That sour electric aroma you can smell is the collective anxiety-stench of games journalists trying to decide whether it’s worth sitting through the full investor presentation in the hopes of discovering some proper context for these pitiful morsels - perhaps even a unique angle which none of those other hacks have discovered, the feckless layabouts.

So he’s taking his frustrations out on the reader by padding his article with sympathy-bait? I’ve come to really dislike Rock Paper Shotgun articles lately

I’d like to remember Evolve more fondly than I do, but I just didn’t have as much fun with it as I hoped. My strongest memories are of feeling annoyed at a constantly recharging jetpack

I think maybe you have too strong of a focus on plot. It’s there to give structure to the breakdown of a family that is passing down mental, emotional, and supernatural problems like they’re hereditary. It’s a showcase of how a family raised to be tools can devolve when they’re finally being used.

!Personally my favourite part is the massive tone shift at the very end when Peter is finally possessed and receives his revelation. It’s a beautifully crafted scene that balances being celebratory and morbid. A fantastically unique payoff to an entire movie’s worth of buildup.!<

Hopefully it’ll come out on steam next year or something as a single complete edition, just like Control.

easy cash grab

You said it

Personal preservation is perfectly valid and doesn’t automatically mean sharing aka piracy. If killing emulation prevents a legit owner from playing their game you’re diminishing the authority of that ownership. Now I’m not arguing all claims of personal preservation are always ok since some games give you a limited license to play and are not owned, but that just means it’s important to see the nuance

There’s no simple answer to that since games become inaccessible in different ways and with different severities. It’ll always be an argument you have to make.

It’s not about the number of years, it’s about how accessible the original title is. The less accessible, the better you can justify the existence of emulating that title

It was a good decision. It was also smart of them to review the initial 100 planet goal to add some much needed context

It’s a double edged sword. Everybody’s got a different line for when something descriptive inadvertently becomes prescriptive

The game being worked on now isn’t really the same game that was originally backed. They essentially had to restart development a few years after the campaign because the scope had expanded. The tech at the time didn’t cut it so they’ve spent most of the time since then creating new tech that would

After the presentation they recorded a new no-crash version and uploaded that to YouTube as well. They wanted to risk the crashes during the presentation to show it was a live, playable demo

Meshing tests have gone up to 2000 and the shards that were left on overnight were 300-500. The current evocati build of 4.0 has meshing enabled, just limited to 100 for now

Personally, I don’t think they should be aiming for 100 anymore, even if it was promised. That number was for the original pitch and was arbitrarily high since it was for a much shallower and easier to create game

Today was day one of Citizencon and CIG revealed a lot of stuff that shows they’re still working to give players the game they want. Most of it was actually tech to answer the scalability problem for everyone wondering how they’re going to get to 100 star systems when they still only have 1

The problems they’re calling out aren’t really specific to anything though. They’re just kind of generalizations that sound like they got formed from news articles rather than observing the development progress.

You have the option to buy most ships with real money, but the general cycle is about 6 months after release into the persistent universe the ships are purchasable with in-game money. The only reason to spend real money on SC is if you can’t wait those 6 months, want to support development, or don’t want to bother with in-game money for whatever reason. There are some exception ships though.

As for the detail, there are big differences between SC and ED. For one, SC ships have completely modeled interiors since the intended gameplay is for you to manually board your ship from outside. ED has no ship interiors as far as I know, just cockpits and exteriors, no matter how big the ship is. SC also has more ships than ED even excluding all the SC ship variants, ground vehicles, and ships that don’t do Quantum jumps, the frame shift equivalent of ED.

True, I forgot about this.

I think people can take issue with the funding model while still believing in the development effort as a whole. The funding model can change, after all.

I’m not comparing their scale, just the ability to enjoy something without it seeming like there’s much there to others. But if you want to compare, I was imagining MC back before even the Nether. I had plenty of fun just mining and stacking blocks to build whatever, nothing like what became available toward 1.0. SC is kind of in the same situation, but their timeline is just 20x greater because of the scope.