Quoting: benstor214Why go after one single company? Something smells fishy…

Getting a precedence ruling. Law on our side of the pond is very precedence oriented. You typically pick the target you think you have the strongest case against. IIRC, from what I heard, Valve lootboxes are really atrocious, even by the standards of lootboxes. Never played any of their games though, so I wouldn't know why.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: coolitic

Quoting: doragasuAs much as I love Valve, they should stop this loot box nonsense.

I'd almost agree if people were being remotely principled and actually applied the same logic to every "surprise mechanic" on the market, like trading cards, or literally every single "gacha-game" there is, by definition of the word "gacha".

But nope, it's just "loot-boxes" because of some contemporary cultural zeitgeist.

Your point is certainly valid, but it's not a reason not to get lootboxes banned, or at least put them under gambling legislation. It's a reason to do the same with the things you named. It's really about time to treat these things as what they are: gambling. I have no idea when it became normal not to know what you're buying.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

People love surprises, but they don't like paying paying for bad ones.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

That helps, thank you! :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain Man

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: Mountain ManIn short, it retains the core design of Civ VII while adding a more traditional points-based victory system.

I guess it had not occurred to you that someone would be asking about this precisely because they don't know what the core design of Civ VII is like. Nobody ever talks about it, people only talk about the heresy aspects, so it's not obvious that there are other significant elements of core design.

I don't even know what he's asking any more. 🤣

Pretty much what Purple Library Guy tried to explain. I have no idea how this simple thing turned into an unsolvable enigma for you, and why. Or how to get it across in a way that makes you understand. If that's even possible. Again, never mind. I will try to find out what OTHER features that game actually got, myself. But yes, the reason why I asked is really that - nobody seemed to have talked much about any aspect of Civ VII, except that controversial one.

PS: You do realize that if you gender assume people on the internet, there is a 50% chance to get it wrong, yes?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain Man

Quoting: Kimyrielle

Quoting: Mountain Man

Quoting: KimyrielleBut hey, you can also always opt to just be rude about it.

Or I could have answered your question by pointing out the two most significant changes in the update: more freedom to play as the civilization you want, and the elimination of railroad-y legacy paths. In short, it retains the core design of Civ VII while adding a more traditional points-based victory system.

Which isn't really what my question asked, but hey. You know what? Nevermind.

Frankly, your question doesn't make any sense. Is Civ VII indistinguishable from Civ VI? Of course not, but neither is Civ VI indistinguishable from Civ V, and V is not indistinguishable from IV, and so on.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Can we just... move on? Please?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain Man

Quoting: KimyrielleBut hey, you can also always opt to just be rude about it.

Or I could have answered your question by pointing out the two most significant changes in the update: more freedom to play as the civilization you want, and the elimination of railroad-y legacy paths. In short, it retains the core design of Civ VII while adding a more traditional points-based victory system.

Which isn't really what my question asked, but hey. You know what? Nevermind.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain ManWhat kind of nonsense question is that? If you want a Civ game that is indistinguishable from VI then just play VI.

The question was (obviously?) meant to ask if there interesting new features OTHER than the forced civ changing that would make VII stand out in some way from VI. In the way that would make it worth getting it now. Because, as you so thoughtfully pointed out, I can always play VI, if I want to play VI.

But hey, you can also always opt to just be rude about it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The obvious question is - since this (IMHO) horrible forced change of civs was the anchor-feature of the entire game... is Civ VII now indistinguishable from Civ VI?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I got inZOI and completely love it. I was never a big fan of The Sims moving towards their overly cartoony artstyle in 4, and inZOI is so realistic that you sometimes forget it's just a game. It still has its quirks and some things are still missing, but they're churning out updates at an incredible pace. Its using AI, so that might be a dealbreaker for some.

I am curious how Paralives will hold up against it. It will probably find an audience, too. I can't quite understand how they're going to fund continued development of the game without any paid DLCs, though. EA (as usual) completely overdid monetization, but you need to pay the developers somehow.

View this comment - View article - View full comments