The news say the project wants to ban lootboxes for anyony. Kids and adults.
Don't try to justify one lie with another. If lootboxes were used to launder money like casinos, bingos and churches, far-right governments would even release them to the dead. Trying to ban lootboxes is just a response to the false moralism that does not like the EA of the incels and the alt-right gamer that supports Bolsonaro. Nobody cares about children, if that were the case it would be...
What a strange country. They wanna ban lootboxes but the far-right government wants to legalize gambling and cassinos at the same time. Maybe they only care for moneywashing.
Don't worry. Jim Ryan is going to give you an opportunity to buy this game for the 3rd or 4th time. Sony is love and never make mistakes.
It's a shame what Sony is doing with Japan studios. Jim Ryan only thinks in short term money.
Yes! Now I can buy the same PSOne games for the third time!
That's exactly how market works. More demand than suply, price rises.
Maybe you don't like market and never realised that.
The game was a good Duke Nukem. The same kind of immature humor, gameplay and plots from average to bad. The blame for perception is not Forever's. People need to reevaluate the perception about the series, which had just one good game among all the releases and a lot of people made the exception rule.
Why would they? Why gamers should have any special treatment? It's a PC part. Anyone uses as it fits.
It looks more like Vita than Switch, IMO.
Why?
If ou think captalism is working I dont have a lot to discuss with you.
I always amuse myself when capitalists discover capitalism.
It helps, but it's not a necessary condition.
There's a kind of rivality between nerd gamers and sport people. Those nerd gamers like to scream that sport games are lesser games and only accept them when "Chads" can't play them IRL, like Rocket League or Mario Tennis.
Most sports games are well made by EA and 2K. But a lot of "gamers" try put a bad mark on it because it brings frustration from the real life. And the argume...
Yeah, I agree with you. Most of times companies just create the future that are better for them. And that's the case with streaming. I don't like it. I feel sorry for those believing they have any power to change that future.
But I do. I don't like exclusive games I bought on that condition become avaliable everywhere. I like the "tribalism" and sense of community that consoles used to bring. You can disagree. It's fair. But you can't say I'm wrong.
Of course I'm thinking as fan. It's what we are. If I was a capitalist man trying to squeeze money from anywhere I couldn't care less about any "children's game". But I'm not. So I care about the product and the consequences of some decision have over me and my perception.
In my personal opinion, these PlayStation Studios Games on other plataforms wear out PlayStation brand for me. I think it makes them closer to a third party publisher and break the bong between hardware and software. If I know beforehand that all PlayStation Games are avaliable on other platforms, maybe I could buy another platform.
There's no reason fot that. Every company has a lot of lawsuits against it. From customers to workers. Its just how things work. Microsoft will just be part of it. Everyday business.
Wrong technology, wrong price and wrong concept. Good games, though. Games were so good that Switch is basically living on them. But it isnt underated. It just sold bad.
We have no data to say it was a bad move. FOMO is very powerful in some fragile gaming demographic. Nintendo must know that limiting offer more people become willing to pay $60 for some emulated games with no treatment, something more difficult to do without limited run.