@Cikatriz_ESP: Keanu has a particular style as an actor. He's not as emotive as some, but I always thought he portrayed his character's emotions in a pretty laid back fashion. You had to read more into the character to get the nuances. Wooden is, I don't think, a completely fair criticism, but I can see how it would be applied.

That said, I trust CDPR to make good use of the actor and create a great character around his abilities. They haven't let us down yet.

The whole situation is a mess. The ESA and the game companies milked the cow for as long as they could, despite clear signs that governments were looking at regulation. If they had taken any real effort at all to self-regulate, as they did with the game ratings through the ESRB, the politicians would have left well enough alone, but no! They had to push their luck, and now the government is going to get involved. That never ends well, as they will keep tacking on more and more regulation every chance they get. That's what politicians and bureaucrats do.

I just don't see how they could think they could get away with gambling in their games forever. Call it what you will, dress the names up as you wish, it's gambling, and gambling is regulated in pretty much every country on earth. The gaming industry brought this down upon themselves with their unbridled greed, and now we just have to hope that the entire system isn't brought crashing down by the inevitable overreaction by big government.

@bigbluebustn: Pence would be even more dangerous for those who oppose the current administration. Trump gives the impression of being stark raving mad, while Pence is infinitely more presidential in demeanor. People are more likely to listen to Pence and not automatically dismiss his opinions as being looney, no matter what they are. Trump is largely held in some sort of check because even his own party supports him reluctantly, simply because his image is that of a thug, not a statesman. That problem disappears if Pence ever takes the helm.

This doesn't need a new classification. Yes, it's possible to become obsessed with gaming and participate in it to an unhealthy degree. The same could be said for any other activity you enjoy. It's a form of OCD, for which there is already a classification and treatments. It's really no different than hoarding, counting and gambling. Creating a new classification merely dilutes the field more, too many conditions that are basically the same diverts research and study.

@odolwa99: I honestly thought Solo was a great film, thought it was the best of the Star Wars movies post original trilogy. I still don't understand why it was so poorly received. Once I got past the idea of anyone but Harrison Ford playing Han, I enjoyed it immensely.

@MkScorpion4400: That's discounting the people who did not know they were vulnerable to addiction before playing, children who have no experience dealing with gambling and the chemical reactions it causes in the body, and games that jam gambling mechanics in after they've already been on the market for a time, leaving the addicted person with a game they spent money on that they can no longer use without great risk, effectively stealing their money from them. Look, I'm not saying people shouldn't be held accountable for their own actions and be responsible for their own safety. I'm saying that gambling is, in all other contexts, regulated and controlled, heavily. Casinos, poker machines, race tracks... they all have to follow specific and strict rules and regulations, as they should. Why should games get a free ride to profit off gambling mechanics and not have to follow the exact same rules? It's an unequal playing field that puts vulnerable people at risk, and it needs to be better controlled. Since the game companies won't do it willingly, they've left themselves wide open for government intervention.

If they don't like it, they really have only themselves to blame by denying the truth and refusing to control themselves in the pursuit of unsustainable increases in profits. Bubbles about to burst, time to take cover.

@MkScorpion4400: It's a choice... until you have someone with a compulsive gambling problem. This is a real thing, caused in part by the specific way the brains of many people react to gambling. It's literally a chemical addiction, an addiction to your own brain's chemicals. The companies that have random loot boxes didn't put them in the way they are by accident, they are designed to give the same rush that any slot machine gives the addict. Blizzard, EA, all these companies researched the heck out of this topic, trying to develop the perfect system to get those whales (addicts) to spend spend spend! They are literally (and I mean literally in the actual definition of the word here) preying on the mentally ill. Put as many direct purchase micro-transactions as you want, but don't be using these manipulative, psychological techniques to victimize the vulnerable amongst the player base. That's just despicable.

@Atzenkiller: It must be a thing, or so many games and platforms wouldn't tout their trophies and achievements so much. Everyone has their own priorities, some people want those trophies. I don't understand it either, but there you go, people have their own things.

@jsprunk: Not likely. If the EGS shows signs of having real legs, Valve will just adjust their cut down to be competitive, or maybe use some of their own massive resources to buy some of their own exclusives. EGS is hardly going to spell the doom of Steam anytime soon.

@Rushaoz: Well, that's the beautiful thing about open markets, we have choices. To me, who uses a lot of those features on Steam, not having them when they could have is a deal breaker as far as Epic is concerned. When that is added to Epic catering to developers and publishers and not their customers and their all to deep connections with a Chinese company, and I'm not interested in giving them a penny of my business. Their business practices are just bad, akin to a rich dilettante opening a shop and using his money to drive the other shops out of business.

Maybe, maybe if they had made their store front far more feature rich, maybe if they hadn't added exclusivity to a market that has historically been about open markets, maybe if they weren't in bed with Chinese businesses (nothing against Chinese people, but Sweeney can talk about his control over the company all he wants, the instant the Chinese government wants that data, they will use Tencent to get it), I'd consider them. I certainly do like that they are attempting to reset the industry standard of how much of a cut to take from sales, and I like that their store isn't cluttered with asset flips and shovelware, those are marks in their favor. Fix a few of the other things, and I'd be much more willing to have a look at them.

As it stands, I won't even support developers and publishers who give them exclusives. I'll buy the games used, on console, instead. Voting with my wallet, as they say.