killamch89

How long have you been playing it for?

How about Uncharted meets Indiana Jones? Nathan Drake and Indy teaming up for a treasure hunt across the globe - just imagine the possibilities. They both have that charm, quick wit, and knack for surviving impossible situations, so the chemistry would be perfect, and the action would be non-stop

I’ve also been loving Rainbow Six Siege. The strategy, team coordination, and high stakes always get my heart racing. The community is intense, and every match feels like a real challenge.

Good for her. I'm definitely not spending my money on it. I'll just wait for the PS6.

I definitely think game ratings should evolve. With so many games relying on microtransactions or long grind mechanics, it's important for consumers to know what they're getting into before they buy. A more detailed breakdown would help avoid disappointment, especially for players who value fair pricing and engaging gameplay without needing to spend extra money or time on repetitive tasks.

As a player, I’d much prefer a steady stream of post-launch content to the current pre-order model. It builds trust with the community and keeps the game alive longer.

Personally, I think platforms should step in and regulate this more strictly. The promotion of in-game purchases, especially loot boxes and similar mechanics, has been shown to have harmful psychological effects, particularly on young viewers. By limiting or preventing this kind of promotion, platforms could set a precedent for ethical monetization in gaming.

I agree. Transparency should be non-negotiable. Players have the right to know how their data is being used, especially with games involving microtransactions or online features. Without clear disclosure, it's hard to trust that developers have players' best interests at heart.

I think 'cash grab' mobile games are indeed harming the perception of gaming, especially on mobile platforms. While they may represent a niche, their prevalence can overshadow genuinely creative and high-quality mobile games. It creates skepticism among players, which is a shame for developers who want to push the medium forward.

I wouldn't even go that far. I'd want to see a disc drive on the PS5 PRO first.

I think a cap on spending could help protect vulnerable players, like those prone to addictive behaviors or younger audiences who may not fully grasp the consequences of their spending. It’s not about restricting personal choice but about promoting responsible gaming practices.

While transparency sounds good in theory, sharing too much about costs might open studios up to backlash if players perceive inefficiencies. It’s a delicate balance between honesty and safeguarding the creative process.

Games should be released as complete products, with DLC used for additional optional experiences. Anything less risks undermining trust in the industry. If developers want long-term player support, they need to prioritize delivering full value at launch.

I agree. Expansions should only add optional content that builds on a solid foundation. When DLCs contain essential storylines or mechanics, it feels more like an incomplete game sold in pieces, which hurts trust in the developer.

I completely agree with this answer.

8 Mile - 8.5/10

Played some Mario Party on the Switch with my cousin.

As modding communities thrive in many games, they often breathe new life into titles, but at times, modders face copyright claims or takedowns. Should games with strong modding communities be given more protection against such claims? Could a balance between respecting intellectual property and supporting fan-created content benefit both developers and players? Would clearer guidelines or legal protections for modding communities foster more creativity while preventing legal issues?