Also, this is something new and different. FPS games have been my go to for years now. A FPS with abilities and magic instead of guns seems like it could be fun. Something like a simple multiplayer demo could let people get a taste of what this is and try out. I likely wouldn’t drop $60 on it just to try it out. But I would buy it after playing if it was fun and offered a different experience.
The quest where you help the girl find her “pet” and you find out at the end that it’s a bearer who was petrified is super fucked up. The whole time you think this girl is talking about a dog or cat. It really hits home how normalized treating bearers as less than is in this world.
My issue with all of this is thus, and the article touched on it a bit:
Gamers don’t give a shit if games are buggy. Actually, we only really want it to be a baseline level of playable. And even then, we’ll probably suffer through a lot. What we want is a fun game.
In fact, I don’t actually think most of us give a particular shit about micro transactions or battle passes other than that they tend to be accompanied by games that are abjectly less fun without them. I wouldn’t have batter an eye if baldurs gate has a cosmetic store because what I want has nothing to do with that.
I want to play games that are fun. That’s the bottom line. Baldurs gate is incredible because it’s good. I would have paid more for it than I did. I would have suffered through micro transactions and battle passes if I had to. Because I don’t give a shit about that.
I’m just tired of games releasing and not being fun.
I'm not. Advance Wars isn't on there either. They're going to find a way to sell them to you for way more than the subscription of NSO, in addition to what you're paying for NSO.
kotaku.com
Ważne