Print

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

[Kot]

3) Windows 10 REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE, which I really don't understand at all. I don't remember this happening when games started dropping XP support. Do people also flip out when new console titles are announced that don't support the PS3...? Game devs work for the most recent platforms, and that is for better or worse Win10,

No real reason to make it exclusive (ESPECIALLY with the "definitive editions", considering they run on even older systems than XP), other than to force use of Windows Store, and when games started dropping XP support... it actually was a controversy, I remember Just Cause 2 or something was the first one, and some people complained, but nevertheless, a lot of games continued to "unoficially" support XP, and games were completly playable on it for long time.
The hope is that they finally kill the Windows Store someday and all the games go to Steam anyway.

[StagnantSoul]

3) Windows 10 REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE, which I really don't understand at all. I don't remember this happening when games started dropping XP support. Do people also flip out when new console titles are announced that don't support the PS3...? Game devs work for the most recent platforms, and that is for better or worse Win10,

No real reason to make it exclusive (ESPECIALLY with the "definitive editions", considering they run on even older systems than XP), other than to force use of Windows Store, and when games started dropping XP support... it actually was a controversy, I remember Just Cause 2 or something was the first one, and some people complained, but nevertheless, a lot of games continued to "unoficially" support XP, and games were completly playable on it for long time.
The hope is that they finally kill the Windows Store someday and all the games go to Steam anyway.

Steam is only marginally better, it supports making people pay out their ass for every extra thing as if we should pay for game balance or features that should've been in the base game.

[forsaken1111]

Yes, windows 10 is the devil and steam is his mistress. We get it, you guys don't like either platform. I haven't had any problems with either, I've been using Windows 10 since it went out in beta to developers and haven't looked back, and I don't understand the hate for steam.

Steam is only marginally better, it supports making people pay out their ass for every extra thing as if we should pay for game balance or features that should've been in the base game.

Like this... what does a studio's DLC policy have to do with steam? Steam/Valve doesn't decide who charges for what.

[QuakeIV]

Actually they do, the companies have to negotiate with steam to set a price.

[forsaken1111]

Actually they do, the companies have to negotiate with steam to set a price.

To set a price, yes. That is due to regional pricing. They don't decide what a developer sells though. The complaint was that they (steam) 'support making people pay out their ass for every extra thing'. Steam doesn't make studios sell things or mandate that 'game balance or features' must cost money.

[QuakeIV]

They do let them charge quite a bit for the DLC however.

[forsaken1111]

They do let them charge quite a bit for the DLC however.

And? If the DLC price isn't worth the value of the content, don't buy it. As an example I've only purchased a few of the DLC for EU4/CK2 because the others didn't seem worthwhile. Either they added features for regions I have no interest in playing, were purely aesthetic (portrait packs, songs, etc) or simply were not well done. Most of them I just waited for a 75% off sale.

Either way, Steam doesn't decide how many DLC a company puts out or what their contents are. The only thing Steam does is regional pricing for your product and marketing/distribution for your product. If a company puts out every single feature of their game as a paid downloadable pack, that isn't in any way related to steam. If a company makes its game in such a way that you need to buy DLC to have a complete experience that has nothing to do with steam.

as if we should pay for game balance or features that should've been in the base game.

So back to this quote. If a studio does this for its game... fuck em. Don't buy it. Ignore them. Vote with your wallet.

[StagnantSoul]

Then why is it only through Steam that I see this being done? The closest I see outside of them is Blizzard, and that's because they're practically doing a new game for each installment.

[forsaken1111]

Then why is it only through Steam that I see this being done? The closest I see outside of them is Blizzard, and that's because they're practically doing a new game for each installment.

I don't know why you have only seen this through steam. Perhaps because your main experience is gaming via steam? It happens elsewhere too. Train Simulator has over $2000 of DLC available through their store. It's also available via steam, but not exclusively. It's not a great practice but not at all limited to Steam.

[Mech#4]

Blizzard has game content sold on their store. You can buy things like pets in World of Warcraft, card packs for Hearthstone, announcers for Starcraft 2 and so on.

Ubisoft seems to have various season passes on their store.

Microsoft store has, uh, a whole lot of stuff. Apparently a lot of free to play casino games and things like Candy Crush. Looking at a specific game, Gears of War 4 looks like it had the usual lot of season passes, item packs and so on.


Looking at those stores, I'm going to give Blizzard the best marks for layout, colour choices are nice too. Ubisoft is alright while Microsoft is kind of a mess with free to play games seemingly having more screen space than paid ones.


All that aside, well, there was Dungeon Keeper. I remember peoples reactions to that game.

Here's a neat game, called "0 A.D." that's like Age of Empires, free to play and open sources.

[Aklyon]

Yeah, amount of dlc and whether or not its on steam aren't related subjects. Looks at the Sims, for an example.

As for XP, it was hanging on the 32-bit edge of gaming for awhile. It wasn't a huge surprise when it started being dropped because devs wanted to have the nice things 64bit has over it.

10 has nothing special like that in its favor, unless DX12 counts as a lesser sort of advance? I've hardly heard any news about that recently, large majority of stuff seems to still use dx11 or 9. Or its using OpenGL or vulkan or whatev.

[Mattk50]

I've seen three broad categories of response to the announcement.

1) Concern that this is just a cash-grab and the game will be terrible. Which is valid, it might well be and that's my biggest concern, too.

2) Enthusiasm, because Relic are certainly capable of making good games, and another AoE game in the spirit of AoEII but generally improved and modernised would be pretty damn cool.

3) Windows 10 REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE, which I really don't understand at all. I don't remember this happening when games started dropping XP support. Do people also flip out when new console titles are announced that don't support the PS3...? Game devs work for the most recent platforms, and that is for better or worse Win10,

Windows 10 exclusive mans windows 10 store UWP system exclusive. There are a ton of reasons to prefer .exe to UWP including modding support, recording games, better functionality, and the whole experience of using uwp "apps" is just so crappy and segmented from normal program use that most utilities dont work. And that if they're putting all this microsoft marketing gimmick over the functionality of the game any watchers would be wise to realize this means they arent putting full effort in already.

[alamoes]

I've seen three broad categories of response to the announcement.

1) Concern that this is just a cash-grab and the game will be terrible. Which is valid, it might well be and that's my biggest concern, too.

2) Enthusiasm, because Relic are certainly capable of making good games, and another AoE game in the spirit of AoEII but generally improved and modernised would be pretty damn cool.

3) Windows 10 REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE, which I really don't understand at all. I don't remember this happening when games started dropping XP support. Do people also flip out when new console titles are announced that don't support the PS3...? Game devs work for the most recent platforms, and that is for better or worse Win10,

Oof.  Good to know. 

Windows 10 exclusive mans windows 10 store UWP system exclusive. There are a ton of reasons to prefer .exe to UWP including modding support, recording games, better functionality, and the whole experience of using uwp "apps" is just so crappy and segmented from normal program use that most utilities dont work. And that if they're putting all this microsoft marketing gimmick over the functionality of the game any watchers would be wise to realize this means they arent putting full effort in already.

[Duuvian]

Arise!

Steam has this for a free weekend. I haven't tried it yet. AoE 1 was one of my first games of this type a long time ago, I think in the Windows 3.5 days and I memorized the cheat codes for it at the time so I may have spent a significant portion of my youthful free time on it. I don't think I spent much time on the later editions, though II and Age of Mythology were something I had at some point on CD and played through. It seems I own III on Steam as well but I don't think I played it much back in the day. Empire Earth was probably a better clone of AoE but I think that series died out with Sierra was continued for a few sequels but petered out on a release that was deemed sub par according to wikipedia on the series.

Wololo

[EuchreJack]

Damn, I missed that.  The original game was my intro into computer games. My dad and I used to play the crap out of that and the second one.
Thanks though for the happy memories.