Backlogger
Member
Hopefully the FPS police don't cause (directly or indirectly) devs and pubs to take their games off Steam and/or PC
Why would they?Hopefully the FPS police don't cause (directly or indirectly) devs and pubs to take their games off Steam and/or PC
Hopefully the FPS police don't cause (directly or indirectly) devs and pubs to take their games off Steam and/or PC
I thought they would work their way back. Have they missed some recent 30fps games or something?You'd think the Framerate Police curation group would actually label games from the last few years rather than go back to the 1990s for starters.
"Obviously TotalBiscuit wouldn't condone that sort of thing" but his sycophants are not exactly people he keeps on a tight leash, so they just basically become his attack dogs because all they seem to understand is if TB doesn't like a thing (surprisingly, they know even if he only implies it), they'll go after it for blood.If people are using it to target developers, which I personally doubt it since they get targeted anyways these days without it, then that sucks.
But I like it. I didn't know WotS 4 was 30fps. I'm glad that I found out. It still won't stifle my purchase, but now I won't be so let down when I start the game up.
If people are using it to target developers, which I personally doubt it since they get targeted anyways these days without it, then that sucks.
But I like it. I didn't know WotS 4 was 30fps. I'm glad that I found out. It still won't stifle my purchase, but now I won't be so let down when I start the game up.
I think the whole "framerate police" is a pretty terrible idea, honestly. Obviously, I'm all for informing people as much as possible about a game before making a purchase - but this has got to be one of the worst ways to go about it.
I understand that they're simply exploiting how the store shows particular curators for a game, but after all this blows over the end result will be that these capped games will simply have a +1 "curators recommend". The store displays new and/or popular curators by default, and it's something that developers can block from their store pages if they choose. If the group remains popular, the best option that developers have is to simply block them from the store pages, and some already have.
If I had developed a game on Steam, regardless of the status of it's frame rate, I'd simply exclude this group from my available curators that show up on my store page. Especially now that the group is taking it into their own hands to issue threats to developers. We're way past the point where Valve needs to step in and shut groups like this down, in my opinion.
Aww YsssMoving on to Ys Origins..
This music video basically sums up the range of feelings I had with the game so far.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8-vje-bq9c
Probably one of the most awesome things I've seenin my life.
If I had developed a game on Steam, regardless of the status of it's frame rate, I'd simply exclude this group from my available curators that show up on my store page. Especially now that the group is taking it into their own hands to issue threats to developers. We're way past the point where Valve needs to step in and shut groups like this down, in my opinion.
A safer alternative: give the developers/publishers a dedicated box on the store page to list things like this, and make it optional. If it's left blank, it could simply say something like "Unspecified" which would prompt them to fill out the information. If they choose not to display it, you can pretty safely assume the game has a fixed framerate.
I think the whole "framerate police" is a pretty terrible idea, honestly. Obviously, I'm all for informing people as much as possible about a game before making a purchase - but this has got to be one of the worst ways to go about it.
I understand that they're simply exploiting how the store shows particular curators for a game, but after all this blows over the end result will be that these capped games will simply have a +1 "curators recommend". The store displays new and/or popular curators by default, and it's something that developers can block from their store pages if they choose. If the group remains popular, the best option that developers have is to simply block them from the store pages, and some already have.
If I had developed a game on Steam, regardless of the status of it's frame rate, I'd simply exclude this group from my available curators that show up on my store page. Especially now that the group is taking it into their own hands to issue threats to developers. We're way past the point where Valve needs to step in and shut groups like this down, in my opinion.
A safer alternative: give the developers/publishers a dedicated box on the store page to list things like this, and make it optional. If it's left blank, it could simply say something like "Unspecified" which would prompt them to fill out the information. If they choose not to display it, you can pretty safely assume the game has a fixed framerate.
Does ultra street fighter iv not have full screen or something? I don't see it anywhere.
Try alt+enter.
yea i figured that would work. It is absurd that a common sense feature like full screen is not in this games menu options.
Shutting down the group would really be the only option. Unfortunately, it seems like the war hounds will be out for you the moment they find out that the Framerate Police curator is blocked from your page. The more you try to resist, the more they'll throw a fit.
This would be a much better and more neutral way to go about it. Which means it'd probably never happen. ;-;
The better alternative is have a developer-produced 'game specification' tab after recommended requirements, listing a game's supported resolutions, frame-rates, a list of compatible peripherals (controllers, racing wheels, etc), if it has subtitles, amount of graphical scalability, and whatever else that the game is capable of supporting. Perhaps even something like a graphics card benchmark graph if the dev is particularly resourceful. This sort of extra information could solve a lot of potential surprises before they happen, while also bringing PC games' collective features more in-line with one another, not to mention helping prevent a lot of laughable PC ports from ever plaguing the marketplace.I think the whole "framerate police" is a pretty terrible idea, honestly. Obviously, I'm all for informing people as much as possible about a game before making a purchase - but this has got to be one of the worst ways to go about it.
I understand that they're simply exploiting how the store shows particular curators for a game, but after all this blows over the end result will be that these capped games will simply have a +1 "curators recommend". The store displays new and/or popular curators by default, and it's something that developers can block from their store pages if they choose. If the group remains popular, the best option that developers have is to simply block them from the store pages, and some already have.
If I had developed a game on Steam, regardless of the status of it's frame rate, I'd simply exclude this group from my available curators that show up on my store page. Especially now that the group is taking it into their own hands to issue threats to developers. We're way past the point where Valve needs to step in and shut groups like this down, in my opinion.
A safer alternative: give the developers/publishers a dedicated box on the store page to list things like this, and make it optional. If it's left blank, it could simply say something like "Unspecified" which would prompt them to fill out the information. If they choose not to display it, you can pretty safely assume the game has a fixed framerate.
Long Live the Queen is listed in the garbage dump. What is wrong with you people?
I'd like to live in a world where that isn't a typo.
How many players are actually playing in windows mode?
I play windowed in a fair amount of games so I can alt+tab out to other apps. I'm sure the number of people who also do this is low.
The better alternative is have a developer-produced 'game specification' tab after recommended requirements, listing a game's supported resolutions, frame-rates, a list of compatible peripherals (controllers, racing wheels, etc), if it has subtitles, amount of graphical scalability, and whatever else that the game is capable of supporting. Perhaps even something like a graphics card benchmark graph if the dev is particularly resourceful. This sort of extra information could solve a lot of potential surprises before they happen, while also bringing PC games' collective features more in-line with one another, not to mention helping prevent a lot of laughable PC ports from ever plaguing the marketplace.
I mean, honestly, there's no good reason to avoid this sort of transparency now that the refund system is in place.
Fullscreen games can support alt+tab. It's only the bad ones that lock up or crash when you do it.
I remember my early years of PC gaming when I thought it was standard across all games. Oh, those were the days.
What? Just... what?!
I remain sceptical, seeing that some developers would prefer to advertise their games rather than add more information about the game they're currently trying to sell.Actually, developers can add whatever they'd like to their Steam store pages. So if they wanted to, they could add all of this information. The only thing is that it'd be a lot more effective if it were standardized among all games / developers.
Ironically, the first game on Steam that actually does this (regardless of whether their game has a locked framerate or not) would probably see a huge bump in sales as a result, and others, seeing this success, might follow suit.
There's more of those than I'd like. It's even worse on Mac OS - forget locking up or crashing, the command just does nothing. Game stays in foreground but simultaneously unselected so my movements don't register in a fair amount of the ones I've played in the last year on my rMBP.
Why do I care that Command and Conquer 3 is 30 FPS? And that's the only curator for this game?[/IMG]
What the fuck...
Why do I care that Command and Conquer 3 is 30 FPS? And that's the only curator for this game?
Not that I really use the curator system, but seeing 30 FPS locked emblazoned near Add to Cart pisses me off. Keep that shit near the review section, I don't even follow you, Framerate Police!
What the fuck...
Why do I care that Command and Conquer 3 is 30 FPS? And that's the only curator for this game?
Not that I really use the curator system, but seeing 30 FPS locked emblazoned near Add to Cart pisses me off. Keep that shit near the review section, I don't even follow you, Framerate Police!
curator system is pretty much broken and dumb
that's why everyone should just use my thingie :>
What the fuck...
Why do I care that Command and Conquer 3 is 30 FPS? And that's the only curator for this game?
Not that I really use the curator system, but seeing 30 FPS locked emblazoned near Add to Cart pisses me off. Keep that shit near the review section, I don't even follow you, Framerate Police!
It's okay to like different things.
curator system is pretty much broken and dumb
that's why everyone should just use my thingie :>
Alert Waifu Hunter.
But seriously, is seeing some other curator's "This game is great and is fully strategic and real-time. 9/10 [Link to Site]" any better?
The curation system was a mistake, you know. It's nothing but advertising.
it's probably like 20 hours more since i also played the beta a bunchI applaud your 94 hours in Dead State, btw. Nobody else is more than eight hours from my Friends. I keep meaning to start it but see a shiny object or something.
-___-lewd
Circle is a strange beast -- at first it didn't click for me... but then I gave it another shot and I really liked it for it's strong ties to the core NES games.
Aria of Sorrow (and Dawn of Sorrow) are my favorite Igavania games, bar none.
Harmony of Dissonance really didn't do anything for me and was a rather huge disappointment.
I guess I'm in the minority but I think the 30fps steam currator is pretty useful, it gives some info that I would like to have before I buy a game, it wouldn't affect my purchasing decision much but if I see a game with the 30fps "badge" I would be more keen on finding out why it's locked which could point to other problems as well.
I appreciated the challenge that that title provided, and the music is great. God damn was it dark on the OG GBA, though.
On a different note, maybe I'm misremembering but Batman Origins fights seem a lot tougher than the ones from Asylum and City. This is on hard mode, but still. I like it.
It's very useful information to have as a consumer.
I know I know. This is probably stupid.
Is there a reliably way to get Batman Arkham Knight for steam currently?
It's very useful information to have as a consumer.
Depends on the consumer.
I agree that the information is important to consumers. I disagree that having a curator that gives the same 5 letter review to each game is the right way to inform us.
I agree that the information is important to consumers. I disagree that having a curator that gives the same 5 letter review to each game is the right way to inform us.
I don't really see any other alternative. Valve banned useful tags such as Uplay and 30 FPS. Enhanced Steam warning are an option, but that dographic is likely more well informed than your average user anyways.
Enhanced Steam warning are an option, but that dographic is likely more well informed than your average user anyways.
I don't really see any other alternative. Valve banned useful tags such as Uplay and 30 FPS. Enhanced Steam warning are an option, but that dographic is likely more well informed than your average user anyways.
I think this was a creative way to get the word out.