this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2023
87 points (82.2% liked)

Patient Gamers

11554 readers
196 users here now

A gaming community free from the hype and oversaturation of current releases, catering to gamers who wait at least 12 months after release to play a game. Whether it's price, waiting for bugs/issues to be patched, DLC to be released, don't meet the system requirements, or just haven't had the time to keep up with the latest releases.

^(placeholder)^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Share your unfiltered, unpopular gaming opinions and let's dive into some real discussions. If you come across a view you disagree with, feel free to (respectfully) defend your perspective. I don't want to see anyone say stuff like "we're all entitled to our own opinions." Let's pretend like gaming is a science and we are all award winning scientists.

My Unpopular Opinion:

I believe the criticism against battle royales is often unwarranted. Most complaints revolve around constant content updates, microtransactions, and toxic player communities

Many criticize the frequent content updates, often cosmetic, as overwhelming. However, it's optional, and no other industry receives flak for releasing more. I've never seen anyone complain about too many Lays or coke flavors.

Pay-to-win concerns are mostly outdated; microtransactions are often for cosmetics. If you don't have the self control to not buy a purple glittery gun, then I'm glad you don't play the games anymore, but I don't think it makes the game bad.

The annoying player bases is the one I understand the most. I don't really have a point against this except that it's better to play with friends.

Overall I think battle royale games are pretty fun and rewarding. Some of my favorite gaming memories were playing stuff like apex legends late at night with friends or even playing minecraft hunger games with my cousins like 10 years ago. A long time ago I heard in a news segment that toy companies found out that people are willing to invest a lot of time and energy into winning ,if they know there will be a big reward at the end, and battle royales tap into that side of my brain.

This is just my opinion

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mojo@lemm.ee 58 points 1 year ago (7 children)

I couldn't care less about owning games physically. I'm way more likely to lose/damage them then lose access to their download.

[–] Mister_Rogers@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago

I held on to physical media for a long time, and the legal ownership implications are scary for digital media, BUT the argument of avoiding creating plastic waste at one point outweighed this for me, and I've been all digital ever since, but to each their own. Definitely pros and cons either way.

[–] ech@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago

Most people that complain about digital media aren't fanatics for physical items. The problems usually come down to who actually owns the media in question.

[–] Sigh_Bafanada@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

While I don't disagree, when I eventually get a PS5 I plan to get the disk version, simply because I can often get disk games second hand for a fraction of the price that they are on the playstation store

[–] SolOrion@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Physical games make much more sense for consoles for this exact reason.

Physical games for PC are pretty much entirely pointless because 99% of the time you're going to use the steam code from the box then either throw it away or throw it on a shelf.

[–] Sigh_Bafanada@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I don't know if I've used a PC game disk since I was playing Myst or the Spider-Man 2 (OG) demo

[–] Redkey@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago

There are several reasons that people may prefer physical games, but I want people to stop propagating the false relationship of "physical copy = keep forever, digital copy = can be taken away by a publisher's whim". Most modern physical copies of games are glorified digital download keys. Sometimes, the games can't even run without downloading and installing suspiciously large day 0 "patches". When (not if) those services are shut down, you will no longer be able to play your "physical" game.

Meanwhile GOG, itch, even Steam (to an extent), and other services have shown that you can offer a successful, fully digital download experience without locking the customer into DRM.

I keep local copies of my DRM-free game purchases, just in case something happens to the cloud. As long as they don't get damaged, those copies will continue to install and run on any compatible computer until the heat death of the universe, Internet connection or no, just like an old PS1 game disc. So it is possible to have the convenience of digital downloads paired with the permanence that physical copies used to provide. It's not an either-or choice at all, and I'm sick of hearing people saying that it is.

I like lending games to friends. If that was supported with digital games, I wouldn't ever care for physical games.

For example, after I beat BotW, I gave it to a friend to play. They likely wouldn't have bought it, and I no longer have any interest in playing it, so it worked out. I rarely play games twice.

I also like the idea of selling games, but I never actually do it.

[–] limeaide@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I agree whenever it comes to PC games, but I won't buy digital media for consoles.

Knowing that the platform will stop being supported, even if it's a decade+ later, makes me not want to buy from it. Especially since if I want to play it again I will have to pay resell prices for the game. I bought so many cool games on the Wii that I won't have access to anymore.

Also, I like buying second hand at local swap meets and garage sales. It's a small hobby for me lol

[–] pory@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

My only consoles are Nintendo and that's because they're all hacked. Digital preservation is possible that way.