Arama Sonuçları

Ждем вас на дискорд-сервере, играем и разыгрываем дискорд нитро . Заходите!

İlk olarak dprog1995 tarafından gönderildi:

AOD is not a rushed game.

Core design had 4 years(1999-2003) to make a PS2 TR game and they failed horribly because they managed this project horribly.(at that time Rockstar made most their PS2 GTA games)
Eidos even gave core 1 more year and they still failed ro deliver an ok game.

-TR fans bash Eidos for telling core to make chronicles but core themselves decided to put experienced TR developers on that project and allowing inexperienced members to mishandle AOD early in development.

-They weren't good at making their own custom engine for PS2. Even Jeremy H Smith claimed that they should have used a 3rd party game engine like Renderware instead of trying to make their own.

-They also wasted their time with ideas that should have been cut during brainstorming/early development phase. All TR fans wanted after 4 and Chronicles were better graphics, better controls and better camera. But Core decided that "Fans want MGS 2 style stealth, fans want dialogue trees, they want a secondary playable character with RE style levels, they want limited stamina in climbing sections,They also want more city areas and less tomb areas !"

-Core management has even claimed that they were bad at managing their TR development team.

The failure of AOD forced Eidos to cancel some of their other promising games. Such as Fear Effect 3.

So no. AOD doesn't deserve to be called a rushed game. Core design messed it up.(unlike their other 5 great TR games.)

I write what I see. As a person who played this game in 2004. And as a manager who works with IT systems. Who understands Maths, Geometry and Physics because of tech education. Most of the big bosses are pure humanitarian. They want a lot what they say today to be done tomorrow. And they couldn't deside what task should be done first, change priorities because of their mood. They think that they waste money and it scares them, they want their money back as fast as possible. And I see the same picture while reading all about creation of AOD.
They live in the financial world. They think that 3 years for ambitious project in 2001 was fine but it really wasn't. You can compare GTA to TR and say "Watch, these guys could do this task in 2 days, why our team can't do the same for us? Should we pay them more money for working at nights and holidays? Could everyone of them do the work of different specialists at the same time to save us time for release a game at the same time as data of the film premier with Angelina Jolie?"
But it sounds childish and like it was said by humanitarian. Just one click of mouse and you'll get everything like you're in a magic world. Computer games are not as simple as the world of magic in their imagination.
They didn't understand that all what these guys were doing required unique abilities and knowledge that needed a lot of time for education in those years.
All problems with AOD were managment's faults. And it's my sight of view. Not programmers and designers who did their work good even in those times. They did their best. Everytime I look at AOD I see that it was brilliant work of people with good technical and design thinking. They were ahead of time in some aspects. And as a child I was amazed in 2004 even after playing GTA.

İlk olarak PopoPrinz tarafından gönderildi:

PVE Servers!!!!

lol theres no playervase its already pve XD

dead game

i wish for some tf2 keys so i can sell it to buy cs skins <3

https://steamcommunity.com/tradeoffer/new/?partner=1530999053&token=L2g_Dx40

tysm in advance <3

Hi all! Thank you so much :D
We can’t wait for you to discover Aeta’s story!

His choice of attire is a bit odd for supposedly 1920's inspired New York, but otherwise Billy oozes "brutal melee frontliner" energy.

for me at least a good map should offer open areas as well as some close spaces (but in a moderated number), various flanking routes, allow map parkour and rollouts, guarantee cover, be symmetrical and avoid oppressive sight lines.
Also some maps have non buildable areas that don't make sense, something to be avoided.
Finally the map should also look good and in theme with tf2.

İlk olarak Perplex tarafından gönderildi:

Funny you have to put a disclaimer like that in a video. And tbh i do not remember seeing that disclaimer when he first posted it. So either i am misremembering or he edited the video and put it in after the fact.
He is using a monotone drone on and on voice. It sure as hell sound like it is done by AI. Listen to anyone else that is actually showing his face in a video and listen to how they talk and then compare to this drone and you will understand why people think it is an AI voice.

Seeing that I was notified of the video releasing on YouTube and watched it immediately and saw that the disclaimer was already there, yeah you were misremembering. The only reason Knudsen even had to put that up is because of the abundance of AI generated voiceovers saturating the platform and him previously being accused of using AI despite him talking like that for all his earlier videos for the past nine years. Occam's Razor, dude, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. And in this case it is, with the simplest explanation being "that's just how he sounds like and has always been ever since his very first video nine years back".

İlk olarak D. Flame tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Draug tarafından gönderildi:

So just to make sure, you have no problem with the change itself, just how it was implemented?

Incorrect. How it was implemented just added fuel to the fire and rubbed salt in the wound.

Let's look at your initial reply to me.

İlk olarak D. Flame tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Draug tarafından gönderildi:

May I ask what is wrong with only calculating based on your language? Doesn't that benefit the player and give them a more realistic view of their localized version of the game?

It is just to manipulate the review scores. That is the problem.

You could always just filter the reviews by your own language, while also being able to get an overall view of how the game was received.

Valve has consistently eroded away the meaningfulness of the review system, slowly, over time. This is just the latest example of that.

1) games have faced review bombing because a region didn't get localization, or some niche cultural issue to them. I would argue that by separating reviews like they did paints a more accurate picture of the game experience for you. That is to say if Chinese players are review bombing a product because it has bad Chinese localization then as an American the likyhood I care about that is pretty low, so the bombing should not affect the scores for me. However let's say I was Chinese then I would really care about the game having poor localization and so they should count. In short localized reviewing is a better indicator on if you will like the product.

2) as I pointed out seeing as how localized reviews are superior it only makes sense that they are the default choice. Nothing is being taken away since you can switch back to global if you want.

3) I am not sure as to what other policies you are referring when you say valve has eroded the usefulness of reviews.