J4CKA1 said:Ostrowidzki1989 said:Having indies forced to have their games worth less than greedy companies like Activision is a terrible idea and glad that changed. AAA games are nothing more than casinos where the player always loses. I never touch that garbage anymore and don't want AAA companies to have all the advantages.
OK, I see what you're saying. I don't think AAA games are as bad as you say, but I understand. Personally I don't like most indies, but I respect what they are doing. Seems like it's one of those things that doesn't really have a perfect solution.
When you have AAA studios going to court to justify predatory practices saying gamers appreciate, "surprise mechanics", or "loot boxes", it kills it for me. Knowing that the best way to get the ultimate gear or have the ability to store more than 100 items in a storage box is to pay more money on top of already having dished out $60 USD.
I remember Banjo Kazooie had that secret double health thing after you've pretty much completed absolutely everything in the game and earned it. That's a feature that wouldn't be in modern games within the base game, but rather a pay to win mechanic that could be bought at the beginning.
GTA 5 recently went too far putting in a casino where you can gamble real money. How the gambling commission hasn't banned that game at this point is ridiculous.
Indies, remasters of old RPGs and a few AA studio's games are all I'll play. The only way I'll pick up a AAA title is if it's under $10.
So in short, some indies might not be perfect, but you can see the pride, passion and love of their project a lot more than say, anything made by Activision or EA.
I find it pretty sad that a lot of really cool IPs from the past will never be what thry used to be. Single player games selling xp boosters and a bunch of weapons, armors and cosmetics that should have been unlockable in the main game are all behind pay walls.
I couldn't support Microsoft going back to giving openly greedy companies unfair advantages again.