Tattorack

Strip away all the fake AI garbage and what you're left with is something that is only marginally more powerful than the previous generation.

When I spend a fucktillion money on a powerful card, I expect it to be powerful, not have a whole lot of tricks up its sleeve to make it appear powerful.

Whichever is cheapest at the supermarket I'm currently in.

Congratulations for making it weird, publisher.

I'll try and find them, but first I heard from it was from Jim Stirling. "The Jimquisition" on YouTube, I think. Haven't kept up with that guy in years.

They're the same thing. "Live service" is how Activision-Blizzard rebranded games that required to be always online. They also solidified the outline of things publishers at the time were already doing with their always online games, such as endless content players will have to buy.

Those documents leaked many years ago, and soon after that the moniker was changed from "always online" to "Live Service".

"Live service" is a game that has an always online requirement. Just getting updates on the regular doesn't make it a live service if the game works just fine without an Internet connection.

Single player Ubisoft games are all "live services", due to some of them needing a constant connection to Ubisoft's servers, and them having in-game shops that only work while online.

So far Warframe has been the ONLY example of a good live service game. It's the OG when it comes to the model, but it's also the exception, and not the rule.

Good riddance. Seems like Sony got the message; we're sick of everything being a "live service".

The Enterprise Strikes Back.

........... Wat...?

Photon toroedoes are more powerful than nuclear warheads. A fleet of Star Destroyers are needed to Delta Zero a planet. Star Trek has shown many times a single ship armed with photon torpedoes can devastate whole planets.

Star Destroyers rely on swarms of TIE fighters, tiny unshielded ships. But ships from Starfleet have shown that their phasers are accurate enough to insta-zap such small craft in rapid succession.

Starfleet ships have firing arcs that cover almost every direction. A Star Destroyer's underbelly is woefully sparse of turrets.

Star Destroyers are slow, sluggish things. Ships in Star Trek tend to be far more maneuverable.

A fully functional, fully shielded Star Destroyer can get completely disabled by a few ion bursts. Most ships in Star Trek have no such weakness.

The engagement range of ships in Star Trek is measured in thousands of metres, and most shots fired land pretty accurately. A Star Destroyer needs to be practically on top of its target to engage it, and most shots still miss.

Star Trek has transporters. Star Wars doesn't even know what those are.

The only thing I see as an advantage for the Star Destroyer is that the Galaxy Class is a glass canon. Before the Dominion War they could dish out incredible amounts of firepower, but take very little.

Also, this is assuming this is only a contest of technology. If a Force user gets involved... Well, Star Trek has a history of always being at the mercy of entities with powers, rather than tech.

You don't say. Kinda hard to avoid if it's now a requirement to run anything.