Neil writes: "We're big fans of the accessories and headsets that PDP Gaming create - after all, the PDP Afterglow AG9 is still one of our very favourite headsets - and so news that the number one video game accessory company in North America have a blockbusting holiday line-up of Xbox One and PS4 accessories ready to roll is a big one - particularly if you're in the market for a new headset."
EA has hired ex-military personnel in order to help shape the next Battlefield game as part of the Hiring Our Heroes (HOH) program.
Why don't you Hire Your Old Dev Team who brought us the brilliance of Battlefield Bad Company 2 while you're at it. It was more exciting than anything recent in the Battlefield series. It just needs to be updated to reach modern times, but it was so great at its core.
This would be nice but that team has tossed out the finals and has arc raiders on the back burner
https://www.pcgamer.com/ex-...
20 thousand still play the final's
https://steamcharts.com/app...
Why get slapped around by ea when you already have something going on.
What the next battlefield needs is a step back simple functional not a live service and smaller player servers than 2042. Just make it like battlefiled 3 with bad company destruction just something simple
But they already killed off ridgeline games that had ex halo/cod devs so no singleplayer unless they make another dev team for it.
https://gamerant.com/ea-bat...
It's what made zipper and slant six awesome. They had military vets working for them, no just as consultants, but as developers as well. I wish Sony never closed them, MAG 2 or an update to MAG and a new socom is much needed.
Older ps3 battlefield titles did the same even went to the range to get sound files.
But all these titles we are talking about were on the ps3 a console so powerful it offered free mp and games did not need 4 levels of payment plans even more crazy was the player size of mag's games.
Sadly I think you are correct. They just don’t get it. They will do their live service game with its Battle Royale and fail at both.I hate being so negative, but I have little faith in EA at this point.
The owner of Steam has been accused of overcharging 14 million PC gamers in the UK and 'shutting out' competition in a new lawsuit.
"Valve, the owner of Steam, is being sued for £656m over claims it is abusing its dominant market position to overcharge players.
The collective action claim has been filed with the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal by digital rights campaigner Vicki Shotbolt.
In the lawsuit, Shotbolt accuses Valve of ‘shutting out’ competition when it comes to buying PC games and DLC, which has led to 14m people in the UK being overcharged for PC games as a result.
The claim is seeking up to £44 compensation for every UK player who has bought a PC game or add-on content from June 5, 2018."
____________________________
So they are trying to take the apple/sony/xbox approach were there is only one store without ever using a pc for gaming.
Anyone with a ounce of pc gaming knowledge knows steam did nothing when competition and the launcher war happened but now every publisher that had there own launcher with games only available on that platform are slowing coming back to steam.
This "lawsuit" should be directed to launcher's like rockstar's as they have games only available on there like the gta collection or ubisoft with xdefiant heck epic launcher exclusive games. There is no grounds in which steam has locked down content to there platform except there own games though there are disc versions of those except half life alex.
Pc players still have the best choice on game buying with multiple launcher's and site that offers keys like my fav humble bundle but on the same platform we have the worst drm along with those 3rd part launcher's that need to run in the background.
yes, let's give storefronts the power to decide over properties they don't own, sounds awesome
I was being sarcastic, 99.9% of games sold on there are not from valve so there's not much they can do about it.
How thick are you? You know Steam sells other's products, aside from a tiny handful of games, correct??? Nonce
Steam allows 3rd party apps (which I hate) and...we all know that egs is the one that keeps buying exclusivity lol. A lot of devs and consumers rely on steam hence it's very heavy support.
Imagine a child safety advocate switching gears and targeting how a business sells games, weird right? I could be wrong, and maybe old blonds in England with the name Vicki Shotbolt are a dime a dozen... but assuming this is the same Vicki Shotbolt of The Parent Zone, her company The Parent Zone partnered with MS in 2014. That's a long time ago I know, but apparently Shotbolt has ties with the UK government.
I'm not saying anything, but MS doesn't let partnerships like that die.
If I get 44 pound from them I'll only be spending it in the steam store...fucking absurd ..one of the most ethical companies out there and largely due to them not being a public offering imo
Regarding Microsoft’s position in the broader game industry, it seems we have our answer: It’s now a publisher first, a subscription platform second, and a console hardware platform a distant third.
when i hear people use the word "exclusive"... all I can think of is the princess bride: https://youtu.be/dTRKCXC0JF...
I would really like for you to expound on this comment.
I assume we both know what exclusive means, but what do you think it infers when utilized in the discussion of games now?
You have pure exclusives, only on one platform no where else. Then you have platform exclusives, available across a family of platforms (such as PS consoles or Xbox consoles). After that you have console exclusives, it's on PC and/or mobile and on a single console system. Then we have timed exclusives, those fall in one of the above but are limited in how long they will last as such.
Understanding that, why do you think the author doesn't understand the word "exclusive"? Do you think it's because everyone should know that games going to Xbox and PC on Day One is what we mean by exclusive now in industry related terms? Do you just ignore that there exist actual exclusives, especially on PC and Nintendo Switch?
Then let's go further in the article where the author said:
"Xbox hardware, and its attitude to console exclusivity for Microsoft-owned games remains ambivalent at best."
Is this the bit you are referencing? Is it a wrong statement? I feel that's up to opinion. But obviously they understand the discussion is about games going only to Xbox and PC. Do they not understand that games like CoD Back Ops 6, Sea of Thieves, DOOM, Fallout 76 being Microsoft developed titles going 'everywhere' they would have if owned by a third-party?
I think they do. And I think this is the crux of their opinion. I feel they are looking at all of this potential power Microsoft is wielding and how they are wielding it. They aren't taking those massive games and making them a foundation to sell their hardware. They're making them a foundation for selling their subscription service and leaving hardware to flounder with no similar titles that would sell the hardware. Sure, there are a few exclusives, but they are going to PC. And that's always going to hurt them in the discussion of 'hardware support'. And now with these latest games, with more games going to more places than just PC, is it not an accurate statement to say that Microsoft's focus is on Games first, subscription second, hardware somewhere down the line in third?
Would like to hear your response. Thank you.
More like an afterthought. Not even a service. Most gamers around the globe don't care about any of the green ''offerings'' and now that they're going full 3rd party even less.
So you're suggesting people would care more, if their games were available to fewer people?
Lol. Yep, what a good gamer mentality that is.
