Carolyn's gender identity has no bearing on the content of this video. She does however bring an excellent stage presence and is obviously enthusiastic about providing great content. Looking forward to MGSV! Thanks guys!
@Born_Lucky @Breyant The fact that you just referred to him by name means, in fact, that he is not doing anything anonymously. Also, he's not spewing hate. I think the general sentiment he expressed in this video was disappointment over the immaturity of the ideas that can sometimes be expressed by the Gamespot community. He even commented on the idea that maybe he is making what he sees as a problem worse by making this videos. That, I think shows that he puts a lot of thought into this show. "Born_Lucky", grow up dude.
@zenstrata The interesting thing is that by not treating it like a "free-to-play", you have to really treat it like a free-to-play (without quotes). Therein lies the problem with that sort of wording.
@megakick I've enjoyed RPGs for a long time, and am all too familiar with grinding myself, to a point that people that don't have a love for those kinds of games wouldn't understand. But it's cheap to me, and harmful to the aesthetic of the game to constantly badger a player to pay more money to acomplish something within the game. To me it removes what gives me thrill in playing games most of the time - the delight that I have overcome something difficult.
That's not to say that all monetized transactions within games are bad, but I rarely see them implemented creatively and intuitively. Largely they just manifest as "HEY, YOU! BUY MORE STUFF SO YOU CAN WIN!"
@sergioaf I'm a huge fan of supporting developers, but I'm also a huge fan of quality games, which, right now, in my opinion, the majority of free-to-play games aren't.
I've seen these segments on Gamespot for a long time, but this is the first time I decided to watch one. This is some very interesting stuff, and timely since free-to-play games are becoming more and more ubiquitous and accessible. I'm not a fan of them, or how they are misleadingly named.
I also would bet that the free-to-play model has the potential to stifle creativity, given that the primary motivation in the model is to get the most money out of the player as possible throughout their time playing the game. This as opposed to the older model of one game, one price, where the game creators and publishers both have an interest in creating the best game possible in order to sell the most copies.
People will vote with their wallets on this one though, and if people continue to buy into free-to-play games, which it appears that they are, companies will continue to create them. My money, however, is not in that pot.
What a shame. From what I've seen so far it looks like Microsoft has really bit themselves in the behind this E3. Sony's presentation was fantastic, and although most of Nintendo's games don't appeal to me anymore, I thought they put on a good show as well.
These anti-gamer, anti-consumer policies that Microsoft is pushing are greatly upsetting, especially considering the fantastic line-up of games they have. We'll if their restrictions lead to diminished sales. My money thus far though is with Sony and the PS4, what a great showing.
If Microsoft really cares about "core" gamers, then they're going to have to axe their ridiculous fee-based used game scheme. Why should I be penalized for buying something secondhand? If I buy a used Toyota, I do not owe Toyota a dime for the car. That kind of charge is absurd.
Also, Microsoft, a step up and welcome relief for your next console would be a removal of links to things that you "suggest" I purchase from the homepage. That kind of thing to me is welcome in its proper context, like the online store accessible through the 360, but not when I simply want to play the games that I already own. It's more of a nuisance, and really ads a tinge of stink to what otherwise are enjoyable experiences.
SuperChin's comments