The "What are you playing now?" Thread

[kosis]

Got Phantom Pain and about to get into it. Downloaded Ground Zeroes when it was free but never played it because I heard it was average... but wanted to complete it first because a lot of the folks you capture/rescue in GZ carry over to Mother Base in PP. Actually enjoyed GZ quite a bit so really looking forward to this new one.

Also, Rocket League is fun as hell if you have friends to play with.

 

[Jack Brickman]

Speaking of DLC, I've heard nothing but great things about Destiny's DLC, and that it has really made it a much better game. Granted, that franchise has a huge following of fanboys, but can anyone here vouch for it? I stopped playing once I reached level 28 and haven't touched it in months. I just got really bored of it and from what I've heard it's nothing now but a grindfest to get exotic gear for PvP.

I just can't justify paying the price of another full game for DLC that should have been in the base Destiny game to begin with. It's obvious that content was cut to sell to players later, and I will not support a practice like that. I sold my copy of Destiny and have no intention of ever playing that game again. The more people keep giving shitty publishers money to abuse and manipulate them, the more they'll keep doing it. We as customers really need to put a stop to these types of practices by not paying the people who use them.

 

[Marcus]

I just can't justify paying the price of another full game for DLC that should have been in the base Destiny game to begin with. It's obvious that content was cut to sell to players later, and I will not support a practice like that. I sold my copy of Destiny and have no intention of ever playing that game again. The more people keep giving shitty publishers money to abuse and manipulate them, the more they'll keep doing it. We as customers really need to put a stop to these types of practices by not paying the people who use them.

Speaking of which...

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/09/07/destiny-lawsuit-papers-confirm-story-changed-substantially

Ever since Destiny launched last September, there have been mutterings about the game's story - or rather, a perceived lack of the one that was advertised in pre-release trailers and promotional material.

Last year, a tester for the game shared on a since-deleted Reddit thread about how he was invited to Bungie to try Destiny out before launch, and encountered a markedly different story to the one the game released with. Though Bungie has always remained quiet on such claims, or even gently refuted them, speculation has always continued that the departure of Bungie lead writer Joseph Staten a year before the game launched was a sign something had gone awry.

Now, in documents published by Venturebeat pertaining to the lawsuit between former long-time Bungie employee Marty O’Donnell and the studio over outstanding shares, it appears the mystery has been solved. Destiny's story was "substantially revised" and it was this that led to the game's release being delayed around a year.

"Although Destiny was planned for release in September 2013, the story was substantially revised beginning August 2013," the documents explain in paragraph 10 of section II. "Requiring a new release date of March 2014 and edits to much of the work previously completed.

"After a brief vacation/sabbatical in early fall, O'Donnell returned, worked on the story and recorded dialogue, but wrote no additional music. His supervisor and the audio team did not consider him to be fully engaged in the work of Audio Director. For reasons unrelated to O'Donnell's performance, the release date was again moved, to September 2014."

What's especially interesting is the fact this decision appears to have been made in August 2013 - a month before Staten, who'd been with the developer for over 15 years, decided to leave the company.

As we approach the first anniversary of the game's release, there's little arguing it's a success but one has to wonder if the story revisions were for the best. With the imminent release of The Taken King expansion, a recast Ghost and a renewed promise to focus on story, we're yet to see what the future holds. At last, however, we're finding out all about the past.

There you have it. Concrete proof of what many of us had long suspected.

I hadn't intended on getting the DLC, but I still have the game. Not really sure when or if I'll ever be going back to it.

 

[Jack Brickman]

I honestly didn't think the game was all that good to begin with. It was fun for about two weeks, but then the lack of content really started to adversely impact the experience. Playing the same five strikes over and over and over again and the same three multi-player maps (I know there were more, but I swear I never got to play on half the fucking maps) just wears on you. The fact that the story was practically non-existent, and that what was there was terrible, certainly didn't help matters.

It took them a year and three DLC releases (that combine to cost the same price as a retail game) to have as much content as most games do when they are first released. That's just unacceptable, especially given how easy it has to be to design Destiny missions since almost none of them have any depth beyond killing wave after wave of bullet sponges.

 

[spydy13]

Speaking of which...

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/09/07/destiny-lawsuit-papers-confirm-story-changed-substantially



There you have it. Concrete proof of what many of us had long suspected.

I hadn't intended on getting the DLC, but I still have the game. Not really sure when or if I'll ever be going back to it.

Not that I really care because this isn't my gaming scene, but isn't this kind of standard practice with MMOs? I mean isn't the taken king more of an expansion pack and not just "DLC?"

 

[Jack Brickman]

Not that I really care because this isn't my gaming scene, but isn't this kind of standard practice with MMOs? I mean isn't the taken king more of an expansion pack and not just "DLC?"

The difference is that your average MMO ships with a significant amount of content. Destiny had maybe five hours worth of content when it shipped, and that might be being generous.

I agree that Destiny was going for an MMO vibe, but even The Taken King's amount of content pales in comparison to the average MMO expansion. Taken King doesn't even have as much content as the base Destiny game.

 

[Marcus]

Not that I really care because this isn't my gaming scene, but isn't this kind of standard practice with MMOs? I mean isn't the taken king more of an expansion pack and not just "DLC?"

Expansions aren't unheard of (see WoW), but the fact that they cut so much content and completely altered the story so close to its original release has been a point of criticism for this game ever since it came out, and now those statements appear to be warranted.

 

[Cassity14]

The DLC in Destiny made for a tremendous experience.

I had gotten completely burned out around February, but I was super impressed this summer with how they've continued to shape the game after coming up woefully short.

Bungie can't control the greed-oriented decisions that Activision made, so they could have simply mailed it in, made their loads of cash, and went home. However, they've put a ton of effort into fixing the game and making it more enjoyable for their player base, and it's worked. I'll definitely be getting The Taken King.

 

[spydy13]

The difference is that your average MMO ships with a significant amount of content. Destiny had maybe five hours worth of content when it shipped, and that might be being generous.

I agree that Destiny was going for an MMO vibe, but even The Taken King's amount of content pales in comparison to the average MMO expansion. Taken King doesn't even have as much content as the base Destiny game.

Oh wow, I didn't realize it was that lacking. I agree with you that voting with your wallet is important, but I think far too many people have accepted that this is the norm (just like many games shipping broken) and aren't willing to put these people in their place.

 

[Jack Brickman]

Bungie can't control the greed-oriented decisions that Activision made, so they could have simply mailed it in, made their loads of cash, and went home. However, they've put a ton of effort into fixing the game and making it more enjoyable for their player base, and it's worked. I'll definitely be getting The Taken King.

Bungie could have written their own ticket following their split with Microsoft. They were the ones who decided to get in bed with Activision and they were the ones who signed the contract that gave Activision the amount of control they have. I don't feel bad for them at all. They're where they are because they made bad decisions.

 

[Cassity14]

Bungie could have written their own ticket following their split with Microsoft. They were the ones who decided to get in bed with Activision and they were the ones who signed the contract that gave Activision the amount of control they have. I don't feel bad for them at all. They're where they are because they made bad decisions.

I don't disagree with any of that, and I never said I feel bad for them.

The fact remains that they're taking an active role in salvaging the situation, and the quality of game improves with every addition.

I'm not going to boycott a game that I now really enjoy playing just because it didn't launch in the manner that it could have. If I did that, I'd simply eat the original $60 investment I made.

The days of spending $60 one time on a video game and expecting it to be a top of the line experience for extended time are over. I've spent plenty of money on MMO's, and now Hearthstone, so I'm just more used to it.

I'm also the type of person who plays very few games exclusively, so I care not to worry much about DLC prices if the game is good.

 

[Jack Brickman]

The fact remains that they're taking an active role in salvaging the situation, and the quality of game improves with every addition.

If those additions were free, I'd agree it was awesome. But they're not. Not only are they not free, but they are expensive as far as DLC goes, especially given the amount of content you actually get with each expansion.

I'm not going to boycott a game that I now really enjoy playing just because it didn't launch in the manner that it could have. If I did that, I'd simply eat the original $60 investment I made.

A lot of games don't launch in the manner that they could have. A lot of the time those developers realize that and fix them for free. They don't cut content from the game pre-release to sell back to you as another sixty bucks of DLC later. And personally, I'd rather eat the initial $60 investment than spend another sixty to get the experience I was promised when I spent the original sixty. There are plenty of other, better games out there that don't expect me to spend $120 for a complete experience.

The days of spending $60 one time on a video game and expecting it to be a top of the line experience for extended time are over. I've spent plenty of money on MMO's, and now Hearthstone, so I'm just more used to it.

It's funny that you say this the very week that Metal Gear Solid V came out, a few months after Witcher 3 came out, and a few months before Fallout 4 comes out. The first two are top of the line experiences for extended time, and most of us expect Fallout to be as well.

I'm also the type of person who plays very few games exclusively, so I care not to worry much about DLC prices if the game is good.

I don't worry about DLC prices if the games I buy them for justify their original expense. I plan to buy both Witcher 3 expansions because the base game was more than worth the money I spent on it. I bought the Wolfenstein expansion "The Old Blood" as well, because Wolfenstein was a great, complete game in and of itself. I would have bought the DLC for Saints Row IV if it had gotten better reviews. I have no problem with paying for DLC or expansions, but the base game has to earn it before I drop the money.

Destiny didn't earn my money. In fact, it's pretty obvious that, with Destiny, they are trying to sell me content that should have been in the base game I paid for to begin with.

 

[Walter White]

Got MLB the Show 15. Only played it for like an hour but I'm pretty bad so far. Mostly at batting. I hit like 3 home runs, but the rest are strikeouts. Any advice or tips for this game?

 

[BimboColesHair]

Got MLB the Show 15. Only played it for like an hour but I'm pretty bad so far. Mostly at batting. I hit like 3 home runs, but the rest are strikeouts. Any advice or tips for this game?

What settings do you have for hitting? Zone, button, or analog?

Do you have guess pitches and location on?

What difficulty do you have batting set at?

 

[Walter White]

What settings do you have for hitting? Zone, button, or analog?

Do you have guess pitches and location on?

What difficulty do you have batting set at?

I only played the intro game before the game downloaded and then like 2 innings of a normal game. I just used the default settings. I'm guessing it is on rookie mode (if that exists).

I think guess pitches and stuff are on but I haven't used them and don't know how. I just hold square for power hit and circle is supposed to be contact but I use the X button. How I'm supposed to know where to point the left analog stick to aim it is what I don't get. Up usually results in a pop fly but it probably depends on the pitch. I got my home runs by pushing up and X.

What I mostly want to know is how to consistently get on first with a base hit and get people on base. I'm swinging at everything too and have to work on my patience. I don't know baseball that well so I'm already at a disadvantage with that.