I consistently get far more hours of playtime per dollar spent with indie games I buy for $5-$15 than $60 AAA games. (I say $60, not $70, because I haven’t bought anything at $70, and don’t intend to start.)
If they want to charge $70 for games, maybe release them in a complete state and don’t include microtransactions and offer post-launch support for a decent period of time. Their ‘Video games haven’t changed price since the 90s! The price isn’t keeping up with inflation!’ argument is a crock of shit because in the 90s, you bought a game and that was that. There’d maybe be a $40 expansion a year later that roughly doubled the content in the game. There were no $60 games with $150+ of day 1 DLC.
Travel is gonna become boring if you have to travel the same road multiple times in the course of the game even if you have a bunch of cool stuff along that road. Eventually, I won’t give a shit about that stuff since I’ve seen it a million times. So I would hope there is still some kind of fast travel to go between places I have already been if the world is super big. Otherwise it’s just gonna feel like you’re padding the game for time to inflate a 10 hour story to take 40 hours to finish.
Nvidia GeForce Now To Introduce Ads To Its Free Tier (www.gamespot.com) angielski
Ads will not interrupt gameplay on the cloud gaming service, but will display as free users wait in the queue.
After Pricing Dragon’s Dogma 2 $70, Capcom Is Now Considering a Video Game Price Review - IGN (www.ign.com) angielski
Dragon’s Dogma 2 is the first Capcom game priced $70, but it sounds like there’s more to come.
Games only need fast travel when they make travel "boring", says Dragon's Dogma 2 director (www.rockpapershotgun.com) angielski
In an interview with IGN, Dragon's Dogma 2 director Hideaki Itsuno defends his game's lack of unrestricted fast travel …