Richnj

Truetrophies and Trueachievements are good sites for looking at and tracking trophies. They hide the hidden ones too.

@Flaming_Kaiser Some games have a content warning and toggle option now. Giving people an opt out at the beginning, or even during the scene to skip, and respecting the audience's maturity level, for them to maturely decide what content they consume.

I just don't agree that "some people don't want to see/do that" is solid reasoning for the content not being present at all.

I had to back off watching the Criminal Mind shows because the episodes involving child cases were getting too much for me emotionally (but my partner loves them). Just, rather than complain that they existed at all, or ask "why isnt the government or network censoring these for me?". I respected the creator's goals for the show and made a conscious effort to avoid the ones I couldn't personally handle.

@SJBUK I agree there are limits that we as a society should place in ourselves.

I think where I disagree is that the act or content itself should be limited. But rather, we should question the context in which that content is being used.

So if we were talking about rape. The act itself shouldn't be grounds for censorship. Fear 2 has a rape scene, and it's not depicted as a good thing. It's quite horrific. But if there was a game where you could force yourself in to NPCs with literally no agency, and it was framed as a positive thing, well, now you've got a problem.

@SJBUK "Would it be OK to not only cut out a foetus but maybe cook it and eat it, for example?"

If it was framed as bad, and people who would not want to consume that kind of content was prewarned and had an ability to opt out (either buy not buying the product or disabling the content), then yeah.

The issue with censorship is that these governing bodies or self appointed arbiters of decency can go too far. I mean, look at Germany. Would you like to have the same level of strictness as them, or would you prefer to have ability to choose yourself? or even find better ways to handle sensitive content?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games#Germany

Edit: Remember that Goldeneye 007 was banned in Germany until very recently. Imagine not being able to buy Goldeneye 007.

I can't stand body horror movies, I'm too squirmish.

But I'm totally fine with it all in video games because it's just not on the same level of realism.

Still torn on this. Firstly, there's so many other RE games that need remakes more, and secondly, because RE 4 holds up so well, and is so good on its own, that a remake would have to be so good or so drastically different that it feels like a good way to miss the mark.

Think half the people will be disappointed if it's not a faithful remake, and the other half will be upset if it's too much like the original game.

I think it will be a miracle if they produce a better RE4 that is just as universally loved.

Just @ Tom, he'll tell you.

I've tried to jump back in to Destiny 2, but I just can't.

I really enjoy Destiny 1 up until you hit max level and they started charging full price for expansions, and I think I dropped off after the Taken King. And I originally tried Destiny 2 when it went free and remember the tower being on fire, but dropped off quickly.

So I boot the game up again, and I'm instantly thrown in to a 6 man firefight for Xur, and I don't know why I'm shooting stuff, I just am. And when I finish that, I kinda left to it. I dont have a clue of anything. I don't know how the story progressed from Destiny 1 or the destroyed tower to being fixed, or what to start next. I have no early campaigns to ease me in because they've been removed. The earliest campaign I can start is the Forsaken, so I start that but again, I'm not given much info of why I'm doing it or why I should care. I'm literally left to learn the changes in skills and mechanics as I'm trying to play through this really bombastic opening level.

I originally tried to Google "how to start Destiny 2 main campign" and found out it's not an uncommon question, and that just feels weird.

I think the removal of the earlier campaigns and any sense of story progression has made the game too awkward to just jump in to.

Unless you are already a massive fan, or don't care for world building, just want to shoot stuff, and have a friend who will show you the ropes, I don't think the current game (and by extension, this new DLC) is going to be something I, or a lot of uninitiated, will find fun to play.

@2here2there the GTA Trilogy got a 5/10 on here, and averaged a 55/100.

Dying Light 2 got a 7/10 here and averaged just below 80/100.

It's not that GTA got negative reviews and DL2 got decent reviews. GTA got mixed/average scores and there's just 2 points difference between the two games. And there are plenty of times I've preferred a 6-7 over an 8-9 game.

I feel like this is more a condemnation on the journalistic review industry when a "busted" game gets an average rating.

Let me guess, sold most on PS?

@get2sammyb @Barryburton97 The app lists that the PS5 versions get the PS4 version also.

The PS4 doesn't mention about getting both versions.

So yeah, both standard versions are the exact same product, just £10 difference.

PS Home 2, come spend time and money here, instead of on games or with your friends IRL.

But why would bungie employees be ready to leave unless they had issues with either Bungie or Sony?

Others here have very competently described the issues with Live Service games. So I'm going to focus on something different.

"Clearly, the company is seeing the sorts of money being generated by the likes of Fortnite and Apex Legends, and wants a piece of the pie. You can’t really blame it: the single player games it makes are award winners, but they’re absurdly expensive to create, and once they’ve churned through 10 million copies sold, there’s very little left to extract out of them."

This is actually a very scary take.

Why be happy with success and millions of dollars, when you can have more? even at the quality of your games? When you can squeeze your content and audience for even more?

That's the opinion we want to go with here?

@get2sammyb "Worth remembering that Assassin's Creed is now a live service game. So it doesn't necessarily mean just multiplayer."

Yeah, and imagine having to buy your new spidey outfits in Spider-man 2, instead of just playing the game to unlock them like we've done in the last two games.

GAAS is hell.

@__jamiie Oh, let me clarify. That was sarcasm. I was satirising the elitist comments of this thread.

@__jamiie Ah, Judger of Posts, I'm glad you have arrived. But please, in order to post less pathetic posts, I need to understand why my post was pathetic in the first place. Please bestow upon me knowledge that only you currently possess.

Haha, stupid casuals, their £60 isn't worth the same as my £60.

As I mentioned in the other article. This being a part of the Handsome Collection isn't the problem. People may have missed it, and since this is a stand alone release, it is essentially a separate game.

The issues are;

• Dragon Keep has not long released, meaning that anyone who paid money, did so pointlessly. PSN+ games really should be a while after launch or at launch. Not two months so that they can get the launch profits then use the game to easy and cheaply fulfill the promotion and PSN+ lineup.
• Dragon Keep is only £8 normally, and within that short period, has already been half price. Meaning, the value that PSN+ users get is really low this month.

Dragon Keep is excellent, but it's like £8 normally, has already been on sale for £4, and now is going to be on PSN+.

1) That's not exactly great value for people who don't have it.

2) It makes people who bought the game at launch look like fools.

@Subsided Normal gaming communities form around games, not platforms. It's why the COD fanbase from the 360 were able to easily move across to the PS4.

Only the console fanboys attach themselves to a platform.

@figboot The highest rated PS5 game is a PS3 title from 2010. And some of the most played games on PS5 include GTAV (PS3, 2013) and Minecraft (PS3, 2013).

No one is more or less deserving than anyone else.

@Pixelated well, you don't get private monopolies is socialism, you seem to think that would be a good thing.

Are you saying that if the anti-trust laws allow the MS purchase of Activision, that there's no concern of MS becoming a gaming monopoly?

@Pixelated "THEN it turns to what? 1 system, 1 owner, 1 company, etc. which... is" the end point of free market capitalism.

That's the whole reason we have to regulatie the system, because without the regulations, we'd get all the things that people fear in socialism and communism, but without the good.

@UltimateOtaku91 Right, but you make out like MS targeted Acti because of their standing, and somehow snatched up this otherwise free agent, they didn't.

None of these companies are altruistic entities. They are capitalist entities. The very same goes for Sony. You honestly expected MS to turn to Activision and go "Hey look, we know you want to sell, and that we have the money, but that wouldn't be fair to Sony?"

They saw an opportunity to acquire a massive money making organisation with some of their covid profit and they took it.

@UltimateOtaku91 "Even after buying Bethesda it was playstation who was in front and even Nintendo were outselling them with hardware and software. So now they have resorted to buying a studio knowing full well it sells a game that's a hit on playstation (call of duty) and a playstation icon in crash bandicoot just to get one over on sony."

Bobby and the board were looking to sell because the heat of the sexual harrasment allegations was getting too hot for them. They wanted to sell to others (I'd assume for highly valuable stock options) but the big players didn't bite. Leaving MS as the only viable buyer.

None of what you said, happened. You are trying to rewrite the truth here to overly villianise MS in this scenario.

MS stuck to the Bethesda contracts, so why wouldn't they stick to the Activision ones?

Sony didn't show this concern with Bethesda. So this makes me think they are much more concerned about the loss of Activision, and are trying to signal to MS and the PS/COD fanbase that the games should stay on PS.

@AFCC Acti and COD aren't the be-all-end-all, but they are big. As I said before, COD dominates most played game lists. Lots of people play COD and religiously, and 70% of all sales use to be on PS consoles.

If future games become exclusive, it's going to affect a lot of gamers.

It's being reported that the Acti board were looking to sell, but no-one but MS made a serious offer.

This isn't as bad as it first sounded (from a monopoly standpoint).

Even better, it's being reported that Bobby will be out too (albeit with a massive payout).

So this is probably the best outcome here.

The only Acti games I own are Diablo and Spyro, but you can't deny Call Of Duty. These games dominate most played games lists. Normally having multiple titles in the lists.

If MS want games that player keep coming back to constantly, Call Of Duty is definitely a strong franchise to have as exclusive to xbox and Game Pass.

(I mean, it's the franchise they've been trying to turn halo in to for over a decade at this point. Kind makes sense they'd just cut out the middle man)

@Pixelated This is 100% free market capitalism at work here.

I thought this was an April Fools, in January. This is mad.

You all complain now, but I'd bet big money that if Sony were to offer a near exact copy of what MS offers, you'd all pay and praise it.

Skyrim killed my BC PS3 a couple years back, and just the other day, my newer PS3 Slim seems to be having PSU issues and won't turn on (so I'm now faced with trying to fix it or buy yet another PS3, which is actually not appealing since SOny have gimped the PS3 Store). And my PS4 obviously only plays PS4 games.

The XBox BC isn't 100% perfect, but it's by far the best BC solution I've seen in a console since the PS2. And I would gladly rebuy my entire PS1-2 collection in digital format. Because at this point, I can't rely on my old hardware anymore.

Watching XBox slowly add BC games was actually very exciting, especially when it was a 360 game that you already owned and it just appeared in your library, or some classic that you somehow managed to miss or not played in ten years. Having Sony do the same thing would be hugely special.

@lolwhatno ""Did you choose to be hetero?, no" Of course I did"

This lore needs exploring.

At what age did you decide to like women?, have you had gay experiences?, did you like them?

""did you choose to eat this chocolate cake over the mango one?" yes, you bet I did. I get your point tho, it's my brain who decided what I like, yes, but my brain is a part of me, so what my brain chooses is what I choose."

This is the bad comparison. I prefer chocolate over mango, but at no point did I make a conscious choice to like chocolate. I made the conscious choice to eat chocolate, not like it. Those are two very different things. I just tried both and liked one more than the other.

Like, I could choose to have sex with a man, but I don't get to choose whether or not I like sex with men. Or are we both in agreement that you could choose and enjoy sex with a man?

It's frustrating because I've been arguing from a stance that 'homosexuality isn't a choice', which you've pushed more towards 'homosexuality is biological', so I've been trying to pull it back.

@lolwhatno You are over fixating on the biological aspect, and in doing so, missing the point.

Did you choose to be hetero?, no. Do blue eyed people choose blue eyes?, no.

You can disagree with people for aspects of their being that they choose. You can't disagree with people for aspects of their being that they don't get to choose.

Unless, you think it's acceptable for gay people to disagree with the life styles of straight people... which, for the record, I don't.

@lolwhatno " I don't have nearly enough knowledge (like most people) about this topic"

"Well that's up for debate and comparing this to someone being born with "blue eyes" is over-simplifying a complex subject about sexuality and human nature. "

Well this is why I picked out the first quote and responded to it. Awareness is important. Some very nice people hold some very nasty views purely on the basis of ignorance. And we are all igorant of something.

That simplification is intentional. Because trying to convince someone of something complex is hard and time consuming. But being born with blue eyes is not something we can control or truly change. Being gay, is again, not something we can control or change. And neither has an outward impact on the lives of others. Ultimately, disagreeing with gay people is as logical as disagreeing with blue eyes. It's purely a socially taught discomfort with a particular trait of another human being.

I don't take any of the internet personally. The problem I have is if there were laws and millions spent every year trying to stop blue eyed people marrying, or there were blue eyed people getting killed purely because they had blue eyes, and the response from someone was this apathetic "well, I disagree with blue eyes", it's less neutral than you might think.

I don't think it's people getting thrown to one end or the other, it's people just being more honest with their deep down beliefs.

@lolwhatno I don't know what the original comment was, but in fairness, "disagree with gays" is still a weird and wrong stance. It would be like disagreeing with people being born with blue eyes.

I've tried Uncharted and TOU but I struggled to get in to either. TOU was definitely better, but 'recent' ND games clearly aren't for me.

A new Jak and Daxter game is what I need I think.

@kingbreww Right, but you use "muh opinion" as a defense while also dismissing the opinions of others. Calling everybody who enjoys R&C a child, isn't an opinion. It's a backhanded insult intended to delegitimise the opinions of others that R&C is actually a fun title at any age.

Also, opinions can be wrong, and we are under no obligation to accept them.

@kingbreww sincerely though, why are you always so insulting towards any product that doesn't 100% cater towards you?. It seems to be a theme at this point.

And ironically, yours is the most immature attitude to have.

@Flaming_Kaiser because the PS4 is holding the PS5 games back from having checks notes flying mounts.

@kingbreww And Cyberpunk, along with numerous other AAA brand new releases, have released in far worse states than Alan Wake.

I have concluded that all new releases are not worth making.

@kingbreww That sounds like a you problem, not a remaster problem.

@kingbreww If they aren't your tastes, why did you buy Alan Wake?

@kingbreww So many peeps keep calling for remakes and remasters because different people have different tastes.

I don't know why it bothers you so much that other people enjoy something different from you.

@somnambulance No, but we can ackowledge how 343i struggle, and in which areas they failed, while also admitting this is better than their previous attempts.

Also, there's (I think) an estimated 30 milllions GP subs across PC and Xbox. Halo Infinite's potential market should really extend beyond that. And I think MS agrees, which is why they made the MP F2P.

@JAMes-BroWWWn Yeah, I do miss when Halo was big (my avatar might give that away).

@Integrity Being 343 and messing it up.

@JAMes-BroWWWn I think we have to keep in mind the context for Halo Infinite. It's coming off the back of Halo 5, and a six year gap filled with bad press,. Oh, and it's still missing long time, essential modes, like co-op.

You wouldn't put down £55 for just an unfinished campign, solo only Halo game. You'd try the campaign on GP and just stick to the "free" MP.

@MyThoughts31 By that logic, wouldn't the only true SR game be the trouble with clones DLC?

I think I've finally figured out the root cause of stick drift.