m76

I always avoid combat unless the game actively punishes you for it. (ie. you get much less XP for doing it that way instead of killing everyoneI

When it comes to consoles the hardware is completely irrelevant to me. The only thing that matters are exclusive games. And in that regard Playstation always obliterated XBOX, it's not even a contest.  As for current gen they are both equally bad. You can buy an xbox but have no worthwhile exclusives until 2023, or you can't even buy a PS5 unless you are willing to pay scalpers (please don't do that), or wait months on a pre-order.

I don't want to pay a subscription for any game, period. It fuels the sunken cost fallacy, and fomo.I play games when I'm in the mood for them. Having an active subscription would force me to play even when my heart is not 100% in it. And I'd still be uncomfortable for not getting the most out of the subscription.

Celebs should stay away from videogames, we don't need them, their presence in my opinion is detrimental to games.
For example Cyberpunk 2077 was extensively re-written to give an earlier entrance and more significant role to Keanu Reeves. Which I think has made the game much worse than it could've been had they stuck to the original pacing of the story.
Celebs are bad for gaming because:
They take a huge paycheck that could be better utilized to make the actual game better. They stifle artistic freedom because artists instead of creating any character they imagine they have to re-create the celebrity's likeness in the game They hinder writing, because characters played by celebrities, get preferential treatment by the writers. They prevent modding, because most celebrities would not allow people to use their likeness in any non pre-approved way. They take jobs from dedicated voice actors who have been in the industry long before gaming become a multi billion dollar industry. While the advantage of having them is singular:
Marketing value through name recognition That's it.

Sure they'll get used to it
NFT Market down 92% since it peaked last year.

Sure they'll get used to it
NFT Market down 92% since it peaked last year.

Celebs should stay away from videogames, we don't need them, their presence in my opinion is detrimental to games.
For example Cyberpunk 2077 was extensively re-written to give an earlier entrance and more significant role to Keanu Reeves. Which I think has made the game much worse than it could've been had they stuck to the original pacing of the story.
Celebs are bad for gaming because:
They take a huge paycheck that could be better utilized to make the actual game better. They stifle artistic freedom because artists instead of creating any character they imagine they have to re-create the celebrity's likeness in the game They hinder writing, because characters played by celebrities, get preferential treatment by the writers. They prevent modding, because most celebrities would not allow people to use their likeness in any non pre-approved way. They take jobs from dedicated voice actors who have been in the industry long before gaming become a multi billion dollar industry. While the advantage of having them is singular:
Marketing value through name recognition That's it.

Nothing. Having access to a modern game would spoil me and I couldn't enjoy anything else until technology catches up.

Because it had basically no single player content at release, and it was specifically made with esports in mind, nothing else. So fans of the classic series were hung out to dry.

I agree that schools need to be more career oriented and need to teach the quest for knowledge instead of hammering in useless facts that make every kid miserable. But at the same time I don't think esports should be viewed as a career opportunity. Esports is a recreational activity, making careers out of it is not economically viable. I mean you never hear of "football high school" sports are always a side activity at schools and not the main focus. Everyone needs something to fall back on after their sports career is over, be it actual athleticism or esports.

I usually do it balanced, do one main quest mission then do a few sidequests. I usually tie up everything else before finishing the main quest,
I don't really get people who focus on just one or the other, doing every side mission before even starting the main quest. Or only doing the main quest line while ignoring everything else.

I'm not a series loyalist. I don't care what series or brand a racing game belongs in as long as it's great.
My favorite racing game is Test Drive Unlimited, but I didn't like the  sequel as much, its physics was a bit dumbed down, and hasn't improved on the original in any way.
Need For Speed used to be my favorite series, but that ended after the fifth game, Porsche Unleashed.
I also enjoyed Gran Turismo up to the 6th game, but I think Sport was an insult to traditional GT fans, and GT7 is a terrible game with an identity crisis. A wannabe sim that fails at being both a sim and an arcade game.
So I can't say I unconditionally like any series.

There are lots of bad games out there that are simply terrible and not worth anyone's time.
But occasionally there are some that are objectively bad or even broken in some sense, but still enjoyable. Have you encountered any such game?
I've seen several of these over the years that I've had fun with.
The oldest I can remember was Car & Driver all the way from 1992, which was a game published by EA long before The Need For Speed, and actually used the exact same formula, it was just based on a different car magazine, Car & Driver obviously. (The first NFS was made in collaboration with Road & Track). I loved how the game menus were made like pages of a magazine, it gave a lot to immersion. But unfortunately the physics of the game was some of the wonkiest I've seen, it was utterly terrible. Another fun fact, this was one of the first games I played that supported SVGA resolution (640x480).


  The next one that stands out for me is another Racing game, but one released 10 years later: Street Legal Racing. This game was meant to be great, but it was published by a budget publisher, and the developers bit much more than they could chew. They wanted to make a game much more complex than what fit in the publisher's timeline and budget. So the game released unfinished, broken and buggy. What has set it apart was the extremely detailed simulation, the game actually simulated the fluids in the car like coolant, fuel, etc. And it had a damage model that beat everything that came before or after until BeamNG claimed that throne. It also had extensive car upgrade and tuning system. The game become a cult classic and still has a very active community with lots of mods available. Most of the games kinks and bugs were fixed in several patches and a re-release, and the developers kept supporting the game long after the publisher bailed. But of course it never achieved mainstream success, and the developers gave up on trying to do complex games soon after.  The company is still around actually but only makes mobile trash since 2009, the original devs on the ground long since left the company. Fun fact: One of the devs turned up in the credits of Driver San Francisco, last I saw.

I've had countless hours of fun crashing and harassing traffic in the game, and trying to build the fastest cars.


  Splinter Cell Double Agent This game was probably the most broken AAA game I had ever played, but it had some such unique mechanics and novel ideas that I enjoyed it despite of it being a buggy piece of trash. Since I wrote a full review on the game way back when I'll link that instead of going into more detail here:
http://madblog.shacknet.us/splinter-cell-double-agent-2006/


  The last game for now is Alpha Protocol: The greatest bad game ever made! This is another game I wrote a  full article on so click for details:
http://madblog.shacknet.us/alpha-protocol-2010/

 
 

L.A. Noire, I don't even remember how exactly it used it but I remember liking it.

I quit playing the game until a solution presents itself.

This can be both a negative and a positive. Some games simply don't tie loose ends as sequel bait, others do it deliberately, while still others just fail to present a coherent epilogue.
For Example Alien Isolation has no closure, and arguably you end up in a worse situation than you started from, which seems to set up a sequel that sadly never came.
Beyond Two Souls, is a weird game, with lots of spirituality and the ending is completely nuts, but in a good way. From all the Quantic Dream games, this is my favorite.
Mass Effect 3's ending raises  more questions because it is poorly written, based on contrivances and plot points that basically mean the end of known civilization if you take it at face value.
 

Well, on PC we had that ch
On the PC we had these things since forever, it's a good thing that consoles are somewhat catching up.

I think for games to be considered masterpieces they have to excel on all fronts. I  can adore the story and characters in a game, but if it lacks in  other areas I would not call it a masterpiece.  Also some games are very much limited by their creation date, so while they are masterpieces of  their era, they might seem inadequate by modern standards.
So here is a list of games that I consider masterpieces, I will not go into detail due to the  sheer number, but feel free to ask me about any, I can gladly recommend any of these games.
Dune II (1992) Raptor Call of the Shadows (1994) Doom II (1994) Tie Fighter (1994) Transport Tycoon Deluxe (1995) The Need For Speed (1995) Wing Commander IV (1996) Carmageddon II (1998) Half-Life (1998) X-Wing Alliance (1999) System Shock 2 (1999) Mobil 1 Rally Championship (1999) Screamer 4x4 (2000) Deus Ex (2000) Red Alert 2 (2000) Max Payne (2001) Mafia The City of Lost Heaven (2002) Command & Conquer Generals Zero Hour (2003) Max Payne 2 The Fall of Max Payne (2003) Gran Turismo 4 (2004) Richard Burns Rally (2004) Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory (2005) Test Drive Unlimited (2006) Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (2006) Crysis Warhead (2008) Mass Effect 2 (2010) GTA IV: Episodes From Liberty City (2010) Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011) Dragon Age II (2011) Portal 2 (2011) Alien Isolation (2014) Mad Max (2015) Deus Ex: Mankind Divided (2016) Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017) XCOM2: War of the Chosen (2017) The Last of Us II (2020) Maybe on a different day a few more games would make the cut, maybe a few wouldn't make it.

There are lots of bad games out there that are simply terrible and not worth anyone's time.
But occasionally there are some that are objectively bad or even broken in some sense, but still enjoyable. Have you encountered any such game?
I've seen several of these over the years that I've had fun with.
The oldest I can remember was Car & Driver all the way from 1992, which was a game published by EA long before The Need For Speed, and actually used the exact same formula, it was just based on a different car magazine, Car & Driver obviously. (The first NFS was made in collaboration with Road & Track). I loved how the game menus were made like pages of a magazine, it gave a lot to immersion. But unfortunately the physics of the game was some of the wonkiest I've seen, it was utterly terrible. Another fun fact, this was one of the first games I played that supported SVGA resolution (640x480).


  The next one that stands out for me is another Racing game, but one released 10 years later: Street Legal Racing. This game was meant to be great, but it was published by a budget publisher, and the developers bit much more than they could chew. They wanted to make a game much more complex than what fit in the publisher's timeline and budget. So the game released unfinished, broken and buggy. What has set it apart was the extremely detailed simulation, the game actually simulated the fluids in the car like coolant, fuel, etc. And it had a damage model that beat everything that came before or after until BeamNG claimed that throne. It also had extensive car upgrade and tuning system. The game become a cult classic and still has a very active community with lots of mods available. Most of the games kinks and bugs were fixed in several patches and a re-release, and the developers kept supporting the game long after the publisher bailed. But of course it never achieved mainstream success, and the developers gave up on trying to do complex games soon after.  The company is still around actually but only makes mobile trash since 2009, the original devs on the ground long since left the company. Fun fact: One of the devs turned up in the credits of Driver San Francisco, last I saw.

I've had countless hours of fun crashing and harassing traffic in the game, and trying to build the fastest cars.


  Splinter Cell Double Agent This game was probably the most broken AAA game I had ever played, but it had some such unique mechanics and novel ideas that I enjoyed it despite of it being a buggy piece of trash. Since I wrote a full review on the game way back when I'll link that instead of going into more detail here:
http://madblog.shacknet.us/splinter-cell-double-agent-2006/


  The last game for now is Alpha Protocol: The greatest bad game ever made! This is another game I wrote a  full article on so click for details:
http://madblog.shacknet.us/alpha-protocol-2010/

 
 

It will be a PC/PS5 port for TLOU1, and multiplayer for TLOU2, or maybe PC version for TLOU2.
No way they are releasing brand new games, unless it's only an expansion like left behind.

Of course faith is not about proof, that's exactly its problem. Religion wants us to think that faith in of itself is a virtue.
Believing outlandish claims without scrutinizing their validity in the slightest is not a virtue, it is called gullibility.
Not everything can be proven, but those things that can't or can't yet we do not base our lives around, we live under the assumption that they are untrue, well most of us at least.
The irony is that the most devout believers also live their life outside their preaching and prayers as if god did not exist. You never see a religious person jump off the roof, and say, oh if  god wants me around he'll catch me. Why does the pope need a bullet proof car, if everything is god's will? Surely then him getting assassinated is also god's will, how dare he oppose god's will then? See how easy it is to poke holes in faith? It's illogical and unreasonable.
Some scientists are religious, I personally don't understand how can they reconcile that in their head, but as long as their science is not tainted by their religion it doesn't matter.
The mistake most theologians make, is that they pre-suppose the answer and try to build a theory that supports their desired outcome. That's not how science works. You follow the evidence wherever it takes you.

Of course faith is not about proof, that's exactly its problem. Religion wants us to think that faith in of itself is a virtue.
Believing outlandish claims without scrutinizing their validity in the slightest is not a virtue, it is called gullibility.
Not everything can be proven, but those things that can't or can't yet we do not base our lives around, we live under the assumption that they are untrue, well most of us at least.
The irony is that the most devout believers also live their life outside their preaching and prayers as if god did not exist. You never see a religious person jump off the roof, and say, oh if  god wants me around he'll catch me. Why does the pope need a bullet proof car, if everything is god's will? Surely then him getting assassinated is also god's will, how dare he oppose god's will then? See how easy it is to poke holes in faith? It's illogical and unreasonable.
Some scientists are religious, I personally don't understand how can they reconcile that in their head, but as long as their science is not tainted by their religion it doesn't matter.
The mistake most theologians make, is that they pre-suppose the answer and try to build a theory that supports their desired outcome. That's not how science works. You follow the evidence wherever it takes you.

Of course faith is not about proof, that's exactly its problem. Religion wants us to think that faith in of itself is a virtue.
Believing outlandish claims without scrutinizing their validity in the slightest is not a virtue, it is called gullibility.
Not everything can be proven, but those things that can't or can't yet we do not base our lives around, we live under the assumption that they are untrue, well most of us at least.
The irony is that the most devout believers also live their life outside their preaching and prayers as if god did not exist. You never see a religious person jump off the roof, and say, oh if  god wants me around he'll catch me. Why does the pope need a bullet proof car, if everything is god's will? Surely then him getting assassinated is also god's will, how dare he oppose god's will then? See how easy it is to poke holes in faith? It's illogical and unreasonable.
Some scientists are religious, I personally don't understand how can they reconcile that in their head, but as long as their science is not tainted by their religion it doesn't matter.
The mistake most theologians make, is that they pre-suppose the answer and try to build a theory that supports their desired outcome. That's not how science works. You follow the evidence wherever it takes you.

Thank you both for understanding my complaint (a lot of people here seem to think I was complaining about skin tone diversity, which I was not, ugh) and proposing an explanation for it! That does make a lot of sense!

I was brought up with religious values, but I never was a practitioner of any faith. For the most part I did not think of god at all.
I don't know if there was a clear crossover point when I become an atheist. It's just that I realized the absurdity of the whole ordeal.
If god is all knowing and all seeing, why does anyone pray for anything? It should already know what you want. They also say that god has a plan for everyone. If so, that again makes praying pointless. Do you presume to have a better plan than god? If god knows everything why do you need to confess your sins? And the most absurd thing is that all your sins can be washed away by asking for forgiveness from god. Not the people you wronged, who cares about them, it's god you need to appease. They also say god made humans in his own image. It seems to me that it is the other way around. Humans made god based on themselves, with all our faults and vices included. The abrahamic god, is petty, vengeful, jealous, has a fragile ego, and strangely holds to the exact values held by people around the time of his emergence. If god actually existed as described by scripture, I'd be working on bringing down the bastard, I'd not worship that cruel egomaniac.  
As for agnosticism, I think that is even less of a defensible position. I can pardon believers for being deluded or mislead, what excuse the agnostic has? If I said that there is a giant red ant in the middle of earth responsible for rotating it, that is not observable either, so should we go on living not knowing if there is an ant rotating the earth? Of course not. Without proof it's just an assertion. Assertions need scientific reproducable proof to evolve into theory. God has exactly the same amount of proof as my red ant: ZERO.