![]() ![]() There is a mixed reputation around site services built explicitly around the notion of connecting devs and streamers on key promotions, the most prominent being Keymailer and Woovit. I won’t promise I’ll play them and I can’t promise I’ll like them, but I will take a look” Maybe just put a message out somewhere (here or your Twitter, I guess) like “hey I’m happy to try out indie games if you wanna send me a key. I know of some youtubers and streamers who are often going “so some devs sent me a key to try their game, and it looked cool so here it is!” I’m not sure what the solution is, though. It’s trained gamedevs to think of anyone who asks for keys as a potential scammer. I am constantly hearing from devs who got asked by “a streamer” to give them some free keys, and half the time it’s not even the streamer, it’s someone pretending to be them, and the other half of the time, the streamer themselves just goes to G2A and resells the keys. ![]() If they can't do it.Honestly from being in the gamedev community, this is probably the worst option. And Google is a multi-million dollar international company with the best servers in the world. Heck, if Google can't make their crummy (and soon to be dead) Stadia platform (it lets you stream games from their servers to your PC) work without huge hitches and input delays, no way Remote Play between players is a viable way to play a high-speed game like this. Regular multiplayer just shares basic info like button presses, gamestates, etc, while Remote Play downright streams the gamescreen on your end to their end, and so far the internet isn't fast enough to make that work that you're sharing your screen with someone on the other side of the globe, causing huge input and visual delays. (Hope it won't take long to atleast get seperate characters, artifacts and decks for P1 and P2 to play with, while we wait for the full online update.)Īs for why people are having issues with Remote Play, i suppose it's the fact you're streaming the game in addition to sharing it. Suppose online co-op for the Switch will probably be a no-go, but i'd be happy with a well-functioning local one, and maybe i'd pick it up on Steam too for the online. Hope that applies to local co-op on the Switch too. I know its a crazy idea, but it might work, or maybe the devs will have an even cooler idea, who knows! If the donating player has less than 400 health, it just balances the health between them, and of course when inevitably the two both reach 1, that's run over. ![]() I propose a simple solution of moving the second player to the first player's location, and having them 'drain' 400 of their HP into the other player's health bar, like an objectively worse version of the healing bosses give you for sparing them. not the greatest, so if we get rid of that we need something for when one player hits 0 but the other hasn't. also suggest keeping the current 'share a deck' mode as an option, but let us play with different decks, or maybe even different characters. This would fix the 'player 2 is screwed' dilemma for PVP too, because they would see themselves on the standard left side of the screen, and their opponent's actions would be mirrored to the right. ![]() I'm personally in favor of online multiplayer, without splitscreen, so you see yourself as player 1 regardless of who's 'hosting'. So I'm wondering what else we as a community would want in our COOP and PVP modes, so hopefully they can get renovated in a future patch. interesting, but ultimately just frustrating. You need to use steam's remote play option, which maybe isn't bad for turn-based games, but given that she was the one hosting I was hit with so much lag I couldn't see any telegraphs, and the idea of sharing a deck and mana pool is. So anyway, I bought a copy for my girlfriend and we wanted to play COOP together. I love this game, I'm not too good at it, but its great. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |