As far as the console versions go, there doesn't seem to be anything really that diff.... OH, YES THERE IS! Xbox One owners of Shovel Knight will see a certain group of amphibious fighters (i.e. the Battletoads!) featured in their game, while Playstation owners will be tested to find the Ghost of Sparta, Kratos, from the God...
As far as the console versions go, there doesn't seem to be anything really that diff.... OH, YES THERE IS! Xbox One owners of Shovel Knight will see a certain group of amphibious fighters (i.e. the Battletoads!) featured in their game, while Playstation owners will be tested to find the Ghost of Sparta, Kratos, from the God...
Have you tried Broken Age? Are you interested in checking out Double Fines latest release?
I started playing it again on Sunday night. Because it had been so long, I decided to start over from the beginning, so I just got to the second half today. So far so good; no guide yet, but I'm not very far in, so we'll see.
Here are the PC System Requirements for Batman Arkham Knight:
Minimum System Requirements
OS: Win 7 SP1, Win 8.1 (64-bit Operating System Required)
Processor: Intel Core i5-750, 2.67 GHz | AMD Phenom II X4 965, 3.4 GHz
Memory: 6 GB RAM
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX... Read All Below you will find the PC System Requirements for Batman Arkham Knight. I'm wondering if any of you are planning to get the game. If you are, I'd like to know what you plan to play it on. This is one game that I think might make getting a new current generation console for (for me that would be a PS4). I'm not sure which option I may end up choosing. So, let me know what you think. Details are listed below.
Here are the PC System Requirements for Batman Arkham Knight:
Minimum System Requirements
OS: Win 7 SP1, Win 8.1 (64-bit Operating System Required)
Processor: Intel Core i5-750, 2.67 GHz | AMD Phenom II X4 965, 3.4 GHz
Memory: 6 GB RAM
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
Graphics Memory: 2 GB
DirectX: 11
Network: Broadband Internet Connection Required
Hard Drive Space: 45 GB
Recommended System Requirements
OS: Win 7 SP1, Win 8.1 (64-bit Operating System Required)
Processor: Intel Core i7-3770, 3.4 GHz | AMD FX-8350, 4.0 GHz
Memory: 8 GB RAM
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760
Graphics Memory: 3 GB
DirectX: 11
Network: Broadband Internet Connection Required
Hard Drive Space: 55 GB
Ultra System Requirements
OS: Win 7 SP1, Win 8.1 (64-bit Operating System Required)
Processor: Intel Core i7-3770, 3.4 GHz | AMD FX-8350, 4.0 GHz
Memory: 8 GB RAM
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
Graphics Memory: 3 GB
DirectX: 11
Network: Broadband Internet Connection Required
Hard Drive Space: 55 GB
News Source: http://www.gamespot.com/articles/batman-arkham-knight-pc-system-requirements-reveal/1100-6426830/
We are getting to the point where I can't play new games :(
Same here. I don't meet the minimum. Looks like a Ps4 purchase. Say what you will about consoles; you never have to deal with that stuff.
Well yeah, but the PCs that could run last gen's games were around at the beginning of the generation too. My meager PC spilled over into this generation too, so I think I got a good run.
Since I have a GTX 690, I "Googled" the GTX 690 vs. the 760 and the 980. It seems to be better than the 760, but the 980 seems to be better than it. My experience with GTAV on the PC has me wondering just how great my PC is. It ran Skyrim just fine on Ultra settings, but I've had to do some research aka "Googling" to get GTAV running more smoothly. I ended up changing a couple of settings.
I am interested in the PS4. In fact, I was very tempted to buy one when I noticed that there's a Final Fantasy Type-O HD bundle. That game also has a demo for FFXV. GTAV for the PS4 made me tempted to get one, but I didn't bite on that one. My PS3 is still running, even though it shuts down sometimes on its own. It's an older model, but not the oldest. I haven't really been gaming on it, but my son has. I've done some media streaming from the PC to the PS3, which was really great. I think I've been waiting for FFXV or FF-whatever and the new Kingdom Hearts to get a PS4. I think I've also been waiting on my PS3 to die, which I'm surprised hasn't happened yet despite it's issue. Still, I think Batman: Arkham Knight might be another game that might make it worth getting a PS4 to play it. Still, I'm sitting on it, not sure when I'll get one, though I imagine I will eventually. I think I've pretty much decided not to get anymore PS3 games, although I honestly can't think of any PS games that I want anyway. That seems to ultimately be the reason why I haven't bought a PS4 yet.
I haven't considered getting an XBox 360 or One. I had the original back around when it was released and loved it. I think the GTA games for it were great, especially since you could use your own music in-game that you had stored on it. Eventually, I let it go and only recently bought another for the Buffy the Vampire Slayer game. That's the only game I have for it now, I'm not sure if I'll get anymore for it. So, some time, I guess I just lost interest in the XBox, perhaps especially due to issues the 360 had (ring of death).
The only current generation console I have is the Wii U, which I've probably had for about a year and I'm honestly really happy with it. I have a few games for it, one of which is Hyrule Warriors, which I've spent a lot of time playing. I have all but the latest (and last) DLC for it. Unlike the other consoles, it's backwards compatible with it's previous generation (the Wii), which I think makes it a little more valuable. I think the Wii U is also the cheapest of the new generation. It's probably also the most unique, just like it's predecessor.
I know the PS4 is doing some kind of streaming service for older PS games, but I don't know much about it. I recently saw an article that stated all the games on the service, but I didn't read it.
What are your thoughts on the current generation consoles?
The PS4 is the bees knees! I've had one since the system launched, and I've only grown to like it more and more. I was a huge fan of the XBox 360, mostly because of the then superior XBox Live service, but Microsoft started making decisions with the UI and the whole spirit of the system started to change. What once was a raw gaming rig, was slowly turning into a playground for advertisers. I hated it, and began to migrate my library over to the PS3. Because of that transition, I never really gave the XBox One any serious thought (although, now that Halo 5 is on the horizon...), especially because of how poorly Microsoft handled the presentation of that machine prior to release. What a nightmare.
Spec-wise, the PS4 is technically more powerful than the XBox One, but I've heard that it's not really noticeable during gameplay, unless you have the systems running side-by-side. Resolution and frame-rate on the XBox One seem to take a hit, whereas the PS4 gets closer to PC quality performance. But then you have to take into consideration the exclusive games. The PS4 may be a beast, but it ain't gettin' the Halos. I feel like they make up for it with Uncharted and games like Bloodborne, Last of Us, etc. The PSN (Sony's counterpart to XBox Live) has grown tremendously, and is much more stable and feature-rich than it used to be on the PS3.
I've only played on the XBox One very briefly. If you are a current fan of the XBox environment, you probably won't be disappointed there. However, I prefer the simplicity of the PS4 interface, the Dualshock 4 controller (an amazing improvement over the DS3, and, in my opinion, the best console controller out there), and the library of games out now, and lined up to release in the future.
If you have any specific questions, please feel free to ask!
That's great, scrypt, thanks for sharing! What you said kind of ties into my "somewhat of an issue" with gaming lately. FPS games are apparently extremely popular, yet I don't have any interest in them. I seem to see mention of them frequently. I know what Halo is and I have played it, but I wasn't very good at it, especially against friends. I feel like my gaming "scope" is quite limited. I think it's also gotten even more limited in recent years. I remember years ago when I felt like a very serious Final Fantasy fan, but after a while that seems to have faded a bit. After playing Minecraft and Terraria a bit, I started looking for more games that were similar, but I haven't run into many.
So, I think my lack of interest in Halo and other FPS games has also made me less interested in the new XBox consoles. I haven't even played on a 360 or One, so I don't have any experience with them. I haven't played on the PS4 either, for that matter.
I'm glad you mentioned the controller because this is where I feel weird. I've been playing GTAV on the PC with an XBox 360 controller and I absolutely love it (using the controller). I think it's weird since I don't really have an interest in the XBox consoles.
What do you think about the PS streaming service (PS Now, I think it's called)? I did take a look at that article I mentioned, but didn't really see much of anything for me. The reason being my limited gaming scope and knowledge of the many games that are on it and out there generally. I did notice that some of the games I own are on that list (like Batman and Final Fantasy games).
I think it's weird since I don't really have an interest in the XBox consoles.
It isn't, not at all. That controller is amazing whether you want the console or not.
Seriously! I think that if I play this new Batman game on my PC I will probably certainly use this awesome controller of mine.
Regarding PS Now, I'd say don't let that factor into your decision. Unless you have very fast bandwidth, you can't even use it. I have no idea what the quality is like, since my internet speeds are much too slow, but the rates (prices for the service) alone make it a turn off, for me. If you want to play PS3 games, keep your PS3 and go find used games for significantly cheaper.
That explains why your part in the round table discussions is so laggy. I still have a PS2 and don't plan on getting rid of my PS3. That is a good recommendation, though. I believe I have a fast Internet connection, but it's not fiber.
The game is out and I still haven't bought it. It's probably because I'm already playing something and I have games to play from the Steam Summer Sale. Also, I've seen news that the PC version of this game has been plagued with bugs. It was apparently pulled from the store until some of the bugs were fixed.
So, has anyone jumped in the game yet? Why or why not?
Not on PC. You can't even buy it. It was such a hack job they pulled it from Steam.
I must be losing my mind. I just said what half of your previous message was. I didn't see that detail at all on the first read.
Yeah, I wasn't sure if they put it back, I haven't seen anything about it recently.
Kerbal Space Program is available today 25% on Steam for Linux,... Read All Kerbal Space Program is a unique game where you take control of designing a spaceship that will launch the Kerbal race into outer space! Apparently it's hard to launch a spacecraft and Kerbal Space Program let's you build your ship and experience the bitter pangs of space launch defeat. Lately many people have questioned games on Steam Greenlight and early access games in general and Kerbal Space Program stands in a crowd of games that rise to the top of what Greenlight and early access can offer. For a few years fans of the game could play it all the way to it's final launch and take part in that journey.
Kerbal Space Program is available today 25% on Steam for Linux, Mac and Windows.
http://store.steampowered.com/app/220200/
http://steamcommunity.com/games/SteamWorkshop/announcements/detail/208632365253244218
A few days ago, Valve and Bethesda teamed up for a controversial new program: paid content on the Steam Workshop. What this amounts to in its current form, is that modders can charge for their work through Steam. On paper this seems like a good idea. In practice, it's a nightmare.
To begin with, the split is massively unreasonable. Apparently Valve is letting publishers decide on the split, and for Skyrim mods, Bethesda has decided that they will receive 45% of the proceeds, Valve will receive 30%, leaving only 25% for the modders.
Second... Read All UPDATE: Valve has pulled paid mods from Skyrim.
http://steamcommunity.com/games/SteamWorkshop/announcements/detail/208632365253244218
A few days ago, Valve and Bethesda teamed up for a controversial new program: paid content on the Steam Workshop. What this amounts to in its current form, is that modders can charge for their work through Steam. On paper this seems like a good idea. In practice, it's a nightmare.
To begin with, the split is massively unreasonable. Apparently Valve is letting publishers decide on the split, and for Skyrim mods, Bethesda has decided that they will receive 45% of the proceeds, Valve will receive 30%, leaving only 25% for the modders.
Second off, many mods that have been free for years now require payment. If you have some of these mods, and if you're *lucky*, when you load up your modded save file in Skyrim, you'll see nag screens asking you to pay. If you're unlucky like me, when you load up your save file that missing content will make your save unloadable. I'm not even sure which mod or mods are causing the problem. In order to continue my game I would literally need to buy a mod that I've been using for years, check to see if my game loads, and if not, repeat with the next mod until it works. I will not pay for these mods (I'd be looking at paying more than the initial $60 asking price for the game) so I will no longer play Skyrim. I've lost the game, basically.
The worst part for me is that this changes what we paid for. Some of the very few people who are OK with this program are using the new Unreal Tournament as an example of why this is ok, but UT was planned for paid mods all along. That's how they're making their money, since it's free-to-play, and you know this from the outset. With Skyrim, the rules are changing 4.5 years down the road.
This has created a massive division in a once friendly community. Free modders against paid modders, players vs. modders, players vs. Valve and Bethesda...
There's another fear that, with Bethesda getting such a huge cut, that there's no impetus on them to develop their own DLC for future games. They still get paid when modders make things, so why do they need to keep their own game alive? It's a disturbingly realistic fear.
There's also the quality issue. Bethesda and Valve aren't checking quality on these. If a mod breaks in an update nobody has any recourse for a refund, and even the flagship mod that they're pitching this program with is very broken/badly designed.
The rating for Skyrim on Steam has dropped from a 98% overwhelmingly positive to 89% very positive. There's a petition with 113,000 signatures to remove the paid mods.
Valve and Bethesda are in full damage-control, seemingly banning people on the Steam forums (some permanent bans) for criticizing the new program.
Mods have always been free. Mods are something players create for the love of the game. It's a community, not a business. On the Nexus, you have the option of donating. Valve could have done something amazing with a donate button, never requiring payment but allowing it, but with this program alone, both companies have lost a ton of good will from their customers. If they don't fix this (and it really doesn't seem like they think there's anything to be fixed) I will seriously consider ceasing to purchase any further games on Steam if an alternative is available. This is purely bad for the players, and good for everyone else, and this is just the latest in a series of bad decisions Valve has made for their customers.
More info:
https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/aboutpaidcontent/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2015/04/24/valves-paid-skyrim-mods-are-a-legal-ethical-and-creative-disaster/
https://www.change.org/p/valve-remove-the-paid-content-of-the-steam-workshop
Right now I am getting an error going to the Steam page for workshop paid content. If you want to read it, check this Google cached page.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:4rm-3WjvEmQJ:steamcommunity.com/workshop/aboutpaidcontent/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Assuming that isn't just a site problem, that could be a very good sign. Maybe they're taking it down or modifying it.
I think what Valve is doing is ultimately good. We have all seen how people can make skins for games like Team Fortress 2, DoTA 2 and CS Go and how well people seem to love that stuff. It seems similar here but implemented in a way that, for now, people don't seem to like.
I like the idea of people making some content for a game and selling it if they want. I also like the idea of someone giving away content for free if they want. I don't mind a split going to the people that made the game but 40%?
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--xTHJWLch--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_320/18lme3q8hy4l3jpg.jpg
I know Valves 30% split is sacrosanct but they could always double split that with Bethesda so 15% Valve / 15% Bethesda. Regardless, i'd like to see more go to the mod creators.
I think the other thing that people don't like is that the game they loved is now broken for them w/o paying. That is pretty bullshit but I understand why they did it. They could have done nothing, which is fine but Skyrim is such a huge mod game that starting with it made sense. They could have said everything in the workshop is free and all NEW stuff could optionally be paid but that would mean some creators uploading duplicate mods, which isn't great. OR they could have said, everyone that had this mod gets it for free and new folk need to pay, which would get around your broken game issue.
Regardless of how this shakes out(I actually trust that Valve will eventually do the right thing here) I don't find the idea of some creators charging for user generated content to be offensive. The thought that someone could make a bit of money releasing things people love seems like a good idea to me. Valve is becoming a store for traditionally generated content as much as for it's users and whereas this step is a bit strange it's nice to see.
Also if most modders find this offensive there are websites where they can release mods for free if they want. This isn't a terrible solution as then it puts a lot of importance on federating PC gaming which is really being owned by Valve right now. I love Valve but it's good to have a healthy ecosystem that isn't one silo.
I don't think the program is a bad idea, I think using it on an existing game and destroying the mod community of that game is bad. It's not about letting people make money on mods, it's about significantly changing the workings of a product we've already bought.
I think that is a good point. The mod community still exists though right? I mean, maybe some people are leaving it over this but it will still mostly be around? That said, destroying your save is bad and yeah, doing this to something already out is less than stellar.
Maybe they should have hit up Rockstar and done it for GTA V.
Yeah nexus still exists, but some modders are pulling their stuff from the nexus so that you have to get the paid version on Steam. Unfortunately it's a lot of the big awesome mods that are going paid only.
At best, there's a major rift in the mod community, and a ton of the amazing content people have been using for years is now behind a paywall.
Gabe responded on Reddit about this.
https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/33uplp/mods_and_steam/
"On Thursday I was flying back from LA. When I landed, I had 3,500 new messages. Hmmm. Looks like we did something to piss off the Internet.
Yesterday I was distracted as I had to see my surgeon about a blister in my eye (#FuchsDystrophySucks), but I got some background on the paid mods issues.
So here I am, probably a day late, to make sure that if people are pissed off, they are at least pissed off for the right reasons"
"Yeah nexus still exists, but some modders are pulling their stuff from the nexus so that you have to get the paid version on Steam. Unfortunately it's a lot of the big awesome mods that are going paid only."
Yeah, I bet some people do want to make money on what they create. I am not sure what I would do if I were them.
"At best, there's a major rift in the mod community, and a ton of the amazing content people have been using for years is now behind a paywall."
Yeah I bet there is a rift. Over time paid / free mods will be a thing and it will sort itself out I just hope Skyrim endures, it's a great game and it's sad to see people have problems playing it.
Yeah I wasn't satisfied with most of Gabe's answers on reddit. It seems like he dodged or didn't understand the important ones. He may just be in damage control mode and I get that.
This move is basically an overnight regime change, so revolt and unrest isn't at all surprising. If this system had been implemented with a new game, it would likely be largely received in a positive light. The biggest problem today, is that current game states, for people using mods which now require payment, is broken. To fix it, and continue the game you've already been playing, you have to pay more money. Keeping in mind that we've been playing a modified game, without any license or guarantee, and we aren't owed anything (that's the risk of using mods), this abrupt change in economy still seems really irresponsible on the part of Valve and Bethesda, and reeks a bit of opportunistic greed.
I can't tell if most people upset by this are simply users or actual modders, but the arguments seem to swing from "Why should I pay for something I've used for years without paying?" to "This will ruin the existing modding scene?" Both seem unconcerned with the fact that modding a game is a privilege, not a right, set forward by the games original creator. It's a wildly amazing part of geek culture, and I'm grateful for it. If anyone is going to profit off of mods, though, the original content creator should recieve the bulk of the revenue. People are contrasting this current revenue split with that of the Apple App Store, and they are two completely different models. The 75% split going to the devs on the App Store is for content they are creating from scratch (theoretically), not modified content of someone elses creation. Not to mention that the discretion is on the modder to charge for the mod (a little publicized fact). They can still offer mods for free, but if they want to start charging for derivative content, then the curators and IP creators should get a proportional cut. Bethesda could have forced every modder to charge for mods, but they didn't.
Reminds me of this enlightening scene in Tombstone: https://youtu.be/JJ79nNquQ0c
I don't know if the original creator should keep the bulk of revenue for a mod but a halfy half split seems reasonable to me. Thing is Valve takes it's cut, Bethesda takes its 45% and now the modder has 25%? I guess it's better than nothing but it's not amazing.
As to people not wanting to pay for things that were previously free, yeah you know I don't know how to address that. I don't partake in a ton of mods and if they all went pay I don't think it would bother me too much. If someone charges money for what they create seems to be up to them and I don't care about playing every bit of content in a game for $0.
Garry from Garry's Mod has some thoughts on the situation:
http://garry.tv/2015/04/24/paying-for-mods/
I disagree with Garry that this provides better choice and better supported mods for users. Nothing has shown that to be true. So far the "better choice" is a barrel full of 50 cent weapons and taking away previous choices, and there are already many examples of incredibly poorly designed mods being charged for.
Now in the long run he may be right, but currently that isn't the case at all, and you can't call it a positive without evidence that it will come to pass.
(from http://garry.tv/2015/04/24/paying-for-mods/) ...but itâs the modderâs work that is making the money
Is it the modders mod that's making the money, or is it the original IP that drives that market? People aren't commissioning artists to paint Spider-man, simply because they are great artists. They are also, and more prominantly, paying for a composition of the character, one of which the artist likely had absolutely no hand in creating. If I'm laying the groundwork, and someone else is making more money than me because of my work, is that fair?
Now, I would totally think it logical that Valve should get less of a cut, since they really don't do much but offer convenience of execution. As of now, reportedly, the modder gets more than half of what Bethesda gets. That's totally fair. Maybe Valve should only get 15%, leaving the modder with 35% and Bethesda with 50%. Would that be better?
"Is it the modders mod that's making the money, or is it the original IP that drives that market? People aren't commissioning artists to paint Spider-man, simply because they are great artists. They are also, and more prominantly, paying for a composition of the character, one of which the artist likely had absolutely no hand in creating."
I agree. I also think there is a place for remix culture and it's not bad to figure out a system where everyone gets paid. For me, it's get a bit more hazy when certain people don't want to allow fan contributions OR remix creations. For instance, in music, anyone can cover a song and you don't need the authors permission to do that. If you do that and make money from it there is a royalty that is due to the composer. I kind of wish we had a system like that for most stuff and it seems Valve is sort of allowing the creators to set that which is nice but also problematic as the split seems a bit uneven.
"If I'm laying the groundwork, and someone else is making more money than me because of my work, is that fair?"
I heard this the other day and it seemed good. Not really what you mean, but it's about fairness and thinking about others having enough. For me, I am not as worried about Bethesda and want to see mod creators get a nicer slice.
http://www.stuffeddrunkandmerry.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/neighbor.jpg
I don't understand why Bethesda should get more than the modder. It's not like the modder is redistributing a modified version of Skyrim, they're distributing a small chunk that was created using Bethesda's tools. Unity and Unreal Engine don't take a 50% cut of profits made using their tools. There are no assets being redistributed. It's just a framework with which to create content in a particular context.
Skyrim is more than a framework, it's a finished house. Unreal Engine is nothing without the games that come from it. Skryim will always be Skyrim (I hope), mods are superfluous to the Skyrim experience. Fun, and some even genius, but in the end, superfluous.
Yeah Skyrim is a finished house, but the mods are using a framework to create new content. They aren't selling Skyrim with extra content, they're only selling the extra content.
"If I'm laying the groundwork, and someone else is making more money than me because of my work, is that fair?"
I heard this the other day and it seemed good. Not really what you mean, but it's about fairness and thinking about others having enough. For me, I am not as worried about Bethesda and want to see mod creators get a nicer slice.
Would you think it more fair that there was a sliding scale of profit distribution the more successful a product is, essentially taking responsibility away from the creator to be fair, and placing a restriction on excess profits? Isn't that basically capitalism vs. socialism? Is that what this is all about?
But, as you said, Travis, it's new content within the context of Skyrim. Without the context of Skyrim, that mod would be irrelevant. A new bathroom added to a house may increase the overall value of a house, but, without the house, that bathroom is fairly useless. Unless you're camping :).
Right, and that's a good analogy. The people who made and installed your bathroom don't have to pay the original house designer 50% of their profits.
Furthermore, if mods add value to the game, in a case like the mod that finished the incomplete war between the imperials and storm cloaks, or the mod that fixes crucial bugs (unofficial Skyrim patch, I think it's called), if those mod designers charged, the mod designer is paying Bethesda for the opportunity to fix problems in their game.
Basically what I'm saying is that Bethesda or whoever could just release an unfinished game (which while I loved Skyrim, it kinda was unfinished), and rake in profits while others finish it for them.
"scrypt: Would you think it more fair that there was a sliding scale of profit distribution the more successful a product is, essentially taking responsibility away from the creator to be fair, and placing a restriction on excess profits? Isn't that basically capitalism vs. socialism? Is that what this is all about?"
It's not socialism at all, it's just a system where people that create stuff all get paid appropriately. Some people might get super rich from it, nothing wrong with that. Having the government decide the split seems good but often isn't because when such a system needs updating and there is little political will to do it, things suffer. So I like Valves approach but as we see with Let's Plays and YouTube where the company decides the split, it gets a bit uneven(Looking at Nintendo).
So yeah, I don't know what the proper system is myself but this seems like a good first step. I think that we will see some game developers giving all the money to mod creators and some getting more. I think we might see more or less content based on the rev split and I am curious how that will all work out.
Basically what I'm saying is that Bethesda or whoever could just release an unfinished game (which while I loved Skyrim, it kinda was unfinished), and rake in profits while others finish it for them.
That's a funny position, because that's what some feel the industry suffering from at the moment, only It's being done without mods (most Early Access, Destiny, Sim City, Battlefield 4, etc.). "Unfinished" also seems highly subjective these days. Most of my friends have put hundreds of hours into Skyrim. Unfinished or not, it's playable, and quite enjoyable. If Destiny supported mods, I would be ecstatic, and yet I've put hundreds of hours into it. Destiny is a proof of concept, and not much more than that. Should someone else be able to make a living helping to finish the game, without the consent from, or payment going to Bungie? Some would say "Hell, yes!", but I would argue, no. Make your own game. Look at Star Wars. In my opinion, Lucas did horrible things to his creation, but ultimately it's his creation and he can do whatever he wants with it. Yes, I think there may be cultural responsibilities, but in the end it's his art. Money has changed hands, licenses transferred, and now we are getting a Star Wars that we really want (hopefully) ;).
The house building analogy isn't perfect. Obviously, contractors are hired to build specific additions, not given tools to do what they want and then compensated retroactively based on an arbitrary scale. However, when the house eventually goes to market and sells, that bathroom contractor won't see a dime of the sale profits.
A game creator does not have to support the modding community. As I said before, this is a privilege subject to the terms of the original IP holder. Mods created outside of consent of the original creator is a breach of copyright law. Jon's comment about anyone being able to cover another artists song and not having to get permission, is only partly true. Performance of someone else's work in public is technically an infringement on copyright law, and the license holder could definitely take action. It's done so often and so widely that it's near impossible to police, but that doesn't necessarily make it okay.
I'll ignore the Star Wars getting changes from Lucas post release thing, not because I don't have an opinion but because I want to keep this about mods and since we love Star Wars I could see this conversation changing
That said, it seems OK to me(and the courts) that you can modify the things you own if you want. Might mess up a warranty or break it, but it seems you can change things you own. It get strange with digital goods, but I am pretty sure I have the spirt of the law right when I say that if I want to change something for my own use that should be fine. Distribution gets tricky(as you say) so Valve making a system like this with the original owners in mind is great.
"Performance of someone else's work in public is technically an infringement on copyright law, and the license holder could definitely take action."
I was talking about covers, which you're right doesn't quite address the modding issue specifically. I've covered songs at a live gig before, I think I owe someone some money but I never paid it. My apologies to U2 or whomever
That said, I still side with creators and people getting paid but I am not sure what I think when someone wants to lock what they do down and not allow any outside contributions to it. On one hand that seems wrong to me but on the other hand I don't mind granting a limited monopoly on something so people can sell it(the basic premise of copyright as I understand it but IANAL).
"A game creator does not have to support the modding community. As I said before, this is a privilege subject to the terms of the original IP holder."
Nobody is arguing the legality. No doubt Bethesda could disallow modding altogether or require $200 a pop for them. They are perfectly within their right to charge whatever they want. That doesn't mean it's good for their fans or their thriving mod community.
OK I meant "I wasn't arguing legality," certainly there are legal points to be brought up, but my points were never about what they should be allowed to do.
We're not really arguing what's best for Bethesda, or their fans, but rather the viability of this new system, and the timing of it. To think that this will substantially change the modding community is silly, I think, and people that are taking reactionary actions are essentially protecting their own interests (and that's fine). Funny, though, that Modder A is understood, even lauded, in their actions to take down mod content because they don't want anyone else profiting off of their work, and yet Bethesda is being chastised for wanting a share in a completely optional system, if anyone cares to participate, but basically following the same principle. I don't understand that. Money isn't evil, nor is wanting compensation for work. Saying that Bethesda hasn't done any work, in regards to these mods, is missing the point. These mods would not exist without Bethesda's blessing, and Bethesda holds the rights.
Here's something interesting I just read though. Tons, TONS of mods are created with new assets from the free versions of Autodesk software. Many of those are now charging for their mods. This is against the ToS of the Autodesk educational software. There's an interesting legal issue.
I still don't know what you're arguing with "Bethesda holds the rights." Nobody has disputed that.
What if this system was implemented with Camera Obscura (which, as of now, has a total of 2 Steam Workshop files) instead of Skyrim?
Also, @jdodson but I am not sure what I think when someone wants to lock what they do down and not allow any outside contributions to it. That's an interesting statement. Feelings aside, do you think they should have the right to do this?
With Camera Obscura it would certainly be less disruptive by a long shot.
I still don't know what you're arguing with "Bethesda holds the rights." Nobody has disputed that.
I thought one of the primary arguments was compensation, and how it should be divided, not whether this was good for the fans. My arguments concerning Bethesda as a copyright holder point toward the rationale of them getting a bigger cut than someone building a modification to their game (finished, or otherwise).
Ah you're saying that is what entitles them to more compensation. OK.
Well yeah they're entitled to whatever they want to take, but they can't expect the world to be happy about that distribution. Is it fair? Does fairness even matter? I don't know. But it isn't good.
That was essentially my argument, that, I feel, it is fair, contrary to what's being said. Specifically as it concerns the contrast to what App Store vendors make. http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2015/04/24/dayz-creator-weighs-in-on-paid-skyrim-mods-your-turn-rockstar/
"That's an interesting statement. Feelings aside, do you think they should have the right to do this?"
Ugh. As a human I don't know how to seperate feelings from myself because they are part of my experience. Some say they can do it and I think they are not being accurate.
That said, I think in certain contexts ... I guess.
But I heard some musician say they wanted to lock down their music so certain people couldn't cover the music. I don't want to get into the context of the person that said it because it's not something I want to talk about BUT the notion of excluding certain people from that seems really wrong to me.
In the case of covering a song I think it's better to allow anyone to do it and charge a royalty.
In the case of a review video on YouTube I think it's better to allow them to show clips from said video if the majority of the work is original and charge a royalty.
In the case of a Let's Play video I think it's better to allow it and in the cases where the author wishes charge a royalty.
In the case of video game mods I think it's better to allow it and where the author wishes charge a royalty.
But as to the question of locking a work down from all outside contributions entirely? I guess so but it seems against the notion how stuff is created, which is to build on the work of others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Clause
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
Ugh. As a human I don't know how to seperate feelings from myself because they are part of my experience. Some say they can do it and I think they are not being accurate.
I hope you stay away from serving on a jury! :D
Well seriously, unless you're a Vulcan you can't. And even if you're a Vulcan you can't always. :)
This might be getting off topic, but your pull quote explains exactly how the copyright laws protect creativity; by giving "exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." This isn't like programming, where open-source is a cool thing. "Open source" art isn't generally considered cool, especially among struggling artists. Working from inspiration and getting better at your craft by learning from someone else's work is an entirely different conversation.
More than likely why I wasn't selected for Jury duty. That said I bet is was because I made the entire court room laugh and the lawyer wasn't. It was fun, but you know I didn't get to serve and that bummed me out. Always next time.
That said, I can't separate myself from emotions but I can make choices based on rules. I do that all the time.
"Well seriously, unless you're a Vulcan you can't. And even if you're a Vulcan you can't always. :)"
https://longboxgraveyard.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/spock.jpg
I've been at court for jury selection twice but both times they had the jury before I even got called into the courtroom for the questions. I was also bummed out, I wanted to do it. Civic duty and all that.
Also @scrypt: I'll say that they are entitled to it but it isn't exactly "fair" but at that point you get into a debate of semantics that I'm really not interested in, lol
And Jon, a brief aside-- your pic-- did it bug you how different NewSpock is from OldSpock in how his emotions are controlled?
"And Jon, a brief aside-- your pic-- did it bug you how different NewSpock is from OldSpock in how his emotions are controlled?"
Yes, it does. One of the reasons people loved Spock is because he was the guy that could keep it cool most of the time. HE WAS THE BEST OF US!
For the record, Defense Council Travis, did you read this article before making that last comment? http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2015/04/24/dayz-creator-weighs-in-on-paid-skyrim-mods-your-turn-rockstar/
I don't want to argue semantics, either. That sounds exhausting! ;)
"This isn't like programming, where open-source is a cool thing. "Open source" art isn't generally considered cool, especially among struggling artists."
Creative Commons stuff is the closest thing I can think of when I think of Open Source art, and I think lots of it is cool. That said we both care about people making a livable wage and if they can do that with what they do, the better.
"Working from inspiration and getting better at your craft by learning from someone else's work is an entirely different conversation."
True, but when we consider how stuff is made realizing that we don't build in a bubble helps when we try to think about what kinds of laws to work inside.
I did, and I disagree with some of the points used to get to that.
But the fact of the matter is that this is entirely uncharted water and there are no analogies for what is going on here. The app store model doesn't work here, neither does the professional developer percentage example. It isn't exactly a derivative work. It isn't 100% new content.
I think it will work itself out to a good spot eventually (hopefully, maybe) but damn did they ever pick a bad game to start this experiment.
I think it will work itself out to a good spot eventually (hopefully, maybe) but damn did they ever pick a bad game to start this experiment.
100% Agreed.
The only thing that concerns me, and this is going slightly off-topic but maybe not really, is that they've known for a while that Greenlight is broken, Early Access is broken, and their customer support is broken, and they've said "yes we're working on that" for a while now, and nothing has really changed.
People are saying this is the death knell for Steam and that's going way over the top, it's nothing of the sort. But I hope they do actually start working on their problems.
I'm betting, and this could be me being totally naive, that once Galaxy drops from GoG, you might see Valve a little more active on maintenance front. That level of a competing product, I hope, would be taken seriously by Valve. I'd like to see Riot form a relationship with GoG. I doubt it will happen, but that would be a fun, big deal ;). Now I'm getting way off topic!
"People are saying this is the death knell for Steam and that's going way over the top, it's nothing of the sort. But I hope they do actually start working on their problems."
Death knell for Steam? heh. That said, I imagine they will improve, they seem to be getting better every year.
"I'm betting, and this could be me being totally naive, that once Galaxy drops from GoG, you might see Valve a little more active on maintenance front."
I used to just want to own games in one place(Steam) but now I really like that I have quite the catalog on GOG, Humble, Origin and Ubi. I might not love Ubi's system but it's nice to know I don't have all my eggs in one basket. I like GOG so I wish them well and hope for a nice client launch I can try out soon.
Origin is getting really good, actually. And they have top-notch support from everything I've read.
Did you two sign up for the GOG Galaxy beta? It's pretty sweet in its early form. A client was the only thing I was missing from GOG, now that they have it I'm super-excited.
As for Ubi I have no real experience with their client by itself. I've only ever used it through Steam. I've never bought anything straight from Ubi's store/client, it just launches when I play an Ubi game from Steam. For the most part it gets out of your way but sometimes something just blows its mind.
As for "they seem to be getting better every year," as far as I know the big complaints people have had in recent years haven't been touched, most notably their customer support. Steam in the early days was a nightmare, though, and they've definitely improved their client and framework over the years, and earned their seat at the top of the PC client charts, but some competition would help improve some of the other issues.
And scrypt, let's just embrace being off-topic :)
What kinds of support issues should they address? I've had support issues in the past and they took a bit to get back to me but seemed to help me out. Are you talking about games running at all or people not figuring out how to work Steam?
No their customer support is just straight up bad. They take weeks to answer and then pick out some keyword for the question, paste a form answer that doesn't solve the problem, then it takes two more weeks to get a further response back. Every time Gabe shows up in an online discussion he seems to pre-emptively address it too, like "I know it's terrible, we're working on it."
I can't remember what the question was, but last year some time I had a question that went unanswered from two different support reps pasting two different form answers that had nothing to do with my problem. I eventually just gave up. At some point in there they told me my ban wouldn't be lifted, even though I've never been banned.
http://www.pcgamer.com/valve-on-customer-service-support-we-have-to-do-better/
This discusses their current stance on it.
https://www.change.org/p/valve-corporation-improve-steam-customer-support
A petition with examples, and some of these are kinda like what I dealt with.
I've never gone directly to Valve for support issues. I usually surf for answers on the web. Maybe I've never had a serious enough issue, but then I rarely, if ever, go to software companies for tech support. I don't know why. It might be more helpful if I did (or not, as the case may be).
I believe I signed up for the Galaxy beta, but never heard anything from GoG. I'm really anxious to try it out, as that's the only reason a lot of my GoG games have gone uninstalled. It's a sad excuse, I know, but there it is.
It isn't a sad excuse, at all. It's why I haven't bought many games from GOG. Having a client is so convenient!
Honestly, coming back to this after a few hours, I'm still really quite upset at the fact that they could have done some incredibly basic QA to determine that save files could be totally screwed for people who don't wish to buy the mods that transition to the paid model, and neither company did. That's the kind of oversight people get fired over, it's so incredibly simple.
I moved my Xbox 360 save over to PC, and installed the DLC, and tons of mods. Played happily for quite a while, and now that game is ruined. I could pirate the mods, but Jeez, should I really have to do that to continue my game? I'm just disgusted and disappointed.
Wouldn't you just have to chalk that up to the risk of using mods? I don't think that QA could have helped. The fact that the game states haven't been transferable between modded and natural games is evident of that. Who would you hold responsible for that?
Bethesda knows that save games under modded games require those mods. If you have any state saved that changes the defaults a mod installs, then your save file requires those mods, and removing them will break it. Bethesda and/or Valve should have known that modders would take away their free mods to replace them with paid mods. It's a very short line to broken save files.
Plus, "the risk of using mods" isn't something they can reference anymore, if that's paying customers.
(no, I'm not a paying customer in this case)
Also under normal circumstances, with the previous "risk of using mods," I could roll back to a known working mod if something broke.
I can't do that anymore. The workshop removed my file automatically because I didn't pay for it (even though it was free when I subscribed to it), and the mod is no longer available on the Nexus.
ALSO I should learn to fully think through my comment before posting so I don't end up with 5 where one would have sufficed.
I'm sure they understood that save games could break, but what could they have done to prevent that from happening (aside from, of course, not implementing this system)?
1. Grandfathering in existing Steam mod subscribers to not require them to pay.
2. Not doing it.
3. Heavily modifying the Skyrim save system to... OK this is nutty impractical.
Here is a Lawrence Lessig talk on laws that choke creativity. It's about remix culture and is from 2007 so it's somewhat dated. That said I think it's relevant to this discussion as companies are now allowing mods(I think they are kind of remix) to be monetized by mod creators and this seems like a good development if not implemented strangely in the case of Skyrim.
http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strangling_creativity?language=en
I don't know how I feel about so-called "remix culture." Frankly, I think it's weird that everything has an index these days; an ism, or a culture, or genre, or whatever the next thing is. I don't really buy his whole talk either, for some reason. Good art and creativity tend to come out of adversity. The poignancy of message is lost when the struggle for art is watered down to the point where no message can even take hold. Personally, I'm not a fan of sampling, even though I like some songs that use it. I remember watching the Grammys one year ( I think it was the Grammys), and Sean Combs was on stage with Sting, and they did some weird mash-up of Every Breath You Take, with Combs rapping during what would be the verses... It was a sad moment for me. I suppose you could argue that it was creative, but to me it just looked like bad art, and a poor representation of each of those artists abilities. Remixing the works of existing art can sometimes bring about cool things, I guess, but often it just comes off as uninspired. As a creator, why would I want to literally base my work on someone else's? Then there is the misrepresentation of the original artist; how often is credit given to the original work in these remixes?
I'll have to watch Lessig's talk a couple more times. I didn't see anything in there about laws choking creativity, which I'm not sure is even possible.
Good article from a perspective of a modder who would like to be paid.
http://www.pcgamer.com/im-a-modder-i-deserve-compensation/
I've seen some posts where people are saying "This is what we want, we want modders to get jobs working for studios." I mean, I don't think that's the dream for everyone. In the case of this modder, it's not his at all.
After watching through a couple more times, I think I'm even more confused. I feel like Lessig is insinuating the stifling of creativity, but what he's really talking about is the stifling of innovation, which makes a lot more sense to me. Opening user generated content up for business should be the title of the talk (it's his opening statement). His examples don't seem to hold water, either. Did ASCAP suffer because BMI offered free music, or due to boycott because of an attempt at outrageous increases in licensing fees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCAP_boycott), which would be a much different story.
An argument could also be made that such uses of remixing or free access have actually hindered creativity, at least in some respects. Pieces become rehashes of rehashes to the point where we're just living in a loop of regurgitated art (this is basically why 'hipsters' are a thing). It's innovative, but not really creative. When everyone has access to everything all the time, the landscape tends to look uniform, the past and the present blur, and then how are you left to express yourself?
Why does the date on that article say April 26, 2011? What is the criteria for posting on PC Gamer? It reads more like a blog post. He doesn't really make any points as to why he should get paid as a modder, only that he deserves it because he works hard, while mocking the companies that allow modding in the first place. In fact, at one point he basically is just telling the reader to abandon opinion, and agree that modders deserve to get paid. That's not a good article.
"Why does the date on that article say April 26, 2011?"
It's says "on hour ago" to me, but it could be some bug.
"What is the criteria for posting on PC Gamer? It reads more like a blog post."
I guess i'd compare it to an opinion piece like you'd see in a newspapers opinion column. I don't mind a diversity of opinions on a particular topic, not sure where he urged anyone to abandon a point of view, but I sort of lightly read it.
As to what you said about Lessig, I hear you. I mostly agree with his points but I can see where you are coming from. If culture has become worse because of technology in the ways in which you say, that may be true. That said, compared to earlier decades i've been part of there are tons more options and I think, in general, I am pretty happy with the quality of creative works. I think the market is in a "sequel-itus" sort of focus which can be good(loved the new Dawn of the Apes movie) but can also be as you say, rehashes and not very good.
tl;read anyways
I'm surpised no one has mentioned Dota yet. That game was a mod of WC3. They eventually broke off to make their own game. Their game did not add features to the existing WC3 game like most skyrim mods do. They created a new game with WC3's tools.
I don't play too many mods because I'm lazy to look them up and install them and keep everything updated. I did use some oblivion mods and they were awesome.
Here's my thoughts on what has happened:
They shouldn't have implemented this on a game that's been out for so long with free mods for so long. No one made those mods to make money and changing it now seems silly.
As a consumer, I hope there is a good balance to this. Twas a good point about developers releasing unfinished games on purpose to allow modders the ability to finish the game for them and still let them reap the profits. I think ultimately, this will balance itself. Modders will look for a good split and good effort before they spend their own time "fixing" a game. And hopefully a company recognizes this when they release a half finished game. This could be beneficial... There's certainly been games that developers gave up on half way but could have been released due to high demand and available modders wanting to tackle it
From a modder perspective, it only opens doors, so I don't see a negative here. They can still create a mod and release it for free if they choose. They just now have another choice and this may drive modders to create even better content. (The flip of that is of course, people now creating and trying to sell shitty mods. Again though, the market will have to sort that out).
I'm really not sure what valve is doing for their cut though. It seems crazy they want to take such a huge slice.
I think the cut between developer and modder should be case by case and will be driven by supply and demand. If a company is releasing a game with mod support and they want active modders to keep their game alive, maybe they'll offer a better split. However, if a top tier game is being released and they have plenty of their own content to come or they just know their game is solid and will be a prominent game w/o mods, they may very well take a bigger cut from modders. And why not?
Modders will start looking at games to mod and add it up themselves. The biggeer the game, the bigger audience it hits and more likely their mods will earn them money. Maybe a modder will make mods for Elder Scrolls VI even though their cut may be 15% instead of for Neighborhood Backyard Brawl where they'd receive a 35% cut because in the big picture, they know they'll make more money from a bigger game.
I can only hope that the quality of the games and mods don't suffer from this.
But yeah...Dota. I'm curious how things would have developed with that game had this new program been implemented back then.
Bethesda wrote a bit about why they are doing paid mods.
http://www.bethblog.com/2015/04/27/why-were-trying-paid-skyrim-mods-on-steam/
"This was in 2012 and we had many questions, but only one demand. It had to be open, not curated like the current models. At every step along the way with mods, we have had many opportunities to step in and control things, and decided not to. We wanted to let our players decide what is good, bad, right, and wrong. We will not pass judgment on what they do. Weâre even careful about highlighting a modder on this blog for that very reason.
Three years later and Valve has finally solved the technical and legal hurdles to make such a thing possible, and they should be celebrated for it. It wasnât easy. They are not forcing us, or any other game, to do it. They are opening a powerful new choice for everyone.
We believe most mods should be free. But we also believe our community wants to reward the very best creators, and that they deserve to be rewarded. We believe the best should be paid for their work and treated like the game developers they are. But again, we donât think itâs right for us to decide who those creators are or what they create."
Looks like they're pulling it: http://steamcommunity.com/games/SteamWorkshop/announcements/detail/208632365253244218
"But we underestimated the differences between our previously successful revenue sharing models, and the addition of paid mods to Skyrim's workshop. We understand our own game's communities pretty well, but stepping into an established, years old modding community in Skyrim was probably not the right place to start iterating. We think this made us miss the mark pretty badly, even though we believe there's a useful feature somewhere here. "
Right. I hope they continue the model with some other game though, it's not a bad way to roll if it's the right fit. Travis, are you happy with this? Will you come back to Skyrim? I hope your game isn't forever hosed.
Good on them!
If my game can be continued then yeah I'll definitely come back to it.
And I was never against the model, just the implementation of it and the fact that they chose a game with a vibrant mod community already, and massively changed how it worked.
And seriously "we obviously had no idea what we were doing" is about the most honest thing I've ever heard from a company. I love them for that.
I'm disappointed in how short sighted they were but this redeems them entirely.
Wow, this will be the 80th comment!
It works! I had to resubscribe to a couple. There seems to be at least one that I have forgotten, but it doesn't halt my save file loading or anything.
I messed around a bit, and I'm remembering why I stopped playing last time. I can't get to Solstheim! The loading screen just loads indefinitely. Perhaps I'll work on fixing that.
But yeah, the save file is back. :)
That was kind of an intense two-day roller coaster! Now, we're right back where we started, except there is this thing that happened, which will hopefully come back in a better way. It feels like it was all a dream...
Haha, yeah. EA has been pretty nice lately.
Consortium operates under the premise that the game developers, Interdimensional Games Inc. (iDGi), have developed a satellite capable of sending a human mind through a digital rift in spacetime. As the player, your subconscious is supplanted into the body of Bishop-6, a diplomat... Read All Consortium came out just a little over a year ago, but I've only recently put the effort into completing it. Well, playing it. Completing it is a little more complex than a single play-through. Don't let the cartoon quality of the graphics fool you; there's a lot of depth in this game. If you're at all a fan of Star Trek, LOST, or crazy mysteries in alternate realities, I think you'll dig it.
Consortium operates under the premise that the game developers, Interdimensional Games Inc. (iDGi), have developed a satellite capable of sending a human mind through a digital rift in spacetime. As the player, your subconscious is supplanted into the body of Bishop-6, a diplomat of sorts and a member of the crew of the airship Zenlil. What happens next, is up to you. There are a number of choices to be made, so multiple play-throughs are encouraged. Be active, passive, peaceful, violent, or somewhere between. The story unfolds because of (and in spite of) your actions. You're a mind from the past, invading the future! You can even let that little cat out of the bag, but it might not go over so well...
Voice acting is superb, which is always a boon when delving into the landscape of alternate realities. What also helps, is that the score is the work of the moodily brilliant Jeremy Soule, which, by the way, comes with a purchase of the game. Available directly from the games site, GoG.com, or Steam, Consortium also comes with access to the files that were available from the companies A.R.G. website prior to the games launch. Purists can put those puzzles together for themselves, at http://interdimensionalgames.com/, or you can sift leisurely through the packet that comes in the DLC, it's pretty much all the same info.
The second game of a planned trilogy, The Tower Prophecy, has been announced with a plan for crowdsourcing sometime in 2015.
Official site: http://consortium-game.com/
Gog.com: http://www.gog.com/game/consortium_the_master_edition
Steam: http://store.steampowered.com/app/264240/
You had me at "LOST." lol
I wish I had more time for more games! This one piqued my curiosity!
The good parts of LOST, not the ending ;)
I was ok with the ending, but I understand I'm in the minority. But when Hurley started stabbing everyone, it was such a twist that made it memorable enough to be good for me.
I can't remember if you're joking or not, it's been so long. Stabby Hurley seems like a very memorable thing.
It was a joke :) Kind of a fake spoiler, but at this point, if anyone's actually upset by a LOST spoiler, that's on you.
Back to the game though, with your multiple play-throughs, how much time have you put into the game?
I've only played the one play-through. After you finish, the game encourages you to play multiple times, making different choices, eventually uncovering more of the mystery. So far, though, I've put in about 6 hours, at a fairly steady pace.
I was fine with LOST's ending, especially if you have seen the epilogue. I don't know why it was never aired on TV and only in the extras.
Well, now I'll have to see the epilogue!
Coincidentally, Consortium is on sale right now, on the Steam, for $4.49, until April 27.
I did like the epilogue. I'm glad I saw it!
I just saw the epilogue. Now I have to watch the WHOLE SHOW OVER AGAIN!
Why didn't they include that in the show? It really explains a lot.
Also, the packet of files that comes with the purchase of Consortium contains stuff very similar to the DHARMA tapes. That, mixed with the alternate reality theme and mysterious entities, was the basis of my associating Consortium's experience with LOST. You know, all the extra goodies that kept you on the forums for days at a time, trying out new theories and trying to make sense of it all.
OK, you sold me. I don't know when I'll find time to play it, but I had to buy it :)
I think I bought it last year, and just started playing it a few weeks ago. In fact, as long as you get to it before December 21st, 2042, I'm sure you'll be okay :). Otherwise you would probably break the game, and possibly reality as we know it.
- Recommended
- New features
- Play with controller or keyboard and mouse
- Benchmark tool included
- Custom soundtrack
- Recommended
- New features
- Play with controller or keyboard and mouse
- Benchmark tool included
- Custom soundtrack
A year later, it was released for the current console generation, I thought it made getting a PS4 a bit tempting, but I didn't given in to that. Although I'm sure GTAV is much better on the PS4 than the PS3, it wasn't enough to convince me to get one.
Now it's April 2015 and after a few delays, the game has been released for PCs. I pre-ordered it on Steam and got a free copy of San Andreas and some GTAV in-game bonus cash. They even gave us more bonus cash after the last delay was announced.
It has been stated that the PC release is pretty much the ultimate version of the game. It includes a video editor where you can record your game play and share it on YouTube. You can unlock different characters and animals for use Director Mode. The game also allows you to create your own customized radio station by placing MP3s in the âUser Musicâ folder (under âDocumentsâ>Rockstar Games>GTAV by default). Also, even though it doesn't contain any modding tools, there are already mods out for it. Perhaps one of the biggest features of the game is that it received a graphical update, 60fps at a higher resolution (4k). If you'd like to see a comparison check out this video, which is in three parts:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5A6EBL2t6Lo
Before you get the PC edition, it's important note the system requirements, I'll explain why in more detail.
https://support.rockstargames.com/hc/en-us/articles/203428177-Grand-Theft-Auto-V-PC-System-Specs
I didn't pay much attention to the hard drive space requirement (65 GB), which didn't dawn on my until the game became available to pre-load. This game is the very first game that I've experienced âpre-loading.â What this meant was that I could get it downloaded and installed (because I pre-ordered), but it would be encrypted, and thus unplayable, until its release date. What made me take notice of that hard drive space requirement was the 59 GB download on Steam. This made me think that this has to be the biggest game ever. Retail copies of the game come in a 7-disc box set.
Game play stutter: I was pretty confident about my PC, until I ran into an issue where the graphics in this game kind of âstutteredâ. This made me think that my PC wasn't up to par. Further research into the issue showed me that many people have reported issues with frame rate drops. Many of them have different hardware and their own theories as to why this occurs (see https://support.rockstargames.com/hc/communities/public/questions/203473047-GTA-V-PC-Stutter-Issue). So, I figured that it has to be an issue with the game, although I may need to try out different graphical settings.
The game includes a benchmarking tool which can be accessed by pressing TAB on the âAdvanced Graphicsâ menu option. While most of that test ran smoothly at 50-60fps, there was at least one spot where the frame rate started off very low, but increased before it was over. Since the test dropped me back in the game and didn't give me a result, I decided to benchmark my PC. Later, I found out that the benchmark results are included under Documents>Rockstar Games>GTA V>Benchmarks by default. So, I downloaded and ran a demo of 3DMark on Steam. The first test I ran was Fire Strike âfor high performance Windows gaming PCs.â The results were really awesome (check it out: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4596441).
Thanks to the news on Steam, I found out that Nvidia and AMD released new drivers for their GPUs with the game's release. So, before I played the game, I installed the latest driver from Nvidia. Rockstar has updated the game already to 1.01 because of the issue I had and a few others (see http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/04/17/gta-5-patch-101-to-address-issues-on-pc).
Initially, I only played the first mission in the game using the default settings. I thought it looked great and I noticed that I could change the view to first-person, which I don't recall being able to do on the PS3, granted that it's been a long time since I've played it. I also initially used they keyboard and mouse, hoping for better controls than San Andreas. I wasn't really disappointed with that configuration, but I thought using a controller would provide more fluid movement. I only played it briefly, at first, because I knew that in order to get GeForce Experience to optimize the game based on my hardware, I had to play it first. So, once I was able to save the game, I exited back to the desktop and let GeForce Experience configure my optimized settings. I know it increased many of them.
The next time I played, I decided to try it with a controller. Some time ago, by recommendation, I decided to buy a USB Xbox 360 controller for my new PC. I haven't really used it until now. I plugged it in before loading the game and it installed quickly and didn't seem to need any configuration. Once I got in to the game, I decided to start again from the beginning and I was glad that I didn't need to configure the controller or tell the game I was using it. Instead of telling me the keyboard and mouse controls, it showed the buttons on the controller. I now play the game using the controller, which I think is simpler.
While I know some people have hesitations about getting the game now, I think they are justified. Many people have already paid $60 for it and want to wait until it's cheaper. The issues that people have had with the game are also a good reason to wait. Right now, it seems to be difficult to tell how the game will perform on any PC. It would be nice if there was a demo for it or if the benchmark test was more easily accessible and gave a test result. Still, I think the game is great and it's popularity and sales (across all platforms) definitely seem to prove that. The game has already overtaken Skyrim as the most played 3rd party game on Steam. If you think your hardware can handle it and don't mind paying full price for it, I recommend getting it. However, it may be wise to wait until the game gets further updates resolving issues or until it's on sale.
Links
Check out this interview from PC Gamer with Rockstar: http://www.pcgamer.com/rockstar-talk-4k-pc-performance-and-more/
If you've already played the game on one platform, visit this link to learn how to transfer your GTA Online characters and progression between systems: https://support.rockstargames.com/hc/en-us/articles/202892778-Transferring-Your-Previous-Grand-Theft-Auto-Online-Characters-and-Progression-to-PlayStation-4-Xbox-One-or-PC
I think waiting seems like a good idea too. Many people seem to have had a good experience with it, but my PC isn't quite up to specs with yours. That said, I look forward to picking it up and playing it as max resolution as I can.
As far as the game/story goes this is what we got with the PS3/360 version right? No new content as far as this release goes right? Did they do any DLC for GTAV?
I've done a lot of "research" into the issue I had and how to optimize the game and my video card. In the end, I didn't change very much. I made one change in the Nvidia Control Panel, which was to set that global setting to one display, since that's what I'm using. I also toned down all the settings one notch in the game, which produced good results. Then, I decided to experiment and see if there might have been one setting that messed things up. So far, it seems that having Shadow Quality at High rather than Very High fixes my issue.
As for your question, yes, this is mostly the original game with improved graphics and just a few additions. This version has Self Radio, the radio station that allows you to use your MP3s. It also has the Rockstar Editor, which allows you to record and share game play. As far as I know, the game hasn't received any DLC. Also, while there are no tools for it in the game, people have already created mods. One mod, that I saw, was the Batmobile.
I got all the gold medals in Flight School with Trevor. I did the Stunt Plane Time Trials, but decided getting gold was not important and just more frustrating. I ended up getting silver instead. I also went hunting with him, which is something I didn't do on the PS3. I learned a few things about that. One is to climb on the RV or use the ATV to avoid getting killed by cougars. Another was that in order to save your progress, you need to finish the day of hunting, which is only available during certain hours. I also started doing the Bail Bonds missions, which I didn't do before. So far, I've only done the first and I have looked online for help with that.
You can hunt in the game? That sounds fun. From the look of things it appears pretty involved too.
http://gta.wikia.com/Hunting
Yeah, Cletus gets you started on it. On the PS3, I did the intro mission where he shows you how to hunt elk. That's as far as I got with that. On the PC, however, I went to the hunting spot marked on the map. I did pretty good and achieved some good ranks and now have to do some harder things, like get a pic of a coyote and boar together. I also have to kill two elk with one shot, which I've done before, but died during the mission (damn cougars). It's really fun, actually, even though I most definitely do not go hunting in real life. I thought about recording a video because, while I was waiting on time to pass so I could go hunting, I saw a bunch of elk jumping all around the area. A few even died and I don't know if they had run into a cougar or just fell.
I recently learned how amazing Chop is. One time I switched to Franklin and he was playing in a field with Chop. The game tells you how you can throw a ball and get him to retrieve it. It also tells you that if you ride in a vehicle (like a motorcycle) that doesn't have room for him to get in, he'll follow you. Since Franklin had his green motorcycle nearby, I decided to take Chop home, which wasn't far away at all. Once I got there, though, I decided to get in Franklin's white car and let Chop in. This was a time, recently, when I was constantly visiting one of the hospitals (in Strawberry) so I could get a free helicopter. I have purchased the helipad, but still can't afford a helicopter and I need one to get at least one of the spaceship parts. Anyway, I got to the hospital and got out of the car, Chop did so, too. I then climbed the first ladder and Chop some how made it up there, too. I then climbed down, got in the car (because there weren't any helicopters there), and he magically made it off of the roof and inside of the car. Hahaha, I just thought that was funny. I have never tried out the app that let's you play with him on a tablet, but it's something I might try eventually.
I took another look into the "stutter" issue I was having with the game. I checked the Rockstar forum post that I linked in my original post. Someone said that they fixed the same issue by turning off High Resolution Shadows. So, I again had GeForce Experience optimize the game settings for me and when I got in the game I turned off High Resolution Shadows. Now I am running on those optimized settings except for that one I changed and the game runs much more smoothly now. One thing about the many settings in the game is that each has it's cost in VRAM and some seem like you really wouldn't notice a change anyway. That one setting I changed reduced the game's VRAM requirement by about a gig, I think, which is very helpful. The game does show you the VRAM cost of the settings you've chosen and how much your GPU has available. You can, of course, exceed the VRAM limit of your GPU, but doing so may cause the game to run less smoothly as the GPU will have to access your RAM or CPU to process the extra VRAM needed. I read about that some where online. Right now my settings cost about 5GB VRAM and I only have 4GB. Still, as I said, the game is running much more smoothly now. I'm almost done collecting all of the Spaceship Parts. I've also been using the Self Radio.
Funny thing happened recently. I've been grabbing the Scrap Letters lately. On my way to one of them, I ended up driving up a hill or mountain. When I got to the top, I got some air, meaning the car flew a bit above the top. While doing so, I ended up hitting a bird. I laughed, I thought it was funny.
Last night, I finished Story Mode. That was the second time I've seen the credits roll in the game, I had forgotten how long that is! Jumping back in the game, there was one mission for me to do with Trevor (I'm avoiding a spoiler here). After that, I didn't know what to do. I've spent a total of 79 hours in the (PC version) game. I've completed all the races (boat, car, and off-road) with the exception of the stock car races. I did two of those, once with Trevor and once with Franklin. I won different cars each time and I'm sure there are others to win as that check point is not marked as completed (with a green check mark). I'll probably go and finish those. One reason I didn't do that before was because I currently don't have many places to store the trophy cars. With Trevor's win, I stored the car in a garage I bought with him, which has room for at least one more I'm sure. Franklin's home garage currently contains the vehicle you get from collecting all the space ship parts and the one I got from his stock car race win. Michael's home garage contains a police car and maybe one more car.
I did finish Flight School with Trevor and got a gold rank in each, but it was such a pain that I decided I wouldn't do it again. I tried the stunt plane time trials, but again it was such a pain that I decided to just do them for fun and not worry about what rank I got. I think I got silver in all or almost all of them. Otherwise, all the races were rather easy. The stock car race wasn't one of the easy ones, but I didn't mind repeating those to win them.
I also completed the hunting missions with Trevor. Some of the challenges weren't as difficult as I thought. For instance, some of them require that you send him a picture of multiple dead animals. Well, you don't have to include all of them in one shot. You simply take a picture of one, save it, and then take a picture of the next. Once you have taken a picture of all the required animals, send the last to him and they will all be marked as complete.
I think I finished all of the Strangers and Freaks missions, except I realized I didn't do the Epsilon missions (Michael only missions), so that's what I'm working on now. I've thought about replaying all the missions to achieve a gold rank, which requires you to do certain things. I'm not sure if I'll do that, though.
After the Epsilon missions, I'll probably jump into GTA Online by transferring (really copying) my PS3 character to my PC. You can only do this transfer once and I'm fine with that. I spent very little time in GTAO on the PS3. I was very happy with the character I created, so it's great that I don't have to try to re-create him. As I've said before, I think he looks a lot like me.
So does the single player campaign take 79 hours to complete or is that your game time doing other stuff too?
That was how much time I put into the game, which included doing a lot of things. That was a bit after I completed story mode.
I think this was a great debate about what direction games should give you vs making you explore and try things out.
The interaction starting at 3:17 sums these games up, to a tee. This is my favorite review of Bloodborne, and possibly any game, mostly because of what @AdamPFarnsworth said, and because I've grown to respect Jack and Rich above most other game reviewers.
November 17, 2015 is the release date, and it's coming to PS4, XBox One, and PC via Origin.
(*Edited for clarity. Thanks @Travis.) More Star Wars goodness from Star Wars Celebration. In-engine* footage looks beautiful! A fine year for all forms of geekery!
November 17, 2015 is the release date, and it's coming to PS4, XBox One, and PC via Origin.
(*Edited for clarity. Thanks @Travis.)
In-engine footage. How. How is that done int he game engine?
Yeah, it says Sony at the front and I have a hard time that's a PS4. Unless they are doing some crazy engine magic or something.
MAYBE this is some ultra PC or whatever but even then.
Will this game look something like this? Sure. Just like it? Uhm, I don't know. Maybe.
The PS4 is quite powerful. It wouldn't surprise me at all if this was running on that hardware. I doubt that the graphics will be this shiny when the game releases, but if you look at what devs like Ready at Dawn, Ubisoft, and Naughty Dog are doing with the hardware, it won't be that far off. Not to mention, this will be DICE's, what, third game on the system? They should be able to hit the sweet spot.
It does say at the end "Frostbite game engine footage representative of playstation 4. Not actual gameplay."
Right I know it wasn't actual gameplay, but it was done using the engine they're using, and it was spectacular. I certainly wouldn't expect that kind of gameplay.
Isn't it fantastic? I was so blown away. It perfectly replicates that nostalgic NES feel.
It really feels like a lost treasure, rather than a new game. I got a similar feeling from FEZ, but Shovel Knight has that sweet 8-bit sheen to it. Such good fun!
Really is.
Cinemassicre did a recent video on the Battle Toads XBone crossover: https://youtu.be/rrSbdeW3_hI?t=430