• Welcome to the Angry Joe Show Army!

    Join our community of gamers passionate about our community and our hobby! Whether it's playing, discussing, or watching games, regardless of platform, genre, or location, we have a place for you, always!

  • PS4 Forum

    The AJSA Playstation 4 Division: Game Nights and More!

    The AJSA is on Playstation 4! Join us for weekly Game Nights with a selection of the best games the PS4 has to offer!

  • XBO Forum

    The AJSA Xbox One Division: We Got You Covered!

    The AJSA Xbox One Division is ready to connect with you on XBox Live with a ton of events for the best Xbox games!

  • News Archive

    The Best News from the Best Sites, Every Week.

    The AJSA News Collection Team is hard at work condensing a week's worth of news into one giant-sze digest for you to chew on and discuss! Links to source articles are always provided!

  • More Info

    The AJSA Expeditionary Force: Deploying to Play the Best PC Games!

    The elite vanguard of the AJSA, the Expeditionary Force (EF) chooses a new PC game every week! Join us for weekly events and help decide if the game has a future in the AJSA.

  • The Team

    Streaming Now: The AJSA Stream Team

    Joe can't stream every game, but our talented AJSA Stream Team covers a wide variety of games and personalities! Check them out, and show them some AJSA Love!

  • The Tube

    The AJSA Community YouTube Channel

    Featuring news, gameplay clips, and more from the community! The Community is a chance to showcase the best moments in AJSA Gaming!

Malphisto

Veteran
  • Content count

    140
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Malphisto

  1. I have so much to comment on about all this... 1: The guys deciding to make these "reaction" videos to what Joe put up and were deliberately ignoring obvious facts for the sake of justifying their fake outrage just to piggyback off of Joe's channel. View Leeches seeking to generate as much attention for themselves as possible. Fact of the matter is, Joe NEVER at any point in time mentioned anyone by name in that first video he did. So for this one dude to think he's some sort of special snowflake and just "assume" that Joe is "indirectly" responding to him is just straight up asinine. 2: The people crying about SJWs in regards to this whole thing are just ridiculous. At this point, THEY are even worse than the SJWs they're going on about. THEY are the ones who are making this about politics. To my knowledge, the company has said playing female characters is 100% optional. One of the major things so many have been advocating for over the years is MORE PLAYER OPTIONS for our games. Players, regardless of their own gender in real life, like being able to pick and choose their gender in games. So for these Anti-SJWs trying to strong arm the company into taking that option away, its LITERALLY THE SAME DAMN THING THEY ACCUSE OF SJWS... Yeah, that shit's getting really old. They're basically trying to dictate how others should play games and imposing their beliefs on everyone. Such blatant hypocrisy. 3: The "Historical Accuracy" people are at least putting forth a reasonable argument grounded in logic. But at the same time, this is a game. The idea that they would deny themselves enjoying said game just because its not 100% "Historically Accurate" is just crazy. That's like saying games aren't real enough so I'm not going to play them. I mean, seriously? I saw someone make the counter point "Well respawning after you die isn't historically accurate either, so womp womp~" And its true, like if you're really going to get so bent out of shape over something so trivial like that to the point you refuse to play said game, then you need some personal time to reflect on yourself.
  2. The main issue we're facing here is that the industry as a whole is trying to "normalize" this level of corporate bullshit. The top dogs like EA, Activision and Ubisoft have for a very long time tried to establish a sort of monopoly in the market. This has gradually shifted the power/control away from we the Gamers to the corporations. Instead of us being the ones to set the standards for company policy, they do whatever they want and just expect us to deal with it. They spent YEARS conditioning the Gamer Community to be complacent and go along with their agenda. Many will even go out of their way to defend such anti-consumer practices, like the battered spouse living in an abusive relationship. It sucks, dude. Unfortunately, the grim reality here is that the only way to stem the tide of this cancer is for these games to fail... There's no sugar coating it. The games that employ these practices need to crash and burn, lose both player numbers and sales. Its gonna suck. There's gonna be a lot of potentially amazing games that will suffer as a result. Possibly studios too. But that's going to be the only way to correct the imbalance of the situation.
  3. Agreed. Honestly, the issue there is that TF2 was more or less sacrificed for the sole purpose of supporting the crushing defeat of COD last year. Battlefield 1 was the true winner there and releasing the two games so close to one another resulted in one cannibalizing the other. The greater concern now is that EA recently purchased Respawn Entertainment. Now I fear for the future of the franchise... (Personally, I want to see TitanFall having the Titan aspect of the game being more similar to the kind of crazy customization options found in the Armored Core series) COD has the potential to innovate and become more than it is, but it never will. Its sole purpose is to essentially make everyone feel like a badass even when there isn't much thought involved. Its always the same formula for the game design over and over. Honestly, I'd rather the franchise just crash and burn and outright die. Its continued success has been impacting the industry as a whole. And how they're working Loot Box crap now in this newest one is just........dirty.
  4. I am inclined to agree with the above. Coming from someone who was there at the start for the first game and who played all the way through to the Taken King expansion, there are glaring problems with this franchise in general that have yet to be actually addressed or even acknowledged by the companies involved. "Identity Crisis"- Simply put, even from the beginning this series has had a hard time trying to decide what exactly it wants to be. And everyone you speak to about it will all have their own answer to said question. And often what ends up happening is that the game's vague identity makes for a whole host of convenient buzz word rebuttals to anyone posing legitimate issues or concerns with the game. For example, the non-existent Player Progression. The fact that the game itself is 90% designed to revolve around the player spending the vast majority of their time replaying the same content over and over again in an agonizing grind and fight against the game's RNG Loot to acquire Legendary and Exotic items. And then the instant something "new" gets released, all of that time and effort spent grinding is thrown out the window at the drop of a hat as suddenly all of your weapons and armor are rendered obsolete whether or not the newer gear is even actually any good. (You'll always go for what offers the higher damage/armor rating, eliminating any notion of actual freedom of choice in how you want to build your character) A common argument will usually consist of "well that's how they do it in an MMO" which is such a disingenuous response. First, Destiny is not an MMO. The most someone could possibly get away with calling it is MMO Lite. Because there is certainly nothing at all "massive" about it. Second, not EVERY game calling itself an MMO does that. Third, the entire notion itself absolutely kills any justifiable reasoning for playing Destiny beyond beating the main story content which, from personal experience and from what I've seen of others, ranges anywhere between 7-8 hours of playtime for anyone decent at shooters. The same is true for the Raids. Let us assume someone buys Destiny 2 for instance. Beat the main story and then step away until the next DLC is released. Within minutes you'll get weapons and armor dropping from basic enemies that will give you the necessary stats to run that Raid, with the added bonus of having completely bypassed the grind. Meanwhile, recently I finally caved in and decided to start playing Borderlands 2. Holy crap... Its like Night and Day between the two. I have yet to beat the game's main story and already I've seen boss innovation, epic level design, vehicle combat that actually encourages having friends on to ride along with you like back in the good o' days of Halo with the Warthog, a literal wealth of different and unique weapons, an AMAZING story with enjoyable characters, actual variation between the different classes to choose from, an actual reason to explore the map and finding all kinds of tucked away loot damn near everywhere... At this point I've been left wondering to myself if Destiny was trying to more emulate Borderlands 2 or a weird mix between that and Warframe. (Since I recall hearing that Warframe was in fact a source of inspiration for Destiny) But in both regards, even with both highly successful games being readily available for easy research, Destiny failed on both fronts in trying to do what these other games had already accomplished. Argetlahm already brought up the points regarding the gutting of the grimoire, and honestly it didn't ever really reflect on anything experienced in the game anyways. And I read the hell out of that thing. Between that and everything I've seen concerning the ORIGINAL story by Joseph Staten who was the former Lead Writer on Destiny before its initial release, the plot that we see now in the game just flatout pales in comparison to the sheer masterpiece that could have been. And at no point in time was this flawed narrative ever properly seen to by the company. Ever. Others may argue that the story has "improved" over time, but I disagree with that notion because it implies that the flawed narrative was corrected at some point. Which it wasn't. Vanilla Destiny, which acts as the foundation for EVERYTHING else in the series, is riddled with plot holes, horrendous storytelling and an anti-climatic and confusing final boss fight/ending that to this day remains one of the most popular memes on the internet. Zero attempts were made to go back and change any of it. Because that would involve giving the people who already paid for that content free, additional content which they won't do unless they can make money off of it. Which is quite frankly a load of horseshit. You would think that they should feel obligated to provide a COMPLETE game to their players as compensation for continuing to remain loyal even after being sold an incomplete game. Or at the very least, as a means to try and win back those who decided to quit as a result of such. I could easily keep going but I'd rather not test to see if there is a text limit on posts, lol In my opinion, I would hold off on getting Destiny 2. If you haven't played it yet, I can DEFINITELY recommend Borderlands 2 instead. You will definitely be getting your money's worth.
  5. If you are legitimately skipping sections of the game can you even justify the claim that you're even playing the game? We need to learn to draw a distinction here between these two concepts. There is a VERY real difference between an "Easy Mode" for a game and an option to "Skip" entire sections of a game. I don't see it as being an overblown reaction in the least, in fact I'd say my response to the concept is rightfully warranted. The article you presented was the first time I have personally heard of this "Skippable Bosses" argument. At what point did I make such an assumption? And honestly, if said developer gave the player an option to just skip said parts then I should think that said developer clearly doesn't have much faith in their own work to begin with. If the gameplay is really that tedious then the obvious conclusion is that aspect of their game has failed. Offering players a means to simply Skip it is not, nor should it ever be, treated as a free pass to compensate for their own shortcomings. That is just straight up lazy game design. That is something the developer needs to acknowledge and own up to and, honestly, do whatever they can to fix it as I would personally believe they have an obligation to do so for their players. No, it is not reasonable. Why did they buy the game in the first place? There are only two reasons here. 1) To play a Video Game experience. 2) To just see what happens in the story. The second option is no different from watching a Movie or reading a Book. It is likewise no different from simply watching a video of someone doing a Let's Play. Games are much more than that. It is the evolution of Art, combining so many different elements together into a single medium. As such, there is much more to it than simply the story element. Am I saying its wrong to only want to enjoy a game's story without all the other aspects? No. For example, I'm not intending on spending the money to buy the new Awakening the Nightmare expansion for Halo Wars 2. Mainly because I'm pinching my pennies as is. But that doesn't mean I can't still enjoy the story aspect. I went on youtube and watched a video someone put together of all the cutscenes. Yes, this means I effectively skipped actually playing the content. And the simple fact of the matter is that this does not count as me playing the game. The truth of the matter is that this does ultimately spoil the experience for me. Had I actually gone and played the expansion myself, it would have been an entirely different experience altogether. Kinda like if someone were to skip playing BioShock Infinite and just watch all the cutscenes. You're still going to miss out on the actual experience itself. This is also the reason why people don't like spoilers. It ruins the overall experience. It undermines the game design. I believe you missed the point of what I said. The concern stems from the discussion existing in the first place. People are advocating for it, meaning there are people who want it. WHY do people want it? SHOULD people want it? You seem to be dismissing my concerns as nothing more than hyperbole when in reality no, these are legitimate concerns and serious questions I'm presenting. Your accusation likewise doesn't make sense considering I also stated; So where exactly are you getting this idea that I'm saying EVERYONE would use said options? I'll give you that perhaps my "Life is too hard, I give up" analogy could have used some better clarification. Looking back on that, I wasn't trying to imply a suicidal notion with it. I was trying to demonstrate that the psychology itself of bypassing challenges like "Skippable Bosses" is sewing this harmful mentality that its alright to just give up if something is too challenging. One needs to take a step back and look at the bigger picture here; "What are the potential ramifications of this? How does it impact the culture and industry in the long term?" I realize you tried to respond back to this be presenting the generalized groups of players out there and how not everyone is the same. I get that, and as you can see I had already acknowledged that as well. But that isn't the point I was making. There are two videos here that I feel contribute much to this conversation. Followed up with;
  6. There was something he mentioned in there that really did not sit right with me. "an article arguing for skippable bosses" ...............What? Hold on a second. That sounds like a totally different topic from the one concerning an Easy Mode in games. I didn't even know that was a thing. Are there seriously people out there trying to push the industry into implementing a legitimate SKIP feature for bosses? O_o I know when I voiced my concern in the previous post about the potential impact this debate would have for the future of gaming, I didn't think we were already to that point. Holy Christ on a cracker, THAT is just ridiculous. Like why even play the fucking game at that point? You essentially just spent $60 on a movie you could have just as easily enjoyed via Let's Play video. And hell, if you can skip boss fights why not just go further and implement the option to skip whole stages? Now this is something I stand totally opposed to. This is very potentially harmful to not just the industry, but the culture itself. Being an Indie Dev myself, I've taken great pride in my effort in creating a vast variety of enemy types and challenges. This is an experience I wish to share with players and I derive my satisfaction from their experience. Its no different from when I DM for my D&D group. So as a developer, I simply can't fathom this notion of giving players the option to just "skip" large elements of the adventure. Again, referencing my D&D group, it would be like the party stumbling across the final encounter that is supposed to serve as the climax for the adventure, and out of nowhere the party just "skips" the whole thing and automatically win. No. That is not alright. At that point, why should I even bother taking the time to make the game challenging at all in the first place? Yes, there are players out there who wouldn't simply abuse the Skip Button. But the mere fact its there as an option automatically takes a hit to my motivation as a developer. And yes, I do have the choice to not implement that feature. But what happens when (Because its no longer a question of "IF" anymore...) the game or myself start getting backlash and attacked by these entitled advocates of "Easy Gaming" over me refusing to fall in line with other developers? That is the potential damage/threat this mentality poses to the industry as a whole. The loud, vocal advocates harass, protest and continue pushing until one by one, one company after the next caves in. Till eventually, it becomes just another "expectation" for games to have these sort of features. And anyone who doesn't will be made to suffer for it. Now, I also said this didn't just impact the industry, but the culture as well. Simply put, back in the 90s this conversation would never be happening. Yes, Cheat Codes were always a thing back then. I remember back in Armored Core you could unlock Human Plus that removed the game's limiters for AC weight requirement and using the GNL without having to kneel. But you were still playing the damn game. That was how players could access an "Easy Mode" for said games back then. Again, I have nothing against that. But at no point in time do I recall any of those Cheats allowing you to Skip playing the game. The games got easier for you with said cheats, but just like in Armored Core, it was still very possible for you to get killed. Same with Contra, getting extra lives didn't mean you couldn't still die. You were still EXPERIENCING the game. Easy, Normal, Hard; whatever the preference, Gamers are still always being presented with a challenge. The difficulty of said challenge just changes. But this debate is having a negative impact on the culture. Whatever happened to the mentality that if something is difficult that you take a moment, step away from the game for a bit, then come back and try it again? Is it possible that we're seeing a shift in psychology? That the players themselves are finding it easier to just give up rather than sticking with it and persevering? Is this evidence that our society as a whole is losing the will to fight or the motivation to push through so as to overcome challenges? In the end, I'm left questioning my faith in humanity. Are we evolving and becoming better or are we going in the opposite direction? "This game is too hard, I give up." "This life is too hard, I give up." Its a notion that fills me with dread...
  7. In my opinion, both sides of the debate have valid points. Difficulty Levels have damn near always been a thing for many games. I always play on normal because I'd prefer to play the game as originally designed. For most of these types of games, the difficulty setting will either remove or add elements not originally apart of the base game experience. Easy Mode = Any or All of the following conditions, typically; -Enemy A.I. dumbed down. -Fewer Enemy Encounters. (Less Mobs) -Reduced Enemy Damage. -Permanent Buffs for the Player. Hard Mode = Any or All of the following conditions, usually; -Enemy A.I. on steroids. (More complex with algorithyms designed to attack more frequently and with dynamic behavior, constantly changing patterns) -More Enemy Encounters. (Crap loads of Mobs, often chaining aggro if you're playing in an MMORPG like Mabinogi) -Increased Enemy Damage. -Negative Conditions imposed on the Player. (Your HP used to auto regen? Not anymore~) Normal Mode = None of the above, just the base game without any augmentations. I'm totally alright with this setup. It allows weaker players the opportunity to also enjoy and learn said games and then, if they want to, they can go and increase the difficulty at their leisure. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. However... My issue is when this debate starts to impact game development. Case in point, Crash Bandicoot is a Platformer. That Bridge level? I'm still fucking stuck on it. That shit is just flatout hard to do. There is no real way to make that easier for people, not unless you compromise the game's own design. For example, there are at least 2 parts in that bridge level that can and will royally screw someone over. Both involve making jumps across large holes in said bridge. The only way to make this easier is if you legitimately make that gap smaller, thus making it easier to jump over. Which basically defeats the purpose of the game being a platformer. Granted, I suppose you could have two different versions of that level...? Easy Mode has it where said gaps are shorter and Normal Mode has the stage left as is. Personally, I find both sides guilty of being entitled. The Elitists who think they're better than everyone else are wrong for demanding games not have an Easy Mode for people, because why should that even matter to them? Meanwhile, those who think EVERY game SHOULD have an Easy Mode are wrong for thinking that the world has to revolve around them. Both groups are equally as self-centered. And the debate itself is potentially damaging to the industry as a whole. There are games that don't offer a choice in difficulty setting. What happens when said games, in an attempt to cater to those who demand easier experiences, end up designing their games to actually be easy? The gaps in said bridge either no longer exist or are a simple cake walk to get across. This whole matter is a two way street. I'm alright with there being a choice. However, I am concerned about the future ramifications this topic will have on the industry.
  8. For a moment, can we back track to what you were originally saying? The original debate was whether or not this was gambling. You were the one who then tried to change the subject by looking to make this into a matter concerning laws. You have already agreed that it is indeed gambling, as such you concede the debate, correct? I felt it important to reign in the discussion because you were taking it to a whole other place beyond what the original debate was about. Its also why you are seeing an impasse, because I see now that the real issue here is that the previous focus of the argument moved away from what was actually being argued. If you read back through the thread, one can easily see how this happened. Essentially, you presented the notion of it not being dubbed "Gambling" by the law, in order to try and force your point of refusing to acknowledge that it is indeed gambling. It was a straw man argument you were putting forward and that somehow became the central focus of the debate, a debate which was technically already over the instant you contradicted yourself. The rest is just semantics. You are correct, all those things you listed would be counted as such, which is why one is correct in saying something like "I took a gamble on whether or not that burger was going to give me the runs..." That is literally an act of gambling. The whole "law" portion of this debate is an entirely OTHER topic.
  9. No, for the same reason that the Civil Rights Act doesn't actually extend to the LGBTQ Community. It hasn't actually been codified into law because people have just been extending the interpretation of the pre-existing law from way back when to also include those folks as well. Again, the law isn't infallible and most are super out of date and haven't been keeping up with the ever changing and evolving society. Which is why laws often require either being amended or new laws being made. And we determine this through discussions such as this. We can both agree that it does fall in line with the definition of gambling. So it makes sense that we should revisit the current existing laws regarding such to likewise include such. Bare in mind, gambling itself isn't a criminal act that isn't allowed in the country, but there are regulations for it which exist for good reasons. But if we can reason that something does match the concept of such then it should likewise be included. The system which governs our society must be kept updated to make sure it is operating properly. Also... Uhh... Alright... Wait, something isn't quite right about this statement, lol Again, you're contradicting yourself, you're agreeing its gambling but then turning around and saying it isn't. Which is it? XD And if myself and Crazycrab are presenting the literal definition of the word to prove the meaning of said word, then shouldn't that prove beyond any shadow of a doubt? Again, you're making light of this as if it isn't as big a deal as it is, or like you are expecting something more beyond the word's own definition to prove its meaning. If you are trying to say we aren't allowed to present the word's literal definition as evidence then what else are you wanting to see? What is your criteria for what stands as a reasonable argument? (Cause it feels like you're just moving the goal post in this case) Case in point, first it was "prove this is gambling" and now its "prove that this should be a law"... =P
  10. Bare in mind, definitions exist for a reason. I feel as though you aren't paying enough credence to this fact. You subscribe to the doctrine of logic, correct? There should be very little debate on this particular point then. Logic dictates that if something matches the definition for a word then said term is as such given to it. This is simple truth, I think anyone would be hard pressed to try disputing such. And why are you saying you're not the one who needs to be convinced? If your thought process is of the same vein then wouldn't that make you the ideal subject to try convincing? Personally, I find the response to be more like a cop out. You'll accept it if its codified into law, but if you aren't in agreement with it then how does it then become a law? And further on that point, shouldn't the law be based in logical deduction? Basically you are presenting a no win situation simply because you disagree with the notion that such is gambling even though you technically already agreed that it was. So I'm having a difficult time following your train of thought. Debates are a method designed to ascertain truth and reach a mutual conclusion by all parties involved. One side is either right or wrong and the process is intended to discover such. But at this point, your argument merely consists of; -"Who cares about silly definitions~" -"Until someone breaks the non-existent law it will never be a law." -"I'll consider it gambling when there's a law that says so because I'm somehow incapable of determining this for myself." That is essentially what you have presented, which is honestly a rather weak argument. Its somewhere in the same category as "I'm right because I say so" which doesn't actually fly in a real debate.
  11. To be fair, odds are he does visit the forum but just doesn't post for a number of reasons. When someone hits the popularity level that he has, if news got out that he actively responded to posts on here then a number of issues could easily crop up; -It could/would easily attract the Troll Brigade which would no doubt lay siege to this forum and overload our moderation staff. Not to mention the more hardcore trolls who actually know some real dirty tactics. -The forum would explode with people spamming the place with every single person demanding his attention. That's bad news bears, take it from me. You get bogged down by it, it devours your time and eats into your day making it impossible to get any real progress made and eventually you just get so fed up with it that you distance yourself from the whole thing. (Because being the center of attention fucking sucks, especially when you're trying to encourage others to step up and be their own person) -You'll end up having instances where if he responds to one or two people, suddenly you end up with this shit load of others who get jealous and grow bitter over it, creating a whole other slew of problems and drama. Trust me, its better this way. Besides, the Angry Army is more than that. There may be disagreements between some of us here, but ultimately this is a place of like minded individuals who share similar values. And really, Joe's rant is only one part of the equation. REAL Change is never a one man show. We aren't voiceless. You aren't voiceless. Here you are, speaking to us. It is the Law of Causality. Cause and Effect. You heard Joe, you listened to what he had to say. This caused a chain reaction, which would eventually lead you here to make this thread. A single voice can have far reaching effects. The Angry Army isn't just Joe, but we're also part of the equation. By spreading the message, passing on our values and sharing our opinions with others across the Gaming Community, it is akin to making ripples in a pond. The longer you fight, the longer you hold fast to your ideals, will always effect the outcome. Hence the slogan; Never Give Up, Never Surrender.
  12. I mean, it is gambling by sheer definition. Just because the law doesn't define it as such doesn't mean it isn't. For example, TYT covered a similar situation which applies to this one; The Law isn't infallible and most laws are seriously out of date and typically left up to interpretation. This video's topic/debate/conversation is, in my opinion, very relevant here. Because once again, and as Crazycrab has already presented, the actual definition of the term/concept for Gambling does indeed apply to Loot Boxes. Are you always getting something? Yes. But that fact alone doesn't change the meaning of Gambling or the addictive nature associated with it. There is also the sociological ramifications to take into consideration. I've noticed a rise in awareness and "popularity" for Loot Boxes to be tied to the growing cancer of micro-transactions in the Games Industry. It serves to further encourage and perpetuate an ongoing problem that is gradually conditioning society to accept the practice in literally everything FOR literally anything. And now the most recent victim of this harmful trend is the new Star Wars Battlefront. At the end of the day, it will always boil down to "Where do we draw the line in the sand?"
  13. To be fair, gambling does indeed apply to many things. If we're going off of just simple logical deduction. Now whether or not any of such topics SHOULD be a gamble is an entirely other debate. That being said, you're getting a tad off topic. Loot Boxes are indeed a form of gambling, this much is true. Is the practice wrong, though? At that point we start to hit the root of it and ultimately there will be different opinions as this essentially boils down to a matter of personal values. Though, for this particular topic regarding random games being featured, I'd say that its more stupid than anything else? The reaction from others in this thread can serve as evidence enough of that. There is a huge difference between something like random merchandise from Loot Crate and random video games from this. Especially in an age where we are seeing more and more of an aggressive push towards digital downloads, what reason would Gamers have to spend money on this? If they are looking for older games from the NES or ATARI era then that typically means they are looking for something in specific. It would prove faster and more cost effective to simply hunt for those particular titles as opposed to playing slots in this sense for a very low if not non-existent chance of getting what they want. The concept just sounds silly. I can't imagine there possibly being very many actually willing to buy into this.
  14. I'm well aware, the point I'm trying to make is that there shouldn't be such a huge emphasis on graphics. Personally I found the Xbox 360 and PS3 to have already achieved a decent level of graphics. But this constant "chasing the dragon" mentality is just ludicrous at this point. As a prime example let us look no further then the SWB franchise itself. The 2004 game really didn't look THAT much different by comparison and the gameplay experience was friggen amazing. I spent hours upon hours playing the hell out of that game. And that was back on the PS2 and Xbox, mind you. Are the graphics better in the 2017 game? Yes. That much isn't being argued. The assertion though is that it really shouldn't be such a central focus for people. (Because there are people out there who think graphics are everything) I would much prefer developers have a stronger focus on gameplay elements and the overall experience itself which is what you'll actually be doing in said games. Hell, I would still argue that the older SWB games are still superior to the newer ones.
  15. I'm so glad someone made this thread. I saw the video last night and got so pissed off over it that I couldn't fall asleep. Was even considering making this thread myself just to give me an outlet for said rant/emotions. Which speaking of... This crap isn't funny. It has moved far away from being even remotely joke-worthy. Call me crazy, but the rate at which micro-transactions have been aggressively spreading to all manner of other games seems to be dramatically increasing. I think to date, if I'm not mistaken, 2017 has seen an alarming rise in this practice with more and more "popular" franchises introducing them for the first time to the point that its becoming a common topic in the news for at least myself. Let us not forget that Bethesda is once again also trying to implement Paid Mods with their Creation Club shtick and they are apparently doubling down on it this time. It is literally no different from micros, its just not being called that. Jim Sterling put out a new video addressing this topic as well today for his show, but even then he missed a few points that should honestly be getting addressed. The bottom line here is that its all 100% a greed driven practice. There is zero reason for it. Mind you, I'm perfectly fine with concepts such as DLC/Expansions, assuming it isn't just cut content that's being held ransom which happens way more often than it should. But that $60 price tag is no joke. The argument that likes to get tossed around by the brainwashed nimrods, who have been conditioned over the years to just accept whatever is given to them, is that the base cost of games somehow isn't enough for these companies to turn a profit. Bull. Shit. This entire notion was already disproven by CD Projekt Red with The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt. A game that cost $60, with beautiful graphics, well portrayed and fully voice acted characters and NPCs with a massive open world setting and an award winning story that personally had me crying at the end. (Not to mention plenty of replay value because it even features multiple different endings based on what you do in the game) They were even putting out FREE DLC for it. It was almost like a direct insult to all these other AAA companies out there. I happily paid for both of their expansions which even came with a real life Gwent card game. The other factors that consistently get ignored or overlooked by others, including Jim, is the fact that while the base $60 price tag has remained the same over the years, there is also a shit load more people BUYING said games now all over the world. The Games Industry only continues to grow as the Gaming Community does as well. Its grown so large to the point that now we have legit eSports which back in the olden days was just a friggen pipe dream some of us would fantasize about playing on our Super NES or Sega Genesis. Or Pokemon Red/Blue on Gameboy. More consumers automatically translates to greater return for products being sold. So even though the cost of games has gone up over time, so has the number of sales to compensate. (Not to mention the fact we have Indie Devs out there making amazing games with next to no real funding for them and even they end up making a hefty profit off of sales) And this isn't to say that Jim didn't make an excellent argument, because he did. Especially at the end of his video where he pointed out that literally no one was ASKING for games to cost so much. Yes, the boost to graphics is nice, but I've made the argument in the past that you don't need photo realistic graphics to have an amazing game. Some of the most iconic, legendary games in history paled in comparison to the graphics of today. But that's because their story, gameplay and character elements were all amazing. For example, the old school Final Fantasy 7 was epic. Meanwhile, I'm predicting FF7 Remake is going to just look friggen amazing yet ultimately fail to compare with the original. Because at the end of the day, graphics aren't the only thing that matters. (Ultima III: Exodus for the NES still remains in my Top 10 RPGs of all time) Perhaps even more frustrating are those who try saying that "micros being in games is just the norm now" as if that somehow justifies the practice. It doesn't. If the Gaming Community were to actually come together on these issues and protest this horseshit then yeah, it would stop. Companies are in the business to make money. They are machines with the sole intention and purpose of generating the greatest bottom line possible for products being sold. If they could get away with selling people a game that is literally just a button you press that costs $1 each time you press it, they would. In a heartbeat. The only reason they don't is because that shit wouldn't fly and they would obviously get medieval levels of backlash for it. In fact the ONLY reason that micro-transactions weren't already a thing in every single game we see is BECAUSE said companies are afraid of the potential fallout and damage to their brands/sales. This basically means that the ONLY reason we're also seeing a dramatic rise in these practices across so many games now is because more companies are becoming less and less afraid of us. We no longer strike the fear of God in them with the thunder of our mighty wallets closing. Gamers have always factored into this equation. We have always held the responsibility of establishing and maintaining set STANDARDS for what is or isn't alright. And every time we give these companies an inch, they take a mile. We can't afford to keep losing ground to them. Like, literally cannot afford. Its not as if our economy and minimum wage is improving... Its NEVER too late to change industry trends. This fact remains true no matter how bleak a situation may look. They only want us to believe its some impossible task so as to discourage any efforts made against them. People do change as well. For example, I used to defend Halo 5's micro-transactions because its effectively doing the exact same thing as this game; Free DLC and Maps. But gradually, over time I began to realize just how hollow my accomplishments were in the game. And mind you, I have logged a shit load of hours on H5. But when I went back and played H4? I remembered how much more of a challenge and enjoyment I got from that experience. If I wanted that badass Gungnir Armor then I had to unlock it through personal achievement. And everyone who saw me wearing it would know that yes, I did in fact earn that badass armor. That's called TRUE Player Progression. When you feel like you have actually accomplished a grand feat and the reward is proof of it. It may take a long while to happen. It may require these companies taking it to such an extreme level that even the ardent defenders of these practices among our own kind are just flatout unable to justify their own bullshit anymore, and likewise join together finally to fight back against it. (Hopefully it doesn't need to get to the point of having games that are just buttons you press...) Never Give Up. Never Surrender.
  16. Comment Blocker? Could I have the link to download that?
  17. To be fair, I don't tell these people that I'm with the AJSA cause its really none of their business anyways. My issue and why I end up feeling compelled to argue back, stems from the sheer ridiculousness of the allegations being presented rather than wanting to specifically defend Joe. But you and Kaz are right, it is a colossal waste of time and no one should be spending the energy fighting with those nimrods, myself included. I just hate having to accept it. I would like to believe that everyone can be reasonable enough to have a civil debate without it devolving into an exercise in futility...
  18. So I'm noticing this growing trend of very obvious clickbait videos cropping up on youtube in regards to Joe's Destiny 2 Review. Each one seems to be drawing from the same source; Reddit. Apparently, the legion of Desticles who can't seem to handle any sort of criticism, have been driving this campaign to establish a false narrative that Joe apparently "lied." At no point do they actually contest any of the points he presents in the review. They would rather try and attack his credibility instead. I actually got into it with one of the youtubers who were doing this and holy crap... It was literally impossible. He began ignoring what I was saying and cherry picking random sentences of mine to respond to instead while just persisting to repeat himself over and over again. Seems like the "core" of their case against him is that they're trying to say he gave Destiny 2 a low score because the Raid was "hard." Note, he NEVER said that shit was hard. He called it tedious. Its a chore. Del even stated that the Vault of Glass was far superior by comparison. And when I pointed that out to the guy my comments were promptly deleted. That's how badly some of these people desperately want to cling to their delusions. I know it really shouldn't surprise me. Ever since The Taken King released, the greater Destiny Community went ahead and gave Bungie/Activision a free pass on all the issues with the game that were still present and simply just being ignored. And when Bungie first introduced the micro-transactions along with it, a large chunk of the community were going out of their way to make excuses for it. I completely left the community roughly over a year ago, seeing just how toxic it had become with a lot of the more level-headed players having long since moved on to other games and greener pastures. At that time, Reddit had more or less transformed into an echo chamber where any negative opinions were voted down into oblivion and any dissenters were ganged up on. So it makes sense that Reddit would likewise be the source of this nonsense. I dunno. It still drives me friggen nuts. The game will never improve with that sort of close minded, "Bungie can do no wrong" mentality they've fostered over there.
  19. There is actually a LOT of reason to trust the hype for Anthem, honestly. The circumstances and scenario relating to Anthem has a lot of parallels to that of Destiny back when Joseph Staten was still involved with it. That was back when the original story of the game was still intact and the original "vision" for the game was still there. It was that vision which generated soooooo much hype along with the fact that you had Bungie, a well established champion developer which had really made its mark with the Halo series, a game that literally revolutionized the genre. Much of Destiny's success is owed to the Bungie Brand being stamped on it. But as we eventually learned, before the game's release there were multiple red flags happening behind the scenes. The execs at Bungie had decided Joseph Staten's story was somehow too linear and complex for the kind of audience they were looking to target. The original masterpiece that had been created was subsequently butchered along with various chunks being torn out and put aside only to be repackaged as "DLC" (Dark Below and House of Wolves) and sold separately. Its the exact same setup as what we see with Destiny 2. The ending of the game's story missions followed by the EXACT same aggressive marketing included in the game's case trying to sell players ANOTHER "Expansion Pass" that is just waaaaaay too similar to what happened last time. Now, many of the former Bungie Dev Team have either quit the company or have been fired. Luke Smith has risen up the ranks and has taken full advantage of that whole situation to elevate his position within the company. (I friggen hate that guy...) HOWEVER... Anthem has been pooling together the creative talents of legendary writers from BioWare history; Just like Bungie, BioWare is also one those studios that have achieved a sort of Legendary status with a large following of fans. And while the recent Mass Effect game had serious issues, we now know that the reasons for this were because it didn't actually have BioWare's full attention, as most of the studio's resources and efforts have been going into the creation of Anthem. (Likewise, Mass Effect 3 was supposed to be the end) Also, Anthem has the added benefit of being able to learn from the mistakes of Destiny and use the feedback from that community to help improve and properly charter the direction for their development along with other games such as Warframe. People wanted to be able to fly in Destiny? Boom, people can fly in Anthem. People love the underwater sections in Warframe? Boom, people can go underwater in Anthem. People wanted to enjoy exploring in Destiny? Boom, people can go exploring in Anthem AND be rewarded for it. (Its actually encouraged) People wanted more weapon diversity in Destiny? Boom, we obviously see that confirmed in Anthem with one guy rocking a Mortar Launcher and the other showing off a friggen Multi-Missile Launcher. People wanted better graphics for Destiny? Boom, Anthem looks hella good. And while a lot of what went wrong with Destiny can be argued that most of the blame can be attributed to Activision, BioWare has been dealing with EA for years now. Does EA factor into this? Yes, but for the most part the publisher doesn't impact or restrict BioWare's creative freedoms. The most we can see in terms of involvement is EA imposing micro-transactions in their multiplayer aspects. That's about it. And it seems as though BioWare has control over what is or isn't put in said micros. Whereas with Destiny, that shit started off in the Taken King expansion and has progressive become much worse. (So many people in the community protested micros in Destiny...but there were so many trying to defend that shit that now those micros have become a permanent fixture in the game...) But on that note, another thing to keep in mind is that it is abundantly clear that EA has been making power plays against Activision lately. We saw this with the release of Battlefield 1 in which DICE straight up directly challenged COD. Now we see Anthem coming in heavy, fully loaded and looking to directly challenge Destiny. And when companies compete against one another, the customers are the ones who always benefit the most. Which is why I say thank God for Anthem, because another main reason so much shit has been allowed to happen with Destiny is due to the lack of serious competition in the market place. So even for people who aren't all that interested in the game and are hardcore Destiny players? Anthem can only mean good things for Destiny as well, because Bungie/Activision are going to end up having to compete for your attention and money, which means the Destiny Community will actually have some real influence finally instead of the illusion of being cared about.
  20. I have literally been holding off on listening to anything related to Destiny 2. As a Day 1 player of the first Destiny, I saw first hand how the game so many had so much hope for was slowly ruined and turned into the mess that it is today. Vanilla Destiny was good, but the game was just...lacking in so much. And that basically defines the entire franchise at this point. Just a damn shame. I was first introduced to Joe's channel with his previous Destiny Review. Became a fan ever since. Its rare to come across a game reviewer who is actually honest and tells it like it is. Ever since this review was posted, I've been finding myself getting into arguments with people in the youtube comments. I try to ignore it, but the sort of mental gymnastics they do to justify their blatant bullshit just drives me nuts. I mean seriously, some of the crap these people say; "Joe is a liar!" How is anything he said in the review a lie? "Joe didn't even play the Raid!" He did experience the Raid... And regardless, why the hell is the Raid so crucially important like it could somehow magically invalidate any and all negative points being presented about the rest of the game? O_o "Oh, this just isn't Joe's kind of game." ...How do you even know that? How does him having a negative opinion about the game automatically translate to that? So anyone who doesn't give the game a high score are only doing so because its just "not their kind of game"? Its friggen daffy. Its like the people who try to say "Oh man! Destiny 2 is a whole new game!" Delrith hit the nail on the head with that during his rant on the Twitch stream, its not some whole new experience. There is one thing I would have liked Joe to touch on as well, which would have been the fact that Bungie literally swept EVERYTHING OF INTEREST from the original game under the rug. Sooooooooooooooo many people wanted to actually travel into and explore the Last City. There was so much potential with it. Interactive NPCs, Player Housing, Shopping District to open up the possibilities for items and crafting, a Recreation Center (Something akin to like the Gold Saucer from FF7 where you could spend Glimmer to play Arcade Games, possibly even some of Bungie's older games like Oni or Marathon, Sparrow Racing simulator, etc.), CLAN HALLS (Different spaces you can spend Glimmer on to buy and fully customize for you and your Clan Members to access and hang out in to actually socialize), interactive benches and seats for you to actually sit on like a normal person, etc. SO MUCH that people were wanting to see done with the Last City. And what does Bungie do? THEY DESTROY THE WHOLE THING! Or what about the Speaker? Everyone was waiting for him to actually explain shit to us. The original story for Destiny written by Joseph Staten even had the Speaker as being a central character and hinted at him being a primary antagonist for the plot. It was supposed to be a huge deal. Again, so much potential to be had there. And what does Bungie do? THEY KILL HIM OFF LIKE ITS NOTHING! You don't even care that he's dead, either. His death is so meaningless because they did NOTHING to actually establish his character. Its the same damn thing with the Awoken Queen apparently getting killed in Taken King right at the start. I mean seriously? First they butcher Joseph Staten's masterpiece and then they just gradually kill off and destroy all the remaining fragments of his story. Destiny was meant to be so much more than it turned out to be. Its a damn shame. Thank God for Anthem...
  21. So yeah, this has been gradually getting worse for me and now that I have just beaten the game not but 15 minutes ago, I desperately need a venue for expressing my thoughts and venting a tad bit. I may or may not decide to go ahead and toss a copy of this over in the feedback section at the game's official forum. I happily welcome anyone else who would like to weigh in on this or share their own opinions on the game as well. Where to begin, though? In truth, if I wasn't such a huge fan of the series the vast majority of my issues might not even exist, but considering what they were trying to accomplish with FF15 I feel its important to be critical on the things that clearly deserve it. And when I say I'm a fan, I mean that I have played and own every single Final Fantasy ever to be produced, have assisted with a number of "Fan Theories" associated with them and have even done my fair share of online RPs centered around the franchise. (FYI, my two favorite games in the entire series was FF6 and FF9) Let's go down the list. Pros~ I have over 80+ hours spent as of beating the game, so it isn't as though it was terrible. The developers managed to nail a few aspects and that is ultimately what kept me playing for as long as I did. The Kingdom of Lucis was rendered beautifully and I quite enjoyed spending time in the world setting itself. I actually liked the added danger that accompanied night time and that made the world come more to life. I liked the Mob Hunt system and that served to show off the environment more by having me travel to places off the beaten path. In addition to that, the spirit of exploration was alive and well here. I hate games that offer you an "Open World" and yet there is very little reward for spending that time exploring, which is definitely something you get here. (Such as picking up a Thunderbolt 2H from Malmalm Thicket. You can tell that exploration was seriously on the developer's mind as even the Tipsters would show you the location of caches for extra goodies. In this respect the game scores major brownie points for going above and beyond in this regard, something most other games either do a lack luster job at or only bother to put in the bare minimum effort. Camping was also quite enjoyable and between that and being able to sleep at inns as well as actually EATING in the game, it makes the experience far more authenticate in terms of realism. Not to mention all the various mini-games that were available; Pinball, Fishing, Chocobo Races, etc. The game's combat was also very good. The combination of effects and sounds really serve to make you feel like a badass when you come down hard with a Greatsword and break off a piece of an enemy. The Warp-Strike was also a nice addition that kept the action fast while giving added tactical options in battle. Cons~ The story. Yeah. What you have here is basically all the right elements of an EPIC tale, but damn near none of it is properly put together or conveyed. 1: FF15 is like FF7 only without the Turks, Rufus, Hojo or Shinra in general. The Niflheim Empire was utterly pathetic, relegated to nothing more than a simple plot point used to conveniently progress the story missions along. You had important looking characters show up such as that old guy who never made another appearance, they were shown once or twice and then quickly forgotten. And just when you think this will change or the game will start to pick up with all this? (When you actually travel to the Empire, personally) NOPE! EVERYONE IS DEAD! You can't even be like "what a twist!" with that nonsense. Quite possibly the most interesting character of them all from the Empire was General Glauca who played a MAJOR role in the downfall of Lucis. We're talking about the guy who killed YOUR father, and you don't even get to see this dude. Not once. And why? BECAUSE THEY DECIDED TO KILL HIM OFF IN THE KINGSGLAIVE MOVIE! WHAT. THE. FUCK. I get that they want FF15 to be the second coming of FF7, but look... The game had already been released for years before they ever came out with Advent Children, and even then that was meant to serve as a sequel to the game's story. You take a HUGE chunk of the game's narrative, rip it OUT of the game itself and decide to sell it separately as a movie? No. That's bullshit. At the very least, General Glauca should have survived to be present in the actual game. I don't care about Nyx. If you wanted me to care about him, then he should have been a party member. 2: ZERO BACKSTORY FOR ANYONE. You know what MOST of all the other games have in the series? Fleshed out party members. Example, as part of the main story of FF7, Cloud and the party travel to Rocket Town where they encounter Cid who ends up joining the party. You get some of his backstory the first visit and then the second time the game brings you back to Rocket Town its all about Cid. Each character is given ample stage time, and as a result the player gets invested in them. THAT is why Aerith's death is considered legendary, because to actually lose a character, a party member in a Final Fantasy game, will hit the player hard right in the feels. Where was that here? You got Ignis, Gladio and Prompto at the start of the game and that was it. Which is fine and all, but are you seriously telling me that NONE OF THEM get any kind of personal quest? Or is that the purpose of these paid DLC "Episodes" because money? Yes, I am aware of the anime Brotherhood which tries to do this, but again WHY DOES THE GAME RELY ON ME LEAVING THE GAME TO LEARN THIS? This is like Destiny with those stupid Grimoire Cards all over again. Additional Media is intended to "ADD" to the experience, not serve as the damn foundation for a story that was clearly in desperate need of more TLC. 3: Prompto, specifically, is the most ridiculous character of them all. In fact, the game itself contradicts his own backstory that was established in Brotherhood and utterly fails to answer any basic questions. You find out that the Empire's Magi-Tech is created from Daemons and that the machines you fight are essentially newborn children bred for combat. You then find out from Prompto that he is no different from them, created in the same way. BUT THAT MAKES NO SENSE. In Brotherhood you see a young and plump Prompto living in Insomnia who later becomes friends with Noctis at school. HOW THE FUCK DID HE GET THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE!? His backstory is just, at this point, soooooo convoluted that I can't even bs my way into somehow making it all fit together. And bare in mind, I don't give a rats ass if they somehow magically find a way to tie the loose ends together in the DLC, the fact remains that the game, upon release, has a twisted story riddled with plot holes. I feel as though the game world and mechanics were made first and then the story came second. Its NOT OK to seal off KEY PLOT POINTS behind paywalls. No one should have to be spending extra money JUST to understand what the game failed to properly convey. I care less about pretty graphics and care MORE about a meaty, juicy story, which is why I STILL rank FF6 above FF15. 4: Princess Lunafreya needed a LOT more fleshing out. She had the ability to communicate with Noctis and his group through Umbra the entire time, so why the hell did they never meet up? If it was her "mission" to give Noctis the ring, she literally could have done it at any time. Likewise, they could have traveled together to form the covenants. Now... If she was purposefully keeping her distance from Noctis because of the covenants seemingly killing her and she knew he would try and stop it? That's one thing. Though, the game fails to give any sort of indication about this. And the romance between her and Noctis just...it feels way too forced. In fact, the entire time I kept hoping that the game was being "hands off" about it in order to leave an open opportunity for some other potential love interest, like Iris. (Who I was personally pulling for) And even when Lunafreya dies? You get this impression that she's more like an older sister to Noctis rather than a lover. 5: I'm still confused about Ardyn. The game didn't do a good job of explaining what his whole story was about. Its revealed that he was also a King of Lucis, but then that is where it gets muddled. Ardyn is the darkness, but why? How? Was there some random thing in the game that I failed to read? Because the story failed to convey these answers to me even after I killed the guy. And a better question might be what was his motivations? I got the impression he was trying to bring about the prophecy (Which was likewise rather vague and poorly delivered to the player, I mean that's the kind of thing a game should establish either right at the start or close to the beginning), which truth be told I didn't even remember until inspecting the various paintings just before the Throne Room at the Citadel. But what was his ultimate goal? He obviously was expecting a final confrontation with Noctis, but was he expecting to die? He seemed awfully surprised when Noctis and his ancestors vaporized him afterwards, but shouldn't this have been also expected as per the prophecy he was helping make happen? In the end, Ardyn's reasons are just convoluted. I felt no real emotion from the battle itself or even after he died. His existence just seemed like one giant Deus Ex Machina, there for the purpose of setting up Noctis having to die in order to drive away the darkness. And even then, is the darkness actually gone for good or is the world just screwed now that the last King of Lucis is gone now without any living heirs? Not like it matters since the ring clearly dissolved as well which means the crystal is pretty much useless now too. There were a number of other, smaller story related issues that popped up but they mostly came up in dialogue between party members, I can't really remember what was said off hand. But yeah, the game's story was a massive problem for me. Like I said, all of the elements are there to have this really amazing, 10/10 epic story, but it was completely mishandled and needed way more work. Of course, that wasn't my only gripe with the game. I get that they were wanting to do this whole "Road Trip" thing with the four guys, seeing the sights and camping out, etc. But to be honest that kind of shit should have been all focused BEFORE the Empire decided to betray Lucis and seize control of Insomnia. At no point did I feel like the "Rebel Prince" fighting to reclaim his homeland. With the exception of Cor and the lady who was with him, there was no one else. Why? Hell, even at the end of the Kingsglaive movie, Nyx's friend managed to survive and left the city. So that's it then? No one is contnuing to fight back or put together a resistance movement? And why the hell was Noctis and the others just so casually driving around the countryside after the fact? Again, I understand the whole Road Trip experience and such, but there weren't any Imperial Checkpoints that had actual soldiers stationed at them. You got to visit a grand total of 3 enemy bases (Even though they appear to be all over the place on the map), and after clearing them out it was nothing. Why? BECAUSE YOU HAD NO REBEL FORCES TO MOVE IN AND RETAKE CONTROL! You don't even get the opportunity to destroy these places, you literally just leave so that the enemy can move right back in, totally invalidating your efforts. (Like capturing that one guy during the second Base Infiltration only for him to escape before you can even finish the mission. He gets handed off to some Hunters and then magically escapes, cause reasons... ) I felt no drive or motivation in the least to attack these bases. And the only other time I had to deal with the empire, outside of the main story missions (which were short as fuck, for the record), were the random drop ships. Furthermore, what the hell was up with that super linear garbage past Altissia? Let me get this straight... You took the time to flesh out Lucis, but Altissia only offers the city despite the map clearly showing a larger land mass? Yeah, I was seriously expecting to be able to leave Altissia and go explore the rest of those areas. This really clipped my wings when I quickly realized that the "Open World" aspect which was one of the few big things keeping me invested was restricted to only Lucis and no where else. I immediately got the impression here that the game felt unfinished. Which is probably the case, the developer was most likely forced by corporate to push the game out despite wanting to do more with it. And if that is the case and what we got was a rushed product? Then that could very easily explain why I have all these issues with it, in which case it really is just like Destiny all over again and I really... REALLY wish this bullshit would stop already. Again, if having a FULL and COMPLETE game means taking a hit on graphics? Fine, I'm cool with that. I grew up playing ATARI for Christ sake, I don't give two shits how photo realistic things are on my screen. OH! AND THE END GAME! NO! BAD! You know what made going after Ruby, Emerald and Ultima WEAPONs worth it in FF7? Spending time at the Gold Saucer fighting in the Battle Arena or breeding Chocobo for the sake of getting a Gold to visit the secret locations on the world map? That all of it was taking place before the end of the game. Basically all of the "cool" stuff is set for AFTER you beat FF15, meaning that you can't even access it until after you have already completed the game. Why should I bother spending time getting something like the Balmung Sword or any of these other "Legendary Weapons" when the story is already over? The 80+ hours I have was spent doing Side Quests. Why? Because I wanted to do as much as possible and be fully prepared for the "Final Boss." It was a joke. Ardyn was a total failure. I kept expecting something grander to happen, but no. I had 99 Hi-Potions, Potions, Elixirs, Hi-Elixirs, Antidotes, etc. I came expecting a challenge. I even went and grinded for a Sturdy Helixhorn to fully upgrade the Engine Blade into the Ultima Sword. I even went and got ALL the Royal Arms. I kept waiting for Ardyn to whoop my ass throughout the entire battle. Hell, I thought the way to him was going to be loads more difficult than it was. In the end, I was disappointed to not find said challenge. I know there are supposed to be "free updates" coming out to expand the story, but as it stands now I don't feel like investing anymore of my time into the game as a result of having beaten it. Yes, there is plenty of "End Game" content in the form of new side quests and really powerful bosses, but do I REALLY want to put in anymore time than I already have knowing the kind of ending this was? And look, this isn't even "End Game" either, because all I'm doing is literally "going back in time" to before I went to Altissia. That isn't what I consider to be End Game. TRUE "End Game" would have been Noctis NOT dying at the end, assuming his position as the new King of Lucis and then getting to see the Aftermath following the defeat of Ardyn. Hell, you could have even justified not being able to go around Insomnia by saying it was still undergoing reconstruction. And then I could take KING Noctis around the world and do said End Game activities. But no, instead you did two of the things I hate most in both games and anime. You did a stupid ass "10 Year Later..." garbage during the main story as well as killing off the main character. That pretty much ends my rant. Personally, I would give FF15 a 7/10...8/10 if I'm being generous. The 7/10 seems more fitting if you add in the horrible way that Magic was handled in the game (Grenades? Really? ) and if you weren't really into the Side Quests or other various side attractions. And if I was judging the game simply on its main story content alone? It easily drops to a 6/10.
  22. Ahem... *Votes RWBY*
  23. Well, my birthday was 3 days ago, which at the end me and the wife decided to get our very first PS3 since it was always a pipe dream to have both and get access to all those exclusives that we missed out on playing. It was crazy cheap and we had the money to easily get it, so we just went for it. Its actually a tad weird being back on playstation after having been on the 360 these past number of years. I know that a lot of my friends on the 360 have switched over to the Xbox One, and practically all of her coworkers upgraded to the PS4. So I see the trend is rapidly picking up speed. I was just curious to see who all is actually still actively playing on the PS3 and if there are any clans for its games.
  24. I didn't want to do individual quotes. I apologize if I gave the impression I was accusing you of being just a Joe follower, I didn't think I was saying anything that would infer such about anyone. And I'm personally a fan of the show and take pride in being a member of the Angry Army, so to clarify nothing I've said here was intended to sound like I was against Joe's video. I actually quite approve of him doing hardware reviews. Also didn't think there was anything wrong with his review of the Rift, either. He covered basically everything that folks should know about it. That being said, you kept making mention in regards to my list that these were things not known because the Rift hasn't been out long enough. If you take notice, prior to my list I pointed this out myself and the list itself reflects that. These are things we don't know but that are possibilities. There just isn't enough data regarding long term usage of these things. As for what I based this list on? Simple medical research. The Oculus Rift weighs 470g which translates to 1.03617 pounds. That weight is centered on your face, meaning your neck muscles will be activated to compensate while wearing it. In addition to this, the camera movement is dependent on you moving your head around. So while this shouldn't be a problem for those who only use it for short periods of time, those who are wearing it for extended periods are going to be more prone to having neck related problems. Even headaches triggered by those muscles knotting up. And if you find yourself doing those snap motions with your head to look at something there is also the chance to pull said muscles. And for those dropping $600 on this thing? Or hell, even $300, I doubt most of those folks plan on only using the thing for short bursts, especially if they get heavily invested playing with others while using it. Everything on that list is rooted in scientific fact. I didn't claim them to be 100% true problems but rather making the very real point that they are all possibilities that need to be addressed. To my knowledge, there has been no case study done on the long term usage of this hardware. If there has been I would very much like to see what the results were, considering the fact that we're talking about a commercial product being made available to the general public. But if such research has never been done, then what we have here is a text book example of how these companies only wish to cash in while using the consumers, or in this case the early adopters, as basically guinea pigs to do the testing for them. That's a practice that I do not approve of nor support. Also, with regards to the example of Sword Art Online, that takes place in a world where technology and society itself have advanced enough to the point where its acceptable. In SAO, such VR gaming experiences are integrated with other aspects of reality itself. This is best seen during the events of Gun Gale Online where the eSports scene is very clearly evolved and events aren't just broadcasted across the net and other such games as well but where players can even make a financial living. There is less isolation in this situation, in fact the social medium itself has expanded to the point where entire families are involved in such things. The sad truth is that our society is progressing at a slower rate than our technology. Humans are not ready for this yet and there is no telling what will come of it. Our species has not evolved enough to handle this concept.
  25. No, you really aren't. I apologize if I might sound brash here, but this is the recurring trend that keeps grinding my gears. "I found this boring." Why? "It just was." That is seriously the extent of what has been said here. You're drawing comparisons between the characters in Destiny to The Division and saying one is better than the other with literally NO reason why outside of "just because" and that irritates the crap out of me. How can anyone be a critic about anything when they themselves have zero basis for such allegations? I'm just so exhausted from seeing the same thing everywhere. You cared more about Dinklebot than Faye. But why? That reads a logic error, there is no reasoning behind this. It is a notion that cannot be understood nor disputed because there is no intellectual foundation for it. Yeah, of course no one is arguing because there is quite literally nothing to argue. Anything that anyone were to try and say in opposition to your statement would just as easily be dismissed by you saying "that's just how I felt." Literally anyone can say the exact same thing about anything. Geralt of Rivia could be awarded one of the best portrayed video game characters of all time and yet someone could just waltz up and be like "I hated him" and give no reason as to why they actually feel that way. Where are the standards, man? I mean its not just that, either. And if you want to say this is a matter of personal preference? That you prefer a tiny floating robot with like two moments of dry humor as opposed to an actual person with a more serious-minded character role? Then THAT is what you say. That's called clarification, your preference doesn't match up. But at no point in time does THAT rationale ever justify declaring the other character as being worse in comparison. At that point you're just being incredibly biased. Like how dare this other person not be the same as this other character. Or how about saying Vanilla Destiny offered more than this. Like wow, really? What exactly was there more of by comparison? Vanilla Destiny had... -Zero Context (You were dead, brought back to life with no reaction or background info given at all and then it was suddenly your job to kill aliens because...reasons?) -Small World (If you took the maps for Earth, the Moon, Venus and Mars and combined them, The Division would probably still be bigger) -Pointless NPCs (They were literally all just glorified Vendors. It took them until TTK which at that point was a $140 investment to finally get anything even remotely resembling what one would expect from NPCs in a story. And even then? I gave TTK a score of Nathan Fillion because he carried that entire storyline.) -Recycled Content (The Black Heart mission, Final Boss. Need I say more?) Now let's do a comparison, shall we? Vanilla Division has... -Story Context (You know why you are here, you find out why the others before you failed their mission and you are presented with clearly defined antagonists. Beginning, Middle and End) -Large World (I have the "preference" to explore game worlds and unlike Destiny, I found more reason and reward with The Division. The only reason to explore in Destiny was for Dead Ghosts to unlock more of the non-existent story that you wished was in the actual game and the stupid treasure chests which really didn't give anything worthwhile, as opposed to The Division which is filled with collectibles that likewise reward you upon completing said collections, serving to add more atmosphere to the game and overall plot, as well as all of the loot in the game all having some sort of purpose. Not to mention finding these random locked doors that need lockpicks to open to access more areas. Others may not care or have any interest in this sort of thing, but I personally like my games caring enough to give us explorers a nod) -Useful NPCs (Faye alone gives you more info than Dinklebot, the Stranger, the Speaker, the Awoken Queen and her brother AND the whole damn Guardian Vanguard Council combined. Jessica is your major insight for the virus itself and gives you leads to work off of to track down the source of the disaster as well as the cure. Paul works with you and Faye to understand more about what happened to the First Wave and eventually discover how everything went from bad to worse. Benitez is ever driving the hammer and giving your crusade against the other factions more emphasis and meaning. All of this conveyed to you with good voice acting on top of it all) -New Content (Yes, a Helicopter. Sorry it wasn't Metal Gear Rex or something instead. =P ) There is a LOGICAL BASIS for saying that The Division is BETTER and offers MORE than Vanilla Destiny. Its not Sci-Fi? That's personal preference. Its people instead of aliens or robots? That's personal preference. Its not a First Person Shooter? That's personal preference. Its bullet sponges instead of being realistic? That's personal preference. Huge. Difference. Something not being a personal preference does not translate to "bad game" or "5/10". SCIENCE. Using the scientific method to render a logical conclusion. That is what I respect. That is what I expect from anyone who looks to give a review of anything.