Akun

I used to pay quite a hefty sum for mobile games like FarmVille and other niched management games. They're so predatory, especially the latter, because their only "management" is to click a button and earn money in the game that way. The only PC games where I got myself willingly engaging in microtransactions would be the dead game, Marvel Heroes 2016, but the microtransaction for that wasn't as bad as other games that use lootboxes, because I only paid for aesthetic items like Spider-Man's alternate costumes, where were a lot of fun because they came with different voice actors you might recognize from your childhood cartoons, like Christopher Daniel Barnes voicing the symbiote Spider-Man. That game was pretty decent, so it's too bad it died.

I feel like most companies have already used bots for churning out positive reviews for their bad shows, so AI reviews don't feel like a new thing.

I probably wouldn't sell it off, seeing as the Switch is still a relatively new console that Nintendo wouldn't replace for a while. There might be other third-party IPs that might pique @Empire Of Sight's interest in the future released on the Switch.

Yeah, but with certain games like Spider-Man, they're usually related to plot elements, like Johnny Storm showing up or something.

Yeah, but to me, their "impact" is kinda shallow, depending on your reflexes only rather than your decision-making skills based on your morality and logic. That was my point in the post your quoted.

Well, to be honest, the only JRPG I've ever played on it was Shin Megami Tensei V, which had a pretty lackluster story. However, I've heard that Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is receiving all kinds of praise, so you could try that out. I've also bought Fire Emblem: Three Houses and Three Hopes on the Switch, but I've yet to play them yet. The Switch is unfortunately a pure gaming device without any other features like movie-watching or even browsing the Internet (at least I think you couldn't surf the net). It's not a home entertainment device like the PS5 or the XBox, unfortunately, but I never had to use those entertainment features of the PS5 or the XBox myself because I have my PC. I do use the PS5 for its blu-ray function, but that's on rare occasions when I need to watch South Park.

I've barely touched Pokémon Legends: Arceus and the Pokémon: Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl Double Pack after a few hours of playtime. lol I do tend to use the Switch for other stuff though like JRPGs and visual novels; basically third-party non-Nintendo games, ironically.

Yeah, Singapore loves its security. It's not exactly my favorite country despite growing up here, especially since I grew up on American media preaching all about freedom, and Singapore, while it's no North Korea or even China, isn't quite the free country as America. But the fact that I could type this and even say this in public without being executed though means it's at least free enough. And I can't exactly complain either, since the security means I could walk around in my neighborhood at 3 in the morning without worrying about getting murdered. It's a safe country.

Nobody's playing a straw man. Stop projecting your own insecurities. I was merely calling out how ridiculous it is to say anything is overrated at all when it's all subjective at the end of the day.

I got bit by the Mass Effect bug again hard, so I'm preparing to reinstall the Legendary Edition again along with all the essential mods. I was very hesitant though, because it's three games lasting several weeks, and I haven't even finished Devil Survivor yet because I got bored on Day 7 fighting Belberith. But the Mass Effect trilogy has felt very personal for me because it's the most memorable gaming experience I ever had, so it's hard to resist the temptation of replaying it again and revisiting all the beloved characters. I don't quite remember the MaleShep romance with Ashley because I only did it once prior to ME3's release, so I might do that again. I've often played FemShep because of Jennifer Hale's passionate performance, so playing MaleShep again would be quite... interesting. Not really a fan of Mark Meer's monotone performance to be frank (FemShep just sounds a lot more emotional), but I guess I'll put up with it. Got kinda bored by Jurassic World: Evolution 2 by now after a week (maybe more) of dinosaur creation, so that's dead now, extinct. Ah well. Fun while it lasted.

Yeah, but sales figures don't necessarily mean something is overrated though. Transformers films make tons of money, but they're some of the most hated movies in the entire history of cinema, period. That's why I find the term, "overrated," and its use, so arbitrary. And if we're to dig deeper, what is the measure of whether a game is rated too high? In comparison to other games that you know of? Do you know every single game in existence? Have you played every single game in existence? At the end of the day, it's all an opinion based on your own experience. Someone who enjoys niched retro games might find modern AAA games overrated.

Looking through my Mass Effect posts on VGR, I was ultimately led to the reminder of one particular scene that made me cry hard in Mass Effect 2: David in the Overlord DLC. Oh lord. This scene was just disturbing, devastating, and just so infuriating. I feel like everyone wanted a Renegade option of just shooting Gavin so hard. lol That music really, really didn't help.

I'm always advocating for multiple paths in a game's storyline. I know it's hard to do, so I don't really have high hopes for such a feature to be more prevalent. But on the other hand, you get a JRPG like Shin Megami Tensei where some of their endgame content does contain multiple paths depending on whom you side with (SMT IV comes to mind). I believe Fire Emblem games also contain different paths based on whom you side with. I feel like this is mostly a JRPG thing though, because whenever a western RPG does it, they'd often resort to the lazy "slideshow" method like Fallout: New Vegas or Mass Effect 3, instead of creating three distinctly different gameplay levels based on player choices. Now, obviously, games like Detroit: Become Human and The Dark Picture anthology could do it easily because they lack gameplay features outside of QTE, so it's easy to make them. But I would propose for game developers to be more daring and innovative, creating full game levels with multiple paths. You see this in older RPGs too like Dragon Age: Origins, so I don't know more AAA games these days don't have such features anymore. I heard The Witcher 3 had multiple paths, but I'm not really a fan of medieval fantasy settings, which is why when CD Projekt Red announced Cyberpunk: 2077, I thought we were going to get Witcher 3 with a sci-fi cyberpunk setting, with all the multiple paths Witcher 3 had to offer. Alas, that was not so, with the way the life paths were described by people who've played them. Another cool concept I've really liked in the past is Undertale with the players' act of pacifism being a core important part of the story, and even though I had my problems with the message, Spec Ops: The Line had a nice concept like that as well, so I wouldn't mind seeing more games in the future turn the game genre on itself, like the Goombas in a Mario game calling out Mario for stomping on them all the time or something, or a Pokémon game where the questionable ethics of dog-fighting comes into question. Just spice things up a little and do a little subversion to make the familiar formula fresher, more interesting. BioShock had a good idea in terms of farming the Little Sisters for ADAM, but they made it too easy morally to choose not to farm them. And I'm not talking about how challenging the gameplay is, but rather, making the decision more morally grey. I'm not exactly sure how to do it, especially in the obviously morally questionable objectivism of BioShock context, but a game where the innocence of a malicious ghost child comes into question would be interesting as well in horror games. Imagine having to play through Silent Hill 2 without killing any monsters, for example. Speaking of horror games, here's a concept for you: a protagonist whose appearance becomes more grotesque depending on your moral actions, but the other characters actually call out on this. In most games that have such a feature, I feel like the NPCs don't usually call out on the protagonist's appearance, such as Mass Effect or even Fable. How about a horror protagonist with some kind of disease that gradually makes them become as deformed as the monsters they fight? Maybe the deformed lump of flesh becomes a burden even that movement becomes harder by the end of the game, and maybe depending on your choices, you could either become one of the monsters or fight against the disease with all your might. I don't know. I'm just spitballing here. 😛 Hope it helps. lol

The link doesn't work. Sad. Maybe it's from an Amazon page of a different region I don't have access to. It has always been the more popular series since Persona 3, which was what's bugging a lot of SMT fans because people started to not care about the mainline titles as much anymore while Atlus was busy milking the Persona franchise with its merch and Persona games spin-offs like Dancing All Night and Strikers. We were lucky at all to even get Soul Hackers 2, the sequel to a spin-off of a spin-off (Soul Hackers being a spin-off of Devil Summoner games), but even then, Atlus chose to market it with Persona 5 skins, so you know how much faith Atlus has in non-Persona games these days.

There's a lot of hype around CD Projekt Red "fixing" Cyberpunk 2077 again, and it did tempt me a little bit to repurchase the game and play it again (I refunded it after one hour on Steam), but after doing some research on the "life path" options, how they barely have any impact on the rest of the story, I'm once again not interested in the game anymore, which is a shame. However, all these complaints about the life paths does leave me thinking. RPGs like Cyberpunk with their false illusion of choice is the reason why I don't enjoy sandbox games because the outcome of your decisions in sandbox games are as inconsequential as Cyberpunk 2077's life paths. Think about it. Choosing whether to be a Nomad or a Corpo in Cyberpunk only means something in your mind. Whether V is a different person from any other player's version of V is in your mind, because the story's gonna be largely the same for everyone. It's all imaginary, just like sandbox games like The Sims where you imagine the Sims to have more interesting lives than just whatever career paths the base games offer you (I haven't played The Sims games for a long time, but one thing that bothered me was that you couldn't even see what the Sims' workplace was like, making your choice of career path for your Sims feel all the more hollow). It's like playing with Lego blocks and imagining your Lego man to be some superhero when he doesn't even have a costume. It's like spending 100 hours designing a theme park in some super creative fashion - Planet Coaster doesn't give you extra points for creativity as far as I know, it only rewards you for meeting the visitors' needs and making the rides fun. Same with Minecraft. The only "impact," "interaction" and "reward" that exist for these games are in your mind. In that sense, while that ultimately means that Cyberpunk 2077's inconsequential life paths wouldn't make the game appealing for me, I don't think the game did anything different from other RPGs or even sandbox games in terms of offering players the false illusion of choice. Many modern RPGs' "choices" are aesthetic-based, or more commonly, the choices only affect the gameplay, never the story, so Cyberpunk 2077's "faults" in terms of its life paths are more like the industry standard for modern RPGs. That's because it's hard to cater to the choices of billions of players. It's hard to make a bazillion different outcomes and paths based on player choices, even if CD Projekt Red did promise a game that "would change gaming forever." That's why when a game does create the lightning in a bottle, the rare game where your choices actually lead to multiple outcomes and endings, that's when it's such a gem to me, which is why I held Detroit: Become Human in such high regards because your dialogue choices alone could ultimately lead to so many different variations. Even Fallout: New Vegas did this better, even though its "outcomes" is just a series of slideshows, the same way Mass Effect 3's developers added different "outcomes" in the extended cut of the game through a series of slideshows. But anyway, it's why I find it a shame that the roleplaying aspect of many role-playing games isn't as immersive as I would like it to be, for a game's story to reflect on your choices the same way a gamemaster would work the plot around your characters' choices and backstory in a tabletop RPG. It's why "roleplaying" is such a joke among a lot of MMO RPGs. I remember how roleplaying is pretty much dead in Star Wars: The Old Republic because it's just a bunch of people imagining their characters going on adventures the base game didn't offer. It's just kinda sad, to be honest.

I don't have much interest in medieval fantasy settings, unfortunately. I'm more of a sci-fi guy, and yet, I don't even like Star Wars that much. I guess it's because I never really grew up with all these popular franchises that I didn't care about them as much. I was certainly old enough by the time those LotRs movies came around, but I was still watching cartoons at that age, not exactly the passionate film-buff I would become in later years.

I feel like we're talking about the same thing without acknowledging that the other party is correct. 😆 Persona 4's sales numbers on the PC didn't do as well as Persona 5 because it's a PC port, not a new game like Persona 5, so it's obvious that people who've already played P4 on the PS2 or the Vita wouldn't bother buying it on the PC. I didn't even know it got ported to the PC until you told me, which is how little interest I have in a game I've already played ages ago. The disparity in sales numbers between Persona 4 and 5 isn't really that shocking because Persona 4 was split between THREE different consoles, meaning you have to literally accumulate the sales numbers of ALL three consoles to even make an accurate observation - and even then, it wouldn't be a 100% accurate reflection of how people felt over the span of the release of those three consoles either. People's interests would dwindle over the course of three console releases. It happens. Persona 5, on the other hand, had the fortunate opportunity of being released on the PS4, so the fact isn't that people didn't care about Persona 4 as much as Persona 5, but more that people didn't have the opportunity to care about it in terms of "sales numbers" because they might not have owned a PS2/Vita/PC at the time of its release. In other words, it's not a fair comparison, at all. It's like comparing the PC version of Halo: Master Chief Collection's sales numbers compared with each individual game's original XBox releases. Again, I feel like we're talking about the same thing here, especially since I was going to point out that the rise in popularity in anime and JRPGs have indeed given Persona 5 the advantage as well, much like you yourself have pointed out.

Pretty much, because murder is a crime, and to name the list of games where murder is a central theme... phew. Off the top of my head though, there's the controversial Rockstar game, Manhunt, which is literally about a serial killer killing other killers. Then there's those Postal games, but they range from murder to juvenile delinquency. Then there's Batman and Spider-Man games which are about superheroes taking down criminals, especially those Arkham games where the main characters are superpowered criminals. And let's not forget, games where you could play supervillains like the Evil Genius games. Those are technically crime-focused games as well... just a more exaggerated and unrealistic form of crime.

I feel like that's pretty subjective to which forum or social media you follow though. I'd need to see some hard evidence, like statistical charts mapping out the amount of chatter or something to be convinced. lol Because really, whether a game is talked about often enough in circles you're familiar with is just as subjective as whether a game is overrated or underrated, suitably bringing the discussion back full circle. I guess the sales numbers could be enough evidence, but I don't know. I feel like that only tells me whom owns a PS Vita and PS2, and then a PC, not how many people cared about Persona 4. By the time Persona 5 got released, I'm pretty sure quite a lot of people have already owned a PS4 - it certainly isn't as obscure as a Vita that nobody asked for. But regardless, this is why I find discussions about whether a game is overrated or not kinda dumb. No offense. Because look at us arguing, and you trying to convince me, a nobody unrelated to you, that the game was overrated. It's like... okay? You might be right, but so what? Just pay money to support underrated games. Whether a game is overrated or not is determined by sales numbers, meaning people actually went out of their way to vote with their wallet, people like you, so complaining about other people's votes is just kinda ridiculous when you have the same freedom to vote for the next Persona game with your purchase.

Whoa, not so fast. Persona 4 is easily getting a lot of traction these days after the recent announcement that Persona 4 is getting ported to the PC, so clearly, there's still a lot of people out there craving for Persona 4 (not that I could relate... at all...), meaning that Persona 5 was anything but a one-hit wonder. That being said, I do get what you're trying to say. I was just saying that Persona 5 wasn't the one-hit wonder you made it out to be. I don't think Persona 4 really tanked in sales numbers? At least I didn't hear anything like that. And the number of Persona 4 fans that are still around craving for that P4 port makes me think that they have always been around in large numbers, just never being vocal about it. And that's the thing: just because a fanbase isn't vocal about a game doesn't mean it doesn't exist nor does it mean there's no one interested in Persona 4 - a lot of people still are, and they're looking forward to the P4 port.

Yeah, but the fans are part of the general public...? I mean, sure, there were non-Persona fans who bought the game, but it feels kinda weird to try and examine the non-Persona fans' input for how well a Persona game does when it's the latest of a long-running franchise that existed since the '90s, long before the Persona spin-offs even existed. It didn't "randomly" become popular; it became popular because the fans liked it and supported it. It's like saying a Pokémon game became randomly popular in contrast to similar monster-taming games; Pokémon games have a fanbase behind it that made them popular and continuing to support that bloated franchise despite its often lack of innovation and originality.

But I think JRPG fans have already expected that kind of pattern, especially where the Persona and SMT games are concerned. Persona games have stopped overhauling their gameplay mechanics since P3, and SMT did the same with Nocturne, so I think pretty much most people who bought Persona and SMT games weren't really expecting some fantastic overhaul, the same way they didn't expect Soul Hackers 2 to have some revolutionary mechanic either because that's not what Atlus does anymore. I guess the timing of its release might have played a part, but when I ask myself what Persona and SMT fans would really expect with each new Megaten game nowadays, I really doubt a brand new sparkling gameplay mechanic would be it. I still feel like the story and characters are the main crux of what separates a game like Persona 5 from SMT V in terms of popularity and sales numbers. Guess which one did better? The one with the better story and characters, Persona 5. SMT V infamously failed because its characters were shallow and its plot meandered to nowhere, unlike the more consistent and solid writing of Persona 5.

The classic "console war" that has defined gamer zeitgeist since the N64 days is long dead. It's all about the streaming wars nowadays anyway, between the Big Three (HBO Max, Disney+ and Amazon Prime) as well as some lesser competitors heading towards irrelevance (Netflix, Hulu, everyone else). I'm glad though that it's dead because that means a lot of the gamers I couldn't play previously are now available on the PC. The only annoyance is that console exclusivity is only an issue if you don't own all consoles, and now that I've bought a PS5 AND a Switch, my PS5 is sitting there collecting dust, and the Playstation brand is no longer the "mystical console that holds exclusive JRPGs other consoles didn't bother with like Kingdom Hearts and Persona games" like it was in my childhood. Even the freaking Persona games are being ported, yet another contribution to the irrelevancy of the Playstation. Actually, the only console I don't have currently is the XBox S/X because I've never been a fan of most XBox exclusives even before PC ports were a thing. The only game franchise I really liked was their big IP, Halo, and even then, I stopped at Halo 3. While the Playstation was busy catering to the JRPG niche that would become far more popular down the years, XBox was catering to the more mainstream gamer crowd with Halo, Forza, Gears of Wars, Dead or Alive 3, basically all the masculine type of games that involved racing, skimpy women fighting one another (or playing beach volleyball in gratuitous lingerie), or hardcore no-nonsense military shooters. Sony and the Playstation, on the other hand, were busy making money off effeminate Japanese men in their Final Fantasy games that continue to be one of the most successful video game franchises in the entire history of video games alongside Pokémon. That's why I've always considered XBox to be the "jock console" compared to PS exclusives which contained more depth and somberness to their games. Sure, the XBox had unique hits like Fable and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, but by the time I got old enough to buy an XBox, those games were already ported to the PC (with KotOR releasing on Windows just a few months after its XBox exclusive release). And by the time Sony dropped The Last of Us and the Uncharted games, PS' dominance over the console war was all but inevitable. Then Insomniac's Spider-Man dropped, and it's check-f***ing-mate. I haven't even mentioned the Horizon Zero Dawn and God of War games that were previously PS exclusives as well. Say what you will about the Playstation, but its exclusives were legendary and defined an entire generation of gamers; XBox only had Halo. But I digress.

I remember the reason I got excited for Persona 5 was because it was a darker and edgier Persona game than Persona 4, which was so tame with its "power of friendship" message it might as well have been a romcom, save a few suspense moments. But Persona 5 got big with its more mature themes, especially with Ann's sexual harassment sub-plot, so that really stood out for someone like me who kinda got bored of Persona games' dating sim element. The gameplay overhaul aspect (or the lack thereof) wasn't even something I paid much attention to because Pokémon games certainly didn't change that much for a long time anyway until Sun and Moon completely overhauled the "gym battle" gameplay, so I treated Persona games like I did with Pokémon games - like they were just another entry with a new story or world to explore. Having said that though, even after having played it and kinda enjoyed it (maybe an 8/10 for me), I've only played it once and forgot about it. Didn't even feel motivated enough to buy P5R when it was released, so you might be right about Persona 5 being overrated. I'm certainly no fan of Persona games anyway, as I much prefer the mainline SMT games that are often overlooked in comparison to Atlus' more successful spawn, the Persona spin-offs.