A problem I’ve had with DnD and Pathfinder is you’re pretty much always required to have a rogue and a cleric in every party no matter what. Okay, maybe if the DM removed all traps from the game you could cut the rogue out.

It’s F2P with all the usual baggage that implies, so it pretty much is.

You don’t have to speak their language to tell that a whole lot of subscribers and donations appear to be rolling in thanks to all of this.

While you can ignore the loot boxes ... don’t forget that the game was made to be tedious *because* of those loot boxes.

No, I’m not missing the point. You’re completely misunderstanding both the article, and my post however from what you’re staying. Here is the entire paragraph from the article, with emphasis on what I was talking about:

What they’re actually doing is trying to find a way to tie progression behind lootboxes. Oh, you’ll of course be able to avoid them, and it will be “player choice” but just like in Battlefront II when people run the numbers they’ll see just how long it takes to actually play the game with only spending $60.

Except on Steam you have to actually purchase the game to leave a review. I don’t know about Xbox, but I’d imagine it’s similar. PS doesn’t have reviews, but I don’t think you can rate things unless you own them.

Can’t say I’m surprised.

...they can also be vulnerable to review bombing. People angry over specific issues, glitches, or even unrelated problems can swarm a game’s review page to kill its rating.

Guy smoking literally 2 feet from a no-smoking sign.

As it stands, a targeted review bomb or two could send a game plummeting from its deserving perch on Steam 250.

I ended up canceling Netflix when they raised the price on me. Picked up Hulu (commercial free version) and it’s nice having an almost completely new library to watch. Might have to bounce back and forth.

Probably unlikely, unless they think up a way to monetize the hell out of it. They’ve had a taste of the “free” to play & loot box revenue stream.

$59k to make a game? Yeah, I don’t think so. Especially with 6 people on the team. That would run them about half a year if they were willing to work for $10/hour (ha!)

The age range used in the article is pretty broad. I wouldn’t put a 10 year old into such an environment. There is a massive difference between a 10 year old, who is in 4th or 5th grade, and a high school aged kid.

You’re making me recall repressed memories from when I tried playing Lego Star Wars with my daughter (and wife)... why oh why did they have to put in PvP damage...

Eh ... I’d move Minecraft down to the younger kids. Maybe not Survival mode, but maybe on Peaceful. Certainly creative mode. My daughter picked it up really easily and still plays it now (she’s 8).

“notable for hardly ever running sales” ... yet your last post was a few weeks ago...

“notable for hardly ever running sales” ... yet your last post was a few weeks ago...

Uh, whatever brought this about happened long before any tax law change.

I’m missing where I said it was limited to a single occurrence a day. Not to mention that happened yesterday, not today.....