Dude, $60 is expensive. $150 is unthinkable.
Dude, it was weird that XCOM 1 came to consoles at all. This is a PC exclusive dev. They've only made one other game that was on consoles. I wouldn't count on XCOM 2 coming off PC any time soon.
It's glitchy, sure. But I haven't run into any bugs outside that have seriously detrimented my experience.
They aren't going to be dumb enough to lock it to 30 on PC. Like most PC games, the framerate will depend on your rig and settings.
I know, right! How dare they try to save their money! They should all be forced to spend their money the way we decide and have no choice in the matter!
I can't wait to see a new IP from Naughty Dog after this.
I've got a tip for Bethesda: Android.
Awesome! Good game design is all that's needed to teach the player, not tutorials.
Not entirely sure why you think I'm trolling. In case you weren't aware, since no one else is, 60 FPS makes the gameplay fundamentally better by reducing input lag. I'd vastly prefer if it got a downgrade if it meant 60 FPS. Gameplay beats graphics every time. At least to me :/
I wish it would get a downgrade to get 60 FPS.
Sigh. Graphics over gameplay once again.
Whats wrong with that? It's a cool game.
Ha.
YES! Why wouldn't I?! Do PS1 games suck to you because the characters aren't composed of millions of polygons? Are gamers really that shallow now?
To claim that graphics matter at all or that they affect immersion is nothing short of ridiculous. You know there are 5 other games in the franchise with progressively significantly worse graphics, right? Are they bad games because none of them use 2048x2048 shadows? Or use 8x MSAA. No, because that's freaking ridiculous. Games have been immersive for a VERY long time, long before we had today's graphical technology, and I'm gonna blow your mind, having better graphics has had abs...
No.
Gameplay matters. Story matters. A lack of technical issues matters.
Graphics do not. They're a shiny coating to help sell a product and nothing more.
Edit: That I'm getting disagrees only goes to show how shallow gamers have become. I guess all games prior to PS3 just suck to everyone because characters aren't composed of millions of polygons. smh.
Then you lower the level of detail or the resolution or the antialiasing. It bothers me to all hell that so many devs, including Naughty Dog now, will sacrifice improving gameplay (Because for the oh so many unaware, higher framerate does functionally improve gameplay by reducing input lag) and instead they improve graphics. I couldn't care less if they downgraded to PS1 graphics if they managed 60 FPS, because then the game would be better.
You see, too many people just don't understand what FPS means in games. It has very little to do with how smooth turning the camera is. The reason people want higher framerates is because it reduces input lag and functionally makes the gameplay better. By going for 30 FPS, devs are saying are, in essence, choosing improving graphcis over gameplay. It's not ok.
God damn it. Even Naughty Dog are liars now.
Then I've got bad news for you, bro. Because that's not how it works. Most Kickstarter games are partnered with larger investor corporations. Kickstarter in general is more for devs who need a little extra that their partner won't fork over or for gauging interest. It's actually quite bizzare for a game, like Star Citizen, for instance, to be completely publicly funded.