MY BRAIN HAD A THINK ABOUT A GAM3

Balladeer wrote:

 Unfortunately, with a few exceptions it's hard for me to get as excited for an indie as for a big engrossing adventure.  They're good stop-gaps, sometimes really good stop-gaps; but for the most part that's what they feel like, and at some point I'd like the gap they're filling to... stop.

This attitude makes your anti-Tencent stance extremely hypocritical :p

Honestly, I find it much easier to get excited about an Indie than any third-party or Nontendo "big" game.

See even though I have the option to play almost any game, I still sometimes feel down and when I do I don't want to do much even gaming. I also have the thing after a big quality game, everything after seems a tad muh, it almost happened with Final Fantasy VII Remake but thankfully Animal Crossing was about.

Odd you guys bring up the mid-2000's as that's likely my favourite period of gaming as three of my favourite consoles were around then with plenty of bangers and I've even grown to appreciate the PS2 more, also online gaming etc at this time along with being able to buy what I wanted instead of waiting for a present from someone.

Buskalilly wrote:

Balladeer wrote:

 Unfortunately, with a few exceptions it's hard for me to get as excited for an indie as for a big engrossing adventure.  They're good stop-gaps, sometimes really good stop-gaps; but for the most part that's what they feel like, and at some point I'd like the gap they're filling to... stop.

This attitude makes your anti-Tencent stance extremely hypocritical :p

Honestly, I find it much easier to get excited about an Indie than any third-party or Nontendo "big" game.

I can't help how I feel. I want to feel that way, I really do!

Honestly my being picky also 'helps' here. More third-party games that I'd want are 'men with guns' games, or games with the same feel as a 'men with guns' game. I'm still going to be more interested by a fun-looking indie than TLoU2 on Switch, but sadly I won't be over-excited by either at this stage unless the indie is Celeste 2: Icy Boogaloo.

Your idea for a good Celeste sequel is ICE? Abolish ice levels.

I'm very much up for Celeste's take on icy levels, where they feel cold but there's no actual impact on traction.

Buskalilly wrote:

Honestly, I find it much easier to get excited about an Indie than any third-party or Nontendo "big" game.

This sums me up as well. I'm in a bit of a malaise with the big boy games. I've played some brilliant ones like Witcher and God of War, but I think the last one I played and felt excited about its potential was the Shadow of Mordor game. I was really hopeful that the nemesis system would lead to games that took aspects of procedural generation and the context of the player's actions in order to create tailor made playthroughs.


It's indies that are experimenting with games. Here's one on PC that I'm excited about.



It might turn out to be bad, but it's got some Papers Please vibes. I'd rather play something like this which takes risks than a safe EA game or whatever.

I think there's a general consensus here, which is: the best game would be a game about locking doors and switching off lights before you leave work.

I started playing football manager 2020 last night but didn't get very far because I was having too much fun with the fact that the game has a beautiful photo import tool.

Why do sports games think this is a good idea?

I remember Rainbow Six Vegas doing it on 360 and it was a achievement much like on FM. Also Perfect Dark was meant to have it on the N64 but we weren't allowed to shoot actual people back then.

I'm not sure that we're allowed to shoot actual people today mate.

Is that hair or a hat?

It's hair, but it does just look like one block texture.

I saw your new profile pic before your post talking about it and I knew you had scanned your face into a game. It also looks like one of those suspect pictures you used to see on Crimewatch.

Just thinking as at work yesterday a few chaps talking about COD and the latest update which was about 34GB and the game now has recommended 200GB space to be free on any platform.

Now on my One X I've a bog standard external drive which takes me to a total of 2TB and I could add one to my PC easily same with my PS4 if I need more space.

But next gen the SSD's on both the systems are going to be issue, surely, even though it's one of the big selling points.  

As let's take the Xbox Series X it comes with 1TB but if you want to expand it you basically need to buy a memory card.



So that's the Xbox issue, MS has the expandable storage space corned unless they allow others to make cards or someone figures out a way to use your own storage, this could be costly.

Then if we look at the PS5 that comes with 825GB and if you want to expand that you can use a PC SSD which great as you can just get one of the shelf much like you can with the PS3/4 but none on the market currently are the same speed as the SSD in the PS5, which could also be costly as they'll be new on the market.

That we have a system where expandable memory is available but could be costly because only one company selling it and another where you can't actually get anything to expand the space.

One factor which is worth considering is that, in theory, SSDs can mean for much smaller file sizes. Currently, if the same asset is used in multiple places it is copied as this allows the game to find the file quickly when it needs it. With an SSD, the file can just be included once and the game can quickly locate it in each different situation it's needed. Whether developers will make use of this . . . who knows?

The big thing is how quickly the console can move a game between the SSD and a traditional hard drive. If this process is fast, only the game which is currently being played needs to be on there, and you can just switch them if you want to play something you don't currently have installed.

I'm sure this will all be figured out by the time I buy one, in five years.

I'm genuinely still fine with no more than 500Gb as I just delete games that I'm not using and reinstall them when I need them. My internet is decent enough such that it's only massive files that take ages to download.

I know other people like to have everything available but for me personally I just don't see the problem here.

I usually do the same thing as Muss as well, though I did buy and external HD for my ps4 at the end of last year. Also I know this might be a big ask but it'd be nice if devs were a little better at compressing their data to keep overall file sizes a little smaller.

Will they though, as I'm thinking will games get bigger and the next COD is 300GB or something that's what three to five games saved on your drive. As it come up as the two chaps were discussing what they had to delete to get the updated to fit.

Also Buska both have said you can't put a Series X or PS5 game on to a HDD but you can do the other way around but for myself, I'd likely leave the One, 360, OG Xbox games on HDD and then all Series X games on the SSD.

The bigger the file, the more likely it is that there could have been optimisations for sure, but I think file sizes are only ever going to bloat upwards as development cycles become more and more about cutting edge graphics combined with the knowledge that consoles have big standard hard drives.

300gb is a ludicrous file size (even assuming that the 300gb is a combination of min free space + file size) but most games won't approach that. If they did, surely MS/Sony would partition off parts of the SSD so that they always had free space. Otherwise things just wouldn't run, or they would have file sizes that are bigger because they're deliberately reserving the space they need on top of the game itself.  

No, I don't think file sizes would get anywhere near that big on average. Even if they do, however, it's not like I ever have more than a couple of games on the go at any given time anyway.

That's why I said it was a big ask because if they aren't that arsed about doing it now then why would they start next gen? Though I have seen it being done by big companies as for example Ubi had several big patches for R6 Siege that actually consolidated the data to make the overall file size smaller than it was pre-patch.

It was just a extreme that could happen as 200GB now for COD at the moment seems a tad extreme which likely could be compressed. Just as Jas says if can't be assed now where base systems are 500GB, can't see them being bothered next gen.

I might just have become better with what I have installed for awhile personally and the few people I know in work, I guess will as well.

Holy moley. Games to RRP at £64.99 on the PS5/Xbox

Thank god for being able to sell on games.

I think people are overreacting personally as it's one game which has a higher price, and we've seen prices for games at launch on new consoles before, like the PS4 verison is meant to be £55 but will any of us actually pay that? (Maybe if we were to download of PSN)

Like we had this thread https://www.gnamer.com/t252-most-you-ve-paid-for-a-wii-u-game

Where Wii U games launched at £49.99, £10 more than PS360 but after a while were also £39.99 and I'm 99.999% sure I paid £59.99 for COD Ghosts for instance on PS4 at launch

The only thing I really take away from NBA 2K21 it's the first game not to use smart delivery unless you buy the collector's edition

Good memories of seeing Turok: Dinosaur in my local Blockbuster in 1997, with a 'Was £80, Now £70!' sticker on the box. It's down to a fiver in CEX now, so it just goes to show that games don't stay full price forever. My advice is to hold fire on NBA 2K21 for another twenty-three years and get it for a discount. 

I remember Res Evil 2 was £80 on N64 and at the time £20 on PS1