“Not having used one” followed by “but it’s safe to say”

No. If you’re doing an honest review, omit these kind of things. I honestly stopped seriously reading this there since it shows there’s zero credibility here, but the rest is entertaining.

Post the specs, sure. Don’t say dumb shit like this.

Gatekeeping is one thing but people wanting to make the game harder for themselves is just another individual way to enjoy the game same as wanting to make the game easier.

It’s a weird thing people seem to do in order to “be right.” It’s the whole “someone is wrong on the internet” thing with a bit of the “acksulally” thrown in. It’s like a mindset that if you’re not part of it seems bizarre. I don’t get it myself.

“Your stat gains—defense against that boss, mostly—have diminishing returns, so it’s not eventually an automated win button. You till have to play, die, repeat. Struggle....*Everybody* gets *much* closer to the intended experience, and *way* more people get to play and enjoy. ”

The game design itself also nudges you towards doing or using certain things. Tree Sentinel is there to show you that maybe not every fight is one you need to get into right away. Margit to teach you that delays will fuck up your life if you spam roll. That initial section going into Stormveil with the giant to learn…

One thing that I appreciated about DS2 was that it gave the weirdo loser purists who really get mad about people using even things placed in the game by From not inteded to cheese enemies as cheating something to make them shut up and go away.

“So what your saying is all gamers are addicts that only play games because their addicted okay”

Then all gamers are addicts.

They DO happen, though. XCOM and XCOM 2 are currently being sold at a discount of 94%, for instance.

I think you nailed it. If you are the type of person who - when I ask you what games you’re playing right now, your eyes light up and you can’t wait to tell me everything about what’s going on.

Not trying to offend you or anything Sisi, but I really get the impression that your sole job here is to advocate for gacha games, to try to paint them in a more positive light to core gamers. If so...I fear it’s a fools effort, for there is basically no other crowd that abhors gacha as much and as passionately.

To generalize and claim that any one who plays these mobile games must be addicts, absolutely speaks to what this article is saying. It’s not a casual thing anymore.

CONAN THE BARBARIAN SAYS... ok, I see the point and I accept it, some of these games have a deep strategy element. Some of these games allow people to get invested for week in very cunning strategies and schemes. And some of these games have great art and design, clearly good programmers poured art and technology into…

“And how is that any different from any other game there is? Most games absolutely work on that level, especially as games move more and more into the live service sphere.”

I have friends who at this very moment are sitting at their desk on break playing mobile games they will tell you they don’t enjoy because the phsycogical tricks hooked them. The entire point of designing games around them is the game doesn’t need to be fun or interesting as long as the dopamine hit of opening a loot…

Do they? People spend real money on fake slot machine apps (i.e. which don’t pay out real money) all the time, and there’s no argument to be made that those games are “fun” beyond the gambling dopamine rush.

But for too long, the media discussion of mobile gaming has ignored the human component: the actual players. ... Their games aren’t inherently inferior, and they’re consciously choosing to play games that fit into their busy lives. It’s time that PC and console players learn to respect that.

If that were true slot machines wouldn’t exist.

If Assassin’s Creed, God of War, Horizon, Witcher, Diablo, Final Fantasy and WoW can all be called RPGs, then Cyberpunk can absolutely be called one too. Personally, I think the term has become so broad as to be basically useless these days.

I guess I’m just not seeing how sexy pixels negatively impact actual people. If that link is demonstrable and proven, then I’ll change my perspective.