E3 2016 - June 12th to 14th

gizmo

It's worth noting that the initial press release from Frontwire used some pretty poor wording to describe Valve's involvement in the project. They've since posted a follow up here, clarifying the situation, which was also covered in PC Gamer's article on the subject here.

The project itself can be found on Steam here. So far it's just a bunch of assets in Unreal Engine 4 and to be honest, technical hurdles aside, I'd be amazed if it gets any further without a Cease & Desist being issued.

Icyseanfitz

Is anyone actually expecting anything good this year? I was excited for Bethesda but I've a feeling remastered skyrim is what were getting, cdpr said they wouldn't be showing their new game, maybe rockstar has something? But again they take forever with pc releases and my ps4 doesn't really interest me anymore.
Nintendo nx is a no show......but we have watchdogs 2....great.
I just can't get excited for this year at all, psvr might be interesting but again you'll probably need to buy the ps 4.5 for that.
Probably another 10 minutes of last guardian without a release on top of everything

Forgot bioware but ea have well and truly f***ed them up by now, new mass effect will probably resemble the division/destiny

Generic Dreadhead

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

Is anyone actually expecting anything good this year?

Honestly, No. I am expecting it to be a let down

Anything I will want to play will have releases soooooo far out from today that I won't physically be able to get excited cause it'll be like agggggeeeeeesss still it comes out

Retr0gamer

I haven't expected anything good from triple A games in years. Doom was the only high profile game to surprise me in ages.

Cuphead gameplay, looks and sounds really pretty but take that away and I think it looks a very average platformer. Bosses are supposed to be where it's at with this one though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy0bpSyeCuQ

Retr0gamer

That video isn't selling me on it anyway although previous videos with the boss battles looked a hell of a lot better.

I was hoping for a good Contra style game so hopefully it delivers some good boss battles.

Retr0gamer

Retr0gamer wrote: »

That video isn't selling me on it anyway although previous videos with the boss battles looked a hell of a lot better.

I was hoping for a good Contra style game so hopefully it delivers some good boss battles.

Yeah I can't find the article I was reading earlier, but I got the impression reading it that they were under some pressure from feedback to have traditional platforming sections as opposed to it being just boss rush.

_Redzer_

I'd love red dead 3 and a remake. I'm greedy, I'll have both

Sieghardt

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

Is anyone actually expecting anything good this year?

I'm expecting Devil May Cry 5 and the Resident Evil 2 & Ridge Racer Type 4 remakes to be good
Resident Evil 7 could go either way
From Software's game should be interesting too

CastorTroy

I would like all games that are shown to be planned for release within a year.

Penn

Oh man if we got a Devil May Cry 5 announcement I'd lose my sh*t. Wouldn't even care if they said it's not out til 2018, just once it's coming.

Also, I almost wouldn't be surprised to get info on the next GTA. GTA4 was released 2008 and first trailer for GTAV was three years later in 2011 if I remember right. Been three years since GTAV came out and they'll likely be using the same engine and most of the same mechanics as V for the next game. That being said, I'm guessing we'll get the next Red Dead game instead.

Zero-Cool

Read earlier how Rockstar have earned 500 million dollars from gta online microtransactions alone, much more than they ever expected. It's almost free money when you compare it to the ****ty updates it gets. A couple of new cars, clothes and missions every few months. I think it has changed rockstars whole approach to it's upcoming games. Next GTA might be completely online (maybe a single player tacked on) if RDR gets announced, either remaster or new one, I'd expect a similar online model in that too, going much further than the online in original RDR.

EoinHef

GTA Online had a F2P model even though it was part of a fully paid game IMO. Stupid amount of grind to get the high level gear. If thats the way they go in future it will probably kill the franchise for me. With the success its had though i must be in a minority.

pablomakaveli

I never got into GTAO either. Couldnt actually get into an online game for around a month after release. After that it was fun for a week or two with friends but it just became a boring grind.

Given the money they made from it i wouldnt be surprised at all if the next one is online only. I hope im wrong but at the very least we wont be seeing DLC expansions like the Lost and the Damned and Ballad of Gay Tony again.

The GTA thing amazes me, but it shouldn't.

I played it 99% in co-op with pals doing missions, heists ets, never once did the game get in your face for money or make you feel like you had to pay money to keep up. What are folks doing with shark cards ???? Buying property and helicopters or what ever?

EoinHef

Played mostly with a group of about 5 friends,never bought a shark card. Was level 81 by the time i had a high end apartment,armoured car,sports car,helicopter and a nice little rhib dinghy.

Played everything on hard and with gang members for extra RP and $. Took that long even though i was maxing my time with the game by doing it as efficently as i could. That included a serious amount of repetition in normal missions and heists to get to that point. Only for all my mates were playing i would have given up long before that. Was pretty sick of it by the end,repitition and load times really sucked the joy from it at that stage for me.

Its a valid point that this stuff wasnt a 100% nessacery to do the missions but whats the point if you cant get new gear. New gear was the only variety in the online IMO.
Again judging by the success its had,my opinion is a minority one.

All i want from R* at E3 is a remastered RDR,as i never played it when it came out. If they want to go all out online for there future titles best of luck to them but i cant see them being for me if they follow the current GTA O formula.

J. Marston

Considering how easy and popular it was to glitch money, I find it incredible, almost unbelievable, that they made that much from micro-transactions.

Icyseanfitz

tried to get into gtao on pc after release and again a few months back, was constantly having connection issues where everyone would leave the server but me couldnt be arsed going back to that broken game

Zero-Cool

I've never bought a shark card (gta online money) but just checked there and 38 euro gets you 3.5 million. To put into perspective, to become a ceo (new feature) costs approx 3.5 mil. New cars released, some cost 1 mil. A yacht with all the trimmings cost about 8 mil. Some high end apartments cost over 1mil. Contact lenses cost 10 fecking grand....

That 38 euro will buy you absolute shyte online. As stated above, anyone on the Boards crew with multi millions just used grindy glitches.

Now i have no doubt there are people buying the shark cards but you need to spend 75 euro to buy a yacht.....that is just madness.....and rockstar are just rolling around in the cash

I wonder if this had anything to do with Benzies leaving.

Robert ninja

EoinHef wrote: »

GTA Online had a F2P model even though it was part of a fully paid game IMO. Stupid amount of grind to get the high level gear.

It's the same situation for a LOT of game these days. SFV, MGSV, Destiny. It's a double dip. Make them pay full price and now since they're invested, pile on the grind-skip and booster monetisation which has been sharpened to a science at this point to be as addictive as possible.

It's as greedy as it gets and I've distanced myself from all companies that have been up to it. Grind skip and boosters is only ok to monetize if the game is actually free... or a reduced price at least.

Generic Dreadhead

Robert ninja wrote: »

It's the same situation for a LOT of game these days. SFV, MGSV, Destiny. It's a double dip. Make them pay full price and now since they're invested, pile on the grind-skip and booster monetisation which has been sharpened to a science at this point to be as addictive as possible.

I'm gonna be that guy, but Destiny doesn't have a "Grind Skip" booster you can pay actual money for.
The only things it has that ask for real real life currency are cosmetics or emotes.

There were false articles a while back about buying things like Level Boosters and Ammo Packs but that never happened.

But yes, you have a valid point about the addiction thing, they all have teams of behavioural psychologists working for them now (Destiny included) whose job is to keep you on the hamster wheel.

It's these types of people who make King Games and Zynga and all those crowds their boat loads of cash

the groutch

Cormac... wrote: »

It's these types of people who make King Games and Zynga and all those crowds their boat loads of cash

And all power to companies if they can make money that way.
I just don't want offline story modes disappearing from games because the microtransaction model is the "easy way out" for game developers/publishers.

martyos121

the groutch wrote: »

And all power to companies if they can make money that way.
I just don't want offline story modes disappearing from games because the microtransaction model is the "easy way out" for game developers/publishers.

The good thing is that these days, for ever company that sells out, there's two new ones with innovative ideas to make up for it. It might mean the death of some huge game series eventually, but something else will inevitably fill the void.

MiskyBoyy

Cormac... wrote: »

I'm gonna be that guy, but Destiny doesn't have a "Grind Skip" booster you can pay actual money for.
The only things it has that ask for real real life currency are cosmetics or emotes.

There were false articles a while back about buying things like Level Boosters and Ammo Packs but that never happened.

What about these level boosters to bring you straight to level 25?


http://www.polygon.com/2015/12/15/10210066/destiny-level-boost-microtransaction

Generic Dreadhead

MiskyBoyy wrote: »

What about these level boosters to bring you straight to level 25?


http://www.polygon.com/2015/12/15/10210066/destiny-level-boost-microtransaction

Never happened. Did happen, I was unaware.

MiskyBoyy

Cormac... wrote: »

Never happened.

I can see them on the xbox store right now.....?

https://store.xbox.com/en-IE/Xbox-One/DLC/Destiny-Level-25-Hunter-Pack/0d852c73-3271-4bb1-a1af-357d8345fe1d

dunworth1

MiskyBoyy wrote:

I can see them on the xbox store right now.....?

And you got one free with one of the expansions if I remember correctly

MiskyBoyy

dunworth1 wrote: »

And you got one free with one of the expansions if I remember correctly

I don't even play destiny any more but just happened to spot these level 25 boosters yesterday when looking up the "Rise of Iron" expansion on the store.

Generic Dreadhead

MiskyBoyy wrote: »

I can see them on the xbox store right now.....?

https://store.xbox.com/en-IE/Xbox-One/DLC/Destiny-Level-25-Hunter-Pack/0d852c73-3271-4bb1-a1af-357d8345fe1d

I had a look on the PS store and never found them. But did some further googling at it seems like they do still exist. So yeah, I was in the wrong there, apologies.

dunworth1 wrote: »

And you got one free with one of the expansions if I remember correctly

Yes, you got 1 free.

It's a VERY weird thing because (what with destinys 2 level system) being level 25 actually doesn't matter a damn.

If you're level 25 and have a Light Level of 60, you're still fairly rubbish overall.
It would be like being lvl 30 in the Division but having a single digit gear Score, or Being level 50 in Borderlands but using level 7 weapons.

Like, going 1-40 is pretty much a tutorial and has absolutely no grind (lets say there are ~40 missions, well you're levelling up once per mission or so).
The Grind begins AFTER you hit level 40 (and the boost is to level 25, not even 40).

It's kind of an odd one in that no one I know who plays Destiny has ever used one, nor would they ever consider using them.
At the time they were lambasted by the community since it's a dumb thing to exist, let alone buy.

I'm trying to draw comparisons that make sense, but it would be like paying €30 to bypass the 1st 5 hours of Skyrim and just load in at level 10 (but still with the basic stater sword you would have had at the beginning regardless) or something.
Like it doesn't actually help you play or enjoy the game and you're just jumping on the hamster wheel anyway so why skip the quickest, easiest part.

The max light level you can be (at the moment) is 335, now if it was a boost to give you say 10 free light levels that would be different, you could buy your way up the chain to 335 without doing the content.

Anyway, I digress, it's a totally dumb pack, so dumb I actually can't believe it actually became a thing cause it's so dumb.

Still though, I guess I was incorrect and they actually made it a thing.

Apolgies for dragging this off topic. I can't be the only Boards Destiny player who was under the assumption that that whole DLC boost was utter horses**t.

Regardless of it is actually helpful, it's a s**ty practice for to exist full stop, and I won't defend that. It's kind of one of those scratching your head "what were they thinking moments". 30 f**king your euro to skip the easiest, least grind, 1st 6 hours or so. What. The. F**k.... it's laughable

ItsHoggie

And them level 25 boosters cost like €30 is it? Crazy money for something which means f*ck all in terms of level wise in destiny.

I've no problem with micro-transactions as long as there only cosmetics and don't take anything away from the game if you don't buy them or give you a way to unlock them through actually playing the game. But keeping certain items locked behind a paywall no matter how small they are is kinda petty.