Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ygdrad]

This game has mouse acceleration on by default and forces it back on if you disable it. Why any pc game developer would do this is beyond me. To fix this you want to go to %LOCALAPPDATA%\FortniteGame\Saved\Config\WindowsClient and edit GameUserSettings.ini with notepad or some other text editor. You'll want to find "bDisableMouseAcceleration=False" and change it to "bDisableMouseAcceleration=True". After this save the file and then right-click the file, go to properties and make it read-only. Now launch/relaunch the game, figure out your wanted sensitivity again, remove read-only from the file, go back to the game, turn some random setting on/off and apply to update the file, go back to the file, turn mouse acceleration off again, and finally make the file read-only again.

Now if only I could figure out how to change the field of view to something other than a horrible 80 degrees :/

How good is it in single-player? Or does this really need to be multi-player?

The missions scale based on party size. If you place defender NPC's wisely and have a good layout, most missions should be soloable with some effort.

[JimboM12]

games fun but im having issues with party invite and occasional chat lag, is anyone else getting this?

[Ygdrad]

After playing the game for a couple of days with some friends, I can say the game is a whole lot of fun.

[Folly]

The llama thing is giving me serious Déjà vu. Does anyone recall another game that used the same gimmick?

[Vibe]

Fun game but progress locked behind lootboxes? ugh

[Twinwolf]

Got the game for free because a friend got the special edition that gives you a code to give a friend the standard edition. Having fun, planning out my main fort but I need more resources to properly trap it, and the blueprints to make those better traps

Fun game but progress locked behind lootboxes? ugh

Quests usually give you the things you need to progress. The lootboxes just give you extra stuff, and they're a common reward for missions anyway.

[jocan2003]

Hey if somebody is looking for a friend to play with, i got teamspeak, discord and everything, im just missing a fellow dwarf friend to invite me

[Folly]

Quests usually give you the things you need to progress.

The side-quests dry up pretty quickly, leaving daily quests as the only means of obtaining new heroes and schematics, at the grueling pace of 1 llama per 2 days. There's rapidly growing dissent on the forums as more people hit that wall every day.

[JimboM12]

Quests usually give you the things you need to progress.

The side-quests dry up pretty quickly, leaving daily quests as the only means of obtaining new heroes and schematics, at the grueling pace of 1 llama per 2 days. There's rapidly growing dissent on the forums as more people hit that wall every day.

In this respect, the game is starting to remind me alot of Warframe. We need a "challenge" mode we can do daily to get a few reward llamas and an "endless" mode that gives out better ones and is much harder than the regular challenge mode.

The daily challenge modes should also be tied to individual accounts, this'll be fine becuz 1: they're hard so you'll need a team, 2: the game's paid (for now) so you can't just create dummy accounts to attempt this and 3: if you get a full team of friends you can run it 4 times between all of you, promoting daily play and team play. In the future when it goes f2p, to prevent terrible abuse you can lock the dailies behind a level/quest barrier to discourage dummy grinders who'll attempt to run it solo daily and get their asses kicked cuz these are supposed to be hard.

[Tnx]

From watching videos of let's plays...  This game seems to reward selfish play and punishes those who build for the team.  That's really sad for a co-op game.

[Neonivek]

I was thinking of getting it but then I noticed it was a paid game.

Which is REALLY odd to me given that this is pretty much a free to play model that they will make hand over fist cash with microtransactions (and aren't even SLIGHTLY subtle in trying to rake in that cash).

[Twinwolf]

Apparently it will go free-to-play sometime in 2018, which explains some of that. I don't particularly care because I don't mean to be doing any micro transactions and I got my copy for free

[Folly]

First of all, free llamas today only! Claim yours in-game!

From watching videos of let's plays...  This game seems to reward selfish play and punishes those who build for the team.  That's really sad for a co-op game.

This is true to some extent, but all of the loot that players scavenge is extremely transient. It get's consumed to build structures and traps which disappear when the map ends. There is no significant benefit to hoarding everything you can find while letting your team do all the work.
The permanent growth factors are schematics and experience; the former comes from completing quests, while the latter is shared equally among the team.

[symonthewise]

Microtransactions are by definition intrinsically bad?

Whose definition? Yours?

How about the definition for over 1.8 million websites?

5.7 million websites say that a nudist lifestyle makes you immortal

73 million websites believe unicorns are real

79 million websites believe that vegetables were invented by the government to control peoples minds

103 million websites believe that science is a lie

Heard of the expression he couldn't see the forest for the trees? Your post is a perfect demonstration of this expression.

He made an implication that I was the one person in the world or one of a small number of people who believe that micro-transactions are bad for the consumer ("Whose definition... Yours?"). I showed evidence that a huge number of articles have been written about the negative effect of micro-transactions and that it's a common position to take (note: my point was that it was a common understanding of micro-transactions not a justification of that understanding).

His actual 'point' was a poor logical trap. Had I responded that I was defining micro-transactions as bad for the consumer he would have just said "Well that's just an opinion". If I provided actual evidence to contradict the trap he (or someone else in this case) could just dismiss the evidence with some form of "The amount of people agreeing doesn't make it right."

So although I refuted the point I stated "A round Earth? Whose definition? Yours? That logical game is so stupid." In other words demonstrating my position that it shouldn't matter how many people believe something, that alone doesn't justify it precisely because there are a lot of ill-informed people in the world (which you have now just supported, thank you kindly!) After that I just went along with his line of argumentation anyway to show that even if it did he'd still be wrong.

TLDR:

I rebutted you before you even posted.

26.4 million websites believe that Folly missed the point

If this were a videogame I believe one could describe your post and its effect on Wile's argument as 'friendly-fire'. By trying to discredit me you helped enforce the point I was making. I guess I should thank you? Thanks!

To be fair, you made a definitive statement. Microtransactinons are, by their definition bad. This questionable assertion was challenged and you responded with a glib meme in place of an argument. The response to this, though it was unnecessary as most should know there is no connection between the volume of google search results and the truth, was adequate.

[Neonivek]

How about the fact that micro transactions, the kind that will be in Fortnite, is basically gambling but an even worse kind that plays off of the addiction of players.

Basically being a leech to the consumer... Like a bar that only sells alcohol to alcoholics.

I am getting really close to the personal opinion that paying real life money for randomized loot... should be made illegal. It hurts far more people then it helps and is a multi-billion dollar business on its own (often FAAAAR more profitable than actually making good games)