I think the better question is what about games deserves to be in a general history museum? The advent and changes of technology and the implementation is far more important than the examples of it in use. There are very few games on their own that would qualify as “culturally impactful” to the greater world by their sheer existence. (Mario, Pokemon, and Tetris immediately come to mind).
If we are talking about a “video game museum/exhibit” then the list broadens a lot, but it’s less about the “what” and more the “why” that needs focused.
Most of these I get, but idk about hollow knight unless it’s a part of the “Metroid/Castlevania” exhibit. It’s a good game but idk if it’s quite “museum” status.
Oh for sure, the sites are getting in trouble. But that’s because advertisers don’t want to be associated with those things.
But the payment processors, that’s literally how they make money. Can’t make money off the top if there are no transactions. Banks will still let you deposit your money if you get it from a drug deal, bit of a don’t ask don’t tell there, but it’s the government that has problems with how you got it. (hyperbole but you get my point)
I still think separating from credit card co.'s is a good idea regardless. But its pretty rare for them to turn down transactions unless they have to.
Hell Cashapp is jokingly called the “drug dealer financing app” but you don’t see them getting shut down any time soon.
It’s gonna be a hard push for a lot of these companies to stop accepting transactions for NSFW stuff unless they can prove it’s harmful or they get legal repercussions because it’s a big part of business. In an economy where “year over year growth” is such a big deal, neutering transactions that account for (guessing generously) 7% of your revenue is a hard pill to swallow without serious force.
It sucks that this is going around too. Because no matter what the “right” choice is the devs are still gonna have to see what should have just been their fun project get thrown around in gaming politic hell
Eh, idk. The Witcher universe has a framework for an RPG, but the books have always been about Geralt and Co. You could do something different in that universe, but I think the story and the games have some very strong structure that comes from the player being Geralt and living his story.
Witchers are a rare dying breed. Trying to shove another new generic Witcher in would force you into writing a whole new series of stories, and backgrounds, just for that one character, which would make it get lost in the mix imho.
I’ll add Spiritfarer. It’s not “pink” per se, but it’s a much more “happy feelings” game. It’s about taking lost sould and ferrying them on your ship, talking to them about their lives and feelings, and you can give them hugs of course.
I kind of like the nu XCOM approach though and I get the reason for the change. It’s way less accessible when every turn around and step deducts time units and you have to do the math in your head before moving so you don’t end up stuck in the open with no time to shoot. (Forgetting the cost of turning a guy or crouching leaving me unable to shoot has cost me a fair number of chumps). There are a lot of skills in WotC and LWotC that still let you move shoot move too.
That said Xenonauts 2 is a good split of the difference for both of them
At least in war of the chosen, the seeds for the round are static. Idk if there was a way to turn it off, but by default they used it to nerf save scumming. So if you know you’re going to miss and you want to bother with save scumming you can at least try a different tactic instead of going over and over hoping to eventually hit.
Honestly, just get a mod that buffs your hit chance like the rest of us sore losers lol
It’s never really been an “issue”. The rolls have always been accurate, and the XCOM devs have even said in XCOM 2 they gave an invisible “buff” on hit chances on some difficulties.
The problem is we as people assume that something like 90% is a guarantee, and a miss in XCOM always feels so much worse, especially when they changed from time units to just a flat “do a shot, hit or miss them all” approach. So even though statistically you’re going to miss 1 of every 10 on a 90% shot, when it happens twice it’s “bullshit”. But that’s just odds man, gamblers fallacy is real.
It’s the problem when you have public voting on these, the ones more people know about are the ones that rise up. If it’s panel selected then it’s (almost always) rigged by whoever is giving the award to show off their game instead of the actual good one.
I mean look at the Steam awards, Liars Bar won “Most Innovative Gameplay”. Liars Bar, the game that is literally bluffing cards and dice, a game that has been around for literal centuries, “most innovative”