![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/8nN0qtLEOJ.png)
It would help if the lawsuit was actually focused on lootboxes, microtransactions, and the like as harmful gambling.
But it doesn’t. The lawsuit claims video games themselves being good creates an addiction.
It would help if the lawsuit was actually focused on lootboxes, microtransactions, and the like as harmful gambling.
But it doesn’t. The lawsuit claims video games themselves being good creates an addiction.
It certainly is more mask off this time around. They aren’t trying to hide behind euphemistic slogans like “ethics in game journalism”. Now they are just blatantly open about their anger that women and minorities are being represented in games and how that’s a bad thing.
Those secondary sources often aren’t reliable as well. It depends on the source and its history of accuracy in reporting. There’s plenty of newspapers that have been determined to not be a reliable source, including any tabloids.
It’s also rather inaccurate. One can use a primary source like the DOT for information to add to an article. It’s just that a primary source like that doesn’t contribute to general notability and importance of the subject matter. The subject needs to be shown to have relevance that has been covered in other forms than just primary sources.
The use of primary sources has long been restricted to minimal usage, since primary means any form of self-published claim. And that sort of source shouldn’t contribute to any form of notability.
“Then on the other hand you can find an article on every Pokemon on Wikipedia.”
You’re rather out of date with that claim. Once upon a time, like a decade or more ago, this was true. But when the notability requirements became stricter, the vast majority of Pokemon articles were removed and redirected to list articles. There are currently only 28 articles on individual Pokemon, out of a possible 1021.
I remember this controversy. The highway editors in question were super opposed to any form of referencing requirements for these highway articles that all other Wikipedia articles have to adhere to and wanted individual articles on the most minute small road routes.
When the editing community at large suggested having broader higher level articles that combined these much less notable articles into a bigger article that was more properly referenced and better showcased a level of importance, the highway editors…well, to put it bluntly, had a hissy fit.
So, in short, you didn’t bother to look at the user reviews in question that are full of right wing morons complaining about wokeness?
My assumption is that you are also a moron.
Better? My point still stands.
Tia Nadiezja over in the comments there also has good points:
"Bethesda games get a pass on serious, game-breaking problems that would kill games from other companies. Skyrim still, a decade and more after its original release, two full remasters in, has more glitches and bugs than Mass Effect: Andromeda or Cyberpunk did at launch, and those bugs did serious damage to those games’ reputation.
Throw in the horrific treatment of staff by Bethesda’s management and the open transphobia they’ve displayed, and people should not be playing this bad game. Have some standards, folks!"
"An honest conversation about Starfield needs to come from judging the game for what it is. And the game itself is … fine, I guess? A recent Kotaku article articulates in more detail how Starfield isn’t “humanity’s greatest achievement,” but it’s an enjoyable game and that’s fine. The menu system is extremely clunky and the aforementioned encumbrance issue is still there—all systems that haven’t changed in decades. Whether it’s deliveries or the fate of the galaxy, nobody else seems to do anything but you, the player. Just because these are hallmarks of past Bethesda games doesn’t mean that they get a free pass.
And herein lies the problem. Because Starfield is so similar to Bethesda’s previous offerings (for better or worse), Bethesda “fans” are pushing back against critiques of the game as a critique of all Bethesda properties. Looking at Sterling’s video about encumbrance again, the online defense of the game’s issues boils down to fans saying, “I can’t tell you why. I just do.” This is indicative of the lack of thought that Bethesda actively encourages in their games."
Yeah, that article does a good job at summing up the issues here. It really shows that maybe we need to have a broader conversation about how most past Bethesda games are worse in retrospect, actually. Starfield is helping to exemplify and point out that.
“if you just take it for what it is without thinking what you wanted it to be”
Why would I do that for any video game? With that mindset, you could claim any game is good, because you aren’t actually engaging with its content on the level that it deserves.
Don’t prop up bad games.
“So many complaints I can just address as “it’s a bethesda space game, and this is what it’s supposed to be like”.”
Why do you have such an incredibly low bar for Bethesda in particular? Demand better or you help make the entire video games industry worse.
A significant amount of the bugs do seem to be based on how long you’ve been playing and how far into the game you’ve gotten. The farther you get, the more bugs start appearing.
People have been reporting various bugs in a number of places. Here’s one example: https://www.reddit.com/r/Starfield/comments/168i21o/psa_major_bug_do_not_board_enemy_ships_to_capture/
And a bunch of people bringing up various things here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Starfield/comments/166vco5/starfield_bugsissues/
That’s precisely what I’m seeing with streams of the game. There’s so many bugs and just bizarre design decisions, especially with the opening hour or so, but the streamers then claim it’s a perfect game with no problems.
My concern is when I’m seeing streamers play games like Starfield and run into a ton of bugs, often game-breaking ones, but then go and praise the game to high heaven.
I just want a basement level of proper standards, that’s all I’m asking for.
I have more fun watching other people play it, discover new secrets, and talk about the lore than I ever would playing the game myself.
Yeah, I don’t get it either. I rather easily went through and deleted all of my posts and comments. It was quite freeing, really.
I also went through each sub that I moderated (solo, since I didn’t want to cause conflict with any co-mods or others) and both privated them and set them to NSFW. I did set the co-run ones to NSFW though and they haven’t been changed back yet, so I guess the others are okay with that.
And I have yet to receive any messages from admins telling me to change them back. I go and check my account every week or so. Nothing’s changed.
So, what exactly does Minecraft (one of the primary games mentioned in the lawsuit) do to cause this? Because that seems like a major outlier compared to the other listed games.