I've got to say...both of those sentences are an absolutely wild perspective. The first on the history of the medium, and the second for thinking that Bethesda will make anything other than the type of game they've always made for the past 30 years.

It's hard for me to take it that way when the author is citing player count numbers in the headline as though that matters at all in a game with finite content and a low cost of entry. Even you using the word "engagement" in what's meant to be an innocent way just has me thinking about how live service games have poisoned the way people speak and think about video games.

If they were, we probably would have seen it by now.

"There is indeed pressure from the market because the standards in terms of production values, length of experience and knowledge of our medium from customers are going up," Clerc says.

This is another important piece. Games that used to be linear and 8-15 hours are now open world and 60-80 hours long (often to their detriment). Most of the biggest games are designed to be played forever, which means it's coming at the expense of buying or playing new games. And development cycles are exceeding 5 years when they probably ought to be aiming for under 3 years.

The industry is making games with riskier development cycles, adding features that arguably don't make them any better or more marketable, and they're designed to make it actively hostile to the next person trying to sell a game to the same customer. It's no wonder it can't sustain the current trajectory.

"Antiquated" is certainly not a word I've heard anyone describe BG3 with until now. Personally, this is the first year in a long time that AAA has spoken to me, because they haven't been catering to me much for the past number of years.

That's not game design. It's the feel of a single mechanic. And honestly, there are so many open world games to play that have driving that feels good.

Yeah, but we already know what those are. These games that we didn't buy yet are new to us and, therefore, shiny.

I don't think greed is the best explanation when it's his whole family's charity and none of the money has gone into anyone's pocket.

Personally, I have yet to come across that hypothetical package. But if that's truly your concern, why not make standards around font size instead of the words themselves? There are laws around this kind of thing for lending rates and such to make sure that you're not tricked into a bad loan with the "fine print". What I see this law trying to do for the meat industry is to make it seem as though there's no substitute for the product they offer, even though there is. It's different, but it's an alternative that they'd rather brush under the rug.

In the first case that you're replying to, we're using the modifier "vegetarian" in front of the word steak to note why it's different than a regular steak. In your example, you're putting "vegan" in front of steak and lying, because it's not vegan. How many people are actually getting confused by a vegetarian product made to replace a meat-based one, especially considering the veggie one is likely more expensive? Meanwhile, how much more likely do you think it is that the meat and dairy industries would rather there just not be any perceived alternative to their products at all? Because that one seems far more likely to me. I know nothing of the politics of France, but those industries have tried and are trying the same tactic over here in the US.

I'm on Linux, so if I buy from GOG, I don't get cloud saves or automatic updates. If we had Galaxy on Linux, it would be my default store. But it's not on Linux, so I shop on Steam.

Loot boxes are so 2017. It's all about battle passes, engagement, and player retention now.