I can't say for sure I'd have bought it, but I've been wanting an nVidia Shield update or serious competitor for a couple years now.
I wasn't even aware of this project, though, so either they weren't trying to drum up interest, or I've had my head in the sand?
Hoyo has been hurting from these strikes, especially as they only affect some of the studios that they employ for voice acting. I have seen numerous and repeated calls to replace the voice actors because some characters are voiced now and some aren't.
So I'm not surprised that after months and months, they finally decided to just move on with studios that are still taking work.
I absolutely think that it's unethical to use someone's voice work to produce a replacement for them without their consent and appropriate compensation. And from that article, it sounds like Hoyo agrees with me.
I did, at launch. It was somewhat fun, and I didn't regret my purchase. It's pretty much exactly the game you expect, from the ads. That alone makes it noteworthy, IMO. :D
There are even games that already do this. I still end up second-guessing, but at least "you last saved 8 seconds ago" makes me pretty sure I got it.
Certain attitudes toward certain companies will guarantee upvotes, even if it doesn't accurately reflect the actions the company has just taken. They're just farming upvotes, clicks, ads, etc.
I've yet to find any way to "fix" the situation. People aren't interested in being open-minded. They just want to push some endorphins and move on.
And you can even return it, if it's released and you haven't installed it... Or if it's on Steam, and you played it less than 2 hours.
There really isn't a lot of reason to strenuously avoid pre-ordering if you're pretty sure you'll buy it at release.
And even better, a lot of games have pre-installs that can save you time at release. You could be playing the game instead of being mad that it isn't downloaded yet.
Nice! I paid for early access and thought it had potential. Time to finally see how it turned out!
In theory, it's possible for games that don't use encryption. None of which are official Switch games.
Normally I'd disagree (because games written for a single console don't do well with hardware upgrades), but since the old console already runs at different speeds when handheld and docked, I'd expect most games to be able to handle faster processors safely. We'll have to see how that shakes out. If it really does run them better, and it has drift-proof sticks, I'm quite interested. Otherwise, I'll wait a year or 2 until there's a good, cheap library of games for it.
Besides that "one weird trick", the other is to just include a diverse sets of people/cultures in your game. There's no need to push their agendas, just don't misrepresent them. That's actually what they're asking for, even. It's a lot more effective, IMO.
Trolls will still complain your game is woke, but they won't have any teeth.
Gee, I think that's about the same time they decided that they community wanted more difficulty and made the decision to make the lowest levels of the game into bullet-sponges and to make no changes at all to the parts of the game that veteran players wanted more difficulty in.
Now it's super grindy for veterans, and not fun for newbies. Exactly the opposite of what was wanted by all.
I am not at all surprised that people are quitting.
This isn't a screen aspect ratio. It's a ratio of 1 portion of the screen to another portion of the screen.
It's short for 90%:10%. 1 app uses 90% of the screen and another uses 10% of the screen.
It's not comparing the length of 1 edge of the screen to a perpendicular edge of the screen.