Developers generally have a choice between going to one of the massive publishers (which allows for better promotion and for expensive games to pay off, but comes at a cost of their will over devs), or to self-release, which means way less players will even know about the game, not to mention buy it.
Arrowhead realistically only had the first option.
That’s not to say there’s no fault of theirs in the situation, just that it’s not a free choice and that Sony is still the main culprit
Honestly I’d rather have a cheater in my lobby than Riot Games deep into the sections of my PC they should never have accessed.
With that said, I do not play Valorant for this reason (and also because it would require me to dualboot since Vanguard cannot be ported on Linux, lol)
Many countries actually have such systems in place today, even Russia (lol) - not that they work too well.
Normally, there are two sources of issues here: petitions can in fact be declined, and, in cases where the signature count depends on scale of the petition they can be intentionally escalated as to make it impossible to gain enough signatures. Besides, in many cases petitions can be left unanswered for longer than promised.
Long story short, the system is open to shenanigans and doesn’t make the government truly accountable.
We need the system that would actually make politicians rapidly lose their jobs when they ignore public opinion.
That’s what I normally do - pirate or ignore AAA’s, but always buy indies.
The problem with the union idea is that most games just won’t pay off huge investments, so there needs to be someone competent who filters out profitable games, and funds games based on expected returns…and at that point we get, essentially, a publisher company. Or maybe a cooperative. But barely a union.
If slaves would have a vote, they’d certainly strongly choose one option :D
Same for the discriminated groups.
If they don’t have a vote, this depends on the rest of society in the short run, but can cause violent rebellions in the long one. Democratic system does not eliminate possibility of revolt.
Long story short: Sony decided (after sales!) to make it impossible for players to get into their already purchased copy of Helldivers 2 without a PlayStation Network account. Originally, players could just use their Steam accounts.
The problem, aside from bloating and privacy concerns, is that there are many regions in which PlayStation Network isn’t even available, meaning hundreds of thousands of gamers would just be locked out of the game they bought.
Now, after immense pressure (players immediately dumped game reviews into oblivion, and bombarded the developers, forcing them to renegotiate with Sony) it was decided not to make PlayStation Network linking mandatory.
Watched video too, and it gave me an insight: feminine characters lay better on my gentle and caring personality, allowing me to better express myself.
I can play such caracter more organically, and there’s also less social friction when in multiplayer (interestingly, even when party knows I am, in fact, male)
Unbalanced (lemmy.world) angielski
Homeworld 3 Reviews [opencritic - 80% average, 79% recommended] (opencritic.com) angielski
Sony cancelled the PSN account linking requirement for Helldivers 2 (lemmy.world) angielski
"PSN isn't supported in my country. What do I do?" Arrowhead CEO: "I don't know" (lemmy.world) angielski
I truly don't know how to explain this to anyone who wasn't around then without them thinking we were out of our minds. (startrek.website) angielski
Oh trust me. I know your frustration better than you do. (lemmy.world) angielski
Male players: Why do you play female characters? (kbin.social) angielski
Got the idea of posting this when I watched this YouTube video that talks about reasons men love playing as girls....