Marketing was an issue but there were things wrong with the game that had nothing to do with marketing.

If the executives tell the developers they need to add or change something to match what the marketing team put out and that they have limited time to do it, those changes can have adverse effects on other systems that may have already been in the game before the changes were mandated. Altering something simple can sometimes lead to other systems behaving incorrectly especially if you don’t have enough time to implement it properly, this is a very common thing that happens all the time in programming.

Of course it is, they get paid more than junior developers.

This is definitely from that one psycho Windows 7 guy.

This is literally “make the Battlefield player pay money to reload their gun.”

The issue with Cyberpunk was 100% a problem created by the marketing team and executives giving false promises and ideas about the content of the game, and rather than admitting they were wrong, forcing the developers to change what they were developing into the game the marketing team was marketing.

Forcing return to office is not doing anything to production of the game. The only thing it does is give the company an excuse to fire people to make earnings reports look better.

Why does anyone need to figure out whether a forum is left or right leaning? You go there and if you like the content you stay and if you dont like the content you leave, its literally that easy.

Well I think others have already sufficiently explained the grammar rule that applies to “an herb,” so I won’t mention it further.

As far as what it means, who even knows? However, it is clear from the context that it is meant to be a negative remark. This person made this tweet while upset after just resigning because the Kotaku CEO wants the authors to focus on video game guides rather than news, which the EIC says is in direct conflict “with her vision for the company.” Saying anything unclear about the CEO with that context is obvious that it would be meant in a negative or disparaging way.

I mentioned PC only because I don’t know if the fan patches that fix up the game are also available for OSX or not.

They’ve wanted to do this for a while and some big publisher I think it was Warner Bros or Activision literally said “No, because we might have some legal claim to the IP, but we aren’t going to check, if you do anything with it we will sue you.”

Honestly, No One Lives Forever was a great game that would only be muddied if brought back.

Also, this article is wrong. You can still play both NOLF and NOLF2 on PC. There are fan patches that get them working on modern operating systems and fix up some bugs, while adding support for widescreen and HD resolutions.

Hard to imagine they would try to make something radically different when they can essentially reuse the same engine and genre/setting and make more profit that way.

I mean, Kotaku didnt have the best journalistic integrity track record to begin with, and the EIC approves their articles, so…

50 guides a week sounds ridiculous, but I wouldn’t be surprised if Kotaku authors were already doing this.

EDIT:

Glennon also announced her resignation on Twitter, writing, “I’ve resigned from Kotaku and Jim Spanfeller is an herb.”

Also, maybe don’t immediately publicly disparage your boss after resigning because they made a choice you didnt agree with?

According to this review, “aside from minor issues, the game stands tall in the action rpg genre.”

Divinity III it is, then.

If this is anything like the other two lawsuits filed over the same thing, they probably list the same companies, including but not limited to:

• Activision Blizzard
• Treyarch
• Raven Software
• Microsoft
• Nintendo (of America, not Japan, lol)
• Sony
• Apple
• Google
• Epic Games

and others. Like, they literally name just a bunch of big gaming and tech companies.

Ah, I glossed right over that, my bad.

Yes, as I said, I agree that there is a problem. But the problem can be solved by just not engaging with the addicting elements (and setting limits on your childs gaming, and ultimately by bringing this as a case to the FTC).

Video games and cake are not necessary for life. You can choose to eat other things; do other things. Additionally, video games are not like cake. For example, a person can choose to only engage in the multiplayer elements of a game and not engage with any other part, wheras you can’t decide that you only want to eat the egg whites in the cake. If you take a bite of that cake, you have to engage with every ingredient in that bite.

It may be better for games that include elements such as lootboxes or microtransactions to lock such features behind some sort of age gate, but this has the problem of the game requiring data on children, and that such a feature can easily be defeated or bypassed just like every kid that asked their grandma to buy them GTA.

Regardless, this is not really something that needs to be a lawsuit by private individuals, but rather is something that necessarily should be brought up to the FTC, which would have authority granted by the government to present the necessary arrangements for mitigation of the problem.

From another article on a similar lawsuit filed in Illinois last year (interestingly, the minor in this case is referred to as D.G, and in the Arkansas lawsuit the minor is referred to as G.D.):

The 9-year-old Illinois resident, who goes by D.G. in the complaint, “experienced severe emotional distress, diminishes social interactions, loss of friends, poor hygiene, and withdrawal symptoms such as rage, anger, and physical outbursts,” according to the complaint.

D.G. spends six to eight hours a day playing video games across multiple platforms including the Xbox, PS4, iPhone, and Android devices. The complaint points to a number of patents owned by the gaming companies that allegedly push users into in-game spending.

[…] The suit also named Apple Inc., Google LLC, Microsoft Corp., and Nintendo of America Inc. as defendants.

You know what this sounds like to me? A bad, irresponsible parent refusing to actually parent their child, and instead trying to blame literally the entire video games industry for their negligence. A person looking to try to make a quick buck, not a person that actually wants to change the industry for the better. In my opinion, this is a person that should not be a parent, because they obviously cannot handle that responsibility.

From an article about this lawsuit filed in Arkansas:

The filing claims G.D. plays games over a dozen hours a day and has spent thousands on microtransactions. The suit seeks damages for injuries related to G.D.'s addiction (pain in his hands, shoulders, and elbow), related health care costs, statuary and punitive damages, and legal fees.

This sounds like the same problem, the parent neglecting to set limits for the amount of time their child spends playing video games, and neglecting to limit the types of games their child plays. I mean, in this suit filed in Arkansas, the suit claims that “rubber-banding” is specifically designed to cause gaming addiction. “Rubber-banding,” which is a term from racing games to describe the behavior of other racers speeding up to the player, as if they were on a rubber-band, in order to present the player with challenging gameplay. It is not comparable to something like a lootbox microtransaction, but this suit claims they are the same.

Again? While I agree there is a problem, this is kinda like blaming the fork for making you overweight. Yeah, the cake is colorful or whatever, but you could just not eat so much of it so often? Or if you’re a parent, pay attention to what your child is eating?

This is Epic wanting 100% profit from microtransactions, and literally nothing else.

Honestly after Redfall Arkane is going to have to work really hard to not repeat that dumpster fire.