Yeah, I feel the same about the events. But there’s only 2 “pro” tracks (White Land and Port Town 2), and I think they’ve dropped the frequencies of the full Grand Prix now with the Miniprix (which also include White Land and Port Town 2 as their final race)… which means I still haven’t played on Silence (I tend to be a bit too aggressive and end up blowing up on the 3rd or 4th track on Grand Prix).
That’s still a total rotation of 6 tracks (I’m not counting Silence because it’s hard to get there), and most of the time you’re playing on only 2 of them.
I mean even without inventing new F-Zero content, there are other Mode-7-style F-Zero games (that nobody played, but still they exist). It wouldn’t ruin my nostalgia to play tracks from BS F-Zero GP2 or the GBA F-Zero games. But yeah, you can’t tell me splatting some tiles down for new tracks would be that hard… I’m sure this is a game where you could even procedurally generate the tracks pretty well and eliminate the “memorization” aspect. I’d love that as an “event mode”.
Look I’ve got no skin in the game here, what’s wrong with having a mod that removes a selector in a character creation screen?
I get that some people are upset if they get misgendered or whatever (as I would be…my chosen pronouns just happen to line up with what everyone assumes they are…comfy living) but is it really necessary to force everyone to have a pronoun selection option if they don’t want a pronoun selection option? You’re not going to make someone blinded by hate see any clearer by forcing them to do something that only affects them.
Edit: I’m sorry if my questioning hurt some folks, that wasn’t my intention. I couldn’t see what the big deal was, but thanks to those who made the effort to engage with me, I have a more informed view and I can appreciate why the mod was removed and why its existence was upsetting.
This is not the first time something like this happened, some months back someone upload a mod that removed all rainbow flags from the spiderman game. Im guessing its the exact same thing like the last time: Someone made a new account to upload a mod that was only made to spark controversy. The mod itself didn’t matter, the author is just a troll that wanted a reaction from this. They knew they would get banned so they made a new account. Nexus has the same stance on this as last time: they don’t platform trolls so they removed it. It’s not about the mod, it’s about the authors intentions, which are to harm the platform
Was going to comment the same. How is this mod hurting anyone? Isnt this the point of modding, to tweak it a little bit to suit your tastes? Its not like its a rape or child molesting mod. Those things should get deleted. But this? Such a petty thing to do.
Imagine there was a group of people in your school, in your workplace, in your city who for some reason feel that Kazakhspy should not exist. They’re not allowed to kill you, that’s against the law, but they would if they could. Instead, they say fuck Kazakhspy, go kill yourself Kazakhspy, I can’t stand you Kazakhspy. Hearing that kind of thing on a regular basis might be a little hurtful. Now imagine some game studio heard about this and thought hey, let’s include Kazakhspy in our game. And then that group in your community was like “what the fuck is this! I hate Kazakhspy and now they’re shoving Kazakhspy down my throat in a videogame? I will not stand for this.” And goes through the effort of making a mod to remove you from the game and puts it on the website. You hear about this and see that it’s up there with a few downloads. You might be a little hurt to know some people hate you so much they’ll mod a game to spite you just because they don’t like your existence. Then the website owner is like, “Wow, this is weirdly hateful and doesn’t belong on my website. Let’s not perpetuate hate against Kazakhspy.”
That’s why. In context it’s hurtful to people because the intention of creating it was to hurt people through hate.
What’s wrong with having a mod that removes the skin color selector? I get people care about race and stuff, but is it really necessary to force everyone to have a skin colour selection option if they don’t want a skin colour selection option? You’re not going to make a racist see clearer by forcing them to do something that only affects them.
You have it in your own question. It is hateful. It was made by the hateful for the hateful to perpetuate a hateful idea. You might even call it a kind of hate speech, which probably means it violate Nexus’s terms. Even if it doesn’t, it’s icky af. And Nexus is entirely in their right to refuse hosting it. The nod creator is still free to use their own mod and share it in other ways, but Nexus should not be forced to host it.
Zero-K. It’s a competitive online RTS loosely based on the classic Total Annihilation (which led to Planetary Annihilation and Supreme Commander). Some of its features are a bit overcomplicated, but it does an amazing job innovating within the RTS genre.
It’s fast, aggressive, and fun. You spam units, claim territory (in the form of metal-extractors and energy-grid that upgrades their output, and building defenses to protect that) and raid and assault your opponents.
It abandons the hoary old concept of factions, instead giving you your choice of starting factories… and as the game progresses, you can expand into other factories to access the synergy of units. So you start a battle with a narrow slice of the unit-pie, but ultimately can access the whole inventory in a single match. There is no “teching” really, besides constructing resource-buildings, which keeps the focus on resources, construction, and combat.
It has a full single-player campaign that introduces the game’s complexity bit-by-bit… but the campaign does have some difficulty spikes, particularly since the units do get rebalanced once in a while and so an old mission will become suddenly easier or harder as the developers patch the game.
The game has a Lua-based GUI plug-in architecture if you like WoW-style UI mods as well.
Everyone showing up late to go ‘well I don’t see why they removed it!’ –
You are why.
Trolls escalate. They keep pushing until they get smacked down, then cry and scream and pretend they’ve been proven right. Being ignored doesn’t just embolden them, it bores them, and tells them they need to get worse to get attention. No matter what happens - no matter what anyone says to them - they get to use it in their stupid little word game.
The nature of bad faith is that there is no right answer.
You have to simply get rid of it, and the sooner, the better.
I understand your point that the behavior surrounding certain mods can escalate and create a toxic environment. In that sense, it’s not just the mod in question but the kind of interactions it may foster. However, that leads us into a very slippery slope. If we start removing mods based on what they might encourage rather than what they actually do, where do we draw the line?
Note that mods can be used for multiple reasons, not all of which are nefarious. Some people may genuinely appreciate the option to customize their experience in a way that the mod allows, without any intention of engaging in toxic behavior.
Your argument seems to be based on the idea of acting pre-emptively to negate potential harm, which is a valid point. But this can also set a concerning precedent that may affect the open nature of modding communities, by limiting what can and cannot be customized.
So the question then becomes, how do we balance preventing potential harm with preserving the user’s freedom to customize their experience? It’s a complicated issue, but one that deserves open dialogue rather than summary judgment.
I can’t see how Unity increasing prices is anti-competitive. If anything, them going brainfuck with fees can only serve to open the market to new players. Also, I doubt they’ll be able to make the fees retroactive, at least for games that won’t get updated.
Inb4 the “omg this is so entitled I swear I mean you guys are sending us DEATH THREATS I have PROOF that DEATH THREATS were sent to the developers (by our firm’s sockpuppet accounts) and that is so uncool stop being so ENTITLED” PR statement
As a fan of Ms. Marvel, I enjoyed the main campaign well enough, but all the MMO stuff is obnoxious. Luckily you can mostly ignore it and go through the campaign missions single-player. I uninstalled it after getting to the end of the story.
While the OP meant it the way he answered you, the way I see it used most often colloquially is that when someone or something does the heavy lifting especially in gaming, they are providing the bulk of the work. Like doing the heavy lifting in a team game equates to carrying the team, or saying a character does the heavy lifting instead of the player, means the character is overpowered and carrying the player (or vice versa).
You’re getting downvoted but you’re right. People who buy starfield need to accept to themselves that they enjoy bad games and rewarding the companies that make them.
I imagine you must have a pretty sad life if you find yourself spending free time insulting people who enjoy something you don't like.
There must be some serious mental illness going on to spend time in threads about products you don't like. I don't like Ford vehicles, but I don't spend my time on Ford forums insulting them and their owners because I'm not a miserable loser with nothing to fill my time.
Go find something you enjoy. Nobody is interested in your pathetic trolling.
The only thing worse than corporate cock sucking is this constant insistence that only positive opinions should be shared. If I wrote a dystopic novel about that I’d be criticized for being too heavy handed. And since enshittification is directly the fault of people like you, I’ll piss on you all I’d like thanks.
Lol? Armchair psychology much? I’m talking the shit with my friends and you’re occasionally begging for my attention like I’m your alcoholic father. Stop projecting your shit onto me.
It has nothing to do with agreement. It's the premise of spending time in a forum for a product you don't like, and insulting everyone else. That screams mental illness and a miserable life.
Todd Howard has said ES 6 will be his last Elder Scrolls. That makes me really sad. I was hoping Starfield would be his last game.
I honestly think the only way ES6 could be good would be if the writers and environmental artists of Elder Scrolls Online are a huge part of it. The core Bethesda team has shown they can’t write for shit anymore. And please please can the animators.
I wonder if the utterly generic and inoffensive stories are intentional. People LOVE to be outraged today. They tried to boycott the latest Harry Potter game because they hate J. K. Rowling. Maybe Bethesda is just trying to stay as far away from the outrage as possible, and the result is… this. Maybe all the interesting stories get canned or neutered and turned into side quests.
Wat. No.
Bethesda has had a policy of streamlining thier games and making sure the player can win everything since Oblivion. They only “play it safe” to make sure the player never loses. That’s all it is.
Seriously, it’s a product for sale. Don’t like the price, vote with your wallet and don’t buy it. What’s with the manufactured outrage for every topic nowadays
Its not an old game, MK1 is the latest release. The people getting served this are running it on hardware that was weak last generation. At a certain point you simply cannot push these devices any further. MK1 for Switch was never going to look beautiful, the current gen Switch can’t do it. I’m okay with devs making their games available, I mean at least you can play it. Theres a reason a Switch 2 is in the works.
Because you have the full choice to not buy and support it, if you think the price is unreasonable. It’s not a vital need, and nobody’s forcing customers to buy it. Housing, food, healthcare, we don’t have a choice. Buy or die. A video game? Not so much. The issue is not game publishers overcharging, it’s players who moan and whine… AND THEN BUY IT ANYWAY, thus ensuring the publishers will continue the practice
Others have already replied with this info but I’m just spelling it out for anyone who is not familiar like me:
They fucking named the brand new game mk1. Is it a remaster? No. It’s not a remaster. Is it a recreation of mk1? No. It’s an alternate timeline game given the worst name in the history of naming things. It’s genuinely a brand new game.
Sometimes I wish I could have a job where companies just say “hey should we make this decision” and I tell them “that’s so fucking stupid no one will actually like that” and get paid well for it.
I've had some similar roles before, but more often than not companies just do it anyway, even if you have a lot of data to the contrary. It's stupidly easy for someone in management to push some of this through despite the data, choose an arbitrary metric to define their success, get their bonus, and then bail for another company. Meanwhile, folks left at the company have to then try and fix all of the nonsense. It blows that we value failing forward. I've seen a few decent products just tanked this way.
Which is bullshit. It reminds me of when web email services offered ridiculously small inbox sizes, such as 25MB or 50MB. Then in came Google and offered 1GB, and all of a sudden all those companies found the way to match Google’s offering.
But I guess if people are willing to pay for those ridiculous prices, and deal with in-game payments… shrug.
People are complaining because they don’t like a thing, that’s fine. Same as you’re complaining in this post. Call companies out on their bullshit. Also don’t buy bullshit, that’s a good point too.
Because it doesn’t qualify as bullshit. Company made a product, set a price. Either you find it worth the price or not, but either way what’s the reason to kick up a fuss over an optional good
Company also sold pre-orders for a product, which means people can’t really decide whether the product is exactly what they want until they get it. At which point they complain, because they trusted the company not to sell a sub-par product. What is your issue?
My guy, the complaint is about the price because of the quality. Or, as you are asking, are you saying people didn’t know the price when they bought it?
On a side note, preorders are a scam. If you’re dumb enough to preorder a game in unlimited supply, that’s on you.
I agree that pre-orders are a scam, but it’s shitty to say “you knew what you bought!” when some people literally couldn’t.
I’m not saying they knew what they bought, I’m saying it’s on them for choosing to buy before they knew what they were buying. Seriously, people need to take responsibility for their choices already.
Company made a product, set a price. Either you find it worth the price or not, but either way what’s the reason to kick up a fuss over an optional good
Now you’re saying it’s on people who pre-order. Can’t we stop pushing this on the consumer and start demanding better from the manufacturers? Why can they sell shitty products, instead of being held to higher standards?
In this particular case, it’s not on the publisher. The switch is an old console, and there’s only so much they can do with the hardware. It’s not a particularly big surprise to anybody familiar with the technology.
Why SHOULDN’T we hold consumers to task for their bad decisions? They are arguably making things worse for the rest of us, by repeatedly rewarding bad behaviour from companies. There is no good reason for them to preorder, they just had to be the first instead of waiting a day for reviews to appear. Well, if you’re going to be impatient, guess what? The risk is on you.
In this particular case, it’s not on the publisher. The switch is an old console, and there’s only so much they can do with the hardware. It’s not a particularly big surprise to anybody familiar with the technology.
Then they should be open about this before and during release.
Why SHOULDN’T we hold consumers to task for their bad decisions?
Because it doesn’t work. One side of the equation spends lots of money to make sure as many consumers as possible make bad decisions, because it makes them even more money. You can’t fix this only by changing the other side.
I didn’t suggest fixing it. I said the consumers consciously made a bad decision, and they should take responsibility for it. I’m tired of grown ups acting like kids.
For example, if a game memory institution makes games available for download on their website, a game developer studio must now ask for a fee for it or ban making European digital cultural heritage available to European citizens.
This is a thing? I’ve never heard of games being a digital cultural heritage.
Library of Congress staff discussed its video game collection, the process of making a preservation copy of the data for long-term storage, the unique description challenges for video games and possible access solutions.
I don't see any actual playable games downloadable from www.europeana.eu at the moment, which is the website for the EU's collection of digital cultural heritage. That does come with the caveat that I've never used it much and may well just be missing something, though. However, there is a fair bit of stuff about videogames, even including images of physical hardware kept in various collections across the EU. I can also definitely see an argument for games being part of cultural heritage, particularly as the medium develops and becomes a bigger part of our culture. I think it'd be pretty fair to count Tetris as Russian cultural heritage, for example, not only because of its incredible influence but also how much it brought a Russian folk tune to global awareness (even if, ironically enough, it was an American version that did this second part).
Archive.org has some flash and older pc games available for free, I downloaded a wolfenstien game off there, but it turned out to be Spanish version, so your milage may vary
games
Najstarsze
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.