I feel like we’re maybe getting confused about terminology here? “Redundancy” is a specific term for a specific form of dismissal. It’s not a euphemism for “firing” because firing someone is a different kind of dismissal. Terms like rightsizing, reset, re-allocating resources, trimming the fat – these are certainly euphemisms for redundancy that should be called out.

I get the sentiment. But to me personally, “redundancy” is pretty clear and doesn’t mask the pain that comes with being let go. There’s also generally a difference between being “fired” and being “made redundant”. Redundancy suggests that their job doesn’t need to be done anymore b/c of a restructure, bankruptcy, merger, and the company needs to meet certain obligations for that redundancy not to be considered an “unfair dismissal”.

Sure is a videogame

To clarify, it was released in Europe as well :)

That’s fair, I 100% agree. No matter the reason for a game’s poor quality, you shouldn’t let it off the hook. Especially if it’s a commercial product.

Personally though, I don’t think he’s pretending not to have heard that point. He clarifies multiple times in the thread that he’s fine with people criticising his work. Instead, he’s speaking to a kind of criticism that claims – incorrectly – to know things about the game’s development, and that offers naive solutions to complex problems. In my opinion, that kind of criticism is pretty worthless, and takes up air that could otherwise be spent discussing the game’s real, concrete problems.

But I get the frustration. Bethesda’s response to criticism of Starfield has been dismissive on the whole, so the director of the game coming out against some criticism is tone-deaf from a PR perspective.

Also, it seems like no-one who complains about discourse online takes the time to provide examples of what they’re complaining about… So it’s hard to know what exactly Emil is talking about here.

I think it’s a fair point. They’re not arguing against all criticism, just the kind that comes from a place of ignorance for how games are made. There are certainly a lot of people who say things like, “why didn’t the developers just do X Y Z”, with no empathy for or understanding of how games get made. It’s possible to criticise things without spreading ignorance.

I was really worried about this game from the trailer but this is actually looking sick as hell… I like that they’re playing with different kinds of monsters and environments. And co-op sounds like a lot of tense shouty fun.

How come? :)

For sure. That’s just how articles have to be titled to get clicks unfortunately. It can be annoying, but it helps keep journalism alive, so you take the good with the bad.

The author’s arguing that BG3 makes Starfield look like a shallow RPG by comparison. Their broader point is that Starfield is behind the times compared to most RPGs released in the last couple decades, even compared to something like Fallout 3.

Yeah fair enough, I can see why you’d get into it. I think the humour wasn’t for me and I found the plot to be too low stakes. Art was great though.

Finished Oxenfree II, completely agree, writing was excellent. Characters are far more complex and the story was super thematically rich

A bit of Oxenfree II. It’s good so far. Their previous game Afterparty was a pretty limp experience IMO, but they’ve won me back. It’s been a weirdly nostalgic time and the writing is solid. It leans on much of the lore of the first title, which means the mystery isn’t so interesting this time around. But we’ll see how it goes, it might surprise me.

Not sure, just didn’t know any unions had that kind of power. I’m from AUS, so maybe things are different here

Why do you describe unions as a labour cartel? Never heard that phrasing before.

Yeah fair point. I tried it with a couple friends and all the jank became fun instead of tiring.

Most popular survival games (Minecraft, Valheim, Raft, Ark) are dull, unimaginative experiences that disrespect your time. I truly don’t get the appeal, other than if you’re a terminally online kid with nothing else going on. They promise this world of near-eternal fun and imagination, and then forget to develop fun mechanics, write a compelling story to give context to what you’re doing, give you goals, teach you how to play…

Raft is probably the worst example I can think of. What a crock of shit that game was. Zero tutorial, a terrible grind. Just lazy. You can softlock yourself in the first 30 minutes if you jump onto an island and let your raft drift away, because you can’t build a new raft, and all the game’s resources spawn around it for no good reason. The game has a Very Positive rating on Steam with over 200,000 reviews…

There are some obvious exceptions. Terraria is still so charming, and does away with the hunger/thirst/durability trappings of other survivals. I didn’t get too far into Subnautica, but it’s clearly a fresh idea and has an ambitious story. And y’know… I can’t be too hard on Minecraft, it’s iconic.

But the rest is just hollow and soul-crushing and in most cases unfinished. They’re punishing time-sinks disguised as a “world where you can do anything,” and the fact that so many go to bat for them really makes me grieve for people’s taste in games.

Hot take over… Woof, I need to lie down…

Great hot take. I sort of agree for something like Pokemon. But I’m surprised you think this way for all Nintendo games. In the world of 3D platformers for example, I’d say it’s pretty hard to find something better than Mario Galaxy, or 3D World. Same goes for Mario Kart. It’s got crisp controls, and the last game in particular had great track design. I wouldn’t say Wipeout is a very apt comparison given it’s not a kart racer.

Damn, that’s super impressive. Would love to see a breakdown on how they achieved that look, especially with how the arm/gun movements are animated.

Pretty dangerous territory making a game about bodycam footage though. Wonder if they’ll try any commentary on that or if they’ll try to play it safe.

Back in the day, Cube World… RIP…