If you don't already have a Switch, it's not a bad investment, honestly.
Big companies aren't as concerned about initial sales as you might think, at least for multiplayer games like Destiny 2. They are more interested in player retention. If the game sells like gang busters, but loses 80% of its initial player base, that's considered a big failure.
@chris235 Don't underestimate the value of player-recidivism. When it comes to online games, companies would much rather have one player who continues playing their game throughout the year than 10 players who only play it for a month. Choosing to jump ship, even if you have already paid for the game, sends a clear message.
The issue with cosmetics is that it's content that, if loot boxes (and dlc) didn't exist, would just be rewards you could unlock for reaching certain milestones in a game. Time was you could get an alternate costume by collecting enough orbs, or pretzels, or whatever the game had scattered around.
I still remember that depressing/hilarious image of players in the "Boycott Black Ops 3" Steam group, nearly all of which were noted as currently playing the game.
The major turning point was this controversy being picked up by mainstream news, not just gaming websites. While the regular Joe might not know what the hell they're talking about, or care because he doesn't play game, the casual player may be finally catching on. These calls-to-action typically happen on niche forums, so mass action never happens. Thankfully, Reddit is large enough that even their niche subreddits can be noticed by those on the outside looking in.
Unfortunately it does, though. The "as long as it's cosmetic, it's fine," has been the go-to excuse for years ever since microtransactions were first introduced. A detestable annoyance that was always in the peripheral, whispering promises of a better experience for as little as $2. It was the compromise that was made. Then $60 games got loot boxes, but they were still cosmetic, so as annoying as they were, they still weren't required to be on the same playing field as e...
OW is a team game. If you're playing it just for yourself, with no regard for your teammates, you're playing the wrong game.
"This product is not available for international shipping."
Really? This is the kind of news that makes it to the top of the page?
Looks like my PlayStation Anniversary theme stays up.
Nintendo's adherence to exclusives is why their consoles are always the ones to buy, assuming you have a good gaming PC to run other games. Exclusivity on other consoles is vanishing, but Nintendo holds strong onto their franchises, of which they have many.
Can anyone really say this was a surprise? Massive events like these that rely on server strength almost always run into the same problems. Just look at nearly every MMO and MMO expansion ever.
Could also be a case where he just wasn't in the right mood for that kind of game when he played it. That's happened to me several times. I'll start playing a game that I know I will enjoy, but can barely get two hours into it before giving up out of disinterest. Usually I go back to it months later when I'm in the mood for a game from that genre, and most of the time I turn my opinion around on it.
The best Superman game was, ironically, LEGO Batman, when you could play as him. I would love to see other DC properties get titles, too (in fact there's an article covering exactly that: https://www.keengamer.com/a... Though highly unlikely, a Young Justice game to coincide with the third season would be welcomed. Aquaman did get a game, though. The less said about it, the bet...
That's true, but not by as much as you might think. The problem DC games have is they're almost all about Batman. Batman's great, I love Batman, but his one super power of being able to leap into any DC franchise and make it about him is tiring.
Changes are happening, which is mentioned in the article, and hopefully they're changes that lead to a trend rather than an exception. The article wasn't so much about the future of Marvel games, but where they have been for the past decade and change.
That's legit a crazy good deal.
Absolutely. So long as you see yourself playing that console again in the near future, it has value.
It doesn't make the initial purchase irrelevant, but hindsight is 20/20. I don't necessarily regret purchasing the games; if I knew then what I know now, I may still have bought some of them, regardless of knowing I'd do it again in the future. It just lessens the value of the Wii U, overall, to have more and more of its exclusives jump ship. In my opinion, exclusives are the only reason to own a console. Exclusive from PC, at least.