Non premium stuff is just on youtube, so they're probably aiming at new viewers.
I honestly also 100% do not understand the reaction they're getting here. They're more informative and overall an improvement from a random shot or just a title card. Especially when there's a variety of games on display.
I don't see what's clickbait-y about them at all? Do ya'll understand what the 'bait' part of clickbait even means?
@turboman:saying one of your favourite YouTubers is Ant***y Fa***no to this day is not a good look given the legitimately awful people he has given platforms to, as well as his own questionable content.
@antihero: That's the one. After browsing through past purchases yesterday (longer than I'd care to admit), I found it and somehow lost two hours playing it.
I really hope they just don't listen to people and keep doing what they ENJOY doing, which is ya know, making fun content for the site and not having to pander to myopic arguments over thumbnails, thumbnails. Whats next, a contra game where you can't shoot?
@finalcut: I disagree. You're free to DM me with whatever you're talking about and we can talk about it there since it wasn't a part of what I was trying to pitch on this thread.
I'm not entirely against Youtuber thumbnails in concept, but I am against having the host portraits be so tiny and cut out so poorly. Take some greenscreened glamor shots of multiple facial expressions or something, I don't know. These are bad, and not funny-bad.
It's cool that there are (currently) no micro transactions, but I certainly wouldn't pat them on the back for that.... who wants to lay odds on when developers will start sneaking them back in to double dip into consumers pockets?
The entire literal point of Apple Arcade is that microtransactions aren't allowed, so I don't see developers sneaking them back in.
Brad complained about that screensaver feature that darkens the screen when not using it for a while and that multiple platforms have that issue that needs to be fixed, but isn't it a feature that you can turn off on most platforms? Why doesn't he do that if it annoys him so much?
@judgementkazzy: Uh huh. And buying a $60 game also used to mean you'd purchased the entire game. Corporations have no interest in keeping promises to you; if it means increasing their bottom line. Let's circle back in a year and have this conversation, after the platform has established itself.
@sekou: ok. Though I’ll place a hefty bet that I’m correct that the service built entirely around the premise of no microtransactions allowed is still free of them in a year’s time.
The Giant Bomb brand – at least on the West coast – gets cheaper by the day, and the idea of a premium subscription model seems more and more superfluous.
Between the total screw-up of a redesign (which continues to fail in justifying its stubborn shoehorned existence by still being less functional than it's ancient predecessor), the garbage video player, the absolutely amateurish level of production quality since Drew left, and now the ever intensifying, embarrassingly cynical pandering to the YouTube audience - you guys may as well just pack it in and actually become a YouTube channel.
Get yourselves a Patreon and be done with it.
You seem like a cool person who isn't overreacting at all.
Hot tip: you can see which devs took bribes for an exclusivity deal, took money to deny you choice, by looking up the APPIDs on Steam of these games. APPIDs being sequentially assigned gives you a rough idea of when Steam pages for games were initially created and devs intended to sell there. This of course doesn't definitively tell you who sold out, just some of those who did. It also counters the popular notion in this scenario that 'Apple funded these games and they wouldn't happen without this deal'.
Just want to say that I'm totally into GB exploring new things and having fun! Felt the need to counter balance all the angry people who seem really bent out of shape over a thumbnail.
79 Comments