pcgamer.com

jaybone, (edited ) do games w RuneScape player pulls off a personal Shawshank Redemption: Grinds his way out of one-zone house arrest by grinding a raid 2,000 times over 10,000 hours: 'It was all worth it'

I played that game like 20 years ago. They put players in zone based house arrest? Wtf is that? But then you can somehow grind your way out of it?

Edit: oh it was self imposed.

jedibob5,

It was a self-imposed challenge.

atticus88th,

I’m going on a self-imposed challenge to be a millionaire…

Mission accomplished, how do I get my own article now?

thedirtyknapkin,

it’s it’s gotta be something very difficult that no one has ever fund before.

Doom,
@Doom@ttrpg.network avatar

Like have sex with me? Or enjoy sex with me? Or be my friend? Or talk to me… or…

clif, do games w Nexus Mods' new owners promise they won't monetise the site to death as users panic at the whiff of venture capital

Promise in one hand, shit in the other, let me know which one fills up first.

Buffalobuffalo,

Let me just use this promise hand to send you a pic.

grrgyle, do games w WoW's Leeroy Jenkins, one of the internet's oldest memes, turns 20 years old—and after looking back on what we wrote in 2005, I feel like we've failed Leeroys everywhere

They just don’t make memes like they used to, and none of us can just run in without fearing the wrath of strangers. The folks who take games too seriously won.

Maybe not everywhere, but multiplayer games for sure have more serious elements to them than I ever thought.

In a way, this is what I wanted back in the 90s when so few people understood the potential of video games as a serious art form.

gradual,

In a way, this is what I wanted back in the 90s when so few people understood the potential of video games as a serious art form.

Same, but definitely not for competitive multiplayer games. That’s the antithesis of the direction gaming should go in.

Instead, we should’ve moved more towards co-op. Gamers would be happier and healthier, which is why it was decided they should not appreciate it.

I genuinely feel bad for all the people getting suckered into wasting hundreds of hours in a game like fortshit just because it’s free and their loser friends got suckered into playing it, too. They have no idea what’s happening around them. If they ever realize it, it will likely be too late.

notgivingmynametoamachine, do games w On the prospect of an $80-$90 GTA 6, former PlayStation boss says 'it's an impossible equation' for big-budget studios to keep their prices down

Maybe stop spending nigh decades and nigh billions of dollars designing these enormous catch all games that are supposed to appeal to everyone?

I Don’t want to spend 90 dollars on a game that has 400 different things to do, 200 of which I enjoy.

I’d rather give Sandfall 50 bucks for a lovingly crafted, focused game that’s actually, you know, good.

conditional_soup,

Came here to say this. Stop trying the build the whole universe in a game.

goodeye8,

I've been saying it for the last decade, there's no real "games are too expensive to make" problem. There's only studios choosing the "go big or go home" death spiral where they inflate the budget and need a hit to stay afloat. But then after every hit the budget grows even bigger requiring an even bigger hit until eventually they're going to flop and the studio goes under. They could just not do that and have a sustainable business. And I get that it's not only the game developers fault. Part of the blame falls on the publishers who most likely force budgets to balloon so they could make more money (if the game is a success). But when I say they could just not do that I mean both the developer and publisher. Both of them should be smarter than that.

But clearly even with all the major flops it has been a successful strategy, because they've been at it since at least mid 2000s. It's only in the recent years where it's really starting to strain all the AAA publishers as the budgets have grown too big even for them. These price increases are an outcome of this budget ballooning. They're feeling their bottom line taking a hit so they increase the price to mitigate the risk.

Personally I said fuck them, let it crash and let's get more studios like Sandfall, who made an exceptional games for a reasonable price.

notgivingmynametoamachine,

Not only that, they produced a game with no major flaws with a tiny (comparable to these mega studios) team AND NO COMPROMISES.

“Man, this game is great but the music is meh” - not at Sandfall.

“Wow, I love the combat but the graphics are dated” - nope, every model is so lovingly crafted they added haircuts and outfits as secret loot

“The combat is the only weak point in this gorgeous, story driven game” not on expedition 33 it ain’t!

Katana314,

It seems like there’s a few studios that get this trick. Hazelight (Split Fiction, It Takes Two) seems to have a good cadence to releases and likely hasn’t inflated their size all that much. They’re consistently making good games.

I wish there were more examples of that.

reksas,

on top of all that; big money, be it profits or revenue, attracts parasites that start ruining the company from the inside. One can feel it on many games that developers wanted to do good but were prevented from doing so because of executives and middle management.

NuXCOM_90Percent,

There is definitely an argument that AA games are a mistake.

But, since 4 or so, GTA kind of has been THE AAA (arguably AAAA) game and those releases literally buoy the industry.

Maybe you aren’t excited for it. Pretty much the entire rest of the (gaming) world is and so are their friends.

Going purely by “vibes”? I could be “okay” with a world where GTA 6 is 80-90, most major studio games are 60-70, small studios are 40-50, and indy games start closer to 30 than 15. Still plenty of room for waiting for a sale but also makes it a lot easier to be successful without selling millions of copies in the first month.

notgivingmynametoamachine,

I’m glad they’re excited for it, but I’d put money on the fact that they’re not excited for literally every facet of the game, which is my entire point.

I don’t think GTA games are garbage - they’re literally designed to appeal to as many people as they can. The problem is R* thinks the way to design a game is to include 500 things, make the game take nearly a decade and cost nearly a billion dollars to produce - that game has to sell at 90 bucks, and it’s bloated with a ton of shit I don’t care about.

I’d rather pay 50-60 dollars for a focused game aimed at a specific audience (see: expedition 33, JRPG fans) than 40 extra dollars for a bunch of shit I don’t care about in a “jack of all trades master of none” simulator.

Edit: remember bowling with Nico? The train mission? Flying in general? All shit people paid for that actively annoyed them.

At 90 bucks, nearly every consumer is paying some % for bloat they don’t care about, all in the name of making a game that will sell the most units.

NuXCOM_90Percent, (edited )

I don’t think GTA games are garbage - they’re literally designed to appeal to as many people as they can.

And they do.

I’d rather pay 50-60 dollars for a focused game aimed at a specific audience (…) At 90 bucks, nearly every consumer is paying some % for bloat they don’t care about

So you want games made specifically for you and cheaper.

Don’t get me wrong. It is genuinely awesome when it feels like a studio spent years making a game specifically for you (see: most of us Armored Core fans with 6). That works until that audience doesn’t show up. This is what led to THQ and the like crashing and burning a decade or two ago where games were successful but “not successful enough”

MAYBE that is going to be GTA6. Signs are, it won’t be. Because, yes, GTA 6 might not be catered directly to you. But the vast majority of people are going to love the overall package. Maybe they skip a feature. For example, I love the Yakuza/LAD games. Unless there is a story beat (involving a character I care about), basically nothing can make me do the crane game for more than two or three minutes (so one purchase…). Similarly, I loved Lost Judgment and have a LOT of Thoughts and Feelings on it. It would be one of my all time favorite games if it weren’t for the fucking after school special minigames.

Doesn’t matter. It might not be a 100% amazing game but it was still a 90% amazing game which… is still really fun.

Because

all in the name of making a game that will sell the most units.

Yes. And… Rockstar pulls that off. I don’t know why they would actively choose to sell fewer units just to make sure you never play a sequence you don’t enjoy.


Again, just to be clear: Very few studios can pull this off. We all make fun of RGG for how much they reuse everything but… that drastically lowers costs and lets them get out a solid 30-70 hour game once or twice a year. And studios trying to turn an A game into a AAA game is literally how THQ died.

But Rockstar is… well, a bunch of rockstars. They CAN do that. They do this through a lot of abuse of labor and manipulative marketing but… it works.


And, to be clear. I actively disliked what I played of RDR2. I found GTA 5 to be “fine”. But me thinking the games are worth getting on sale for 20-30 doesn’t matter when you have the population of a small country immediately ready to buy it at launch multiple times.

notgivingmynametoamachine,

And they do.

I never argued they didn’t?

So you want games made specifically for you and cheaper.

No, I want games with focus. A game doesn’t have to appeal to me - I don’t give a shit about racing games but I can appreciate Gran Turismo’s focus on realistic driving simulation (or at least that’s what it was decades ago, I don’t keep up with racing games), and I imagine the realistic driving sim enthusiasts were really happy they didn’t need to play some prop plane flying mini game to earn the color they want for their Charger or to “get all the trophies” and that they didn’t have to pay an extra 5-10-15 bucks for the privilege.

Don’t get me wrong. It is genuinely awesome when it feels like a studio spent years making a game specifically for you (see: most of us Armored Core fans with 6). That works until that audience doesn’t show up. This is what led to THQ and the like crashing and burning a decade or two ago where games were successful but “not successful enough”

Blame the Publishers and human greed for that. FROMsoft seems to have absolutely 0 issue making highly specific games that only pander to a tiny subset of gamers (before ER anyway), and they knock it out of the park 9 times out of 10. Was it the 84 on metacritic that screwed Respawn out of a bonus on Titanfall 1/2 despite both of those games being fucking amazing? I remember that story vaguely (84 on metacritic, no bonus) but might be getting the pub/dev/game wrong. I don’t agree with the “Well, that’s the way it is, get used to it” mentality.

MAYBE that is going to be GTA6. Signs are, it won’t be. Because, yes, GTA 6 might not be catered directly to you. But the vast majority of people are going to love the overall package. Maybe they skip a feature. For example, I love the Yakuza/LAD games. Unless there is a story beat (involving a character I care about), basically nothing can make me do the crane game for more than two or three minutes (so one purchase…). Similarly, I loved Lost Judgment and have a LOT of Thoughts and Feelings on it. It would be one of my all time favorite games if it weren’t for the fucking after school special minigames.

People don’t “skip a feature” in modern GTA games - they skip dozens, or actively complain about them because they’re annoying (Nico, flying, train). Because they’re designed as generic massive time sinkholes for the lowest common denominator.

Yes. And… Rockstar pulls that off. I don’t know why they would actively choose to sell fewer units just to make sure you never play a sequence you don’t enjoy.

Good for them? I still don’t want 90 dollar games that are only 90 dollars because they’re “Include all the things!” bonanza’s where I’m paying for shit I don’t care about.

You can make a ton of profit a bunch of different ways - Spend a decade making a “jack of all trades master of none” simulator that will appeal to most for an obscene price, or create a passion project for a fair price. I prefer the latter. Again, Look at expedition 33 - 2 million units sold, tiny team, passion pouring out of every facet for a JRPG lover like myself. They didn’t need to spend 500 million dollars and a decade with a team of hundreds to produce a GOTY level product, so I only have to pay 50 bucks. Why would I pay R* 90 for a game where for every 2-3 facets I like there’s a facet I don’t care for That I paid for? Why would the general public?

Also, there’s no need to come off so contentious, this isn’t that shithole Reddit brother, we can disagree and still be friends.

NuXCOM_90Percent,

No, I want games with focus. A game doesn’t have to appeal to me

It just… can’t appeal to a lot of people without being perfectly catered to them?

Blame the Publishers and human greed for that. FROMsoft seems to have absolutely 0 issue making highly specific games that only pander to a tiny subset of gamers (before ER anyway),

Dude… Dark Souls is a frigging Metroidvania. And every youtube essayist looking for some clicks will point out how incredibly tutorialized Dark Souls 1 is up to the Lordvessel. People whinge that Spirit Ashes made Elden Ring too easy all while not realizing that basically every hard boss in Dark 1 and 3 has an NPC summon… and the Dark 2 SOTS update added the ones that were missing.

I love the Souls games. It is fun to pretend they are super hardcore affairs for those of us who want to drive nails into our proverbial winkies (and some. mostly non-From, ones are) but they are ridiculously mainstream games with off the chart vibes.

Was it the 84 on metacritic that screwed Respawn out of a bonus on Titanfall 1/2 despite both of those games being fucking amazing?

I forget what the budget of Titanfall 1 and 2 were but both are very clearly A/AA games in terms of scope and what the budget “should” be. If they were actually somehow the kind of industry goliath that a GTA is then… EA done fucked up.

To put it in movie terms: You are complaining that a Michael Bay transformers is not as tight and well done as Before Midnight. They are completely different scopes.

Good for them? I still don’t want 90 dollar games that are only 90 dollars because they’re “Include all the things!” bonanza’s where I’m paying for shit I don’t care about.

Then don’t pay for it? Again, you (and I) don’t fucking matter when a significant chunk of the planet are perfectly eager to play those giant tentpole games.

You can make a ton of profit a bunch of different ways

Oh, well. If you are a master of the economy maybe you can fix the games industry so that there aren’t massive layoffs every week?

Spend a decade making a “jack of all trades master of none” simulator that will appeal to most for an obscene price, or create a passion project for a fair price.

Again. If you actually CAN make the “jack of all trades master of none” (which is actually a complete mischaracterization of the GTAs but…) game… you make it. Because 11.21 million people who are “mostly happy” and buy it on launch (in 2013 numbers) is a hell of a lot more money than 2 million people who are “ridiculously happy” (in 2025 numbers) in the first few weeks. And, for funsies, RDR2’s week two sales were 17 million in 2018

They didn’t need to spend 500 million dollars and a decade with a team of hundreds to produce a GOTY level product, so I only have to pay 50 bucks.

Let’s actually break that down.

Clair Obscur is a game that came out of the ubisoft content mines. We all love the idea that Guilaume Broche made it in his shed with scraps but he applied most of the game design lessons and industry connections from his time at Ubisoft (and 12 coworkers from Ubisoft) to found his studio and secure funding.

Ubisoft… is not in good shape. But, 5-10 years ago, they were very reliably in that AA/AAA space and the AssCreed games were used specifically to point out that platform exclusive games weren’t the be all end all anymore and that most people were playing the same games regardless of what console they bought.

CO also is a game that came out of the “infinite money” of COVID in 2020-2022-ish. Contrast that with the modern gaming landscape where money for devs is increasingly tight and studios are getting shuttered left and right. Xalavier Nelson Jr has talked about this at length in the context of Strange Scaffold which… is kind of what everyone says they want in a studio. They make great games with a ridiculous amount of heart on time and on budget with little to no DLC. But that still costs money.

Why would I pay R* 90 for a game where for every 2-3 facets I like there’s a facet I don’t care for That I paid for? Why would the general public?

You wouldn’t because you seem to think everything needs to be perfectly catered to you.

The general public does because they like 80-95% of a game and value having a great 20-30 hours with it.

AGAIN. This is not a model that most studios should follow. It was basically the killing fields back in the early-mid 2010s when studios and publishers were dropping like flies because they tried to make AA/AAA games that sold B/A numbers. Arguably, this is what has been leading to Sony and Microsoft killing SOME of their studios (less so one like Tango who get praised as what studios SHOULD be by the prick that fired them all a week or two before that interview).

Rockstar and especially GTA is not that. They are peak Transformers/MCU where they can, through one means or another, employ a significant percentage of the overall industry and still turn a ridiculous profit. And, as a result, keep those support studios open for other studios/films to use them (less so the MCU these days…).

Which gets back to: I 100% think there is an argument that AA games are a mistake. That puts studios in a very dangerous spot where they need to get amazing sales just to break even. Whereas a B/A game can be something like Clair Obscur or Armored Core 6 which is a very limited scope with the potential to branch out. But for the studios who can do AAA? They have every reason to because it makes ridiculous bank AND buoys the industry as a whole.

notgivingmynametoamachine,

We’re just going to have to agree to disagree brother.

I’d say you’re cool paying for quantity while I’m cool paying for quality, but even that comparison doesn’t hold up - of course you’re getting more quantity, you’re happy to pay 50-60% more than I am for it.

I prefer games designed with passion, to be good games, over games designed to “Sell the most units”. I’ll take Krav Maga over arasaka-te any day, for what I hope are super obvious reasons.

And the only thing R* is “buoying” is increasing the price of all games for all gamers without an equal increase in quality content - they’re not alone there though, Nintendo is helping. Fuck em both.

finitebanjo,

The company made over 5 billion revenue and spent over 2 billion cost of operating in 2024, I don’t think this has anything to do with affordability.

notgivingmynametoamachine, (edited )

Not sure I follow sir/ma’am - are you saying R* doesn’t have to price it at 90$ and they’ll still make money?

I mean that’s true, but publicly traded companies are the devil themselves and are required to make as much money as possible.

chonglibloodsport,

If they don’t spend enough money to differentiate themselves then they risk being drowned in a sea of indie games.

Every year the number and quality of indie games increases. The ferocity of competition makes it extremely hard to get anyone to play your game, let alone survive as a developer. This raises the bar on quality to a ridiculous degree.

Take any AAA game from the 1990s. Today that’s a single person project which can’t even compete with the most basic of indie games out there. To actually make money and support yourself as an indie developer is ridiculously hard!

Lembot_0002, do games w The Hundred Line: Last Defense Academy has 100 endings, and it's pushing the creators to the brink of bankruptcy | PC Gamer

Do we even have a significant amount of people who care about more than 2-3 endings?

Elevator7009,

I’d imagine people who are really into “Choices Matter” and some people who are really into story would.

I play !visualnovels and half the fun is seeing what decisions lead to different outcomes. And getting different outcomes for different choices, especially if they are big choices, makes me feel like my choices matter and impact the world, as opposed to if all these supposedly important choices can only ever get me 2 or 3 different endings.

Although I do share your question about how popular my opinion is with other gamers.

Zoomboingding,
@Zoomboingding@lemmy.world avatar

Big appreciation for Undertale, which has 3 major endings but hundreds of variations for each. It’s nice to have the game acknowledge what you did and give you resolution.

duchess, do games w American Truck Simulator is adding a road trip mode where you drive different vehicles, 'say, a powerful pickup or even a sports car'

Casual driving without pressure or violence? They can’t be the first, can they?

dual_sport_dork,
@dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world avatar

Definitely not. Test Drive Unlimited 2 leaps to mind, which while it certainly had racing events and racing related content in it, you could also just drive around doing nothing in particular as much as you wanted.

There are several other racing oriented games that nevertheless had open worlds and you’re never actually forced to race anybody in any of them, albeit usually at the expense of sacrificing any game progression and thus having a rather limited vehicle selection. Need For Speed Underground 2 and Forza Horizon, for instance.

PurpleTentacle,

The same is true for almost any open world game with vehicles. Casually driving a car in GTA while obeying the traffic rules has been a thing from the very beginning.

This still feels different somehow, though.

Lifekraft,

Snowrunner is a little bit about that too.

domi, do games w Sony finally surrenders: PSN accounts will be 'optional' for games on Steam, but they'll give you free stuff if you sign up
@domi@lemmy.secnd.me avatar

I’m surprised they did this. Would have assumed most people don’t care and we were getting a PC PSN launcher very soon.

socsa,
@socsa@piefed.social avatar

I assume we still will and it will just lean more carrot than stick in terms of offering discounts and bonus items.

Ashtear, do games w Against the Storm looks charming and cosy, but it's actually the best and most fiendish city builder I've played in years

I had an intense love affair with this one earlier in the year that fizzled out quickly once the credits rolled. Solid game, but the only thing that keeps it from being in my collection of 1000-hour games is that it’s a little too dense for my taste. Keeping track of what builds what (and which build I had currently unlocked) was taking up a smidge more brain power than I’d like once the difficulty started demanding it. By the end I’d started layering in how to evaluate cornerstones, the best way to do trade, map modifiers, and it became too much. Ironically, I’d probably get to a level of comfort just by putting more time into the game but it’ll just feel like work.

One of those “almost there” games for me.

Carighan,
@Carighan@lemmy.world avatar

Was this before all the QoL updates around saveable production controls and easily seeing which builds what?

Ashtear,

Looks like it was October, so I’m guessing after? The production controls did help once I figured them out but I realized once I was digging through the UI every time I was making a building or cornerstone decision I wasn’t getting into the flow state I wanted.

delitomatoes,

Are there even credits? The game doesn’t end right? No story mode per se

Ashtear,

They showed up

minor spoiler maybe?after the fourth seal. From what I gather, yeah, there’s no ending/story mode or anything.


After the credit roll I took it as a sign I wasn’t getting much more lore or more Aunt Lori. I’d buy a DLC just for more Aunt Lori.

Zeusz13, do games w Helldivers 2 players rip into Arrowhead for 'straight-up ridiculous' Killzone crossover prices, CEO defends the choice

I don’t get the bitching. Is it brutally expensive? Yes. Do you have to buy it? No. In terms of stats the gun is nothing special, the armor is quite good, but not essential. For a one time crossover, it’s fine.

Mora,

Is it brutally expensive? Yes. Do you have to buy it? No.

Will people buy it? Yes.

Will there be more brutally expensive items because of it? Yes.

Kbobabob,

Will people still bitch about the price? Yes.

Atomic,

Can you easily farm SC in the game? Yes.

CaptPretentious,

They hire psychologists to explicitly figure out how to better make sales. Logical thinking will not win. Microtransactions, which consists of crap you don’t need, is a billion dollar industry and has bankrupted numerous homes.

lepinkainen,

Nobody is forcing people to buy anything, you CAN resist.

Womble,

Thats true in a surface level way. Buts its equally true about cigarettes, heroin any other adictive substance you can think of.

lepinkainen,

In-app purchases and limited time game passes are hardly heroin

Womble,

No but your argument that no-one is forced to buy cigarettes is equally valid to arguing that for micro-transactions. One is chemically adictive, the other uses physchological tricks and is almost entirely unregulated.

ripripripriprip,

“This doesn’t affect me therefore it should be a non-issue for everyone else.”

MrScottyTay,

It generates FOMO though. I remember when you didn’t have to pay for stuff in games, so I personally still find it very shitty to have to buy skins etc.

Zeusz13,

Yeah, I can see that one. Using dark patterns is not ok

lepinkainen,

If you’re too weak to resist FOMO, maybe stay off the internet

MrScottyTay,

Even so. There was once a magical time when games did not have FOMO at all.

lepinkainen,

Yes they did, not owning the game was FOMO, and they weren’t free at the time.

MrScottyTay,

I’d much rather buy a full game from the get go and have everything available with no time limit on when i need to buy it.

There is no FOMO if you can leave it for years, actually get the game with all dlc cheaper second hand for a couple of quid and still finding a thriving community online that isn’t focused on completing timed challenges for various currencies to get cosmetics you like the look of before they disappear from the store or the deal for the cheaper price runs out.

Katana314,

I’m still a bit unsure how plausible it is to make a multiplayer game, keep it updated, and not sell content within the game.

The good devs restrict it to cosmetic options, but I can’t say I’ve moralistically stuck to that kind of perfection - I’m okay with new weapons/characters as long as they stay balanced against old ones. It becomes a sort of hazy issue.

MrScottyTay,

Halo 3 and other games of it’s time did well enough, and the multiplayer for them lasted way longer than most live service games.

Actual DLC was better than FOMO cosmetics in my opinion.

Katana314,

Hello? Halo 3 sold map packs, and possibly other things I’m not remembering.

That’s setting aside that Halo 3 was an exclusive. It wasn’t made to sell itself - it was made to sell Xboxes.

MrScottyTay,

Yep, map packs are dlc. And it wasn’t alone. Every multiplayer game worked like that at the time. Exclusive or not.

filister, do games w 'I want to acknowledge that we messed up': NZXT addresses concerns about its controversial Flex gaming PC rental program and commits to taking action

Steve from Gamer’s Nexus is a hero. Full respect for that guy.

rtxn, do games w 'I want to acknowledge that we messed up': NZXT addresses concerns about its controversial Flex gaming PC rental program and commits to taking action

Oh, I don’t think they messed up at all. I think it was intentional and calculated. Business decisions don’t just materialize out of happenstance, they are written, proposed, and approved by multiple people. They came up with and implemented the pricing and the bait-and-switching of components. Their lawyers wrote, reviewed, and approved the contract. Their public relations personnel came up with the untrue statements that should be said in sponsored videos. And now that the shift has left the ass, the CEO wants to pretend it was all a mistake? Fuck off.

BearOfaTime,

Their lawyers wrote, reviewed, and approved the contract.

This is what most people, who’ve never worked for a large business, never seem to get.

As an employee I can never say anything about my company unless I want to be fired. For people farther up the chain who have responsibility for making public statements, everything is first vetted by the legal team.

Hell, at times we peons are given stock responses to give to certain questions.

resetbypeer, do games w Steam is 'an unsafe place for teens and young adults': US senator warns Gabe Newell of 'more intense scrutiny' from the government if Valve doesn't take action against extremist content

Boomers saying and thinking boomer things.

PushButton,

I am not a boomer, but I am starting to be an old fart myself.

Guess what the older generations said about video games back then? Satanic, create violence, hyper sexualization…

And at the end of the day, we didn’t end up as violent atheists watching porn on a portable device…

(For the people wondering, this post is a joke)

Luvs2Spuj, do games w Unreal Gold and Unreal Tournament are now free on the Internet Archive, and Epic says that's A-okay

So many hours on unreal tournament, might get some more now.

JoMiran,
@JoMiran@lemmy.ml avatar

I have played UT on and off since its original release. I am glad that there is no way to figure out my total hours played.

psycho_driver,

I probably would have been at 5000 in my college years alone.

PunchingWood, do games w Warcraft Rumble, Blizzard's first new RTS in years, will finally shed its mobile shackles and come to PC in December

Oh finally!

Said nobody.

Bananobanza, do games w Metaphor: ReFantazio's success is further proof that politics are good in videogames, actually—no matter what reactionaries tell you

Yes politics are great in videogames, if the writers don’t share just 1 braincell like with many current AAA(A) games.

You’d think it’s common knowledge, yet they still churn out these depthless, one dimensional millenial writing slop.

BruceTwarzen,

Politics in video games used to be: metal gear solid.

Politics in video games now is: is that a grill protagonist in my vydia game?

  • Wszystkie
  • Subskrybowane
  • Moderowane
  • Ulubione
  • Technologia
  • FromSilesiaToPolesia
  • rowery
  • esport
  • fediversum
  • test1
  • ERP
  • krakow
  • muzyka
  • shophiajons
  • NomadOffgrid
  • informasi
  • retro
  • Travel
  • Spoleczenstwo
  • gurgaonproperty
  • Psychologia
  • Gaming
  • slask
  • nauka
  • sport
  • niusy
  • antywykop
  • Blogi
  • lieratura
  • motoryzacja
  • giereczkowo
  • warnersteve
  • Wszystkie magazyny