There’s nothing wrong with having different preferences. It doesn’t have to be because someone has a worse or better attention span.
I personally do think the number of enemies that had to be killed should have been decreased. For me, it was mostly because it became comical sometimes that more guys kept coming out of the woodwork. After the fiftieth O’Driscoll you kill, you start to wonder if it’s a gang or a country’s military.
The gameplay is definitely way exaggerated because it would not be very engaging to get into one gunfight per chapter. I interpret these parts of many games symbolically—the amount of violence is to make a point. The game would be very short or really boring if it was realistic in that regard.
Arthur is a really complicated character who, despite being sometimes sympathetic, is ultimately not a good person. Even if you make only “good honor” choices, his story is still filled with points where he struggles to reconcile his actions with his beliefs. You wouldn’t want to live near a person like Arthur in reality, and he doesn’t like being that person.
RDR2 is ultimately a story about bad people struggling against other bad people. One group represents the lawless banditry that is dying out, while the other is the capitalist yoke that wears a nice suit. Lots of normal people get caught in the middle, and they usually suffer for it.
It succeeds for me because it still keeps the humanity in focus. Bad people are humans too. It does not absolve them, but it underscores the conditions that can manufacture them.
Rarely. I don’t think I ever have two years in a row.
Usually only if I’m very sure it’s a game I will get a lot of playtime out of due to past titles. For instance, I did pre-order Civ 7 because prior Civs have been the best hours-enjoyed-per-dollar investments I’ve ever made. No exaggeration, even accounting for DLCs I bought at full price.
I’m sure without context ytmnd.com seems insane.
I have no clue how he’s this quickly been able to have such a positive attitude and sense of humor about it. I’d be despondent in his shoes.
I suppose I shouldn’t be too surprised; Clint always brings such enthusiasm and positivity to his videos. He’s a go-to when I’m sick. He’s like chicken noodle soup in video form.
My appetite for PvP dropped off precipitously after college. I just don’t have the time to dedicate to getting good at any game, and every online multiplayer game I’ve ever played is toxic if you aren’t at least decent. I have no interest in a sixteen year old cursing me out because I don’t have the map memorized.
Single player generally also brings in much more flexibility, especially when it comes to things like mods. With my limited free time, if I’m enjoying a game except for thing x, I prefer the ability to remove or diminish that thing x. Also, you have the ability to pause to change laundry loads or whatever.
It’s been 8 years since VI came out. That’s the longest they’ve gone between releases since the original. It’s also difficult to say if it’s necessary without actually seeing what VII has to offer. If it’s VI with a new coat of paint, then I agree. But I hope they bring a novel aspect like districts was for VI that made it worth it.
It also speeds up the games a bit. I simply do not have the time as a full adult to sink 10+ hours into a single game. I have actually finished every game of Civ 7 I’ve played so far, which has never happened with any prior Civ installments at my current playtime.