We really need to make this a thing again. Not only for software but for anything. And we need legislature to enable us.
Don’t like how the banks treat people? Make your own. In the USA you need 12 million capital to even open such a thing. Since 2008, the banks have seemingly no competition from new banks (source www.upflip.com/blog/how-to-start-a-bank).
One could say that you‘re not allowed to take any of your hard earned money out of the company until you reach those 12 mil capitalization.
Last I checked, you don’t need nearly as much to open a credit union, I think in the hundreds of thousands. But I agree, the barrier is way too high for banking.
I’m not sure what this has to do with a game engine though.
I‘d very much appreciate if you didn’t assume what I wanted to achieve with my post.
To clarify it for you:
I think this unity thing is horrendous
It obviously is part of the enshittification pattern we see everywhere
I feel like this goes far beyond tech
I never wanted to „come across“ a certain way. I‘m autistic have a very different perception of things. My goal in a post is to inform or get informed.
Maybe this helps to clear things up. Feel free to correct things you think are inaccurate.
Godot as an alternative raises some interesting questions. Are there substantial benefits to Unity over Godot? And how many outraged software developers would we need to bridge that gap?
This is the problem with the shareholder mentality that’s ruining a lot of products and services. They don’t give a damn about the longevity of the company. They only care about money now; and as soon as things go sour, they’ll sell their shares and move on to the next company.
I picture it as taking off in a plane full of their employees and customers, and climbing as high as possible. Then, as soon as the engines stall or fuel runs out, the execs casually jump out and pull the ripcords on their golden parachutes.
There should be law forcing major players in the market to commit for 10 years + when they buy shares above a certain threshold and when those 10+ years pass they should be forced to justify when selling. Might be dumb but just saying as things are the market/system will just rot on the daily. Shits corrupted to the core imo.
IPOs usually come out with something like that, investors who commit to not sell their shares for half a year or maybe a year. After that… it’s each one for their own.
I know that execs have time windows they have to be in to buy and sell their stocks, and it has to be planned months in advance, but a massive TOS change like this doesn’t happen overnight or without buy in all the way to the top. They absolutely planned this, and I hope the SEC nails their asses to the wall over it.
yeah I’ll admit i don’t know much about how all this stufd works, but thanks to others i also found out about these rules. But imo those time windows are absolutely useless in preventing insider trading if they plan to do both things in the same time window anyways
I’ve been working on an indie game project for several years now and invested thousands of dollars into it. Fortunately, I had the foresight to use Godot for it, but if I’d used Unity instead I’d be completely screwed right now. Hell, I’m still using the 3.X branch of Godot because I figured that migrating everything to version 4 would be more trouble than it’s worth. Going to a completely new engine at this stage in development would be completely out of the question.
No, it’s a commercial release. I’d been doing everything with placeholder art throughout most of development but I’ve recently commissioned some artists for some professional assets, and I think I’ll have enough to put together some screenshots and a demo video and get a page on Steam, etc. set up within the next few weeks.
It’s a Metroidvania with influences from cinematic platformers (Another World, Flashback) and immersive sims (System Shock, Deus Ex.)
I’m sorry to stifle your expectations, but if you’re working on that project on your own, you’re very unlikely to reach the 200k/year revenue necessary to trigger this new pricing scheme.
I bought the game for science cause it was the only game so far using all major features of UE5 and is a good reference to see how they manage asset, etc to keep the game running at 60fps with provided spec.
I think it does have potential, the mechanic is tight enough(the kbm default binding is not good, needs some rebind to make the combat flow more fluid), frame pacing is smooth majority of time(you have jitter mostly when it switch between cutscenes<->game), pretty much checked all the boxes and doesn’t feel lacking when playing the game.
BUT, it does have poor marketing plan and kinda bad luck in releasing window. It’s a good “alt shooter game” IMO.
It also requires EA's always-online DRM like the recent Star Wars Jedi games. Steam needs to make that notification bigger so I know not to buy that sort of trash.
You mean denuvo? I think it’s a money sinker now so might as well remove it at this point. But it’s EA’s call. Also, yes I have to download EA’s launcher as well.
And EA's launcher requires an active internet connection. Try playing Jedi: Fallen Order on a train, because I sure did, and it doesn't work. There may be a way to sidestep the launcher, particularly on older games like this one that had the launcher retrofitted into it after launch, but regardless, it tells me to stop buying EA games.
I generally avoid denuvo and EA. I literally break this stance just to see what they did with UE5 but ended up enjoying the game as well. It sucks cause denuvo means I can’t hook up RenderDoc and see how they render a frame compare to stock UE5. The movement reminds me a lot of original Quakes(very close to Q3) where you can have lots of control mid air and really snappy movement speed with their mechanics(blinks and grapples). But yeah, if this game doesn’t have this “use all UE5 latest tech” tag I will probably not even know or touching it cause I don’t play shooters after like Battlefield 3. Cause I am old and I like fast arena shooter not modern slow pace CQB/battle pass shooter, I was quite disappointed after trying Halo Infinite. But, that said, any shooter fits my criteria, would probably fail in sales. ^^;
lol, I go take a look, yep, battlefield 3.(note, I have no idea when I added crysis, it’s probably from a bundle or something and it redeems directly. I had high hope when crysis 2 released. ) And yes, I did played 2042 open beta cause we had a company game day that picked the open beta.(and yep I don’t like it. )
Like which type of shooter is your thing?? For me it’s the quick arena/team shooter, my good shooter example would be Q3 and Tribes 2. I think it’s really satisfying when moving quickly and shoot people with actual projectiles, rocket/disc launcher in my examples. (not a fan of hit scan type)
Not quite Quake speed, though I enjoy Quake just fine too. For me, the sweet spot was stuff like Halo, 007, Metal Arms, Half-Life, Crysis, that sort of thing. But yeah, everything these days is an online-only, live service battle royale or extraction shooter.
On one hand, I applaud EA for at least attempting a new IP this time around instead of churning out yet another sequel, but on the other hand, damned if Immortals of Aveum didn’t look like the most generic thing out there.
Based on screenshots and the publisher, it is safe to say that they are using the Stellaris engine for this. Which does not really have traditional turns. Think RTS with lots of pauzing. The engine is also capable of exploding planets already.
I don’t know. Paradox has already messed just last year with it’s Victoria 3 release. I can’t tell if the studio or the publisher is doing most of the work, but the studio has a grand total of three games in 10 years. I am highly skeptical of this game.
I dont disagree, I couldn’t get into Victoria either. That said, crusader kings 3 is becoming a truly incredible game - to my embarrassment, I have 2500 hours to support that opinion. And from what I hear, Stellaris is fantastic as well. I bet they have some of the Stellaris team on board for this trek project, since they seem quite similar from what’s been shown so far.
Fair enough. However crusader kings 3 came out 3 years ago. Since then paradox has downsized. And frankly I don’t think city skylines 2 is looking so good right now.
Someone gifted me Stellaris a couple of years back and honestly, I’ve played it off an on but always seem to bounce off it despite usually loving 4X games.
I’m not sure Star Trek branding is going to be enough to pull me in if the core gameplay is as slow as Stellaris, but I guess it’s all going to come down to price. If anyone needs me in the meantime I’ll be starting a new Stellaris campaign and trying to be more enthusiastic about it this time round!
I will just say this, the mod stretches stellaris to it’s limits, if you want to play the full mod. Expect a half an hour load time. ( the mod loads 3k star systems and 275+ empires.)
Sounds like the local equivalent of Equestria at War for Hearts of Iron (three major continents, many countries on each, timeline expanded into the 1960s).
Oh I thought this was a Stellaris dlc, not it’s own game. Sweet! The timeline goals using canon and non-canon branches seems interesting. Sad to see you have to make sure your planets are employed though, that’s the one thing I don’t like about Stellaris. But oh well.
I dunno. I don't really feel like the character of Star Trek fits within the typical combat game template.
The whole point of the franchise is exploration, finding out what's out there, and expanding the realm of the possible. If I'm in charge of a Starfleet starship, I fully expect some number of my encounters to be techtech'd away or for many of the challenges to be moral rather than tactical.
The enterprise no bloody a b c or d was in constant peril, but the enterprise d was only very rarely in a situation they couldn't shoot their way out of.
Literally in every series except Voyager the Federation is in a hot war with some foreign power and the “Remember when we were just explorers?” Lines are usually tongue in cheek, with the full understanding that exploration was only ever a small part of Starfleet/Federation operations, while they spent far more time dealing with rogue factions and warring with other species.
agreed, the Enterprise always stops the warp engine in front of another ship’s debris. Ton of stories about manouvers with pilot names, tons of situations where the ship weapons doesn’t work so they have to resort to diplomacy, and we’ve always looked at this world from the perspective of one ship. I’m pretty sure the rest of the captains are more Jellico than Picard
The admirals all certainly are, though maybe that’s because of survivor bias, they shot first and asked questions later so they survived. Whereas most Picard-like captains and their ships get destroyed because you have to have an excellent crew to overcome what happens when your morality dictates your actions.
That’s the whole point of 4X games, you don’t have to win militarily. However your opponents may not have your same aversion to it, so you do need to defend yourself. Just like the federation in the show really.
polygon.com
Hot