It definitely feels like this is counter to their competitive advantage in the market (marque single player titles), but maybe the numbers on that just aren't big enough anymore.
I will continue to play the good F2P games (without paying a cent myself) and the great AAA games that I will gladly pay full price for.
I figure if the F2P are going to be funded by others anyway, I might as well benefit from it.
I’ll also signal to the devs that make great full featured games that this is what I want.
If the success of Baldur's Gate 3 shows that gamers don't like micro-transactions, does that mean games that sell well with micro-transactions is prove that gamers actually like them?
Just want to be clear on what the rules are for the logic here.
I realize on an intellectual level I live in a world where Zelda games are revered for some reason. Don’t play them, can’t stand console/j- rpg’s and don’t know anyone that plays them but especially online they seem to be the Alpha and Omega. THAT’s why this is such a big thing, you can’t compare games but to surpass the ultimate internet fanboy dream game by just making a great RPG is ballsy and just what gaming needed right now.
The reason they are revered is that over the last 27 years, the Legend of Zelda franchise has consistently put out one good game after the next with few, if any real blemishes on their record. After almost 3 decades of consistently putting out games that are fun, innovative, and kinda familiar all at once, the fanboys may have a minor point with their obsession of the games.
Get your downvote ready everyone, I haven’t played the new Zelda but I did play and beat botw and it was just okay for me. I found it to be very over rated. It’s not even close to my top 10.
TotK makes BotW feel like an unfinished Beta. This is coming from someone who didnt complete BotW but beat TotK with all shrines and such. The fact that you can make a custom airbike and even use it in some dungeons makes all the difference, IMO.
forbes.com
Top