I biked out to a park yesterday with my big binoculars but I’m still waiting for my tripod to show up so I just checked out the moon some. Thanks for posting.
The Pleiades and Hyades should still be fairly high in the sky, and make great targets for binoculars. I’m also VERY partial to the little beehive cluster in Canis Major (go to the first barely visible star down from sirius, along the dog’s spine, and move directly right from there). If they’re strong enough, the Orion Nebula also makes a great target. The regular beehive cluster is alright; it can be tricky in the city, but you should juuuust be able to see what kinda looks like a faint, blurry star just left of the angle of you make a right angle between Pollux and Procyon. There’s also a few binary stars that make good targets right now. You should be able to split the first bright star out from the cup in the handle of the big dipper into three stars.
People are more likely to go online and complain than to compliment. But why take internet comments so seriously. I have a handful of trusted sources that I use to get my opinions on games. DLC Podcast for example is a favorite of mine. I’ve gotten to know their tastes and where they overlap with mine so when they get excited about a specific thing I’ll know if I’m likely to enjoy it based on our shared interests.
When you get a handful of voices that have a strong overlap with your own taste then you can get outside of the tribalistic bitching of the hive. Comments don’t even concern me anymore.
It’s been a problem for awhile. The media needs clicks so saying something is 7.5/10 doesn’t really drive engagement. Gamers have especially fed into this narrative because the media surrounding new products is always filled with hype and billed as the next greatest thing. It’s caused justified pushback from the community, but I think the pendulum has swung a bit in the other direction now. It’s tough feeling lukewarm about something when you’ve been told it’s supposed to be great. Additionally, the publishers, and some developers, in this industry are greedy cutthroats, which has made them easy targets for people’s frustration. The problem is now that frustration is focused on EVERYTHING involving the games industry.
People are complaining about Avowed? What the fuck is wrong with them?
I’ve been too busy loving it to be online reading anything, honestly cannot fathom what their complaints are tho. Avowed has repeatedly impressed me by being more clever and nuanced than I was expecting a game to be, in writing, level design, and combat.
Only heard a couple people talk about it online (that I trust to be reasonable) and they basically said it was fine but didn’t blow them away. And that’s fine but it makes for boring “cOnTeNt”.
From what I’ve heard, its mostly people expecting the game to be more dynamic - more akin to Skyrim’s varied gameplay systems or Fallout: NV’s story and quests. They’re going in expecting something with heavy RPG focus and getting something more action focused.
It has stealth, it has magic, it has melee combat, it has ranged combat, it has dialogue options for talking your way through stuff, it has multiple ways of solving quest lines…
It’s basically Skyrim, if it was smaller and more focused, with better combat, voice acting, level design, and heads and tails better writing.
Obsidian getting dinged in reviews for making more focused games that don’t waste your time and don’t bet their company’s entire future on its budget and scope has been very frustrating to see.
They still average out to be very positive scores, so I don’t think we can say most people don’t want what they’re making, and no viewpoint is universal, so don’t put words in my mouth.
But you’ll see the same people asking for a more sustainable game industry complain about what they find when they see it.
Also, from a mechanistic standpoint I think that mostly has to do with the high cost of entry for games.
At $80-$100 for a full priced game these days, it’s hard to just buy on a whim. The only time you would is when they’re on sale, which happens well after initial release. So initial sales of games are basically entirely driven by reviews and online discourse (which itself has an effect on reviews), and you basically just have a bunch of people all waiting for the signal to buy or not.
I do think that services like Gamepass are a genuinely good way of reducing that effect, because now anyone can try anything on a lark.
I’m personally not interested in any of the games, but I wish the best of luck to the people that are hoping to win one! I like this, it’s better than letting the codes go to waste
93% vs 77% doesn’t strike me as polarized. 16% difference?
77% doesn’t even seem that bad if it’s a style of game I like. From about 2001 I used to see sci fi movies that looked interesting as long as they had at least a 25% Rotten Tomatoes score because my tastes were different.
Is there something I’m missing? I haven’t played either game and I haven’t looked at reviews. Won’t buy KCD (no character creation) and probably will eventually buy Avowed.
The thing is, those reviews must be left by someone who purchased it. It’s got a self-selection bias. People purchased it presumably expecting to like it. They thought it would be a style of game they enjoyed. Most people who think it isn’t something they’ll like will just pass over it and not buy it, and obviously not effect the score.
Makes me appreciate reviews that are able to give pros and cons to the game, and the ones that are able to say an opinion between “best game ever” and “absolute trash”. Which I still often see on the Steam reviews, usually voted as one of the Most Helpful!
The only problem is that people are idiots, especially online. Go to any comment section and you’ll find people angry at the content, no matter what the content is. And you’re taking them seriously, for some reason. Laugh at them and move on, no more polarization problem. As you’ve said, 77% of people enjoyed avowed. Probably even more, as people are a lot more likely to leave a bad review than a good one.
Brother, picking on your example, Avowed had the gall to charge 11€ more than KCD2 while offering a facsimile of what it promised while KCD2 improved upon their past game in every way. The polarisation stems from a game published by one of the richest companies in the world and in production for over 6y delivering a mediocre experience (at best) when compared to CHEAPER offerings that do much more. In truth, it’s not polarisation, it’s requiring a modicum of quality for your money. I returned it because I was advertised an Obsidian RPG and got a linear shooter with barely any choices and performance issues that would not be foreign in a mobile marketplace. That’s the future gamepass brings, slop. Luckily, there’s US indie, Asian and European developers making good games, KCD2 or BG3 being such examples. Shit, even Lords of the Fallen is a better experience than Avowed as people were delivered the experience that was promised in the promotional materials at less than 70€.
Edit: Dragon Age was technically well executed, but, again, as an RPG, it had little to offer. Would be another game perfect for a mobile app store. The total sales of that game and predicted sales of avowed confirm as much, it’s shovelware capitalising on a franchise name to drive sales while having no craft or passion behind it. If you read the reviews for avowed, the overwhelming majority of the thumbs up reviews complain the game is not worth the price of admission and it’s a mid game at best.
I am sorry, but it seems your Avowed is different from the one I am playing. I agree with your comment, but I am enjoying Avowed like I haven’t enjoyed any game in years! And barely any choices? Really? I just finished the first area (not the tutorial), and there were LOTS of meaningful choices! But speaking of the tutorial, there was a choice there that impacted certain future interactions. The R is definitely there in this RPG. I haven’t played a game where even the little choices matter as much as in this game!
People engage in absolutes. They either love a thing or hate a thing. There’s no nuance.
And it must be made to cater for them, there’s no expectation that it will contain choices they don’t approve of.
And this stance, this modern relationship with the world permeates everything, especially forms of media.
You see it in films and books… Fans and stans and folk trying to take it down. There is no nuance or middle ground.
People don’t accept that, perhaps, something isn’t just “not for them”. That’s why you get grown men complaining about the direction of children’s shows they used to watch.
And this is compounded with social media where polarisation, blunt takes and contradiction are the primary drivers of engagement.
It’s absolutely not just a gaming problem. Movie reviews are getting more and more bandwagon-y. Only a few reviewers post in the first day or two, and everyone else says “okay, they hated it, now I have to hate it too or I’m going to lose credibility”. I think it’s the inevitable outcome of having less famous reviewers, a NYT columnist can post what they feel, but a small blog can fall into obscurity if they have one contrarian review.
The only part that’s unique to gaming is that gamers are the most toxic community in the internet.
Don’t forget the vocal minority problem. The subset of people who comment on things is much smaller than the set of people who consume them. And while the threshold of effort for making comment is low, it isn’t zero, so people who hold more extreme views are going to be more prevalent in the selection because the people with moderate views aren’t going to have the motivation to spend 20 minutes explaining the nuanced position they have, while the ‘love’ and ‘hate’ camps will gladly spend 10 seconds on posting their simplistic view.
Add on the way modern systems work, focusing on likes, upvotes, etc. and you get short form responses getting greater engagement purely because they don’t take as long to read. It’s always easier to get traction with a short, maybe amusing, rehash of a common opinion than with a long dissertation on niche, complex views.
That cycles back in at the top to create a visibility bias so the people making the next round of commentary/content see the wave of love/hate and try to ride it. The result is a feedback loop with a terrible signal to noise ratio.
bin.pol.social
Najstarsze