J4MES OX4D

The way I see it, if people have been paying £50 for PSN which is a complete rip-off in itself then what's another £20 on top? Sony are yet to justify even the basic price they've were charging since 2013 let alone any rises. Anyone that has reservations about this increase should absolutely get out of it now if they have an alternative. Microsoft will go the same way in time so finding an alternative there wont make a difference - there's already been Game Pass increases and limitations and Xbox Live wont be fifty notes forever either. If you have access to a PC then every platform being free is still one of the most overlooked benefits. I've only been saving my PS5 for single player exclusives because there is no way I am paying £50 (now £70) just for something I can do for free on Steam, UbiC, Bnet, EA Play plus the rest. If Sony actually had a full streaming service and backward compatibility library in play for a fixed non-tier price then it would be worth considering but in its current form, PSN is a scandalous charge especially when Sony are leeching off of other people's servers and services 95% of the time. You're essentially paying top-dollar for patches.

Looks like this game is getting a new name - 'Dayworld' LMAO! The Day Before looks to be getting a new name, as November release date inches closer WWW.EUROGAMER.NET The developer behind upcoming zombie MMO The Day Before has filed a new trademark for something known as Dayworld, sugg… This game just keeps on clowning itself I honestly think it's just a prank as well as being a scam.

Reviews are slowly drifting in and it's not looking too good from the big boys. 75% on PC Gamer and a 7/10 from IGN and Gamespot so far. These are perfectly good scores however this game was supposed to be the masterpiece across the board that justified Microsoft's acquisition of Bethesda and it being the huge console seller to bring Xbox closer to Playstation. Early indications suggest this isn't gonna be it although review scores are largely subjective and should be taken with a pinch of salt. Regardless, I expected a bit of a better media reception.

Very disappointed with Spurs last night. Same old culprits making the same old mistakes. I would've personally just fielded a full-strength side instead of relying on players that have proven time and time again that they aren't good enough and also don't have a future at the club. There's probably 4 that still need offing and another 5 brought in which includes like-for-likes and a new recognised striker. Sanchez is about as good as Gary Doherty was back in the day.

I definitely agree - I'd also much prefer to walk around a crafted planet with purpose than some barren wasteland generated by algorithms like in No Mans Sky. I think a lot of people who have genuine concerns are just a bit worried that the game isn't going to be as open or seamless as originally promoted especially with Todd Howard and Bethesda's track record.

The pandemic was a once in a generation situation which brought on many exceptional circumstances and the treasury was ultimately called upon to ensure the continuation of the economy and for the sake of the public. Welfare makes up a huge portion of taxpayer funding and this is something people and businesses relied on, en masse during this time. The entire economy would've hit a brick wall and people would've been burning through any and every penny they had to their name irrespective of savings and future earnings.

The boundary situation kinda leaves me in two minds - on the one hand there will still be plenty to explore and that includes crafted and generated material. On the other, things like boundaries, loading screens and invisible walls will add a certain level of tackiness and restrictions which could greatly impact immersion. Bethesda have pretty much said you can land and go anywhere on any planet so if there is a hint that you can only land in zones which are then further limited to a closed off boundary then that will be another atrocious lie by them and quite a bad one too. Thankfully those that have paid £25 more will get to play the game a week early so lots will be uncovered and reviews will also be in by then but I seriously hope this isn't an instance of cracks showing.

Geezer got arrested🤣 The Starfield Leaker Has Been Arrested, His Apology to Todd Howard Not Enough to Avoid Jail WCCFTECH.COM The story of the infamous Starfield leaker hasn't ended well, as the man was recently arrested for theft of property, among other things

25 years on from the original Way too early to judge but does look interesting. Not too sure about some of the futuristic elements but at least it's not too whacky. Defo keep my eye on this

Because Microsoft have made it abundantly clear that all 3rd party games must release on both the Series consoles simultaneously unless there are exceptional circumstances. Larian had to negotiate with Phil Spencer a way which BG3 could be played on the S and meet MS's requirements without the product being withdrawn at either end. This is not a normal circumstance and proves how difficult it is to meet the requirement set by Microsoft having this console in place. Losing local co-op on a game of this nature is an absolute hammer blow and this is a rare case of users knowing a feature has been removed - how many games in development and that have been released whereby features have been omitted because they are having to work in-line with the Series S. VRAM is the most critical aspect of these consoles so this BG3 issue is stark proof and this is also a 6 year old game with a fairly tried and tested engine. Developers have been very clear on the limitations and restrictions going on for a year now. EA release FIFA on Switch simply for extra money - they launched the same game 4 years in a row with merely squad updates and they are very clear about this. FIFA 22 was still FIFA 19 in everything but name. It's not comparable because Nintendo do not have any stipulations that multiplatform games are to launch simultaneously with their rival counterparts and what is expected of them. EA are not doing it to cater to Nintendo fans - they are just oozing as much dosh as possible and are self-publishing through Nintendo's open market. MS's publication contract requires that softwares are compatible with all current systems and this is where devs are being challenged and limited. There are absolutely stacks of interviews and information about this all over the net. You also mentioned mobile phone upgrades and that just highlights my point - Apple stop supporting older models to push users towards newer iterations and because maintaining older and outdated frameworks hamper growth development of apps and services. There is also not one developer in existence who looks at Steam's hardware survey to determine how to make a game - they do not limit themselves in this way. If they want to swerve MAC, Linux, Win7+ because it holds them back or wastes time then they will do this and many do. It's not 'elitist' to be concerned about how the Series S is holding things back and certainly developers must feel rather frustrated - people bought into this current gen with huge expectations. The S is a bizarre bridge between the One X and Series X and just another Microsoft unit filler. Starfield and Baldurs Gate 3 may be huge games but they can be ran at max settings on a 8 year old PC. Those are games that have been in development for 6+ years as it is but for proper next gen titles, they will likely have to be scaled back just to suit a minority and their publication contract with Microsoft.

Those games were released after their mainline counterparts were completed and did not impact development. The big complaint from developers and publishers currently is them being restricted and having to essentially scale back or produce two different versions of their games simultaneously - this not only reduces the quality and potential of the product but can see timescales increase. Resident Evil 2 N64 is a perfect example because the project was offloaded to a small studio, who in a year were able to optimise the already-completed Playstation build and release it as a standalone a year later. This did not impact the original game, it did not hold back development and an N64 version was not taken into consideration throughout either. It was a welcome surprise but the gap between the PS and N64 was not as wide as it it is with the S and Series X especially in terms of internal technologies and optimisation scales. Nowadays developers are having to produce games with the S in mind - it's nothing more than an Xbox One X.2 integrated into this generation. Sure it has an attractive price-point for for £200 more, you could get the big brother and use it the entire generation. Plop it on finance and you can pay for it over 5+ years rather than pay £250 now and then another £450 down the line. The S will probably stop receiving support before 2025 and a lot of developers will have already twisted Microsoft's arm in mandatory support by then because it's going to prove more and more unworkable. Many developers including Remedy and Larian (who are struggling with developing Baldur's Gate 3 for Xbox currently) have been pretty vocal about this Control Developer Explains Why Xbox Series S Is a Problem for Devs GAMERANT.COM One of Remedy Entertainment's devs chimes in on the Xbox Series S, explaining why the low-spec console is a problem for the developers.

This may not be up for long

Looks interesting plus some excellent motion capture animations. Bit of a different setting to the original and some DNA from Control it seems but Remedy always seem to do a decent job

Delayed once again until Q1 2024. Understandable but this will amount to a 13 month delay at the very least. They should probably pull the plug on release dates until it's set in stone.

Just seen that Starfield wasn't actually playable at Gamescom. A lot of very scripted marketing chat but not a single scrap of independent gameplay shown. Bit of a shame really - I don't think it's a case of the game not being as good as portrayed like how No Mans Sky and Cyberpunk were hidden until the 11th hour but it would've been nice to see them put their money where they mouth was and showcase some of the features they've been talking about. A few of the usual suspects that said Cyberpunk was a bugless, flawless masterpiece are armed with review copies so I'd take what they say pre-release with a pinch of salt in light of this.

The deal has not gone through yet. If it does, it wont be concluded until October at the earliest. Also Sony's agreements are set in stone and have to be honored the same with Deathloop which had a year's exclusivity with Playstation signed just weeks before the deal with Bethesda and Microsoft was finally agreed and before the game released. The exclusivity deal is really nothing significant anyway - it may as well be scrapped altogether it's that pointless.

Looks very decent

S is definitely holding developers back significantly with high-end technologies such as Unreal Engine 5 especially with Phil Spencer promising that every game on their current iteration would run at 60fps guaranteed - something Starfield wont. Devs are having to make a secondary version of their games with key optimisation features omitted and this takes and wastes time especially for a small and rather needless market. Microsoft also don't accept publishers skipping the S so they are forced to produce scaled-down versions for a far smaller market. Unreal 4/old gen games will remain for the next 3 years because Microsoft are holding games back and developers will also have to sit on the likes of UE4 a while longer rather than utilise UE5 as well as removing current gen tech such as ray tracing and dynamic upscaling. It's different with Starfield as it's an in-house game some time really doesn't matter about time and the Creation Engine is so old, it's still capable of making really expansive offline experiences. It's still possible that the S version of Starfield is another PS4 Cyberpunk and we've yet to see any gameplay from this version. It should run fine though. I wish Microsoft would stop releasing weaker consoles by intent to double-dip the market and increase unit sales though. The less powerful counterparts like the S have attractive price-points i.e £250 but after a couple of years, people will end up having to spend full price on the big brother console or run the risk of their games eventually not being supported or being stripped bare of features as well as performance woes. It just costs people more in the long run and even with this tactic, MS still struggle to sell units anywhere near Sony and Nintentdo.

Doom Eternal: The Ancient Gods Part Two (Expansion)

Some surprise news! Brand New Broken Sword Game Announced Alongside Remaster of First Game | gamescom 2023 - IGN WWW.IGN.COM Big news in the world of Broken Sword: developer Revolution Software has announced a brand new game in the series alongside a remaster of the much-loved first game.

I hope this campaign isn't rushed but it'll be interesting to see what Sledgehammer do with it. I didn't really enjoy MW2's in the end - there were varied missions but not much variety within especially where you were in an AC130 for 20 minutes or roof hopping vehicles for the same amount of time. It took several missions before we finally got a proper boots on the ground gun mission! The sniper mission also missed the mark which was quite disappointing. Wasn't much innovation and most missions became exhausting with the same old premise from start to finish in each. Graphics were excellent though and there were a few neat ideas that came off despite a few wobbles.

Out in a couple of days. Not my type of game but it's made from an exceptional developer so I may grab it

I even said that as the first 5 words in this thread🤣