I'm not really into FPS much but the recent Wolfenstein had a good campaign & it looks like this might be worth a jam. I'll wait for a sale though, 10 hours isn't a bad length for a game but few games are worth the price at launch imo.
@jimmythang I think specifically they claimed it was better than 2 GTX980s in SLI in VR. This is mainly due to a new technology where they are able to render the 3D model once for both screens rather than doing a full render for each eye. It's called Single Pass Stereo & is explained here.
It's actually a really exciting move forward for VR but not something that's going to see benefits on a single monitor, no matter how high the resolution.
@spartanx169x: I agree that scores are pretty meaningless but a dollar value isn't much better. For the busy family guy who buys one game a year & expects to sink time into it whenever he gets the odd bit of spare time, it might be worth a lot. To the guy who buys a new game every couple of weeks & wants to move on to the next game, he might have a different set of priorities for what he values. A really fun game that only lasts 2 hours might be worth more than a strategy game that takes hours to learn in his mind.
"Pick up now" or "wait for a sale" might be a little better but I still don't think it's that helpful to the consumer.
Reading/watching the content of the review & deciding what you think based on the details is always going to be better than an arbitrary number. Everyone seems to love Overwatch & perhaps that might get a 9/10 review or a "Yes! $60 Buy it right now!", but if I don't like multiplayer first person shooters, the content of the review is going to be a lot more helpful to me.
Stellaris is a great game but the question for me was whether to buy it now or wait for expansions which will no doubt flesh out the game & fix any issues with the vanilla gameplay. Crusader Kings II, by the same developers, is a game I've spent hundreds of hours in but I still wait for discounts on the expansions because a simple hours per dollar equation doesn't really define value for me.
I don't think Gamespot (or any other major site) will get rid of scores because scores create arguments & arguments equal more hits. I think even a lot of the reviewers on the site would rather do away with the reductive number at the bottom. They often talk about how they don't think of it as "Gamespot's Review" but "Daniel Starkey's Review" or whoever wrote it. If people had to actually pay attention to the content, that would save them a lot of grief but from a business standpoint, it's a numbers game. Pun intended.
@mari3k: I've only put 13 hours in but I can see plenty of room for improvements. Arumba made a pretty popular video with over 20 changes that would improve the game.
It's great but most who have played it would agree that it's far from perfect.
A small form factor PC is hardly a new product. Perhaps shipping a PC with a certain set of hardware components that they know will work with games & have easy 1-click settings could serve a certain market but it's basically a PC in console's clothing.
@Pierce_Sparrow: Yeah, I think a lot of what we know about Ragnar has a healthy mixture of myth thrown in whereas his sons had a lot more recorded about them. I'm looking forward to more Vikings but it will be an entirely different show without Travis Fimmel as the lead.
@cyanak: He worked on Warcraft while Vikings was on a break. Vikings is doing well but I don't imagine the history Channel pays so much that you can just sit around on a chair made of $100 bills while they're not shooting.
Also, what's with the spoilers? I didn't know Ragnar was dead! I've been meaning to catch up on the history books but I'm only up to the second century.
@Barighm: He does a pretty awesome job in Vikings. I'm not sure why you had any hope for a video game movie though. Better to expect it will suck & be pleasantly surprised than anything else.
bbq_R0ADK1LL's comments