then you wont see a good return in quality.

I thought Strafe would have turned out better. Clearly there are lot of issues.

I really hope Gibhard turns out well, it's doing some of the same things with level generation but hopefully it has better algorithms and AI (other stuff like lighting already looks better than Strafe).

Dusk should, in theory, be the best of all the bunch since it will have properly authored levels. 

Weird, didn't they get 180k from kickstarter? I'm pretty sure the team was like 2-4 people before devolver got involved. 

is on final sale at 90% off most places because of it being made "no longer available for sale" due to music licensing issues.

It doesn't really sound as if it's a game I'd like, but for $3 I may go ahead and grab a copy from GOG. 

Alan? Rick man, thanks. 

If not for the fact that Die Hard is one of my favorite movies, that might have slipped right past me. 

Can anybody answer this question?

If a game download code bought from Amazon, Newegg, etc. (anywhere but Steam) states:

"Steam account required for game activation and installation."

After the game is installed and activated, can it be played without Steam either running or even installed on the computer?

If anyone has personal experience of this I'd like to know. Otherwise I'll probably just have to perform a $60 experiment. 

If you need Steam to activate/install then Steam must be running to play it. You can use Steam in offline mode at the very least.

If you try to run the game's exe straight from the directory, it will just launch Steam. 

However, some games only use Steam merely as a platform for buying and downloading, but can be run and played without the Steam client. Witcher 3, for instance. 

That's why I am wondering. It is an AAA title, but the game would not be bought through Steam.

The sentence I quoted is exactly what is stated everywhere I've seen the game being sold, and it does not say that Steam is needed to play the game. Of course, it's not like game companies have never lied before.

It's really too new to buy now anyway, as it's still selling for full price and it's not worth that much really. There is apparently a cracked version though. Maybe when the price drops to something reasonable, I'll buy it and just play that. 

In my experience, if you buy or unlock a code via Steam it will need to be running when you launch the game. Have not done this in a while but every Amazon Digital game I have purchased works this way. This may have changed but I doubt it. 

AAA steam games all have no-steam cracks, if it's steam your worried about. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwNyVE1r3qU

Fuck OFF. 

I watched 3 seconds and then puked on esc.
In case of any spam markers, I'm refering to #9983 

I f quake was just absolutely the biggest piece of shit and it wasnt like quake 

 

I like how the Carmack "endorsement" quote isn't about the game itself, but about Javascript / WebGL. 

"C# is fucking awesome!"
"I played this with an amazing graphics card!"
"Some of the operating systems that support this game are great!" 

Good stuff. 

....it's fast-paced! And retro! And there's no cover-based stuff! And weapons! And movement! And......... 

Quake gave you cover against Shamblers, truly this where the downfall of FPS games started. 

Inner Chains released apparently, but nothing on metacritic? 

I know I'll be preaching to the choir here, but the problem with this stuff is that games in 1996 weren't trying to be "1996 style" games. They were trying to look as impressive and convincing as they could under technological constraints.

Part of what made Quake and Doom so successful was that they found an art style that looked good even when it was blocky. Rather than trying to be realistic (which wasn't practical) or cartoony (which wasn't appropriate), I like to think of it as going for a "comic book" style. Doom is more of a gleefully violent comic book, while Quake is a bit more of a gloomy, gritty Vertigo comic book, but it's stylised.

Thinking that the squares are the thing which make the look of mid 90s games is missing the wood for the trees. What's worse, it's then used to excuse any amount of sloppiness or laziness in the art of these pretenders. 

The JS game was pretty neat, but ofc it was just a prototype.

Is this even from the same devs or just blatant rip-off?