There’s a disclaimer that says not every Switch 1 game will work, but I think it will play on the new Switch with the same lousy performance it has now unless you buy the Switch 2 version.
As it stands now, it’s difficult for the consumer to make the informed choice that you can make with any of those. And the comparison is that you’d prefer cigarettes that didn’t cause cancer, because they absolutely have the ability to make cigarettes that don’t cause cancer in this metaphor, but they choose not to because they believe they stand to make more money the way things are.
That too would have costs associated with it. Nothing is free when you do it at work, but it’s reasonable to impose those kinds of costs to ensure the products they make meet a base standard.
Depends on the territory. The argument is that the practice as it stands now is against current consumer laws in places like the UK. Functionally, even if they were forced to provide this disclaimer, it would still lead to the current state of things being less lucrative and would discourage the practice anyway, which I would still call some kind of a win.
Sure would, but I’m going to set my hopes very low for that one. The best way to make this happen would be to only buy and play their competitors that are more future proofed.
Plans can change in the course of a year. At the time, that probably was their plan, and that it didn’t happen doesn’t make it a guess. We’re hearing this same reveal on the 16th from multiple corroborating sources at this point.
There was an interview with Vincke right around award season 2023 where he said they already knew their next project and were expecting to beat the development time on BG3 in a world without a new eastern European war or a new pandemic. It was something like, “We think it’ll take us 3 years, so it’ll probably take 4.” I’m looking forward to hearing more in 2027.
No worries. There are lots of kinds of games we used to get a lot of back in the day, but their successors or spiritual successors don’t get the kind of attention or marketing that the industry giants do. Often times, if you miss a certain kind of game, just start searching for “modern games like X”, and you’ll probably find it.
I started playing at the end of 2015. I saw the game go through a bunch of different forms. The people pulling higher tier weapons into lower tier bots were mostly doing all-in strategies around that weapon, because they didn’t have enough budget left for much else, IIRC. But it was going to be mathematically impossible to support to 10 tiers of 10v10 matches as the game went on anyway, and it became a really fun competitive game with no tiers in early 2017. Then they went for some kind of half-assed return to tiers at the end of 2018 that made no one happy.
The presence of tiers at all was what bothered me. The version I liked most did have light and heavy blocks with tradeoffs so you could have that depth without wreaking havoc on matchmaking by splitting your player base into 10 different pools.