That's some "$600 for a PS3" level stupid on the pricing.
CurseTheseMetalHands's forum posts
Shooters on PC. I've been trying to get back into playing more games on PC and, where appropriate, as PC games, meaning with keyboard and mouse. I think the last time I played an FPS on PC was Quake II, so I'm seriously hating it and I keep wondering how I ever played this way back in the day. I mean, sure, the mouse is worlds better for aiming, but using a keyboard for everything else...fucking sucks. I fear consoles may have ruined me forever.
Have they pushed any major updates for the game? It was a neat idea and had a lot of potential, but I thought it lacked the depth to keep it interesting beyond the initial few hours.
Honestly, I kinda forgot the game existed. Sadly, that's what this world of early access releases has done to gaming.
Unless Sony does something completely unexpected by announcing that the PS5 will be on sale this holiday season, I have no doubt The Last of Us Part II, Ghost of Tsushima, and Death Stranding will all be PS4 titles. Which isn't to say they won't have PS5 versions, or that they won't receive some sort of patch/update that improves the visuals and performance on the next gen system, but there's no way Sony holds back titles just for the PS5 launch.
I'd be shocked and saddened if Cyberpunk 2077 released on current gen systems.
If the developers at From Software decide to implement an easier difficulty, I'm fine with it, because it's their call. But they shouldn't be pressured and bullied into it. If their artistic intent is to make games that are brutally difficult, that require you to work through frustration and rage to find a zen state of pure focus that allows you to master the combat systems and know the elation of that triumph, then an 'easy' mode betrays that vision. The game is that experience. So, when people argue that they want to experience the game but they want it easier, then they don't actually want to experience the damn game. If they just want to see the art, the world and character design, and see the story from beginning to end, then they should just watch a friggin' playthrough video on YouTube or Twitch.
As for the argument that an easy mode would make the games more accessible for people with disabilities... I have personal feelings on the matter, but I'll keep them to myself because 1) this isn't the place, and 2) I don't have the energy for the arguments that might arise. So, my thoughts aside, the cold reality is, people with disabilities who want to play these games are a very small percentage of the market. From a purely business standpoint, is it really worth the time and money they'd spend balancing an easy difficulty just to sell maybe a few thousand more copies? There would have to be some balancing, because I imagine those people still want the experience to be at least somewhat satisfying. I can't imagine they'd want a complete cakewalk playthrough where the enemies never attack and the bosses can be killed with a single hit. If you asked a dozen people who want an easy difficulty what that difficulty should involve, you'd likely get a dozen different answers. Resources would have to be spent on making the easy difficulty easy, but not too easy, and they'd probably still end up with people who wanted that mode that are dissatisfied. Then, if they did offer an easy difficulty, how much would that impact the sales from those people who appreciate that From Software's games have already had only one mode and demanded players meet the games on their terms? If a large percentage of people feel like From Software has sold out and compromised their vision, will the new audience that change brings in be able to fill that void? And how many of the developers like making games that are balls hard? Might there be an exodus of talent as the developers feel that they've been pushed to make generic, mass appeal games? There are at lot of angles to consider beyond the fact that some people can't play and/or enjoy these games because they're too unforgiving.
For all we know, From Software has already considered this matter and it was decided long ago that they're catering to a very niche market and, for better or worse, some people just aren't going to be able to play these games, whether it's lack of skill, lack of patience, a disability, or whatever. They have a vision of the type of games they want to make, they have their target market, their established fanbase, and that's all they're concerned with. Some people are just going to get left out. It is what it is.
As others have said, including Ben who caught some shit for it on Twitter: not everything has to be for everyone. And I just want to point out that we're talking about a fucking video game. Sure, it sucks that some people are left out of the experience because they have some physical disability, but this isn't life and death. This isn't the lack of a wheelchair ramp outside a polling station robbing people of their right to vote. This isn't a case of discrimination where a company refuses to hire someone because they don't believe the individual would be capable of doing the work. This is a goddamn hobby. This doesn't - or shouldn't - impact anyone's life in a truly meaningful way. If you feel compelled to focus your outrage into not being able to play a damn video game, then maybe you need to reexamine your priorities. And, similarly, if From Software decides an easy mode is good business and you can't fucking handle that, then just don't buy the games. As I said, it's their call. And there are more important things in life to worry about, and certainly more important issues worthy of your indignation.
If it has the same busted loot system as Borderlands 2, an equal or greater amount of Tiny Tina, and the inclusion of dances for the scumfucks who demand such things (unless they troll those people by offer dances as microtransaction DLC and charge $99.99 per dance), then I'll pass. Otherwise, while I'd love to see them improve on the formula, I'd be fine with 'just' more Borderlands, though maybe not nearly as excited as I'd like to be.
While I'd be seriously disappointed in Gearbox if they made a Borderlands Battle Royale, I'd be fine with it as DLC. It can be the shitty Mad Moxxi DLC that I don't buy (or get but never play with the Game of the Year Edition).
Actual character creation, not merely customization, would be certainly be welcomed, but if they aren't going to go all the way with it - the inclusion of voice options with different line reads (if Saints Row could do it all those years ago, why the hell can't anyone else?) to give your character at least some touch of personality, a fair number of cutscenes that actually include your character and show off the abomination you've wrought, etc. - then there's really no reason to bother.
I'm cautiously optimistic and hope we'll learn more at E3.
You have to imagine Sony's attitude towards Stadia will be similar to how they smirked at Microsoft's all-digital/always online plans for the Xbox One and, if the comment at all, they'll just highlight how the Playstation 5 will be the place for collectors, for people who want to actually own their games and share them with friends and family. I mean, Sony still have a vested interest in keeping physical media - particularly Blu-ray - alive and well. While they'll need to make concessions for streaming possibilities, I honestly can't imagine they following the all-digital path in the immediate future. (Unless it turns out that the percentage of people who actually care about physical media isn't high enough to keep Sony on top come next gen.)
This will likely be a focus on Sony's upcoming games and services, and maybe announcing a price cut for their systems. (If new consoles are coming next year - and Microsoft's All-Digital console will be on shelves in May - then there has to be a serious price cut for current systems coming soon. And it's conceivable that Sony would want to jump out there and have the cheapest system on the market, even if only temporarily.) Whether or not they delve into the Playstation 5...might depend on 1) whether it's actually coming out next year or the year after (if it's not launching until 2021, talking about it now seems pointless) and 2) if they feel confident about it, if they want to tip their hand before knowing what Microsoft rolls out at E3. Even though Sony's hubris has been steadily creeping back into the brand, I'd like to think nobody at the company wants a repeat of the PS3 fiasco.
I don't have any particular expectations, but I really hope that it's interesting and worth my time.
I'll absolutely look up puzzle solutions without reservations or guilt. I just don't have the patience to bang my head against something that I can't figure out after 15 minutes or so. I always start out with the best intentions, telling myself that this time I'll play it honest and won't look up any answers, but I always reach that breaking point where I'm not having fun and I know that if I turn the game off without moving past the puzzle I'm stuck on, I'll never turn it back on. The second it's no longer fun I'm off to Google.
All that said, I tend to avoid puzzle games these days. I know that either I'm entirely too stupid for them or they just aren't my cup of tea. Probably a bit of both. Even though I loved Portal and Portal 2 - and didn't look up solutions for either of those - I only enjoyed, at best, the first half to third of Braid and Fez. So I'm not even going to bother downloading The Witness. Even though I recognize puzzle games can be good exercise for my brain, I mostly want to play games to have fun and unwind, not mentally dickpunch myself for hours on end.
The characters and story were forgettable enough that I don't know what they get by attaching the Dragon's Dogma name to what will likely be a by-the-numbers fantasy anime. I mean, I enjoyed my time with the game, but all I really remember about the experience is: dragon stole my heart, climbing around on big monsters, and a fairly large open world with a whole lot of wasted empty space. Unless Capcom solicited Netflix, fronting all the cash for Netflix to develop and distribute the series because they've got a Dragon's Dogma 2 in the pipeline and they want to generate some buzz, this seems like a really odd choice of license to pursue.
Guess they couldn't afford the Elder Scrolls license - which is a damn shame, because I could see getting into a well-made Elder Scrolls animated series - and felt that Kingdoms of Amalur was just too generic even for them.
Honestly, I don't buy many games at launch, but Metro Exodus was definitely in the running to be one of the few this year that I would. Until this. I understand why developers are moving to Epic, and I hope it works out for them, but I can't support them. I mean, you tell me I can have a phenomenal steak, maybe the best steak I'll ever eat, at a discount price, and the bulk of that money will go directly into the pockets of all the people who did the hard work to bring that steak to my plate, but I have to eat it in the bathroom of a Taco Bell...yeah, I'm gonna pass. I'm just not that hungry.