this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2024
28 points (96.7% liked)
Star Wars
4883 readers
2 users here now
Discussion for all things Star Wars. Movies, books, games, TV shows and more are welcome.
1. Keep it civil.
2. Keep it Star Wars related.
3. No memeposts. Memes are great and everybody loves them, but there is already !starwarsmemes@lemmy.world for those.
Community icon art from DeviantArt user DavidDeb.
Banner art by Ralph McQuarrie.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
a big ol' "We'll wait and see" from me. Nothing about this screams "have to get", let alone worth paying (over) full price for it. I think I could happily wait a year and play when it's on sale. Especially since it's a live service game, and guaranteed the second it's not profitable they'll take it offline. Why spend more than 20 dollars on that?
Where does it say it's live service?
I may have used live service incorrectly, but it sounds like it's a cloud-based game, where at least something requires an online server to run. It also sounds like it'll be following the ubisoft requirement of using them to authenticate, so it will always require an internet connection and their servers online to run. I don't know for sure if it's using Ubisoft Scalar, which is their new "Cloud" engine which literally chunks of the world are processed in the cloud, but if it is then that also is a hard requirement on their online costly servers running, which they'll turn off the second it's not profitable.
All of that adds up to me to say treat it like a rental. You are renting this game for a certain amount of time from them. Have no expectations that you will be able to play this again (using the same original purchase at least) in 10+ years.
Ubisoft scalar sounds like an mmo thing more than anything else, so I think the game will be safe from that. Ubisoft seems to think video games have a 10 year old lifespan anyways so it won't matter either way
It's not, it's a weird hybrid engine. They're planning on making it their next big assassin's creed engine, from what I've been following. Allowing bigger worlds than what an individual GPU can run. I'm not sold on it because I don't want online only games, but I do know that's what they're planning. Probably MMOs too, but they directly referenced AC
That sucks and also sounds like snake oil. World size has no bearing on gpu performance. If they want to simulate people in the other side of the map with full ai or something it might affect cpu but I can't imagine of a context other than an mmo where that might be necessary. And it's not like ubisoft's games are so big that they can use the cod excuse of reducing size neither.
Reading about it makes it sound even stranger. Offloading audio to the server means the audio can be dsynced from the video based on internet jitter and requires some artificial input latency (in addition to the internet latency) to compensate. Same thing with most physics. If you're streaming those parts, you might as well make it a full on streaming platform, especially since graphics are more expensive than audio or physics anyways.
Baldur's Gate broke me on live service games. If I can't play offline, I don't need the game. I'm paying something like $80 per year for Diablo 4 (because PS plus required) and I often take months or years off from playing Diablo games. What a waste of money...
I can't afford / ever buy games brand new. I'll wait for a sale as well, maybe when it's more reasonable, like £30ish.