Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Neuro5i5

Neuro5i5

CAGiversary!
Feedback
151 (100%)
This thread will attempt to provide a place to discuss past/present/future PC gaming deals. While mainly focusing on Steam games, any standout sales may also be presented. I will not be updating every Daily/Weekly/etc. sale. The tools to help individuals become a smarter shopper will be provided below.

See this POST for links to store sale pages, threads of interest and other tools to help you become a more informed PC game shopper.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 12 Downvote
inm8num2 said:
The next free game on Epic Games store will be What Remains of Edith Finch.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2019-01-04-what-remains-of-edith-finch-free-next-week-on-epic-games-store
Click to expand...
As this is published by Annapurna Interactive (like Ashen), I'm going to guess almost all of the free games offered by Epic are going to be ones whose publishers/developers are doing the excl0000000000sive rights deal with another one of those games. That is, you can expect stuff like Rebel Galaxy, older stuff from Super Giant, etc.

 
Tsel said:
My only two purchases of the Steam sale were The Division and Yakuza 0. You're welcome.
Click to expand...
If you got the Gold Edition (base game with season pass) I suggest just selling your new version and viewing it as a cheaper sale price... That season pass by itself isn't going to get any cheaper after they gave the base game away for free.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If anyone likes strategy RPGs like I do, Disgaea 1 & 2 are on good sales on the Humble store.

Disgaea PC: Digital Dood Edition $5.37

Disgaea 2 PC: Digital Dood Edition $8.09

If you like micromanagement, hunting the best equipment, tons of grid-based combat, leveling up your weapons and armor to get stronger and then break the game, then give one of these Disgaea titles a try.  It's worth trying one to see if you like strategy RPGs.  Many people become strangely addicted and spend 100-200+ hours on them. (they're not for fickle indie nerds, they're for addicts.)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm glad to see that the Humble Monthly is still pretty rad.  Observer and Sundered were solid additions, and Yakuza 0 alone is worth February's admission price. 

 
If any thread regular isn't getting the current Monthly and wants a chance at a UPlay key for The Division, let me know. I say "chance" because the key may or may not have been redeemed already and I can't guarantee a successful activation. Yes, I know this sounds shady. But no, it isn't.

EDIT: Gone.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I may be in the minority (No, I did not get Division during price glitch) but Division is a solid game.  It can be single or multi player.  I has a story line and plenty of side quests.  There are elements like a ARPG including a loot system, plenty of customization of guns etc.  Even after reaching level 30 there are things to do.  Easily this game can be played 40+ hours.

I have not played the Yakuza or similar games yet but it looks solid.

I am reminded with the talk on the Humble thread that I need to complete Sleeping Dogs.  I wish the sequel was not cancelled.

 
The Division is a fun game, played it a lot, but grinding on the higher levels can get tedious. Still, it's a great game if you can get it for cheap at this point.
 
The Division was like 2016. If anyone is going to be playing it they're going to be playing the Division 2 in March.  It doesn't mean shit that the company is the giving away the first game that no one cares about anymore.  Those are the most useless kind of monthly headliners.  Especially when they're MMOs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I played the Division before all the patches that supposedly fixed the game. It was a really pretty environment but everything else bored me a lot. Also at the time the scaling was so broken even if just a level apart. Torture to play multiplayer. Just felt super generic with not enough enemies and too many bullet sponges. I'm almost 1000% sure it's better after all the patches, but I was done before then. It has good shooting mechanics though. Just always felt super generic to me. i hope #2 is a lot better.

 
I probably put about 250 hours into the Division and then was done with it by June '16.  Those games run their course.  When you trivialize all of the content where people butt their heads against the wall for months then they lose interest.  I'll never understand why companies do that.   Progression = nerf everything prior and make it meaningless.  That's why hardcore players started leaving WoW in droves after TBC.  Progression was hollow and meaningless, especially the truly difficult stuff.  These MMO-lites are resetting the loot treadmill at alarming rates and that's why they have no staying power.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Eh, might just be me but I put way too much distinction in the first M to consider the Division to be an MMO. 24 people on a server doesn't seem to be that massive to me. Hell, your chances of them even being all in the same section of the map (like the DZ) is so unlikely you would really need to consider CoD MW to be a MMO since it has a leveling system and the same in game game economy as the Division... Which is none.

I honestly think as a named monthly title that the Gold Edition should have been the version given away... There's no need to divide the community via content. Last Stand suffers greatly from it. (And they realize it, scrimmage, the horde mode that I cannot think of the proper name of right now, was all free additions way late in the games life... and the no season pass in Div 2 shows it too.)

Granted, for most players the Gold Edition would likely be wasted... Its all endgame content.

In general the Division is in a way better spot than ever before I do suggest everyone try it. Or try it again for those from the pre 1.4 era.
 
nitrosmob said:
too many bullet sponges..
Click to expand...
That's my problem with a lot of these newer shooters that tries to add "RPG" elements for an excuse for grind I mean "character progression" for microtransactions to give you a sense of accomplishment.. I know, staples of MMOs and all but urgh.. I don't know how the game is now, but the streams I watched at release was horrid.

The last good FPS for me was perhaps Unreal Tournament and maybe Battlefield BC 2 or so on a Friendly Fire On server where people don't randomly blast everything everywhere and you actually had to move tactically.

After Borderlands (each difficulty level got progressively worse/amplified if you fall behind on "gear level"), I really dont wanna go thru the pain of shooting the same thing for 10+ mins watching its healthbar slowly dwindle down despite your damage going in the millions and billions again. The numbers inflation there was crazy. But at least in borderlands or other sci-fi FPS, you can sometimes have the excuse that you're shooting at metallic robots or shielded enemies etc...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
deckmeup said:
After Borderlands (each difficulty level got progressively worse/amplified if you fall behind on "gear level"), I really dont wanna go thru the pain of shooting the same thing for 10+ mins watching its healthbar slowly dwindle down despite your damage going in the millions and billions again. The numbers inflation there was crazy. But at least in borderlands or other sci-fi FPS, you can sometimes have the excuse that you're shooting at metallic robots or shielded enemies etc...
Click to expand...
That's what's weird about The Division. It's a Tom Clancy game. For those kind of games, I do expect enemies to take many a shot or two or three - and it's done. The Clancy brand, in particular, is very realistic.

For The Division, though - it's fine w/ fighting regular enemies in a shootout, but any mini-bosses and boss fights are bullet sponge-fests, which just seems weird in a Clancy-branded game.

Still, though, despite my little realism complaint for a Clancy-branded game - I do like The Division quite a bit and do need to get back to it, at some point in time...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MysterD said:
That's what's weird about The Division. It's a Tom Clancy game. For those kind of games, I do expect enemies to take many a shot or two or three - and it's done. The Clancy brand, in particular, is very realistic.

For The Division, though - it's fine w/ fighting regular enemies in a shootout, but any mini-bosses and boss fights are bullet sponge-fests, which just seems weird in a Clancy-branded game.

Still, though, despite my little realism complaint for a Clancy-branded game - I do like The Division quite a bit and do need to get back to it, at some point in time...
Click to expand...
Honestly, the Tom Clancy name doesn't mean much to me on games... Even his games with a quick time to kill have technology not of the current world. Shooting someone more than once isn't a big complaint I have... and the epic sponginess of say 1.3 were undone long ago. They nerfed elements that, while hurt, helped the game in the long run.

Anyhow, if you watch the videos of Div 2 you can see how the armor on elite enemies sort of disintegrates do to damage and if you shoot the same section over and over you will bypass it and kill the target quicker. Hopefully, it helps for those who have that as a reasonable complaint.

 
Damn't meant to add this...  Has anyone been watching Anthem of late?  I guess they had a tech beta in December and the game is looking to hit its late February release date...  and with that they dropped a 15 minute gameplay video the other day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ye3aF_eNtUQ

I'm honestly not that impressed...  It looks rather good... but just seems so soulless to me.  Like it has no character and I kept help but fell like they are just pushing buttons to win...  No real aiming or whatnot.  Also the mission seems so basic that I hope this is some sort of side mission...  Nothing interesting happens.  (But why show off a 15 minute side mission?)

Anyhow, open beta in early February...  I'll try it before release and see what shakes out of it but with Div 2 release date less than a month later I don't see how two of these games works in my limited time and experience already tells me that Div 2 will likely be the superior product.

 
deckmeup said:
That's my problem with a lot of these newer shooters that tries to add "RPG" elements for an excuse for grind I mean "character progression" for microtransactions to give you a sense of accomplishment.. I know, staples of MMOs and all but urgh.. I don't know how the game is now, but the streams I watched at release was horrid.

The last good FPS for me was perhaps Unreal Tournament and maybe Battlefield BC 2 or so on a Friendly Fire On server where people don't randomly blast everything everywhere and you actually had to move tactically.

After Borderlands (each difficulty level got progressively worse/amplified if you fall behind on "gear level"), I really dont wanna go thru the pain of shooting the same thing for 10+ mins watching its healthbar slowly dwindle down despite your damage going in the millions and billions again. The numbers inflation there was crazy. But at least in borderlands or other sci-fi FPS, you can sometimes have the excuse that you're shooting at metallic robots or shielded enemies etc...
Click to expand...
You're comparing two completely different genres with a Battlefield or UT and a BL or Division. It's not a fair comparison. You can still play BFV and get one-hit killed. Jump into PUBG or R6 and it's the same or close to it.

Division is an RPG shooter. I'm not a huge fan of the genre either. I like to shoot things in the head and they die. I don't like stuff like ME or BLs where it's basically rng damage. That said, despite being initially disappointed in The Division, I like it a lot. I don't play it alot because grinding for weapons isn't my thing and I get confused by loadouts, etc, but the guns feel and shoot awesome in the game and if you level up your guy and give him the right loadout you can one hit enemies and get the game feeling like a more traditional shooter.

 
INMATEofARKHAM said:
Damn't meant to add this... Has anyone been watching Anthem of late? I guess they had a tech beta in December and the game is looking to hit its late February release date... and with that they dropped a 15 minute gameplay video the other day.

<snip>
Click to expand...
I'm sure Anthem will be fine and all, but I"ll be surprised if EA doesn't consider it a commercial failure in comparison to their internal expectations. There are so many of these "Games as a service" games out there now, and this just looks like Destiny with jet packs. Single player games like RDR2, Spiderman, God of War, etc have sold extremely well this year but companies like EA continue to chase the quasi-mmo risky endeavor holy grail

 
pasports31 said:
I'm sure Anthem will be fine and all, but I"ll be surprised if EA doesn't consider it a commercial failure in comparison to their internal expectations. There are so many of these "Games as a service" games out there now, and this just looks like Destiny with jet packs. Single player games like RDR2, Spiderman, God of War, etc have sold extremely well this year but companies like EA continue to chase the quasi-mmo risky endeavor holy grail
Click to expand...
Oh, I agree. Not sure why all these companies feel the need to chase the same thing... There certainly isn't time to play them all to "completion" considering some of the elements they add to keep you playing for through the grind.

 
INMATEofARKHAM said:
Damn't meant to add this... Has anyone been watching Anthem of late? I guess they had a tech beta in December and the game is looking to hit its late February release date... and with that they dropped a 15 minute gameplay video the other day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ye3aF_eNtUQ
Click to expand...
I played the closed alpha in December and this is a mission straight out of it, that 15 minute demo gave no context on who you are or why you are looking for the guy that the alpha did give so there is more to it story wise.

I couldnt get into destiny but I really enjoyed my time in anthem, the mouse/keyboard controls for swimming and flying sucked but if they fix that up I think it could be a lot of fun assuming they dont microtransaction the hell out of it.
 
Master Miguel said:
I played the closed alpha in December and this is a mission straight out of it, that 15 minute demo gave no context on who you are or why you are looking for the guy that the alpha did give so there is more to it story wise.
I couldnt get into destiny but I really enjoyed my time in anthem, the mouse/keyboard controls for swimming and flying sucked but if they fix that up I think it could be a lot of fun assuming they dont microtransaction the hell out of it.
Click to expand...
That's good to hear. I'll be honest I don't think I've ever played a Bioware game for its mechanics so if the story suffers... Ugh, that could be really bad.1
 
I'm definitely excited for Anthem. I'm being cautiously optimistic about it. I hope that it's good. Lately I have been wanting to scratch that itch again and have almost picked up Destiny 2: Forsaken a couple of times. I need to read some reviews and hear from players whether Anthem is going to be better on PC or PS4. Will probably skip D2: Forsaken and get Anthem when it comes out, as long as it doesn't bomb.

pasports31 said:
I'm sure Anthem will be fine and all, but I"ll be surprised if EA doesn't consider it a commercial failure in comparison to their internal expectations. There are so many of these "Games as a service" games out there now, and this just looks like Destiny with jet packs. Single player games like RDR2, Spiderman, God of War, etc have sold extremely well this year but companies like EA continue to chase the quasi-mmo risky endeavor holy grail
Click to expand...
Companies still haven't learned that the copycat strategy almost always leads to failure.

Epic doesn't even know how they captured magic in a bottle.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nothing- said:
Companies still haven't learned that the copycat strategy almost always leads to failure.

Epic doesn't even know how they captured magic in a bottle.
Click to expand...
I don't know about that. Fortnite Battle Royale IS copycat behavior.
Epic saw that PUBG was doing good business, so they crapped out a limited game mode from it's then incomplete Fortnite game to go head to head with PUBG so that they didn't just outright lose to a game that took control of the market space.

Between being free and Epic having the reach and connections to go multiplatform and do so quickly, they got all the attention, got there quicker and to most of the mainstream media and non-enthusiast gamers, they've made it look like other people are the copycats.

I think the lesson here is that if you're going to really push hard on "Game-as-a-Service" you need to it be free and ubiquitous- you need the meet the players where they are, not where you want to develop and sell to them. The exclusivity on Xbox One probably damned PUBG to "also ran" status as soon as Fortnite was able to be everywhere.

You then need to be able to capitalize and profit from it in other way. Most of the "big boys" recent failures with trying push out Game-as-a-Service is that they want the $60 up front and then a constant stream of additional purchases for incomplete products.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
INMATEofARKHAM said:
G-Sync coming to a Free-Sync monitor near you!

https://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-brings-g-sync-support-to-freesync-monitors/

Nvidia announces the RTX 2060, more powerful than GTX 1070 Ti at $350.

https://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-rtx-2060-release-date/
Click to expand...
That's awesome @ the whole G-Sync on FreeSync thing.

The more gamers that can experience the wonders of G-Sync (i.e. no input lag, smooth framerates especially when at higher framerates, no graphical tearing, etc ) - well, obviously, the better! :)

And "Wow" @ a xx60 card at that kind of pricing.

Aren't the xx70's usually in that range?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MysterD said:
That's awesome @ the whole G-Sync on FreeSync thing.

The more gamers that can experience the wonders of G-Sync (i.e. no input lag, smooth framerates especially when at higher framerates, no graphical tearing, etc ) - well, obviously, the better! :)

And "Wow" @ a xx60 card at that kind of pricing.

Aren't the xx70's usually in that range?
Click to expand...
Yes (for reference I paid like $290 for my 770 on the Black Friday when they were the current-gen card). And still only 6GB of RAM. I'm sure AMD will beat that performance/price ratio in their upcoming announcement.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MysterD said:
That's awesome @ the whole G-Sync on FreeSync thing.
The more gamers that can experience the wonders of G-Sync (i.e. no input lag, smooth framerates especially when at higher framerates, no graphical tearing, etc ) - well, obviously, the better! :)
Click to expand...
"We tested about 400 [adaptive sync] monitors and 12 of them passed," Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang said at the company's CES press conference Sunday.

I suppose that counts as "more gamers".

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Syntax Error said:
"We tested about 400 [adaptive sync] monitors and 12 of them passed," Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang said at the company's CES press conference Sunday.

I suppose that counts as "more gamers".
Click to expand...
It does go on to say that you can manually turn on g-sync support in drivers (or something) so it will be pretty much all of them.
 
Sure, but turning it on doesn't do much if it doesn't actually work with the monitor and give you results.  They say you can manually turn it on for monitors that failed to pass validation (or haven't been tested but, after four hundred adaptive sync monitors, I'm guessing the popular ones are tested)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Syntax Error said:
Sure, but turning it on doesn't do much if it doesn't actually work with the monitor and give you results. They say you can manually turn it on for monitors that failed to pass validation (or haven't been tested but, after four hundred adaptive sync monitors, I'm guessing the popular ones are tested)
Click to expand...
On the one hand, this would seem to allow folks with Nvidia cards to buy cheaper monitors and not spend money on gsync, which might cannibalize their sales. On the other hand folks with Freesync monitors that want to jump ship to team green might be able to do so without having to buy a new monitor. I'll be paying close attention to this as it develops.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No argument that it'll be a nice change.  Just noting how few monitors seem to support it at this time so it won't be an immediate change.  But if Nvidia can produce a software alternative (Gsync monitors have an actual hardware module inside them, Freesync is all software) then that'll be a good thing for everyone.  Whatever Nvidia loses in module licensing, they'll likely make up in monitor certification and maybe losing the "To get the best results with this card you need a $400+ monitor" stigma.

 
Im willing to bet the 'passing' ones are the ones that are actually worth the money and didnt just slap 'freesync' on the box. Which means they also start to edge close to the price of the gsync comparable monitor. The problem with freesync it is very loose in its spec, you can have a monitor that supports 55hz-65hz and well, thats variable, so they can slap freesync on it and call it good even though you will see almost no benefit from it since its such a limited range.

Gsync mandates a huge range, so the ones that are passing are probably the few 144hz freesync monitors with tight timings (maybe a few of the 75hz ones with a large range). At which point you start to get close to gsync monitor prices. I.e. just from their list of approved monitors, comparing to the dell 27in 144hz gsync monitor everyone buys at 300-350, the only comparable freesync monitors at 27in and 144hz are all at 360$. So you're already looking at the same price

Still though, nice of them to enable adaptive refresh when and where possible instead of only their proprietary form

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Syntax Error said:
No argument that it'll be a nice change. Just noting how few monitors seem to support it at this time so it won't be an immediate change. But if Nvidia can produce a software alternative (Gsync monitors have an actual hardware module inside them, Freesync is all software) then that'll be a good thing for everyone. Whatever Nvidia loses in module licensing, they'll likely make up in monitor certification and maybe losing the "To get the best results with this card you need a $400+ monitor" stigma.
Click to expand...
Just adding on:

The monitors that are confirmed to receive a G-Sync compatibility update, and therefore offer adaptive sync with Nvidia GPUs, are:


Hopefully they're going alphabetically with their testing and got tired...

 
oh man the people who spent $600 on a nice G-sync monitor during the holidays are going to be pissed.  Another example of a company alienating their main supporters.   That's very poor timing.   They should have announced it in November or December.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Penny Arcade's On the Rain-Slick Precipice of Darkness 3
NWGLH-D54M2-LA0L8

Penny Arcade's On the Rain-Slick Precipice of Darkness 4

KD2JT-6ERK9-V2XIL

Action Henk

65IT4-9YVP0-IYJCF

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nothing- said:
oh man the people who spent $600 on a nice G-sync monitor during the holidays are going to be pissed. Another example of a company alienating their main supporters.
Click to expand...
Those $600 monitors are also 4k and 144Hz. You can get a 4k Freesync for $350 if you don't mind 60Hz refresh but what's the point?

I don't know but I'm suspecting that the ones with a physical hardware module are going to perform better as well than the software-side solutions. Which, if you're the kind to drop $600 on a monitor, is still what you want.

 
Do people really spend $600 on monitors? Are monitors the new video cards? I don't think I understand the world anymore.

Also, I'm really not sure that Anthem will be fine. It sounds like a terrible move on BioWare's part, unless it's just a way to make some quick cash so they can bankroll their next real project. 

Hey, I'm curious: any of you nerds who picked up AC: Odyssey over Xmas--does the new game include a Discovery Tour mode like Origins?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top