m76

And for the same reason modding is disallowed. They can't sell their crappy skins if modders release items that are 10 times better for free.

I'm all for more healthy eating, but it can't be achieved by banning stuff. People don't eat food that is less healthy necessarily because they want to, but because that's all they can afford, if they can afford anything at all. If I go to the supermarket, the regular non-healthy products always cost half or less than anything healthy. And it's not because it costs that much more to make the healthy food, in some cases it is actually cheaper. So if the government wants people to eat healthy they should force companies to not upsell the better food. And people will automatically start buying that. I always try to get food that has more healthy ingredients but more often than not it is too expensive, and I reluctantly settle for the one that contains processed sugar.

It surely will create a black market. The US prohibition on alcohol is not so ancient history that we can not learn from it.

The pre-order page for Forspoken has appeared on Steam, and guess what the asking price is? Here in the EU they are: €79.99 for the basic version and € 104.99 for the digital deluxe edition. That's about $90 and $120 respectively. What is this, an out of season april's fools joke?

New Zealand to completely outlaw smoking by 2025. Now I'm not interested if you are a smoker or not, what I ask is whether people should be allowed to do things that pose a health risk? Because if the point of this legislation is to protect people, then there are various other activities that also pose health risks, should the government ban those as well? If what we eat is a personal choice then surely what we inhale also should be a personal choice. It seems to me that the Netherlands, and more recently Belgium where recreational smoking of weed is legal are among the best places to live in the 1st world. So what do you think? Should the government control lives to this degree?

I don't see a morality issue with abortion, because I don't think a fetus is a person. What makes someone an individual worth protecting is the life experiences they accumulated. And nobody starts accumulating life experience until after they are born. Nobody should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term against their will. Those who want to ban abortions often say well they should've been more responsible and use protection. But that argument falls apart, because had they used protection that fetus wouldn't exist in the first place. So they are not advocating for life, they are just advocating for squashing it sooner.

Why? I think GTA IV and San Andreas and even Vice City were far superior games in their time. GTAV seems like an incremental step after GTAIV not a leap as all previous games were. And they completely removed from it what made GTA games so much fun for me to play: the crazy side activities and challenges. The only fun thing remaining are the chance encounters, which are great, and I consider them the best part of GTAV, but they are only a tiny portion of the game. Unless of course you are talking about GTA Online, which is a whole different animal, than the single player game that is GTAV. Not that I consider that a great game, since I don't care for multiplayer games at all.

Quantic already tried to mix it up with action in Beyond Two Souls, and it didn't work out too well. The action sequences were on rails, and very clumsy. It was evident nobody at the studio knew how to make a good action game. I hope they hired some people with more experience this time around.

It seems to me that their bright idea is that players would get these cosmetic items for completing events or challenges in game. What I don't understand is why would anybody want to buy their items, just because it has an unique ID. This is like having serial numbers. Since when is having a mass manufactured item with an unique serial number considered valuable? They all have unique serial numbers! Even if it's a limited run item, it's not the serial number that makes it valuable, it's the scarcity.

NFTs are just another form of cryptocurrency. It is a plague, that needs to die. Ubisoft had to delist the announcement on youtube it was getting so many dislikes. My faith in humanity is somewhat restored. Meanwhile my reaction was to uninstall ghost recon breakpoint immediately.

I can enjoy games without music, in fact in many games I turn off background music because it annoys me. Music existed long before videogames, from the dawn of man, it is not something that can be uninvented. You tap your fingers on a desk and it creates a kind of tune, so it is literally impossible to imagine a world without music.

They didn't have to do the work manually, just check the output of the AI, and adjust the parameters, or touch up those those that came out wrong. But they didn't do any of that. Or worse they saw that it is crap and released the game anyway.

I think that is the potential future of game development. Instead of hundreds of wage slaves toiling away for months creating assets, now it is possible to just use AI to create something based on a few thousand samples. Literally an infinite source of models. And this doesn't have to mean there is no creativity to it, as it is still the human who chooses which samples and what parameters to use. But instead of needing a month to come up with a model for a new building it will take 10 clicks and a few hours of processing time. And the best is that you can go through hundreds of iterations, while with human created assets you go through 2 or 3 maximum, because it is not feasible to do more.

They can still tell fictional stories in a historical setting. But if they want to depict a recorded story, they should be accurate.

Many games used procedural technology (which we used to call it, before AI become trendy) to generate a ton of their assets. It's not the technology it is how it's used that is the problem. You can give the best tools to incompetent, and lazy people the outcome will be terrible. So I would not blame AI technology in the GTA remastered debacle.

It really depends on the mindset of the level designer. Most build their levels to accommodate the gameplay, and thus the locations feel artificial and tailored. The tomb raider games suffer from this greatly. What they should do is either base it on real world locations or at least real world requirements. For example if you want to build an office complex in a game, see if the same design would work in reality, if not, throw it out and start again, or better yet forget that you are working on a videogame, and act as if designing a real place.

Alien: Isolation Beyond: Two Souls Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare Detroit: Become Human Fallout: New Vegas The Last of Us II

If they claim to be historically accurate, or depict real world historical events, then I expect them to be faithful to those events. If they want to deviate from the past just say the game is set in an alternate history.

But the cutscenes and the voices in her head, they are all the same, figments of her imagination. I did not think the distinction was necessary. But you are right the mentor figure only appears in cutscenes as far as I can remember 4 years back. Yes I'd have preferred the look of a fitness model, why should I be ashamed of that. Or is having preferences now problematic? You are right I could've explained how the mental health aspect ties into the gameplay , but I dId not find it important enough. Believe me sometimes I cringe when I read my older reviews, and sometimes I even change them.

Sorry,I wrote that review when the game was released, so I don't remember exactly what was in it. But if I did spell it out then how am I being accused of not understanding it?

It is necessary to have a certain amount of muscle to perform certain physical feats. Have you ever seen an accomplished lean athlete who displayed no muscular definition? Because I sure as hell not. If you do physical things you become muscular. If you don't have enough calories you will be too weak to be good. Well since the game is not reality but a projection of her mind, she could have any physical form in it. Now you are just being hyperbolic. In reality you cannot be a great warrior without being well fed. There is just no way around it. But in the end it is just about the fact that they promised a muscular character and they delivered a far tamer version. Had they not made a point of it during pre production I'd have never brought it up because I'm used to having female warriors that perform the same feats as men, but look like they have sticks for arms in every game. I was hoping this would be the exception. And I was disappointed, is that a problem? Am I not allowed to be disappointed?

C'mon even in the picture you posted she looks far less muscular than in the original scans, you have to admit that much.

Because you completely misunderstand the quote. I didn't think I have to spell it out, and I didn't even want to, because it would've been a spoiler in my opinion to reveal that the whole game takes place inside her mind. Yes, and no. They were her recollections of a former mentor or friend, I Though that was obvious how I meant it. I followed the development of the game, and they prided themselves on the fact that they used a fitness instructor as the body model for the character. The performance has nothing to do with the body, it is virtual, you can freely exchange the body model independent of the performance. See TLOU2/Abby, where the character is literally made up of three people. 1 body model, 1 face model, 1 mocap actor. I never heard that they gave that reason for changing the character, but it's nice that you instantly jump to conclude that I'm being dishonest. But even if I had known about that it would not have changed my opinion on the change. No, I said the voiceover work was OK, but not great, and I wasn't judging the main character in a vacuum, but the whole game as a package. My main gripes with the game were related to gameplay and not the story which is clearly indicated by the fact that I gave 8/10 to the story of the game, which by my standards is an outstanding score. If I'm not talking extensively about the voice work that means I didn't find it outstanding, nor bad, which is exactly what I wrote. You can review games however you want, but please don't presume to tell me what aspects I should focus on. You disagree with me not liking the game as much as you and thus immediately jump to the "oh you just don't understand the game" excuse. I understood it, but I didn't want to spoil anything in the review of the game. A review is not supposed to be a retelling of a game's story. I'm not going to start dropping spoiler bombs in any review, especially if the story is great. I'm more inclined to spoiling stories that I think are garbage. Ninja theory was pretty clear from the beginning on the mental illness aspect, I did not find it necessary to spell it out again.

I only look into it if it has a story significance. But most DLCs nowadays are not really expanding the story in any meaningful way.

Wait, even if I was processing games in my subconscious I wouldn't be aware of it, would I? But the question you ask in the op is actually a different one. So to answer that, no I rarely think about games outside of playing them.