Games

16800 readers

925 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc..
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.

Comments.

No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works

336

Starfield's been left out to dry at The Game Awards—and even dedicated fans are 'not terribly surprised' (www.pcgamer.com)

submitted 1 year ago by nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works to c/games@sh.itjust.works

162 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What's good and what's popular do not necessarily align. Removing "complicated" features for the sake of mass appeal makes the game worse, but more profitable, much of the time.

[–] coffinwood@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago

Also not true. Complexity alone doesn't make a good game / movie / book / piece of art. And lack thereof doesn't make anything worse.

Why is it that when many people like a thing because that thing appeals to masses, it's automatically categorised as lower quality?

Nobody seriously claimed Starfield to be the game of all games. It's good. It's fine. It's not perfect. So what?