Konrad

Let's do this quote thing differently but more approachable for me: "" What you rather would is not part of the debate. It's not your place to say these things. "" Your example isn't working. When you rent a car you have to proof that you can drive it (show actual driving license). It is absolutely clear what you are supposed to do with it. Besides there are clear regulations and government sanctioned rules how to handle cars on state-owned roads. What you do with your own car on your private property is mostly your business. Personally, I wish videogames were clearer about what clients they want cater to oh and I wished that they would be heavily regulated and that there would be more standards and less idiots around, but no one listens to me anyway. But game publishers, especially the big ones are the ones who want to *sell as much as possible* so if they can attract a broader audience they will try that. So yeah. Your car example shows how wrong this is and how they basically sell lies to their customers to sell more. It's like some car dealer selling your blind grandma a car and your dog, even though they are fully aware that it's not meant for those people. Because videogames and some noisey, inappropriate demographic of players. Nope, not the point I made. Games (and Game developers) who treat me disrespectfully can go ffff-them selves. If the game doesn't provide me with the tools to have fun it failed its purpose. Not enough choices for me. End of story. Dark Souls is an excellent example for that. I don't know what you are talking about. I played over 150 hours of Darkest Dungeon backing up my saves, circumventing the shitty rogue-like bit of the game only to have needed to revert to a former save 5 times, maybe. That's one reload per 30 hours. Wow, I wish other games would manage that. And mostly because I wasn't paying attention, or misclicked, so for me it never felt like a test of luck at all. I would have told you to get gud but then I wouldn't be any better than those infantile anal-rententive dark soul-tards, so probably I just had a very very lucky 150 hours with Darkest Dungeon and you just had really bad luck at that game. Sucks to be you, man. You have my sympathies.

I don't get the discussion about difficulty in video games. But I'm jaded and cynical and been playing for several decades. I start with question 2) because that's easy to answer: If he says he has more fun that way, any further discussion is over. Moot point is moot. What he looks to you doesn't matter, what you think doesn't matter - as long as he says he is having more fun in an non-ironic way, I don't even need to watch the video for that issue. Are you really going to tell Ross, me or anyone how we should have fun or spend our time, really? Are you telling us we are having fun wrong? Are you sure about that? Question 1) Why are you talking about what's "expected" of gamers? Arent't we only expected to pay for a "service" rendered? Personally, I wish we would own something afterwards, but let's just pretend for the moment games are just services. Is the service advertised correctly? Does it fulfill its premise? What's its premise anyway? Let's move along and just say that the premise: "Game is fun" is generally correct for the sake of the argument. What makes a game fun? Boils down to personal preference. BUT I would love if this would be standardised but considering the abysmal situation the industry and the world is in I doubt that will ever happen. Now, I would love if the game would treat its players as responsible humans. game is wasting my time: NOT FUN game has shitty controls: NOT FUN game has a stressful and/or boring primary game loop: NOT FUN game has not enough options: NOT FUN game doesn't have an approachable and differentiable difficulty curve: NOT FUN game's story is from a five year old: NOT FUN game is unstable: NOT FUN A couple of these add up and that's it. REFUND, REFUND, REFUND, REFUND!!! Now I didn't even talk about the core difficulty yet, but if games don't let me decide what kind of difficulty and challenge I want, save where I want and instead waste my time instead they fail. Simple message for the developers: If you don't let me play the way I want to play, you don't get my money. So to answer your question: You paid for a service to entertain you, if the service doesn't deliver in a time frame you set yourself, the service failed. I've stopped playing games after 3 minutes because they were obnoxious and disrespectful of my time (and money). I've tried to like games, trying them out over and over again and after hours I decided they aren't my cup of tea and I've played the same game over and over again because it was enjoyable, albeit repetitive and nothing new but exactly what I wanted the game to be. Investment depends on how much the player values time and money. I don't have time for the insulting amount Dark Souls wants from me and I don't like the pubescent advertising coming with it and the lack of choices deliberately forcing me to have fun how the devs want me to have fun is frankly disgusting. Now in comparison: Darkest Dungeon is regarded as a tough game and I love it, but you have far more choices how you want your personal challenge to play out and the advertising is around misery and despair of your party/character not about you (the player) failing. I can play the way I want and interestingly I know what I need to have fun.

It's now available on the slightly less but still very despicable plattform of Steam and most likely totally not my jam.

I can't edit my first post so I add my short review here: I've played Despotism 3k for about two hours now and it's a puzzle management kinda game. You play as the AI Overlord forcing humans to work for you and you have to balance the production of food energy and new humans while the pressure to produce more and more always increases. I find it too hard to be enjoyable. It's stressing me out even on easy mode. I feel this goes against anything what an AI should feel. There should be an option to make time pass way slower. But let's leave it at that. Now the humour is great, there is a ton of reference to classical Sci-Fi movies that are campy enough to be mildly amusing and the story, premise and visual art style of the game is pretty great to awesome.

Sorry for the late reply, this got somehow buried here. I've played Despotism 3k for about two hours now and it's a puzzle management kinda game. Balance the production of food energy and humans while the pressure to produce more always increases. I find it too hard to be enjoyable. It's stressing me out even on easy mode. There should be an option to make time pass way slower. That said, the humour is great, the is a ton of reference to classical Sci-Fi movies that are campy enough to be mildly amusing and the story, premise and visual art style of the game is pretty great to awesome. Hope that helps. What is less stressful to play is Hades. It's a mostly meh to good roguelike with the occasional spike of woah, that was great in case you get rng that isn't a bitch. I don't understand why everyone is having such a great time with it, but I hate roguelikes, rng and dying in general. And that it manages to keep me vested enough to be interested is a good sign. The story is great and I'm a sucker for Greek mythology, so that helps, but other than that I just seem to be interested in a niche and so alienated by the mainstream that even overwhelmingly positive rated games warrant little to no positive emotional response... Oh well, to be honest I feel far more connected to the main antagonist: Hades himself than to his son, the protagonist shown in the picture below...

YoU nEeD to pRepARe to sUrVIVE tHe onCOMiNg Holy Crusade! It doesn't matter how you look or what the game looks. The Holy Crusade is coming to get you! That alone was enough to wishlist it for me.

I play(ed) Despotism 3k, thanks to Ross' Game List. That's why I am here btw. So thanks Ross, I guess.

Considering how badly Bethi's recent titles were and considering that I loathe (with a hell bent passion) their only recent game that was considered quite successful (DOOM Eternal) this is extraordinarily mediocre, meh kinda not so bad it's almost good news. Now, for the first time ever I am curious how Starfield and my beloved yet dead Frankenstein carcass of Elder Scrolls will turn out eventually. Imagine for a second if Epic, EA, Activision or Ubi would have bought it... Or warnerbros. Bwhahahah... The end, basically. Microsoft is bad, but it's at least bad with an occasional consumer friendly cherry on top. What they do with accessibility is actually kinda heartwarming for example. I mean it would be, if sub-zero temperature wouldn't be normal working temp for my heart nowadays... And I am regularly using the xBlox Game Pass to play with it being only occasionally horrible. Not like Bethi's client. Besides Microsoft seems to bring most Xblox exclusive titles to PC now. Yeah, it's a typical case of: It could have been so much worse it's actually probably for the best... Addendum: in a perfect world they would just fire Todd Howard so he has to ask Peter Molyneux for a position and then they can lie together. (Pun intended)

Whoa, whoa whoa, slow down there cowboy. Why do the mentally ill have a megaphone? They can use twitter, facebook and forums just like any U.S. President or your grandma.. Why do you write "mentally ill" in big bold letters as if it is something special? How do you know they are mentally ill in the first place? Did they tell you so? How do you know their claim is believable? Please tell me you are an expert in understanding posts so precisely that you can pinpoint their mental issue directly. If so, you should make money out of that and help mend the world. How do you know you aren't mentally ill and should be locked up by your own standards? I am all for a "Not being an arsehole - License". And without you shouldn't be considered a decent human being and thusly not having access to the decent human being club but that's a highly subjective and controversial topic, and as a proud arsehole myself I probably would fail getting that license repeatedly because sometimes it's just the only possible or viable option to be one.

This game tries extremely hard to be ANNO 2205. But only the Moon/Icecaps bit and rougher around the edges. It doesn't come with the shitty Uplay launcher though. So there is that.

Oh wow, I think I am in love. I'm downloading and maybe tell you soon how I liked it.

1) It's no longer in Early Access. Full release, baby! 2) It's supposedly highly addicting, though after an Initial craze back in Early Access days I have trouble getting back into it. 3) It completely destroys your view on grinding tasks in crafting/survival games and retroactively destroys those game experiences for you. 4) The factory must grow!

I like the expansion part of the game, and would love to play without competitors against something else, but the game focuses on competition alone. It's "hostile-takeover: the game but on Mars" and if you do a hostile takeover you don't get it, because the former enemy's colony just self-destruct. (For balancing reasons) It's supposed to be fantastic in PvP multiplayer but I hate human competition even more than AI. So it's great game, with an interesting premise that is totally not for me. Sad face.

It's the closest thing to an actually sequel to the original Syndicate game. No, no no, not the bad expansion, not the weird and totally uncool second one and not the shitty fps one who just robbed the name and failed. It's still utterly inferior game to the original Syndicate, but considering Syndicate is the best game of all times™, Satellite Reign is pretty fun. Play it when you want a Cyberpunk setting and miss Syndicate enough to accept a downgrade with cooler graphics.

Yup, its "the SIMS" light but in space and with immensely likable characters and awkward campaign missions. I'm utterly biased though.