Different degrees of shaking up the formula. This is Pokemon-but-survival, and I've got another game in my backlog already that's Pokemon-but-metroidvania.
I only heard this guy's name come up in the wake of Starfield, but none of this internet hate mob mentality is surprising. I still get flashbacks to how quickly the internet demonized and harassed Jennifer Hepler of BioWare. Internet bullying is bad regardless, but it's especially hard to know whose work you're criticizing in most video games, because they're made by large teams, and "written by" will often be credited to something like 5-10 people on a game the size of Starfield's.
I had a ton of things to critique in Starfield, including the writing, for one reason or another, and when I saw credits roll, I was looking for how many quest designers they had, because my criticism was that it felt like they were stretched so thin to make so many quests that hardly any of them could stand to be any good. Sure enough, for the hundreds of quests in that game, they only had a handful of people listed under quest design. I'm still not going to single out any of them as being bad quest designers, because I don't know who worked on which quest and if this was a product of how much content they were under pressure to design. There is one person I can point to for a different criticism I had, and that's because he proudly took credit for it specifically in an interview, but rather than bullying someone on the internet for a creative thing that they worked on, just note to yourself mentally that it was a subpar product and don't buy the next one. It's the sane response in a situation like this.
I came across this video yesterday, and I'm 100% on board with Ross and his stance toward games as a service, but this isn't a plan for a lawsuit; it's asking for help in creating the plan. I hope he can make something happen, because games as a service is going to leave a wake of destruction in the history of video games, but temper your expectations.
To be fair, those were so simple that they were barely a challenge when I was 9 years old. When I played Y as an adult, they probably wouldn't have even felt like puzzles.
The last Pokemon game I played was Y. It was largely the same game as Blue and Gold. This expands on the concept in fun, crazy ways, and it's got me intrigued.
Maybe treating these console generations as though they're somehow super different is more trouble than it's worth. Meanwhile, PC games I bought 20 years ago can easily be run on new hardware at higher frame rates and resolutions than when I bought them.
And as far as legally playing their old games in the modern era, your options are to find an old physical copy or subscribe to a subscription service. There is no option to buy games individually. Even back when they did that, your purchases never carried over to their next console. They're awful.
Yup. But if Microsoft is smart, they'll be examining exactly the reasons why Starfield is what it is and how to improve the next BGS game. That will start with throwing their engine away, because any way you slice it, there's just no saving that thing.
Well, if you feel that that's what set that game up for failure, let me tell you about another RPG going through the exact same cycle: the next Mass Effect. That game isn't getting full attention until after Dragon Age. Its first teaser was 3 years ago, and it's still got at least 3 more years to go, assuming Dragon Age comes out this year.
How do you get 13 years? It's been 11 years since the pre-rendered teaser trailer, and it was less than that between announcement and release. They also were open about not being full force on development for the game until Witcher 3 finished, and the announcement trailer served as a recruitment tool, something that most studios don't do anymore.
I'm not sure where you're getting that there's a lack of evidence of charity fraud.
The Moon video quite derisively mocks his and OrdinaryGamers' definition of charity fraud, as coming from the equivalent of "legal Tinder" for matching lawyers and clients, with the distinction being that one is interested in being easy to understand while the other is a definition that determines whether or not someone violated the law. They demonstrably typed in "definition of charity fraud" and went with the top result regardless of its reliability. The Moon video then goes on to point out several ways that the charity could be operating that would make the actions of Open Hand not just legal but ordinary. Jobst has circumstantial evidence for lots of things, and Jirard could be guilty of some of it. Given the scrutiny he's about to be under, we'll know for sure inside of a couple of years. The problem with what Jobst did is that we ought to be sure now, and we're not. If we're going to destroy someone's reputation (and the jobs of the people that he employs in the process) for doing something nefarious, we should know for sure that he actually did it.
The first video showed the money hadn't moved. Correct, we can observe that from his research. The second video alleged more money was missing, alleged embezzlement and fraud, because he guessed that some money from a golf tournament wasn't accounted for. The problem here is that he has no hard numbers for how much money, no source to say that something malicious happened and was hidden, etc. Please recognize the difference here.
The video was phrased with reasonable doubt, while often juxtaposed against a tweet from someone to show why a reasonable person would think so.
Look, I get you're a fan of his, but this "if" is the problem, like I've been saying. The video I linked you, which you aren't interested in watching, only outlines why he may legally want to shut up about Jirard. The video author comes to this conclusion tediously because the law is tedious, but at least he's got some sense of humor. I personally just never want to watch another video of Jobst's because I think he did a poor job of reaching a burden of proof that an actual reporter would need before coming forward with a story. Even not being a journalist myself, I came to the same conclusion as that link the other user sent you. Good on you if you enjoy Jobst's videos, but I hope he holds himself to higher standards in the future.