I don’t disagree that a true space exploration game should have barren planets (I’d imagine most planets in the universe are barren), but they should be more like set pieces (like how a tree is a set piece in a normal exploration game). And they shouldn’t be included in metrics used to quantify the size of the world.
TheAndrewBrown
joined 1 year ago
Gamer can wait until the day a good game comes out, a company needs hype to build it's brand for stock holders.
This is absolutely not true, gamers freak out whenever a game is delayed, even for good reason. And people were absolutely causing a huge fuss about whether or not there was going to be an ES6 so they released a teaser to say that it was coming eventually.
The shareholders would only want them to release the teaser if the goal was the sell stock immediately. Any bump in price from the teaser would even out after probably just a few months.
I thought the title was saying Amazon was going to release a video game based on the Fallout series next year and was like “a video game adaption of a tv series adaptation of a video game?”
For what it’s worth, you can’t use public domain to make a copy of someone else’s take on that public domain character. It’s like how Winnie the Pooh is public domain but you can’t make a Winnie the Pooh with a red shirt and no pants since thats clearly Disney’s version which isn’t public domain.
For what it’s worth, it’s almost never worth it to give any company “the benefit of the doubt”. For single player games, there’s pretty much no reason to play it right when it releases unless you’re impatient. I choose to think of the games release date as a beta release. If I’m super excited, I may choose to play a game in beta but usually I’ll wait for the final release. Then when all the initial issues (which all games have, just some way more than others) have been fixed, I’ll consider the game actually released and buy it for a fraction of the initial cost.
I don’t know that I’ve played a single game that’s released this year yet. And those games will still be just as good next year (likely better) for less cost.
Maybe no one wanted to admit it
So was this a sting? I’m not sure how he didn’t realize something was off when “accident” and “normal shooting” were the same price
Would you prefer they recast and re-record over his voice so the family didn’t get any royalties and his name is less well-known? It’s not hard to make regulations that you need consent from next of kin and have to pay to use the “likeness” of their voice like you do with appearance. Refusing to use new technology because someone might misuse it before regulations are in place are what luddites do
I don’t have a dog in this fight (heh) but no one arguing the other side has presented any evidence either. In my anecdotal evidence, it’s seems more that certain breeds are more powerful, so when they’re improperly trained, they cause more damage so they get more headlines
Also, those breeds attract a certain type of owner that either don’t train them or train them to be aggressive.
Well the mechanical inscentive is the time and money it takes to revive them. It’s pretty negligible eventually, but it’s a pretty big deal at low levels.
Yeah this headline should really just say the ~$41m they actually spent improving the game because that’s still an incredibly impressive number (2/3 the amount of a full expansion). I hate when there’s a good story to tell but they want to make it look even better so they decide to mislead instead of just saying the actually impressive thing
view more: next ›
It’d be a lot easier to not make a bot at all if that was the case. They aren’t intentionally not trying to help, they’re intentionally spending as few resources as possible on helping while still doing enough to satisfy most customers. It’s shitty but it’s not malicious like you guys are implying.