And then, they will blame the studio when the game fails :/. There is no point to force a studio specialized in single-player games to develop a multiplayer one. And using an existing IP for that is not very effective imo (it reminds me a lot when, during PS360 era, all single player games had an uninteresting multiplayer mode solely to justify the online membership, like Fable 2 or Mass Effect 3). It’s exactly like the last Crash game no one cared about.

It feels like they are buying lottery tickets, hoping a winning ticket will cover all their expenses.

I heard they sue Pocketpair on copyrighted systems, not on the design of the Pals (eg: using an object like a Pokeball to catch the creatures). They certainly have solid legal arguments, which explains why they took their time to find some flaws they could exploit to sue them.

I guess it’s time to invest in a mobile controller 😅.

I started a long journey for discovering Dragon Quest (only played to 9 and completed 11). I already finished DQ1 (very nice, simple but interesting nevertheless), and I am now playing DQ2 (and I love it :D).

It’s true for TCG online, but I doubt it will be the case for this one. They announced nothing regarding micro transactions nor how to get extra packs. They can totally make this one free, as it’s marketing value for physical cards is enough by itself.

Yes but if it’s free, I don’t think it’s a big issue. Very different than allowing people to buy lottery tickets (it could be the case, but I don’t think so).

Depends how you see it. TCG is by itself a lootbox game, but with physical cards instead. However, it does not seem that the Pokemon Company wants to turn its TCG game into a digital business, but instead use those apps as promotional products for TCG. Personally, I think it’s a much better model than the one pursued by everyone else. The apps are more a bonus / promotional stuff than a real thing. For this particular app, I won’t be surprised if there is no other way to get packs than waiting for the next day.

It’s normal to be skeptical no worries ;). Pokémon TCG is really a thing of its own, and managed by a separate entity within the Pokemon Company.

I could be wrong, but if it was the case, I am wondering why they did not already do it with their new TCG app that was released last year.

I don’t think so. The TCG online has no micro-transactions. You have to buy real packs to get digital packs in the game.

I believe this new game will just be advertisement for the TCG by itself, without the F2P stuff we are used to in other games. Giving people this app for free, and expect to convert some of them into TCG players who will buy real packs.

I generally support emulation, but I admit Switch emulation is hard to support when it happens while the machine is commercialized and the authors are trying to get money for it.

I don’t know much, but I heard Hasbro has fired all the guys who created D&D (after they bought the licence). Those guys helped a lot Larian during BG3 development (Larian even tried to speak about them when they won at the Game Awards, but were cut off before they could).

I loved Lost Odyssey at the time but, at the same time, it’s probably one of worst JRPG I have ever played when you only consider the beginning. The game is so slow to start, and sometimes a bit too difficult (especially because it does not let you grind, which is very annoying at the beginning because you have not many options).

Besides that, It has a lot to share, with a touching story, very interesting reflections about immortality and harsh/intense moments. The gameplay is good as well, proposing its own mechanics and bosses that forces you to use them.

It’s not easy to recommend because it’s one of those games where you have to play many hours to get in.

As long as it remains an option among others, I don’t see any issue with the subscription model. I play video games for 20+ years, and I can say it’s impossible for me at this point to play once again to most of the games I played in the past. A subscription model is the cheapest way to play most games if you do not play it more than once (which is the case for most games, at least for myself).

Even in the rare case where I would like to play again a game I did not buy at the time, between discounts, remake / remaster (or even emulation), and even if I have to buy it 5 years after its release, it will still be worth it compared to the dozens of games I had not bought.

I am much more concerned about DLCs, season pass, bugged games on release and so on. Releasing incomplete or imperfect games (and this also count for BG3) implies that one day, using a physical copy of nowadays in 20 years will be a subpar experience because you won’t have access to any of this content by legal means (assuming Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo shutting down their online services for old generations, which has already happened and will likely happen again in the future). Retrogaming for games released nowadays is kind doomed if you do not follow the piracy route (which is probably the only secure way to keep track of both DLCs and patches in the long run).

I kinda agree. Back in the days, I was waiting for new games. Now, there are dozens of games waiting for me every time I complete one. It seems to be impossible to play everything nowadays even if you only do that. It’s not a big issue for us of course (we just have to accept we cannot play everything, and choose wisely how to use our playing time), but I can see this being an issue for the industry.

I just bought it a few weeks ago, and started playing it again few days ago. As good as I remember so far :).

I had the chance to play it at the time, and since I hadn’t played SM64 yet, this game was even more impressive to me :). I wouldn’t change anything to it, mixing up 3D platformer with mini-games and a moveset that evolved through out the game, combined with an amazing OST and funny dialogs … it was perfect <3.

Only played the original and 0. 0 was pretty good imo, but it was not really what I expected. The plot focus more about AIs than time travel, so that’s another thing to take into account depending on your tastes.

Yes, it seems to be it. I personally do not like this way of thinking. Marketing is always going to put up some lies in order to sell the product. It feels strange to me to judge a game from what the marketing said about it, instead of what the game truly is. Of course, it would be very disappointing if you can only rely on what the marketing said when deciding to buy or not buy the game. But with all the options available nowadays (reviews, streams, test it for 10€ thanks to the gamepass instead of paying 80€ directly), it seems strange to me to spend so much money, without informing yourself enough, and be this angry afterwards.

As I said, it’s not like the game is perfect, but it’s far to be as bad as those « user reviews » depicts.

People are too harsh for me I guess 😅.

I personally really enjoyed the trip. Far from perfect, and more a 2010 game in its core, but quite entertaining. However, I would have been disappointed if I had to pay 80€ for it (especially because this game lacks polish). I had no hesitation thanks to the gamepass, and I have no regret playing 100h to it :).

I think the backlash is a bit excessive. It feels like people expected this game to be exceptional, having huge expectations that were never met. It’s Bethesda, how can we expect a master piece from them on day one? Besides, it’s not like a success like Skyrim can be reproduced that easily. It’s not bad to have expectations, but if the game is different than what you had in mind, it’s not the game’s fault imo (and it happens too frequently those years, as if all major releases are bad games that should never be played).