kangarootoo Comments

Page 1 of 344

  • Fans figure out how to complete Super Mario Odyssey without jumping

  • kangarootoo 12/12/2017

    @technotica

    “ but almost anyone or any group dedicated enough to solve it could have solved it.”

    I honestly think that is downplaying the research and lateral thinking that was involved here. Identifying where the “jumps” were being picked up was not trivial, contriving ways to avoid that happening was not trivial. Neither were easily visible, the result of simply spending time. Many gamers could spend weeks trying to achieve this task and not make progress.
    Reply +1
  • kangarootoo 12/12/2017

    @technotica

    From reading the article just now, it kind of seems to me like an impressive achievement, doesn't it?

    In terms of a player achieving something that a regular player could not, in terms of the collective effort of several people required to discern the solution to several problems, and in terms of Gamechamp3000 being (presumably) the only person on Earth to have achieved this......

    I'd be interested in perhaps more detail, about why you don't consider this impressive. By what measure should people interested in unusual and/or rare gaming achievements not be impressed by this? By what measure was a problem, that apparently took a fair bit of research to overcome, trivial?

    Or is this where we refer to curing cancer and landing on the moon as non-trivial comparative examples? :)
    Reply +2
  • PlayerUnknown apologises for Battlegrounds' inappropriate female character model

  • kangarootoo 12/12/2017

    @peytonlind

    "Poor feminazis and white knight SJWs getting triggered over something so trivial."

    Are you an AI?
    Reply +1
  • kangarootoo 12/12/2017

    @Gigaflop

    "I truly don't know if jumping on things like this has any impact towards achieving that goal though and fear that it instead poisons the well and induces people to retaliate instead."

    Now that, is probably the thing I am most guilty of, whilst being in calmer moments most advocative (I had to check to see if that was a real word, rather than just my mangling of "advocate" - turns out it is) of. I agree that calling some a nobhead in response to their perceived shortcomings, is hardly going to make them suddenly drop their spoon into their cornflakes and exclaim "What have I been doing? This changes everything!"

    Sometimes I feel like a less smart version of Richard Dawkins. As a friend of mine once said of him "I agree with a lot of what he says. Unfortunately he says it with the voice of a c*nt."

    A bit of self reflection is no bad thing :)
    Reply 0
  • kangarootoo 11/12/2017

    @Gigaflop

    “would you be ok with them leaving this in if you were allowed to choose between different body types”

    Perhaps. In answer to your question, I’m not sure I have a personal stance. I’m just questioning the points put forward in this thread, as I think many of them (any reference to SJWs for example) haven’t been well constructed. Honestly, that is most if what I do on here - just challenge readily given but thinly devised points of points of view.
    Reply +3
  • kangarootoo 11/12/2017

    @CheekyRobo

    It is an opinion because it whether something is or is not sexist, is subjective by nature. If you want to define it as XYZ for the purposes of debate, that is fine, but disagreement will still result because it is inherrently subjective (tall is subjective, 6 feet is objective, but within a debate you can say “tall is any height >= 6 feet”). Results correctly attributed to something become objective.

    I’m not sure what point you are attributing to me.
    Reply 0
  • kangarootoo 11/12/2017

    @anthonyhillman

    I should hope you wouldn't take it seriously, I was very much being sarcastic. I realise that my sarcasm would easily get lost in quite a long post.

    What I meant was that I was ending up playing devil's advocate to some extent, triggered by what I saw as poorly formed counter arguments. I am no advocate for decency and clean living, unless I see a poor case being made for debauchery and deviance, and then I just can't help myself :)
    Reply +1
  • kangarootoo 11/12/2017

    @Gigaflop

    I'm not quite sure why I'm engaging with this, but OK.

    "Trying to actively smooth out the lumps of reality is just as much "intent" of the author."

    So in reality, things of all types happen at times, and not at all other times, all around the world, sometimes.

    When you make a video game character, that is the character, at all times. An art director might refer to the defining features of a character.

    So when you add a feature to any character, it should be in recognition of that fact that that feature will become a defining aspect of the character.

    An individual guy might get briefly aroused in tight shorts, an individual girl might briefly get erect nipples in a tight top, that any of these things CAN occur at times in reality does not mean that an game character should have these things ALL THE TIME.

    As I said in an earlier comment, and it is the last time I'm going to labour the point, a video game is not a documentary. Not only does everything happen with intent, a video game can also never replicate the great variance that happens in real life.


    My very first comment on this thread, was about how some people will plead wilful ignorance in defence of the counter argument they wish to create, and this is one of those situations. Nobody of adult age, with any real intelligence (and I'm crediting you with both of those, patronising as I know that sounds) would offer "real life" as a defence for camel toe on a video game character, or suggest that "real life" is a defence against accusations of sexualisation. There may be other better defences, but "real life" is the defence that is being put forward right now. It is just yet another instance of when defending a point of view, sometimes people end up going to a slightly crazy place, that doesn't fairly represent their intelligence or their maturity.


    Honestly, I don't even care that much.
    If someone can give me a decent justification that holds any amount of water, I'm always happy to change my mind. The reason I am apparently on the side of decency and clean living in this case, is because all of the arguments put forward thus far to justify this brief character change, have been bloody awful.
    Reply +2
  • kangarootoo 11/12/2017

    @Diji1

    1. I'm not at all outraged. I'm trying to encourage intelligent debate. That is above all else, the number one thing I am arguing for. A place where people engage their brains, instead of just putting perfectly normal words in quotation marks, and sitting back like they made a counter argument worth a dick.

    It is a shame that any debate of this subject pushes your sensitive buttons so easily. The ease with which you get upset at what you perceive to be feminism, might be something to focus your attentions on, instead of just whining about it and trying to shut down the discussion.

    2. "Last time I checked" - Clearly you need to check more often and in closer detail, as the fairly even spread of + and - throughout this thread suggest that you aren't checking closely enough. Thankfully there is a decent volume of views of varying flavours of disagreement, both in this thread and on this site, which is the foundation of any good discussion and one of the reasons I come here.

    3. I was commenting here when you were still shitting in your nappies, so don't tell me what kind of website this is, or whether I'm welcome here. If you want your own little echo chamber, where you can use all the quotation marks you want, I can only suggest that you either take your own advice and fuck off somewhere else, or use the ignore list so you don't have to read what I say - either way, stop drowning me in your tears.
    Reply +12
  • kangarootoo 11/12/2017

    @Uberheertje

    "I can assure you that she will not understand you"

    I'm struggling to understand also. Are you saying that you hit your girlfriend?
    Reply +3
  • kangarootoo 11/12/2017

    @anthonyhillman

    "Based on the images provided, it's not sexualised in any way."

    This feels like a disagreement will be hard to resolve, but.... really? Not sexualised at all?


    "It's just there... just like in real life."

    The thing we should always remember, is that a video game is not a documentary. It isn't a recording of something. Everything exists through intent. So these shorts were chosen, to be fitted to this character, and the camel toe was included by choice, by whichever artist made the original model. It isn't like someone put a pair of shorts on a mannequin, and then said "Well THAT was unexpected".

    Consider this. If someone hires a model for an ad campaign, and after trying several outfits, purposefully chose the one that accentuated camel toe, would you also argue that decision wasn't made to sexualise the model? AGain, I find it hard to respond beyond the point of "Well obviously it was".
    Reply +20
  • kangarootoo 11/12/2017

    @LittleBigDave

    To be honest, in terms of general uninformed opinion being pushed about as news, I completely agree with you. I dislike it too.

    However, in this case it felt like that was being used as a means to dismiss the genuine (not world changing, but genuine) story here.

    All discussions about sexism are by their very nature, opinion pieces. That doesn't mean there aren't valid discussions to be had. The way you expressed your, somewhat excessive if I may say, annoyance at this, suggested to me that the reason you were annoyed was that for you it was a non-issue. I bet if a different issue came along, that did bother you, you'd be expressing your own opinion without question.
    Reply +2
  • kangarootoo 11/12/2017

    @LittleBigDave

    No, I think my translation is just fine.

    You wrote -
    "I wish News stories derived from outraged pricks on Twitter would fuck-off out of ALL media to be honest."

    I wrote -
    "I wish the media would only represent the world as I would like it to be."

    I'm struggling to see the difference.
    Reply -11
  • kangarootoo 11/12/2017

    @LittleBigDave

    "I wish News stories derived from outraged pricks on Twitter would fuck-off out of ALL media to be honest."

    Translation: I wish the media would only represent the world as I would like it to be.

    You know what, with that attitude, you'll never really be happy.
    Reply -17
  • kangarootoo 11/12/2017

    I predict this will be one of those threads where otherwise intelligent people pretend that they can't tell the difference between two different situations, to try and make a point. Reply +60
  • Destiny 2 locks one of its most-prized exotic guns behind Curse of Osiris expansion

  • kangarootoo 10/12/2017

    @Malek86

    That sucks a bit. I remember being slightly peeved when my only complete set was undone by my purchase. I suspect for a handful of people it helps drive DLC sales, hence the change.
    Reply 0
  • kangarootoo 08/12/2017

    @Malek86

    "This usually means you end up with something like 1250G in a game, and can't get them all unless you have purchased the DLC"

    No, you do need the DLC purchased for your gamerscore total up to be updated (unless something has changed).

    That was exactly my experience of Oblivion, the only game on XB360 I totalled. My gamerscore total for Oblivion showed as 1000/1000. I then bought some DLC and my total went from 1000/1000 to 1000/1250.
    Reply +1
  • kangarootoo 08/12/2017

    "Bungie has said it will fix the "issue" where players are now unable to collect all of Destiny 2's trophies and achievements without buying the Curse of Osiris DLC."

    I thought that must be a mistake, and a contravention of platform submission rules.
    Reply +1
  • kangarootoo 08/12/2017

    @jamesjordan1

    "go change your shorts and tantrum in your room."

    I'm sure the irony of this is lost on you.
    Reply +5
  • kangarootoo 07/12/2017

    @Rack

    "EULAs are just meaningless hot air to scare people. They carry zero legal weight."

    That isn't strictly true. If you buy an online only game, and you break the EULA, you can be banned from playing even though you spent money on the game, and legally there would be little you could do about it.
    Reply 0
  • kangarootoo 07/12/2017

    Is Curse of Osiris is paid for DLC? A cursory google suggests so. If so, I'm surprised that requiring paid for DLC to achieve a Platinum trophy doesn't break a TRC. Reply +1
  • The new trailer for Hideo Kojima's Death Stranding is sci-fi craziness at its best

  • kangarootoo 08/12/2017

    @Negotiator

    Our last hope, I think you'll find ;)
    Reply 0
  • kangarootoo 08/12/2017

    Hmmmm. In several minds about this.

    1. Interesting start, interesting invisible enemy. Excellent graphical detail.
    2. That dialogue. Sweet Jesus, that dialogue, like a wheel barrow full of cliched bricks, tipped down some stairs. "Then came the next explosion". That literally makes my spine tingle with its lardyness.
    3. The last 3rd, wtf. It just dripped with "Look how weird this all is. Weeeeiiiird."

    So in summary, not sold yet. But then it is only one trailer, and it has a job to do.
    Need to see some gameplay really. Not currently convinced by the whole "What is going on? Who knows? Its all super weird, maybe its a dream, maybe not, who knows? Maybe you'll never know." approach to teaser trailers, in this or anything else.
    Reply 0
  • New Total War Warhammer 2 mode lets powerful PCs push the game to its limits

  • kangarootoo 07/12/2017

    1m13s. The last time I went to a metal gig. Reply +6
  • Netflix doing a Choose Your Own Adventure TV show for adults

  • kangarootoo 06/12/2017

    @Creamysmooth

    I was on the fence about that new Warlock game, but I'll give it go. Thanks :)
    Reply +1
  • kangarootoo 05/12/2017

    @Creamysmooth

    The Tinman games are ace (the writing can be a little mixed occasionally, but often it is very good, and their combat system is very novel).

    They ended up with the Fighting Fantasy license you know, and all of the new digital FF games were put together by them.
    Reply +1
  • kangarootoo 05/12/2017

    @GrayHeart

    If you're a fan of Lone Wolf, this is for you.

    https://www.projectaon.org/en/Main/Books
    Reply +1
  • kangarootoo 05/12/2017

    More on topic, I was crazy for fighting fantasy books when I was a kid. I read a lot of the Choose Your Own Adventure books too, but FF was the original.

    I was just the right age when FF books first came out, and they were massively popular a few years later, when I guess I would have been around 8-10 years old. I remember kids writing walkthroughs for them, which were just a sheet of paper with a list of page numbers, and if someone had finished a tough book (Creature of Havoc was batshit insanely difficult), their route would be much in demand.

    I built up quite a collection over the years, and would buy old ones on eBay just out of nostalgia, even just a few years ago. My iPad is stuffed with game books now, remasters of old ones and brand new ones (anyone who hasn't played Steve Jackson's Sorcery series on a tablet is totally missing out).

    TLDR, I love fighting fantasy. They seeded a life long love of fantasy and gaming, and if the books had never existed I may very well not have ended up doing the job I do today.
    Reply +4
  • kangarootoo 05/12/2017

    @Adamski707

    Good find! :)
    Reply 0
  • kangarootoo 05/12/2017

    @Adamski707

    I remember that, set in space as Irien said.

    I think I've found it. Imaginatively named, Murder in Space.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_in_Space

    Edit: bugger, no I haven't found it. I checked on Youtube, and this isn't what I remember. If we're talking about the same thing, my recollection is of something English, with a bit of a Dr Who aesthetic. Not quite the same as this thing...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fq6WJ0rXwSo
    Reply 0
  • Allegations of cheating rock FIFA 18

  • kangarootoo 06/12/2017

    Honestly, as soon as someone starts referring to haters, to calling other people cheaters, and saying things like "I'm sorry that my life is more interesting than yours", my first reaction is "well, they're obviously guilty".

    If your defence is sound, you just present it, and there ends the discussion. If you start going down the path of insults and ad hominem, one has to ask, why choose a less effective defence than the simple facts?

    Edit: that said, if there is a mechanism that is supposed to ensure that disconnections count as losses, that mechanism should work. If the system worked properly, it would protect everyone from accusations of cheating.
    Reply +32
  • Ubisoft is giving away Assassin's Creed: Black Flag for free next week on PC

  • kangarootoo 05/12/2017

    @Hexagon_Sun

    I believe Ubi have another game series in the works, based purely around all of the piratey stuff. Makes sense really, as it would have been madness to develop that route just for a game and a half (Rogue is also excellent btw - it is kind of AC 4.5, but no bad thing, and it is getting an HD re-release sometime next year I think).
    Reply +2
  • kangarootoo 05/12/2017

    @rahonejm

    "the biggest flaw for me is how they handled secondary objectives on missions"

    This.

    The one thing that I f*cking hate in the AC games, and easily the worst thing about Black Flag, was those sodding optional objectives.

    Not only are they easy to miss as you say (often introduced part way through a mission, with no proper fan fare), it is often a pain in the butt to play the mission "their way" in order to be considered to have completed it properly.

    Thankfully they saw the light, and dropped them in Origins.
    Reply +1
  • kangarootoo 05/12/2017

    Still the best AC game. If you don't download this, you belong in a Victorian insane asylum. One with a really poor grasp of patient care. Reply +1
  • Odd war of words erupts in the messy world of Star Control

  • kangarootoo 05/12/2017

    "they really should talk to competent legal counsel instead of making blog posts"

    Good advice for everybody with any kind of legal complaint in this business, applicable at all times. I never cease to find it strange that grown adults go to blogs and twitter before just talking to the other company in a formal way.
    Reply +7
  • Detroit: Become Human under fire for controversial domestic abuse scene

  • kangarootoo 04/12/2017

    @matthewfrench

    It is that kind of reductive and stubborn comment, that will hinder games in being taken seriously as a medium for art. If you can't engage in a debate, why would anyone change their mind? If you can't engage with the critics, why would they not act to prevent your artistic expression?

    TLDR, be a little more mature about it, and people will treat you accordingly.
    Reply +1
  • kangarootoo 04/12/2017

    @GreyBeard

    "No its not a cop-out, its reality."

    It is an exaggeration of reality. Just because something is subjective, doesn't mean it can't broadly be predicted, or that people cannot make good and bad choices when creating subjective content. The whole games industry exists because good choices can be made when creating qualitative content for subjective people.

    My point is that if you make a trailer that doesn't effectively convey the content it supposed to represent, you cannot blame people for not understanding the content it is supposed to represent.

    Of course you can't hit the target objectively 100% of the time, but that isn't what I said. And I agree with you about all the things you said regards people doubling down, setting their sights against something, being swept up in mass hysteria when hating on something.... all of that is true and happens, but that is not mutually exclusive to making a trailer that misrepresents the content it is supposed to represent.

    It is one thing to explain to people that they have misunderstood the content of a trailer, but to explain to those people that the trailer "isn't the whole game", is to place the blame at the wrong door.

    I don't know how many times to say it really, and I'm not sure I can phrase it differently. Anyone who had no prior knowledge of the game, and saw this trailer, is fairly likely to think "What the fuck is that game about?" To say to them "it isn't all abuse" when that is all they have been shown, and then act like they are a fool for jumping to conclusions, is failing to accept that quite simply, the trailer could have done a better job.

    The trailer could have undeniably done a better job, of conveying everything you eloquently described, without making the discussion about something else entirely. The trailer was supposed to convey that the game was about all those things, and instead here we are...
    Reply +1
  • kangarootoo 04/12/2017

    @GreyBeard

    "Yes, you can blame a viewer for getting the wrong impression because its entirely subjective!"

    To say it is entirely subjective is a cop out. Subjective doesn't mean not qualitative.

    The job of a trailer is to inform the viewer, and any given trailer can be more effective than another in achieving that goal.

    If a trailer gives people the wrong impression of the thing it exists to represent, you can't just say that couldn't be predicted or controlled because their response is subjective. If it were really that simple, there would be no consistently good movie directors, because it would all come down to chance, no?


    "but it needs to present itself for what it is."

    On this we agree, and I believe this trailer failed in that regard, because it failed to do that. It failed to present what Detroit "is".


    "that the worst possible reaction to a trailer is one of ambivalence and disinterest"

    I don't subscribe to that. Whilst an ambivalent reaction is a waste of time and money, a strongly negative reaction can bury a new "product" before it has begun. Did people react ambivalently to Google Glass, or did Google kill it off due to an increasing tide of negative perception?
    Reply +2
  • kangarootoo 04/12/2017

    @GreyBeard

    Well clearly people felt differently about the previous trailers. Specific to your question, and answering on behalf of people I can't really answer for, I guess people feel less uncomfortable with fictional child hostage taking than with fictional physical child abuse.

    I don't disagree with the latter part of your comment, regards the story that Cage is trying to tell.

    To be specific, I don't really have an issue with the story he is telling, or the scene's inclusion in the game that is telling that story. I am simply pointing out that the reaction to the trailer is to some degree what might be expected, given that the trailer (regardless of any other trailers that came before it) can at any time be viewed with no other context, and that with a trailer acting as an ambassador for the game, all trailer creators should keep this in mind.

    TLDR version, you can't blame a viewer for watching your trailer, and getting the wrong impression of your game.
    Reply +2
  • kangarootoo 04/12/2017

    @evarofzentral

    "This pretty much vindicates David Cage's stance that film makers or authors wouldn't receive this kind of attention"

    I'm afraid I disagree, and I thought this question from him in that interview was disingenuous and rhetorical.

    If a film company had a new film coming out, and if that instead of being an actual trailer that summarised the mood and main plot points of the film, instead released a trailer that simply showed a scene of violent abuse, many people would look at the trailer and ask "What the f*ck?"

    That is all that happened here. Cage released a trailer that did not summarise the overall messages of his game, but that focused (crucially, without context) on a single scene.

    He then seemed surprised, and slightly (pretend) outraged at the question. Again coming back to my suggestion that the motive behind the trailer was to be seen as serious art (as serious as a film maker).

    It was a poorly chosen trailer, that failed to do the job of a trailer, and it backfired. You cannot release a trailer to an audience who have no context for your full game, and then blame them for not having that context. It is the JOB of the trailer to give them context.
    Reply 0
  • kangarootoo 04/12/2017

    @spamdangled

    There is also one crucial study, conducted more recently, that showed the aggression displayed during play, was more related to frustration with the controls when used under pressure, than it was with the actual content of the game.

    Previous studies observed aggression during play, and assumed somewhat unscientifically, that the source of the aggression was the violent content.

    Perhaps this mistake was made because the studies were an extension of the sorts of tests used to measure the effect of non-interactive content (such as films), without considering how the results might be influenced when the experience being tested is interactive.
    Reply +2
  • kangarootoo 04/12/2017

    I honestly can't help feeling that part of the reason QD chose this scene for the trailer, is to try and communicate just how serious their business of storytelling in games is. That they chose "adult" content, as a way of saying "the storytelling we do is serious grown up stuff" and to the viewers they are saying (perhaps even challenging) "If you don't think a serious scene like this has a place, maybe you don't take storytelling in games as seriously as we do".

    Perhaps it is that (what could be called) vanity, that has bitten them on the arse this time.
    Reply -1
  • kangarootoo 04/12/2017

    No doubt many who have distance from what the game is trying to say are "missing the point", but one of the key lessons here is about picking the right content for your trailer. Even some gaming press raised the question of why the trailer for the game would focus (arguably clumsily) on this specific scene for its trailer.

    One could argue that a trailer is the compressed, public facing, image of any game. That anyone seeing the trailer should be able to take away a potted version of what the full game will convey. That in fact, nobody should have to "understand more about the game" when they view the trailer, that in fact the job of the trailer is to TELL them exactly that, to give them that understanding of the game.

    So whilst within the full game, the context of this scene may work, and those arguing that within the context of the full game this scene is justified, are also perhaps right. The real question then, is why put something in a trailer that, outside of the full context of the game, could be so badly misconstrued? QD chose to release this trailer as a window into the full game, and whatever you think about the reaction of those now viewing it, it would seem undeniable that QD's decision was the wrong one.
    Reply 0
  • EA Sports UFC 3 beta sparks claims of pay-to-win

  • kangarootoo 01/12/2017

    Even if money wasn't involved, random stat increases like this are on the whole just a less satisfying approach to game design. If a player earns whatever version of XP a game uses, and can spend it freely but consistently, there is some strategy and personalisation to their decisions. Upgrading your avatar through a reliance on dumb luck is a poorer approach to design, and robs the player of (much overused word incoming) agency.

    That is the saddest thing about all of this. Core game mechanics are being replaced with inferior ones, in many AAA games, all because profit from loot boxes and cards is becoming a game design pillar. As a professional designer, this makes me sad.
    Reply +22
  • Star Ocean 4 is a console game with a PC settings menu

  • kangarootoo 01/12/2017

    @The_Ty

    The main argument for me is not that the option are confusing, it is that there is simply no point to exposing them all.

    If the developer knows what combinations work best, and gives the player the ability to choose between all of those good combinations, there is simply no purpose in offering more.

    I get that there is a principled "I know what I'm doing" view that some players may take, but in the end, if they truly do understand all of the options available, they will simply end up in exactly the same place they would have been if the dev gave them presets, but they have spent their own time getting there.
    Reply 0
  • kangarootoo 01/12/2017

    My two pence, I'm in the "give me a good set of options" camp. Again, for the reason already given by previous commenters, that tuning for varying hardware is not a concern on console.

    There is no value in giving players a set of options that can make their experience worse. If the developers know which combinations of options provide a range of good options, between which a player can choose based on their own priorities, that is the best plan to take.
    Reply +1
  • Star Citizen is selling virtual plots of land for up to £96 a pop

  • kangarootoo 01/12/2017

    @the_ewan

    "I know that. And you know that. And everyone else knows that - that's the point."

    Well at the risk of sounding like a pedant, it sounds like everybody knows that the proposition is that nobody knows for sure what the proposition is.... in other words, a punt.
    Understood :)
    Reply 0
  • kangarootoo 01/12/2017

    @joeblobers

    I remain interested in SC, and in the threads of previous articles I've been keen to learn more about it. I'm a casual but convinced Elite Dangerous player, and so SC is totally my thing.

    That said, the volume of money being paid in advance, just to bring a dream to life, seems bizarre to me. I don't doubt the developers have the best of intentions, but regardless of good intentions I just don't know how healthy a development model this is. Vast income, and no particular time line to commit to, I'm just not sure it is the best way to create a balanced and cohesive game. At what point does the addition of features stop, and the "making it all work well together" start? I realise the current Alpha is well regarded by most of those who play it, but I can't also wonder how much "being invested" (financially, and in terms of wanting the dream) affects their opinions, as well as how much the constant "It is still in Alpha" state allows people to offset their expectations and judgement of the current experience.

    It is very much not the conventional way these things are done. If this thing finally comes together, passes through Beta, and is given a "proper release", how will all those who invested over the years feel when the rest of us can get everything they have for less than £50? Do we even know if SC will end up with a free-to-play model (the high costs of the some of the content so far, suggest this is a strong possibility)?
    Reply 0
  • Meet the professional video game boss killer

  • kangarootoo 01/12/2017

    @NewYork

    "why not also archive the entire playthrough?"

    Surely because there is value in good editorial? In the simplest terms (and perhaps proven by his success), some people don't WANT to watch whole play throughs.

    To refer to his approach as gimmicky seems (at the risk of sounding rude) not very well thought through. Specialist might be a word, elitist even if you were feeling particularly spikey, but "gimmicky"?

    There is nothing gimmicky about choosing to have a focus, rather than just "include everything". It isn't gimmicky of a magazine to focus on sports bikes instead of all motorbikes, or for a website to focus on snow holidays rather than all holidays, it is simply curating a vast amount of content for a specific audience with specific interests.
    Reply +17
  • kangarootoo 01/12/2017

    "Unlike other YouTubers, Bossa does not speak or editorialise in his videos. Instead, he's committed to presenting the software in an unsoiled form."

    This alone justifies him being crowned as King of the whole internet, and being given as many chocolate oranges as he can ever eat!

    I was trying to pull some specific gameplay footage together a while back for a presentation, and you cannot imagine how difficult it is to consistently find gameplay (rather than trailers) that doesn't have someone's face stuck in the corner of it.
    Reply +52