RavenHawk profile
RavenHawk's Avatar

RavenHawk profile

183
RMB Jump Avatar
RMB Jump responded to RavenHawk's comment in
2 Weeks ago
Battle royale probably won’t be coming to Ghost Recon WildlandsBattle royale probably won’t be coming to Ghost Recon Wildlands
RavenHawk Avatar
Good.

I'm getting tired of every game trying to cater to everyone and cash in on the latest trends.Reply
RMB Jump Avatar

cater to a majority

FTFY

sign in to comment
RavenHawk Avatar
RavenHawk commented on
1 Month ago
After Parkland shooting, a US lawmaker proposes a tax on violent gamesAfter Parkland shooting, a US lawmaker proposes a tax on violent games
RavenHawk Avatar
How about putting such a tax on gun and ammunition sales instead...

Either they're dumb enough to believe videogames are to blame and/or they just see an opportunity to get money from somewhere else. Seeing as how the republican tax reform will see a huge reduction in tax revenue from corporations now.
sign in to comment
RavenHawk Avatar
RavenHawk commented on
4 Months ago
EA are not giving up on microtransactions, and say cosmetics won’t work for Battlefront 2EA are not giving up on microtransactions, and say cosmetics won’t work for Battlefront 2
RavenHawk Avatar
They threw the 'violating canon' argument out the window when they decided that heroes could fight in any time period, example Rey and Boba Fett fighting in the clone wars.
sign in to comment
RavenHawk Avatar
RavenHawk responded to QDP2 comment in
5 Months ago
Battlefront 2 once featured an Overwatch-style mode with cosmetic loot boxesBattlefront 2 once featured an Overwatch-style mode with cosmetic loot boxes
QDP2 Avatar

I'm not trying to defend the decision to put statistical buffs behind micro-transactions. They made BF2 the literal definition of pay-to-win (the main reason I haven't considered buying the game).


The decision to drop loot box sales (and income) to repair the community backlash though? I'll give credit where it's due. This was the best scenario possible for gamers at the moment. This is the end of my complements for EA though, and the beginning of my skepticism.


If you read my original comment you'll notice I still think they'll put themselves first in the long run, but they won't be as blatant as they were on release.


The entire idea of loot boxes over DLC is a good way for them to earn more money. More people will start to invest if the first barrier is lower (1, 5, I assume 10 loot boxes are still cheaper than an average DLC these days). The lower the price and the greater the reward, the more likely people return and pay more. Addicted investors will keep buying the loot boxes till they have everything (far more income than DLCs) whilst those that previously didn't want to invest £40+ on Expansion Passes will now be tricked into spending more slowly through £2-£10 packages.


Statistically speaking its a flat-out win for EA. It would have been a win for customers too, if only they hadn't imbalanced the game to give payers a literal advantage. Give them skins, or let them unlock kit faster. But don't allow their rockets to shoot further, to come off cool-down faster, or deal more damage. By giving abilities 'levels' to progress through forces people who dont want to invest to either specify into 1 roll or to be at a disadvantage to others. The ideal way to remove satisfying competition from the game.


We can hope customer complaints continue to the point that they re-balance to remove the stronger P2W aspects, but odds are against it. Either they find a way to earn their money, or costs will be cut with DLCs being shortened/rushed out the doors.

RavenHawk Avatar

It's a PR stunt to put out the fires. It's meant to make them look like the good guys.


"Microtransactions are easily startled. But they'll soon be back. And in greater numbers." - Obi-Loot KenoBox.


Best thing for gamers to do is to remember EA's original intent, hold firm, and not buy this game. And if you must buy it, wait until a sale and/or this quarter of EA's fiscal year is over.


EDIT: This isn't a dig at you. I agree with a lot of what you have said. Lootboxes could have been a great alternative source of income in exchange for free maps and other game content. They just went about it in the worst possible way. And a lot of gamers will see this announcement and think "hey, they listened to us! I can now buy this game". Forgive and forget. And then get angry because the same thing will happen with more games down the line because EA got away with it here.


Personally, I don't think the players were even considered when they made the move to temporarily disable crystal purchases. It was more of a last resort to extinguish the flames of this massive PR disaster and it was a happy accident for players that they were affected by it.

sign in to comment
RavenHawk Avatar
RavenHawk responded to Darkedone02 comment in
7 Months ago
The developer of Early Access disaster The Dead Linger on what went wrongThe developer of Early Access disaster The Dead Linger on what went wrong
Darkedone02 Avatar
I think their first mistake is trying to make yet another zombie game. From what I've keep hearing constantly hearing is that the zombie theme is over-saturated. We seen to much of it, have so many games themed off of it, it's like beating a dead horse over and over and over again. It's now to the point where people are very repulsive against the theme because of the over-saturation.

I rather have a sci-fi experience over the zombies theme, because those bring out a larger audience then the whole "horror" zombie cliche.
RavenHawk Avatar

If memory serves me right, these guys came out with this concept when zombie games were on the rise. The market, at the time, was not over-saturated yet.


I remember seeing it on steam and being quite excited for it.

sign in to comment
RavenHawk Avatar
RavenHawk commented on
7 Months ago
The Steam Early Access disasters we shouldn't forget aboutThe Steam Early Access disasters we shouldn't forget about
RavenHawk Avatar
I'd like to bring attention to another turd that ought to be forgotten.

StarForge.
sign in to comment
NirvanaD34th Avatar
NirvanaD34th responded to RavenHawk's comment in
1 Year ago
This is how much extra we'll pay to have a Uplay game appear on our Steam account…This is how much extra we'll pay to have a Uplay game appear on our Steam account…
RavenHawk Avatar
The only thing that's inconvenient for me is that my Steam friendslist doesn't really transfer to any of the other clients (although I saw something about uPlay being able to do something in that regard if you and your friends opt in, but I haven't fiddled with it to find out) and most of the services don't let you change your display name because they just flat out use your account name. So there's always a little bit of confusion when you add one another on different clients because the names don't match up all the time.

I've had some issues with Uplay and Origin in the past, but at least Uplay has been improving and they have some pretty neat features that others do not. Origin on the other hand doesn't appear to have changed their client a whole lot since release...

I'll admit that initially I wanted to keep my games in one library, but after I realized that my Uplay library was growing in the process I stopped caring. It really doesn't make much of a difference anymore and I'll save money where I can.

EDIT: Thought of another benefit of Steam over the others - Steam controller support. It's possible to use the controller for non-steam games, but it becomes much more difficult to set up and you can't import profiles that may already exist for a game.Reply
NirvanaD34th Avatar

its called linking your steam account to uplay. I actually have all 3 accts stea origin and uplay linked through uplay

sign in to comment
MrAptronym Avatar
MrAptronym responded to RavenHawk's comment in
2 Years ago
The Division hacks can't be fixed "without complete rewrite" says netcode devThe Division hacks can't be fixed "without complete rewrite" says netcode dev
RavenHawk Avatar

No, they didn't. It was initially only going to be on consoles but they decided to build a pc version after quite a few petitions, etc.

Reply
MrAptronym Avatar

That makes more sense then. Still, yikes. What a mistake to make.

sign in to comment
Aever Avatar
Aever responded to RavenHawk's comment in
2 Years ago
Star Wars: 1313 could return according to Lucasfilm head, please yesStar Wars: 1313 could return according to Lucasfilm head, please yes
RavenHawk Avatar
I'm really hoping for a gritty Star Wars game intended for a mature audience. I was very saddened to hear that 1313 had been scrapped.

With a little bit of luck we might see one, though I remain skeptical with Disney calling the shots.Reply
Aever Avatar

They're riding the train hype generated by the movie, resurrecting dead projects that have "star wars" anywhere in the description. And yes, it's Disney.


So ... I'm not very optimistic, although I guess this gives a glitter of hope that maybe they can put out a good Star Wars game that isn't aimed at the youngest audience.

sign in to comment
Fraser Brown Avatar
Fraser Brown responded to RavenHawk's comment in
2 Years ago
Total War: Attila is going medieval in the Age of Charlemagne expansionTotal War: Attila is going medieval in the Age of Charlemagne expansion
RavenHawk Avatar

Rome was my introduction to the series when I was a wee general growing into his armchair so I'll always have a soft spot for it. There are some things that no other Total War game has been able to replicate yet (the impact of a cavalry charge to name one).


But I honestly feel like Medieval 2 is my favorite. There's a wide variety of mods available that completely change the game.


The more modern titles started to streamline and strip features that I greatly enjoy whilst adding nothing interesting to me. With Shogun 2 the map started to feel smaller with the proximity of settlements to one another, in some cases you could just hop from one castle to the next each turn, but I let that go simply because Japan is a fairly small country. Overall, I still had fun with it.


Then came Rome II and despite desperate attempts to enjoy it, I cannot. The world they created with Rome II is vast as an ocean but only as deep as the most shallow puddle on a sidewalk. The campaign map is large but feels very cramped because the settlements are over-inflated in size and take up so much room and to top it off are given a huge aura of influence that the enemy can't cross, thus taking away even more space for armies to maneuver on. Speaking of armies, you are no restricted to only a handful. An arbitrary restriction for no other reason than.. well. Because the game says so. Casualties from battle don't matter anymore short of having a unit completely obliterated because they just regenerate the next turn. Even your General is simply replaced by the next nameless (ok, they have names but do you care?) face if he is killed in battle.


Sieges are almost non-existent because you're either assaulting the same little village over and over with the same generic garrison. By the time you finally find a walled settlement there's no one left aside from the weak garrison because the ai tends to run away from you and leave its cities undefended.


Then I just don't know what they did with battles. Either they sped up unit movement or their morale breaks much quicker, but in the older games a lot of the fun was from watching armies slug it out. Now they just blob up for a few seconds and then one side runs away. It happens so fast and so 'blobby' I can't even see the motion captured fighting unfold.


Unfortunately, I think it's another franchise I'm going to have to step away from. I don't know if it's because my interests as a gamer are shifting as I get older or if games are moving away from what I like.

Reply
Fraser Brown Avatar

See, I reckon Japan's relatively small size compared to the other TW maps is one of the reasons that Shogun 2 is the best. Everything is simply more focused.

sign in to comment