Honestly, I’d rather just pay 90+ dollars for a the new AAA games I want to play and stick with indies otherwise. I don’t think the main reason for loot boxes becoming popular is to make up rising costs, though.

They understand being self aware is a hip thing (it is something I generally give points for, to be completely honest) but aren’t actually savvy enough to pull it off. Being self-aware about one problem you have in yourself/your game is only really endearing when the rest of you/your game reflects learning from that…

For me I just cut loot boxes out completely. There are plenty of games that don’t have them and even cosmetic stuff/things that don’t affect that mechanical gameplay just ruin the experience for me. Whether it works on me or no, the psychological nonsense they try and pull are just too grating.

There’s reasons to think unchecked capitalism isn’t always desirable. For me that’s generally once profit motive shifts from making a good product to making the most psychologically-manipulative product. Especially if that product is something with artistic merit.

It’s also a bit disingenuous to lean on the “let people…

I can completely understand not feeling like shouldering that burden when at the end of the day it’s just a first-world hobby, like you said.

I guess I would just say to you that if profits aren’t tied to a good game but instead these sort of pseudo-gambling practices, then there’s no real incentive to make a “good” or…

Being fine with loot crates because they don’t personally bother you is sort of short sighted, I think, when they’re the point of the spearhead when it comes to AAA games becoming more like crappy, pay-to-win mobile games. Give them an inch they’ll take a mile and all that.

Just a thought.

Poe’s Law, friend. Poe’s Law.

“I’m not mad, just...disappointed.”

....it’s not “use matchmaking to try and manipulate people into buying loot boxes” bad, but it still feels just about as cynical.

Also, isn’t the “communal multiplayer hub” Normandy Beach in CoD: WWII? Loot boxes, falling from the sky onto Normandy Beach as a way to push pseudo gambling in a $60 game...blegh.

Edit: I…

I get what you’re saying, but I don’t think it’s that simple. If they designed the game around no mini-map and then added a simple toggle to turn one on for people who need it, that’s one thing. But if the recent years have taught me anything, “it’s optional” and “player choice” doesn’t mean the rest of the game isn’t…

I’ll believe it if Red Dead Redemption 2 launches without a minimap, or if it is actually playable/designed to work with it turned off (which the first game is decidedly not).

My boyfriend and I played this game on PC, performance was lacking a bit but the concept is freaking awesome and we had a great time. I came back to it recently and it was much smoother, I can’t wait to pick it up on the Switch.

It was a very minor point that expresses a bit of fatigue with the idea being the main driving force of the conflict in almost every game, a feeling plenty of people share. Your point of “that’s just how it is” seems less substantial in comparison, honestly.

And hey, nobody is saying it’s wrong that you feel it’s not a…

“Never said he was mad just thought it was an odd thing to state as a dislike.”

As an aside, there are the less obvious ways MT’s seem to affect the design of this specific game as well. For example, in the first game Talion had unique weapons that gained names that made me feel like a real LOTR hero out of legend. Now it’s all random loot, and oh hey look it so happens that weapons and such are…

“I was bothered by some of the reviews for this game because they went out of their way to bash the game for these MTs when this is a game that doesn’t shove them in your face.”

That’s exactly my point though, this specific implementation is “harmless” but we saw “harmless” turn into “holy cow is Batttlefront’s progression really tied to loot boxes”? I’d just prefer they not use predatory business practices in general, I’m pretty much done with assuming companies won’t start pushing more and…

I completely understand the “it’s not too bad, it’s tied to ‘cheering’ your favorite streamers so it’s just a bonus” thing, I do. But to me it’s just the streaming version of “it doesn’t affect the game” or “they’re only cosmetics” and such.

The literal implementation in this one case seem fairly innocuous, but it only…

Yeah, I get that. For me, it’s how it looks in motion, and thankfully it looks like a lot of love was put into this one.

Those are all fair points. Even so, I’d say there’s a distinction between a review which is a person’s opinion about their experience with game and a journalistic piece about the realities of the shift in the market. We’re already seeing pieces done that aren’t treating this as a “joke” and you’re right, that’s…