, this time in the game. This shit is intentional, and fuck anyone who’s told me to look past it.

                          https://twitter.com/acegiak/status/1...997119494?s=21
                          And Polygon was able to talk with the artist who made the image to ask what happened.

                          So from my perspective, and considering myself a neutral party (due to a.) not identifying as trans, and b.) not CDPR fan):

                          Looking at it by itself and considering nothing else...yeah, it does work as a topic to be explored through the lens of cyberpunk. That yeah, it would make sense that in a world where other sexualities and gender identities would find more mainstream acceptance...which means more exploitation from big business and that its obsession with hypersexualized advertisement would expand to include other gender identities.

                          But of course, it's not that simple, and what doesn't help CDPR is the context surrounding this image.

                          1. As noted previously, this not being the first time they've been caught saying or doing transphobic things. That people have, rightfully, lost the benefit of the doubt That it leads to a domino effect of "three strikes, you're out!"

                          2. This is the ONLY confirmed depiction of trans-people within the game. It's not via an NPC or one of V's companions, it's not through playing a quest or encounter that shows a trans NPC reacting to the ad, and not even a demonstration of V getting cosmetic augmentations and showing them switching out their organs to a different gender. So for this to be the first in-game evidence of transpeople...is not good.

                          It's still not good even if we take out the problematic context surrounding it: that despite CDPR's declaration that CP2077 will explore transhumanist themes, the first real in-game example...is in a screenshot used in an advertisement for GPUs. Which taken on its own, seems like CDPR doesn't consider the transhumanist themes to be a priority.

                          3. Related to the above, we only have CDPR's word that things are totally not as offensive in the final game when everything is in its proper context. And, well, talk is cheap, and we won't know for sure if they meant it or are just trying to save face, and buy time until the game launches.

                          So...take it all for what you will.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by tasti man LH View Post

                            https://www.polygon.com/e3/2019/6/12/18662443/cyberpunk-2077-trans-advertisement-cd-projekt-red-e3-2019?fbclid=IwAR2vJUd91EY5i7twjvUCsF1jIjsCdXT36gKY TfJQmOhm2HM-VYQQZjKAC_Y"]And Polygon was able to talk with the artist who made the image to ask what happened. [/URL]

                            So from my perspective, and considering myself a neutral party (due to a.) not identifying as trans, and b.) not CDPR fan):

                            Looking at it by itself and considering nothing else...yeah, it does work as a topic to be explored through the lens of cyberpunk. That yeah, it would make sense that in a world where other sexualities and gender identities would find more mainstream acceptance...which means more exploitation from big business and that its obsession with hypersexualized advertisement would expand to include other gender identities.

                            But of course, it's not that simple, and what doesn't help CDPR is the context surrounding this image.

                            1. As noted previously, this not being the first time they've been caught saying or doing transphobic things. That people have, rightfully, lost the benefit of the doubt That it leads to a domino effect of "three strikes, you're out!"

                            2. This is the ONLY confirmed depiction of trans-people within the game. It's not via an NPC or one of V's companions, it's not through playing a quest or encounter that shows a trans NPC reacting to the ad, and not even a demonstration of V getting cosmetic augmentations and showing them switching out their organs to a different gender. So for this to be the first in-game evidence of transpeople...is not good.

                            It's still not good even if we take out the problematic context surrounding it: that despite CDPR's declaration that CP2077 will explore transhumanist themes, the first real in-game example...is in a screenshot used in an advertisement for GPUs. Which taken on its own, seems like CDPR doesn't consider the transhumanist themes to be a priority.

                            3. Related to the above, we only have CDPR's word that things are totally not as offensive in the final game when everything is in its proper context. And, well, talk is cheap, and we won't know for sure if they meant it or are just trying to save face, and buy time until the game launches.

                            So...take it all for what you will.
                            Also, there’s a pretty telling confusion in that interview: “It’s intentionally objectification!” and “I think it’s sexy!” cannot both be virtues, like the art director says.


                            Remi. she/her. game designer.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by atamajakki View Post

                              Also, there’s a pretty telling confusion in that interview: “It’s intentionally objectification!” and “I think it’s sexy!” cannot both be virtues, like the art director says.
                              He didn't say that tough, he said that the person depicted is beautiful and that companies in the cyberpunk setting of the game hypersexualize that person in order to sell their products.
                              In fact, he specifically said that you will be combating these corporations and that their objectification of people, regardless of their sexual identity, is bad.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by HardestadtTheEvenYounger View Post

                                He didn't say that tough, he said that the person depicted is beautiful and that companies in the cyberpunk setting of the game hypersexualize that person in order to sell their products.
                                In fact, he specifically said that you will be combating these corporations and that their objectification of people, regardless of their sexual identity, is bad.
                                “Personally, for me, this person is sexy,” is a direct quote from /her/ in the article.


                                Remi. she/her. game designer.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X