GamesBeat interviews four lead developers for the four racing games and asks them: What makes your game unique, and why should we choose it over the others?
The Outerhaven writes: With the closure of The Crew's online servers, Ubisoft has started removing access to the game from anyone who owns it on Ubisoft Connect.
Wait. I don't get it. I reported on something that I recently noticed. I did mention in my article that I wouldn't have noticed if I hadn't gone to play The Division 2. That said, if this was nearly a week ago, I wouldn't know, as NO ONE REPORTED ON IT! Not IGN. Not Gamespot. Not Kotaku. No one.
You got people here complaining that there are any real gaming journalists and game journalism sucks, but when someone is acting, doing something to make something known to the public about what a company is doing. What do you do? You poke fun at it. What is it that people want? Do you want to complain for the sake of it? Or do you actually want people to do something to make those who aren't in the know aware of the shady stuff that's happening and to sound the alarm?
It's the "oh well" setting in on digital users. They don't care they don't own their stuff for some odd reason. 🤷🏽.
Good for you! People sometimes just feel the need to show how little they actually have to say. Very respectful dressing down, btw, which is another thing we need more of.
I appreciate your article,
- "If this isn’t considered both a “WTF” moment and setting a dangerous precedent, I don’t know what else it would be"
- "it could also signal other publishers that removing games from our accounts would be okay"
- "Maybe those firmly against this digital future have a point after all"
- "This. Is. Fucked. Up."
As someone against an only-digital/streaming future for entertainment content (movies/TV shows/games/books), it feels like talking into a void about the points above on this website, or on Twitter, or with my friends, etc. People don't get it. I'm strongly contemplating whether this will be my last generation of PlayStation & Xbox consoles (I'm confident enough that Nintendo's next system will still support physical media and that their 1st-party games won't have online-required installation or usage restrictions).
He is one of the long running trolls of this site, he never says anything positive. Every single one of his posts are either incorrect or flat out stupid. Pay him no mind.
I'm so done with Ubisoft, removing games one paid for is a new low...
Bye Ubisoft,
You've done f#c*ed it up !
This was me 9 years ago, when I realized all they wanted to make were filler boring games that are packed with micro-trash-actions.
Snooze! Moving on from Ubi-junk!
I see they're trying their best to surpass Activision Blizzard for being the most hated gaming company. Keep at it, Ubisoft, I believe!
Digital Foundry : Whether it's via FPS Boost or bespoke software upgrades, backwards compatibility on the current-gen consoles delivered an unexpected delight - the ability to liberate older console games from their 30fps limits, running them at 60 frames per second or even higher. FPS Boost did the business for Xbox Series consoles on an impressive range of titles, but there was always the sense that PS5 could do more. It's a hunch that checks out as a range of frame-rate unlocks are available for PS5, covering many must-have games - the major caveat being that only exploitable consoles running on older firmwares are invited to the party.
you love to see new life being breathed into older titles but damn the process to get there. It should be automatic that these work for everyone... not just those who exploit their systems. Really wish Sony and MS would keep this program going officially.
Damn this sucks. I want this shit so bad, but I’m not jailbreaking my console. And frankly I shouldn’t have to. I’m not a tech person, but is it really that hard for developers to unlock the framerate? Or would that have to be a large patch?
"but is it really that hard for developers to unlock the framerate?"
I guess it's not.
But it has become a profitable business if you do so.
So no one would pay for only the framerate patched to being unlocked. So studios need to offer more than that.
But this would take more time, polishing and would cost more money. So they shy away, but won't unlock the framerate, either.
That's just my personal assumption. But from what I can comprehend technically, it shouldn't be difficult to unlock framerates via a patch for older games.
... if it hadn't became a business.
frame-rate unlock should be free ...
We've seen many devs offer free patches and updates to pretty old PC titles, even bonuses ... so why can't devs offer the frame unlock patch for free (in consultation with the platform-producers) for a title from just a generation earlier?
RaidenBlack
"frame-rate unlock should be free ..."
Obviously the result of that thinking is that developers aren't even going to do it.
If they had been allowed to charge $5-10 you would see incentivized developers doing it way more often.
People just always want everything for free, but it's not free to make the patch, people have to code it then other people have to test it, and there will always be other costs involved.
If people want dollar store gaming then expect to get what you pay for.
Raiden I might be wrong but last I thought it cost money to put patches out on consoles.
As far as me paying for it, I'm not all that interested tbh. Not enough to pay for it with older games, and newer games have been pretty decent about it for the most part.
Sounds like the modder has to go in to make changes to unlock it on a game by game basis. "Simple" enough to do it unofficially, but to have it done officially, they need someone to go in a make that change, put out a patch and put it through certification, which I believe is not necessarily a cheap thing to do. It's questionable if going through this would then give them enough sales to make it worthwhile.
Many games still have physics tied to framerate, i think it's cause they wouldn't want to go in and do anything extra. Then there's the 10 dollar upgrades they rather charge. The problem is that there's no compromise, cause if I could mod my PS4 and all I'd lose is online play then id jailbreak it immediately. Mods have done so much for PC games and they could do the same for consoles, but manufacturers hafto be willing to compromise.
It's not to hard to do and there's youtube videos that break it down really well. ANyway most of us here arent able to break are console anyway due to being up to date on firmware from playing
Yep, this sucks having to require a jailbreak for something that should be standard in our industry by now. I learned my lesson when PS4 was jailbroken and I didn't keep a console on low firmware for years, but now I'm holding onto two low firmware PS5s specifically because there are features I'll be able to do that you can't do on official firmware, so this will pay off for me soon enough.
The series' next iteration is coming this year.
I hope Project Cars turns out well!
I choose...three of them. I'm skipping The Crew. Did not care for the beta. If my friends enjoy it, I'll grab it though.
Edit: I fixed it. Sorry for the confusion. I didn't even see The Crew up there at first.
Played all but the crew. Forza Horizon my favourite simply because its not track racer.
Driveclub looked great and handled well, but didn't feel different from any other track racer. (I'm not a fan of them at all though so my opinion probably wouldn't count for much there!)
Project Cars was the worst one, but the demo track set up was boring and maybe didn't do it justice.
Wish I had played The Crew, it looks most appealing to me.
Go with the features you want or even reviews if you have to.
Just give me DC and a wheel and I'll see you when the ps5 releases.