Lol, instead of addressing what argument? Your argument is entirely "nuh-uh, you are frustrated. I know you are because my argument would fall apart if you weren't, so you are. It's just that you like being frustrated."
It's just not the case. There are rare good ones out there, and if that frustrates you into claiming I'm some masochist and therefore my enjoyment is somehow invalid, that's your own whole subscription of issues.
You're writing all live service games as being based on frustration when that absolutely isn't the case, so I have to think you have too many preconceived notions on this subject to actually be open to a conversation about it.
Oh well. No game is for everyone and sometimes the pay content is worth it just because it's damn awesome.
"Clobber" implies violence, which is somehow even less elegant than the standard phrase that the haphazard "cobble" implies. Given the shitshow of X so far, clobber probably works better even if it's not the usual way to phrase this at all.
While absolutely too many things are charged for in gaming today (exp boosts? skip potions? cheat armor that was already fully developed at launch? all ways to get your company on my high seas list).... in the specific case where (1) new content is continuously being developed AND (2) the game is not asking for mandatory spending to continue playing (e.g. no expansion pack to purchase, no subscription fees), I don't think the concept of charging for in-game content at all is abusive.
If I buy once and then a year later some optional paid cosmetics or other goodies are added, I think that's permissible. And if I'm in a free to play live service game, I recognize the ongoing dev costs need to get covered somewhere.
I do vastly prefer those companies that give their games TLC and updates for free, and I'm not saying the standard pricing for optional purchases in the modern market are reasonable. But I think the existence of in-game purchases, if not their current state, can make sense sometimes.
FOMO is a weird term to use here because it implies some anxiety that I could be seeing more stuff than I am.
I get bored sometimes. There isn't enough content here to keep me super engaged, and interesting niche subs about certain small games and whatnot are missed. I end up swapping back and forth between my front page here and my youtube recs, willing something interesting to appear.
But I'm not feeling the slightest anxiety that I'm missing some stranger's idea of wit on a site I don't go to. There's way too much internet for me to ever think I was seeing it all in the first place, so I'm more than fine with missing the latest lyric or pun comment chain or the hottest new AITA fiction.
I didn't say they should cave to fans save give them what they want. I just think there was a way to say this without being mean about wanting it.
Anyway, I don't have a horse in this race, I still haven't played this. Just commenting on how I think I'd feel if that were me. I've played a fair few games where the ending left me wanting a lot more, and not always because the game was just that good.
I feel like this is an overly negative light to paint something fans of your game seem to want. There's an undercurrent of "your wish is bad and you should feel bad" to this.
I appreciate that CDPR has a strong vision for what they want their game to be, but I think if I were one of those fans who wanted to see more of the post-ending setting, I would feel a bit gut-punched by how thoroughly dissed and dismissed my kind of love for the game was.
Maybe CDPR is okay with that though ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don't think the fediverse has this, but I'm a bit confused why so many of these comments are puzzled at why you would want it. We have fediverse twitter, fediverse insta, fediverse reddit, fediverse discord, etc -- why not fediverse facebook/myspace/carrd? Where users could just have small personal (or corporate) pages about themselves that aren't as blog/news focused on the main(user) page.
I don't even think it would be a huge stretch to implement: a big focus on user page customization with a small microblog interface taking up a portion of the screen would do it. (Disclaimer: not saying easy to create, just not that far out of reach vs everything else the fediverse has).
Are there some women who have higher standards than they, themselves, live up to - sure. But that's not what makes an incel.
An incel is someone who believes:
People rarely say #3 and #4 out loud, so once you're at #2 -- which you are -- people are going to start making some assumptions.
And yes, there are some women past #3 and #4 themselves, sure. We've all heard the occasional "men are pigs," and that kind of intolerance shouldn't be accepted no matter who it comes from. But it's absolutely not many/most of us, and if you think so, you're either being overly critical or surrounding yourself with the wrong kinds of friends - both of which are on you and show you need to de-incel your thinking before you go off the deep end.
THEY ARE lol, we actually kept it because we couldn't believe it. No intention to ever look at the thing, just a "how funny is this" moment.
(Disclaimer: Canada)
I swear some days I see as many memes about the people posting memes as I see memes from those posters.