←back to thread

‘Baldur’s Gate 3’ Prepared for 100k Concurrent Players, They’ve Gotten 700K

(www.forbes.com)
400 points redbell | 3 comments | 06 Aug 23 15:38 UTC | HN request time: 0.456s | source
Show context
izzydata ◴[06 Aug 23 18:08 UTC] No.37024861[source]▶
What really sealed the deal for me checking out this game is the promise to not have any microtransactions. That's a trend that has only been getting worse for 20+ years now and I'd gladly pay full price for a game that simply gives me a whole game upon purchase.
replies(1): >>37024972 #
fredley ◴[06 Aug 23 18:19 UTC] No.37024972[source]▶
No micro transactions, offline single player. A luxury in 2023.
replies(2): >>37025170 #>>37025674 #
ls612 ◴[06 Aug 23 18:39 UTC] No.37025170[source]▶
I don't get this take, just in the past 12 months we have seen

-God of War Ragnarok

-Tears of the Kingdom

-Hogwarts Legacy

-Star Wars Jedi Survivor

-Final Fantasy XVI

All entirely or almost entirely singleplayer and all receiving critical acclaim (except for the poor launch of Jedi Survivor's PC port). And the next few months include Starfield and Spider-Man 2, both blockbuster singleplayer games with no microtransactions which stand a good chance of winning game of the year.

replies(2): >>37025205 #>>37025382 #
LegitShady ◴[06 Aug 23 19:03 UTC] No.37025382[source]▶
>-God of War Ragnarok

playstation exclusive

>-Tears of the Kingdom

nintendo exclusive

>-Hogwarts Legacy

I don't know anyone who has played it - maybe we're just not that interested in harry potter

>-Star Wars Jedi Survivor

launched with multiple huge bugs including progression stopping bugs. I'll get it when its cheap and theyve fixed everything, or they haven't and I won't. If your game is bugged from day one don't expect day one pricing to work out.

>Final Fantasy XVI

playstation exclusive.

out of your list there the only ones not platform exclusive or riddled with bugs on launch is hogwarts legacy which honestly doesn't sound like anything I'd be interested in playing.

replies(4): >>37025401 #>>37025699 #>>37029856 #>>37040039 #
1. Loocid ◴[07 Aug 23 03:50 UTC] No.37029856[source]▶
This feels like moving goal posts. Why does platform exclusivity exclude them from being considered in this discussion? They are still all very successful AAA games that have no microtransactions.
replies(2): >>37036240 #>>37040200 #
2. account42 ◴[07 Aug 23 16:02 UTC] No.37036240[source]▶
Because the disussion is taking place in the context of not-platform exclusive game with the article title talking about the number of concurrent Steam (ie. PC) players.

If you don't want to pay for hardware you don't get to own then console games might as well not exist.

3. LegitShady ◴[07 Aug 23 20:03 UTC] No.37040200[source]▶
"look at all the great non microtransaction filled games you can play"

"...if you happen to own those consoles"

Those games are only available if you own that specific exclusive platform, not to the general public on any mainstream platform, so are niche on purpose. They're not really available without an investment into a specific platform.

so in the discussion of 'look at all these amazing non microtransaction filled games' adding ones that require I spend $300-500 on their platform is relevant.