Thanks man!
Thanks man!
Sometimes that’s a tactic, sometimes it’s wild optimism, and sometimes they seem content to make a loss every year and prop it up with investment.
I don’t know about stealing, they stopped taking money when I unsubbed, now I’m watching shit that somebody else paid to make, while not giving them a penny back!
Honestly this seems a bit much. I recently started playing again after years and am generally enjoying it. I guess I already have most of the skins I want from OW1, so I don’t really think about the cosmetics of it. But the gameplay is still just as fun as far as I can remember, the balance seems fine.
But I think lets take off the rose-tinted glasses on OW1. You know what I don’t miss? Needing to buy tons of loot boxes during a specific period in order to get one skin that you particularly wanted. At least now it seems you can just buy what you want, if you care.
Not a fan of Blizzard, although their customer service has been great. And while I think that Overwatch is more deserving of criticism than most, I really get the impression that people at the moment just seem to default to ‘outraged’ unless proven otherwise when it comes to game companies. I don’t know, I just kinda feel like people need to chill just a little, because this is basically all about a slightly different way of selling cosmetics.
I think what’s more important is a real shift towards your ‘type 3’ games. Overwatch is a competitive FPS where users expect new content, which is a big part of the issue. My favourite game to play in the last few years has been Pavlov VR. I bought it for like £15 2 years ago. Since then it’s had a major update, more like an expansion pack that many companies would sell as a new game, and has more recently had a large overhaul. Tons of community maps, content and gamemodes, and just a blast. Before the recent update, the devs were getting lots of hate because the game was ‘dead’. I was like, mate, the game is finished. What more do you want? What more do you think you deserve, did you not get your money’s worth? Why does a game need to constantly change to not be ‘dead’?
Anyway, Overwatch is always going to be that kind of game, but what I’d love to see is more of a move towards the type 3 model for games where that makes sense, that’s what will actually make a difference, it’s what’s actually important. Not wanting microtransactions to be structured slightly differently.
I miss proper expansion packs. The whole 'you liked game? We’ve basically made another game on the same engine and using lots of the same assets as the game you liked, so you can play more game. It has about as much content as game, and is like 50% of the price.
I mean, why not? It is convenient, and to me, really well priced for what you get. There’s lots of things that offer far worse value for money that we don’t really think about.
And I host my own Plex server with Sonarr, Radarr, etc. But sometimes, you just want to jump into something, and TV series can take a huge amount of space.
I don’t know why Netflix is considered so morally repugnant, when they do still offer a good service for the money.
Convenience is worth something to a lot of people.
Not necessarily, companies like Twitter make consistent losses with no real path to change that, yet its deemed to have value by investors.
That makes it even dumber though, surely? Lots of people invest in tech businesses that are not profitable and have no plans to become sustainable, some idiots even buy them.
It’s things like user count and activity that will be more meaningful in that scenario, so one should avoid doing anything to reduce those figures.
This is life-changing. I can’t believe this has been such an easy option!
Like OP, I couldn’t really put my finger on why I found so much of this stuff frustrating, I think this will make a big difference for me.
Which makes them superior, which is why they are used. Cost can’t be ignored any more than the torque or speed, speccing parts that are considerably more expensive that achieve equivalent results is bad engineering unless you have a very specific application that requires it.
If it was ‘objectively inferior’ we wouldn’t use them. You build to your requirements, not by playing top trumps with competing technologies while ignoring the cost.