Your choice, I would've preferred an in-game method of turning off the connectivity myself. It will affect my own choice if I pick this game up or not too.
sigh Well, it shows they learned absolutely nothing about their misstep with Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League game. J.B. Perrette and the executives meddled with this game and soiled it due to their rampant greed; if only they'd left the developers who were passionate about this project just work their magic. There are so many games in the mobile and free-to-play markets it's not likely any of WB's trash will get much traction there either.
An offline mode is the only way I'd consider buying and playing Nightingale; I do love survival games, but I need them to be offline adventures balanced for single-player experiences! As an introvert the last thing I want to do is encounter another person in a game.
I feel like they want to be fooled at this point as well; to push their hopes and dreams on a person that is "rich" as they feel powerless in their own lives. The billionaires are running the show now, currying favor with even a strange Manhattanite failson who mismanaged all that wealth is less of an onerous ask for them. Until they feel empowered to make meaningful changes, Trump is just their figurehead of a doomed future as they won't use their collective power to make a real difference.
I'd love to see this...Real consequences for this lame excuse of a human being! However, I'm sure some republicans will come to Trump's rescue as he has all of them by the balls/ovaries. A shame as this tanning spray-stained fool wields no actual power. It's his followers that hold the power of a cult.
This will make any corpo stooge wet themselves with joy, however, as a consumer I'm repulsed by the idea! I don't want an entertainment universe, just awesome games to play; Preferably games that's single player, no microtransactions, and zero live service elements (that is becoming a gradual impossibility). As a consumer, I now know the companies to avoid buying products from.
@mike591 I'm excited for this game because they've built up a lot of sensible gameplay elements so early on in development. The social system seems more interesting than The Sims 4, where you could become best friends and marry someone on the same day you met them (I've done this so often, even with conflicting personality traits). It takes both time and effort to befriend the other Paras! That is what I desire from a social sim, investing time into creating the story for my character and having that time feel meaningful.
All the flexibility of Bloodlines 1 is gone, it seems like we are stuck with a single character who could be from just a stingy roster of four clans. It's reported that Phyre's gender can be player chosen, I read an article about it. The writing at least seems interesting, but they only showed a small portion of the opening; The quality of the narrative and dialogue could obviously degrade as a player gets further into it. I'm honestly disappointed that The Chinese Room was even given this game to develop, they didn't seem the type to be able to pull a game of this scale off. Especially with the rich history of this iconic World of Darkness tabletop game! If anything, Larian Studios would've been a better choice. Obsidian Studios (give them an awesome budget and some additional technical help, they'd make a wonderful game too).
I'll naturally withhold full judgement or dismissive disinterest upon reading some reviews from Gaming Sites that I trust.
I'm more than happy about the Xbox version of Persona 3 Reloaded...It shocked me that Xbox was getting some more Atlus love! If anything, I would hope Atlus saves the effort for a successor to the Nintendo Switch, which seems to be in the hands of some dev studios (based on rumors).
If it's optional, I don't mind if multiplayer is being considered. However, I want them to focus fully on making a rich single-player experience (my personal preference for games) as a lot of games that just shoehorned in multiplayer were lacking in the single-player experience. My interest is always diminished by the mention of multiplayer, I will take a wait and see approach when this sequel is released and reviewed before forming a real opinion.
I think even the more compelling games I've played used fast travel...Not as an excuse to reduce exposure to a tedious world, but to respect a gamer's time! I prefer fast travel to hubs and allowing me to make a short journey to wherever my next objective is. No Man's Sky has my favorite system for fast travel: Teleportation Portals which you can use to create a network of fast travel spots. It makes exploring previously settled planets a lot easier but still encourages the player to explore their unique universe. It's limited, but in an elegant way which I find to be pleasing.
I can only think of one game that made travel boring: Skyrim. The main reason is that once you've experienced one random event...You've seen them all as there's no flavor to those random on the road events. Fast Travel to any point on the map was designed to hide the blandness of Skyrim.
Even Hideaki must realize that travelling the same road repeatedly will become dull because one can only pack so many random events in a game...I hope that he makes for an option to even avoid that level of tedium in the extremely late/post-game. Else his game will become the very thing he's critiquing.
This isn't a necessity for Riot; the American Gaming Corporations are addicted to layoffs because it's a naked display of their power. If they were made to take responsibility for their bad financial decisions, CEOs and other corporate leeches would have their unnecessarily high pay cut.
That's why I honestly respect Nintendo execs because they will take pay cuts over laying off staff when the going is tough! They might occasionally do shitty things or make out of touch decisions but at least they care about the health of their companies. Game companies can't make good games without talent.