I think I will have to disagree somewhat. Difficultly should change how you play, not how long. Needing to Grind better gear is not respecting the players time.
That said there are games I did enjoy the grind, “the world ends with you” is one of them, but that is a case of earning new ways to play in most cases.
Of course it is exaggerated. That is the point of a hyperbolic arguments.
Examining hypothetical edge cases in more detail is a useful tool for defining where the issues lie in a debate.
Would you support/play a game of 100+ devs if key management DID commit war crimes? I’d like to think probably not.
It’s though it is clear from your response that misogyny isn’t a deal-breaker for you for this case, so the question then becomes; how shitty does a single person need to be before it becomes an issue for you then?
Other people drew a line in the sand at misogyny and there is nothing wrong with that. In fact I’d say it is a respectable opinion.
You probably would prefer to just ignore any controversy and just judge the game on its merits alone, and that is fine in its own way too. It is exhausting keeping up with the news and you would be happier and find it easier to just blindly enjoy a game.
But don’t pretend that just because you are ignoring it, doesn’t mean that you aren’t supporting bad practices like misogyny when you do so.
Edit: downvoted for not wanting to pay attention to stupid controversy about video games? Weird…
It’s one thing to live peacefully in ignorance. I get it. it is exhausting keeping track of every shitty thing a company does when it’s so much easier at the end of an exhausting 9-5 shift to avoid news and play your games guilt free without thinking about who it’s hurting.
It’s a completely separate thing to brag that your ignorance somehow makes your way of life superior.
People caring about these issues, and sometimes leading to actions being taken because of that, all makes the gaming industry, or to be hyberbolic; the world a better place.
It’s fine to avoid news on controversy and just blindly enjoy games, but don’t lie to yourself (and others) by pretending that it is a good thing.
Let’s do some theoretical scenarios for microtransactions:
-apathy with whales: “we need to ensure a good monetisation model to extract value from the whales, even if the normal players are missing out”
-apathy without whales: “let’s try adding microtransactions to extract more value per player, it won’t hurt our sales!”
-No apathy with whales: “no one is buying our game! And our whales have no one to play with! Are the whales even enough to fund this on its own? We got to undo the microtransactions soon!”
-No apathy no whales: “why did we even add microtransactions! Every business knows that only quality games and good marketing can help sales!”
Ah. The “I’ll just tolerate this until it gets worse” mindset. Never backfires!
Surely even you can admit that slipping this in on release was a scummy move.
It’s “theoretical” only because there is no non-monetised version. They could have created a cheat shop with the items for free. Even if you choose not to use them having that option means it is a better experience, so it would still be a “diminished experience”.
If someone can pay extra money to get a different game experience from you then the publishers have denied you the chance at that experience which is “diminished”.
This isn’t even mentioning the performance issues on lunch that would be tolerated because “surely they’ll fix it later!”.
Sure you don’t care. Many people don’t care. And surely someone is going to try and highlight this apathy as a virtue somehow. And so publishers get to continue experimenting with how to milk franchises for every dollar it can instead of making an optimal game experience, overall making the game industry worse.
Yeah, but you’re tolerating it. which is good enough for greedy publishers.
If you want it to stop, don’t buy it. It’s the only option. Otherwise you allow publishers to make your game experience worse for profit.
The reason people like me are disappointed it is selling well is that these anti-consumer practices are not a deal-breaker for most people thus it allows these practices to persist in the game market. That is hardly “nonsense” as you put it.
I’m sure I’ll get a lot of “tolerating” people commenting that these “can be easily ignored”, but I doubt I will get a single person that says their experience was enhanced by these microtransactions, which could have simply been a cheat code instead.
I think klei may be my favourite studio. They create amazing games that are all truly unique but backed by strong game design concepts.
Mark of the ninja - great 2d stealth game were most games in the genre are 3d.
Invisible Inc - great turn-based Rougelike stealth game.
Don’t starve - probably one of the best survival games out there that relies on clever resource management rather than combat
Oxygen not included - a base building survival game, that is well designed to ramp up difficulty with the long term needs of your base
Griftlands - deck building game with a charming plot and interesting mechanics.
Each game they output is truly unique and interesting experience with some really clever design choices, but I think the point they became my favourite studio is when I read their article on Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic rewards to appreciate how well thought out their games were.
I’d recommend “in stars and time”. It is a turn-based RPG with loveable characters. I think it is best played blind so I’m hesitant to tell you more, but if you like games like undertale then I think you would like it.