Part of the beta for this myself. Works better than expected, although I did experience some hiccups at the start of the game. As a whole though, it's very responsive and still looks pretty good.
Once again, not my point. The point is that corporations periodically pick an example to sue as a reminder that they can and will sometimes go after pirates. It literally has nothing to do with a stance of morality held by individual gamers.
Okay? Does that have anything to do with what I said? Just pointed out the title of the article is misleading.
Selling the hacked consoles isn't the problem. The key is that bootlegged games bit. Sit there and casually sell hundreds of pirated games, and you become the next best example for who to sue to remind everyone that corporations don't like piracy.
Four bosses in, the only bug I've run into is the super speed one based on your monitor (at 144hz my horse was greased lightning at the start until I changed to windowed full screen). Otherwise no problems to be found. One mistake I've seen people make though is assuming you can play this exactly like Salt & Sanctuary from the start. The beginning actually encourages use of the shield, and using it aids heavily in survival until you up your stam and regen speeds. I really wanted t...
The thing is though, if there is an iOS workaround, why wouldn't Epic point people towards that instead of eating the 30% loss? Could it be for the same reasons I see this decision having a heavy, negative impact on their sales?
Let's ignore the fact that the Play Store acts as free advertising, and that there are tons of people who will never manage to sideload an app even with step by step instructions. Now instead of this app being number one with huge profits at a cost of 30%, it will be moderately played by those comfortable and trusting enough to load in the app the back way. This also opens the door for people to be pointed towards fraudulent versions of the app that will infect their phones and tablets wi...
Early Access did this game a lot of good. I bought it around a year ago and proceeded to play the hell out of it. Even then, it was fluid, fun, and addictive. I recently went back, and every change has only made the game better. Early Access is always a risk, but this one paid off very well.
Watched a streamer play several hours of this around a week ago. Looking pretty alright.
I would argue Zelda gets worse the more you play. After several hours, shrines become repetitive, mechanics start to feel more like a climbing simulator, and every prolonged encounter becomes a game of "how can I preserve my good weapons?" Horizon gets stronger as it continues, where Zelda starts strong and gets weaker, and this article makes that point abundantly clear.
Don't cheat in online games. Cheating in a single player experience is whatever because you are only impacting your own experience. Cheating in an online game implies that for some reason, everybody should have to play the game by the rules you personally prefer. As a hint, if you don't like an online game in its developer intended form, just find a different game.
This isn't about paying for exclusives, but because Microsoft is endlessly trying to push positive PR spins for every little thing about the Xbox brand this generation. Everyone knows this was a matter of Microsoft paying for exclusivity. No indie dev is going to pass up platforms like PS4 and Switch because one company was just so nice to them. That's simply not how business works. It gets tiring seeing article after article of developers pretending they aren't being incentivised...
I just bought it digital on a whim after barely knowing anything about it. As a whole, a pleasantly surprising experience about 10 hours in. I'm not surprised there's demand for it.
Just what Switch needed, smartphone games. Now that's leveraging potential. Because this game is just so difficult to play for three minutes at a time on my phone.
Only three things are certain in this life: Death Taxes Rule 34
"I'm clearly not the target audience, so allow me to forget how to rate a game that I may not like with as little bias as possible. A 5/10 feels fair for a mechanically sound, beautiful remake of a beloved PS1 era trilogy. That's what they get for not catering to me!" - This reviewer
I imagine you're talking about Steam Machines, and those sort of fizzled out. They tried to offer a simple means of pick up and play for PC, but the market was immediately a confusing jumble of overpriced PCs and actual marketing didn't really exist. They were just gaming PCs that companies tried to sell based on the tech inside instead of saying simple things like "can play this recent release at a stable 60 FPS at 1080p". It didn't help that failing to meet the goal o...
Vita...remote play...been a thing for basically ever. I know it's an easily forgotten collaborative feature between Sony devices, but still. Either way, people tend to forget, THESE ARE ONLINE GAMES. SWITCH DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO A 4G NETWORK. So basically you're at the mercy of free wi-fi or tethering data. Online only titles on Switch are not this amazingly convenient thing people seem to think they are.
The Switch has been out for over a year, which means final development kits have been available even longer, and the game is long since finished and released in Japan. The fact that all they can still say is that they're working on it should be a sign to worry, not a sign of an impending release.
You realize it takes more than a desire for sales to create a quality version of the game that SE would feel comfortable distributing, right? This article is one big red flag indicating a very troubled development process. No one says "please stop asking about this" because they're excited and think things are going well.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.