In fhe same way you can voice your opinion, someone else can voice why it’s flawed, why people should look at a project like this and point out why people should just regurgitate the same old “AI slop” venom. Putting those points forward isn’t being mean-spirited, it’s highlighting the nuance around a topic and adding more to the conversation than “tis gud”/“tis bad” without being a personal attack so there’s no need to go on the defensive either.
Absolutely. That review I posted is exactly what I was anticipating when seeing the footage multiple channels were posting back in January. I’m just a little surprised to see so many singing false praises like that shit he shows of a reviewer giving it a 100 and starting with a line like “it has flaws”. I encountered another video where the review had the gall to say “the parkour is the best it’s ever been. It’s nothing like in Unity but the animations are so good”. This is a reviewer who’s previously panned animation-based parkour in favour of the old mechanics-based style. Everyone’s blowing Ubisoft because the company is supposedly on Death’s doorstep despite them having firmly put themselves there. It’s sickening.
Doesn’t matter. Not about the quality, nor the morons downvoting me. The conversation is about percentage and a misconception. Steam takes 30%. PlayStation takes 30%. Same with Microsoft and probably Nintendo. 30% is also the “small” portion Google and Apple take on their platforms. I only know of Epic and GoG that take less. We’re talking about numerical fact, not opinion, and I can’t help but notice it’s the platforms that are comfortable having a monopoly that take 30% while the ones that publicly promote competition (or at least claim to, to be fair) that take less.
Lack of optimisation. The spec requirements alone point this out but then they still commonly run like garbage.