Polygon: The ESRB’s new warning seems to hide loot boxes in plain sight

The Chink Commie Government actually did something by forcing devs like Blizzard to be upfront at the chances of getting shit in their lootboxes, but here we don't, it's artistic censorship if we remove lootboxes, if you people don't buy them, they won't know what's inside!

Isn't it easier to list the games that DON'T have paid DLC, DRM, censorship, etc? In fact, honestgaming.net should simply consist of text deriding the user for thinking such a thing could possibly exist, along with links to popular piracy websites.

Who has the video of that one gaming representative getting his ass handed to him by those Hawaii politicians?

They have only ever existed to protect corporate interests. They were created to stop government intervention. Hilarious that their staunch defence of of the bottom line, refusing to take action on labelling lootboxes, could be what triggered government intervention after all.

It's funded and controlled by the corporations it's supposed to regulate, of course it's a joke. They just created it to prevent being regulated by the state

They do have a point here though:

Having specific warnings about different types of extra purchases aren't useful if the parents who are supposed to be controlling the spending don't know the differences between them. And if you did know the distinctions between all the different types of dlc/microtransactions then you would likely have already looked into if that shit is in the game before buying it. That isn't a good enough excuse to just have everything fall under a general label like they are doing, but it does show the larger problem of consumer ignorance and the multi-layer shitfest that is the modern game industry. The ESRB is obviously going soft on the issue, but the issue is also much larger than just better labeling can solve.

It's worse than gambling in some ways since you have no chance of coming out ahead. You're always going to lose money, unless you get some type of outside business going that can monetize things. It's just throwing extra money away after already buying a game.

Feels good to be a yarr harr.

Even better. Open it up to a rating system. On a scale of best, to optimal, iffy, bad, and fucking appauling. It'd need to be watched incase of bots but it would work wonders. Maybe also like said, spot light games that make compromises or make the smart choice and avoid microtransactions.

Add DRM, there already is a steam curator for denuvo games.

Textbook definition of the phrase "the inmates are running the asylum."

Everyone who's not an idiot knows that but for some reason like those redditors who bought Nu-Battlefront 2 thought the ESRB would do something, they won't, it's between two buttfucking by a greedy corporations protected by their lobbyist or government regulation that means more power to them and what is acceptable or not by a bunch of boomers or commiefornia cucks who wanted to ban violent videogames.

Those parents who were with the hawaiian politicians argued that this bulshit lootbox scam still prays on the vulnerable regardless of age, and there's little to no regulation because they even pointed out that these same companies are raking in the dough with this type of scams, microtransactions were a majority of where their profits were earned, good job on the research soccer moms.

What? This is a good thing.
YOU SHOULDN'T BE PLAYING OR BUYING AN UNFINISHED GAME TO BEGIN WITH NO GOOD GAME HAS HAD IN APP PURCHASES

It's predictable that they are playing the game of willful ignorance. But after every argument I've had with a drone/fanboy/shill about how shit DLC can get with their same response being "It's just a little cash. Who cares, It's just one piece of DLC. It's everywhere so It doesn't matter", I can't be totally mad ESRB for taking the same ignorant stance the masses that eat up the shit use anyway. I'm was glad about the Battlefront 2 reaction but it looks like any idiot who bought that game and wanted government intervention has to lie in the bed they've been making since horse armor.

All the rating systems would be fucked in favor of the Larger companies. Wouldn't work

It's the fact that this doesn't solve the problem (which is ignorant consumers but) and the same people will still be buying stuff with microtransactions without any discern if it is DLC, pre-orders,currency, lootbox, etc.

...

You guys like the design?

I made up the marks for DX:MD by the way, I know nothing about the game.

Games either have paid DLC or they don't. They either have DRM or they don't. They're either censored or they're not. Making a sliding scale only serves to make excuses for these things.

So whats the next step? How do we keep raising hell about this?

Actually have ESRB recognize the different forms of monetization game companies are using

I can make it just a red or green then. But can't games have, for example, only cosmetic microtransactions (so would be yellow) or be pay to win (which would be red) ?

Get people informed with games with lootboxes or any similar gambling mechanics while having the history of the company's use of this bullshit in full display, maybe like a website like what is doing, but need to polish it and the colors to get normalfag retards or parents to recognize it

Surprisingly accurate though:

Like the others said, sliding scale doesn't mean shit. It could be really subjective.
If you want to go about it the easy way, specify what the DRM is (steam, denuvo, unknown), if there are microtransactions, always online(yes/no for both of these) and if it's censored(if yes, then what versions E.G. german version for wolfensteins).
If you want to really do something, specify what's going on with sources and archives. For example

That said, just making the site is a big step. Good job user.

Why the fuck did anybody ever expect the ESRB to do anything? They're not a consumer watchdog group. They're an industry marketing firm which was designed explicitly to create the illusion of self-policing (note: self policing) so as to keep government regulations at bay. If anything the "Mature" content ratings have only ever served to make games more attractive to children, just as the "explicit lyrics" labels on CDs did, while clueless parents completely ignore the warnings as if they never existed.

As such, they won't take action unless the government threatens to step in, and the lengths they will go to to "self-regulate" depends entirely on the breadth of the threat governmental regulation poses.

Self regulation was a mistake.

This is what your post sounds like to me. This is what the next generation of gamers will say, and you will be stuck dealing with.

And don't forget the game prices.
There are free games, paid games, subscription games and even the fucking paid then pay the subscription games. People may think of them differently (e.g. accepting microtransactions in free games, instantly rejecting a game for having a subscription despite the initial 60 dollar cost).
Actual price is not necessarily needed, just a "paid or not" should suffice.

Color coding is too subjective, it should be categorically analyzed My proposal
Censorship Criteria:

Just don't make it too garish, that's good too, might be also good to add in the developer/publishers track record of screwing people.

Something like this better?

Further to argue for specific categories, here is an example of the ESRBs flawed subjectivity. archive.is/5Dspr The DOA: Paradise and "Creepy Voyeurism" incident

No, the point of such a system should be to allow the consumer to make a fair judgment based on facts.
IMO a good format to copy would be the layout of pages on the PC gaming wiki
It has simple tables based on overall categories with a check, X as well as some other things, but also features notes for each check and relevant info later on in the page.
pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Deus_Ex:_Mankind_Divided

I think a separate linked page for developers might work better.
Maybe have a "has the developer fucked up in the past?" yes/no thing might be good.

Better. I think you should keep it simple in there though, have the comments tab be an explanation tab and mostly yes/no things, then have each game have an page where you expand upon the stuff.
For example, pic related as the short version of DeusEx, long version would be like
-Microtransactions

Also, sorry for the literal paint editing, didn't feel like opening GIMP just for that.

I like this idea. Just recently are we remembering how shit Ubisoft now that they're banning "hate speech" on Siege. Anyone who was familiar with Ubishit's MO would have known the signs and not bought the game.

Keep working on that idea, man. It's good and will help break barriers.

Developer background, yeah that will do, add in the difference between developer and publisher fuck-ups.

Prices vary over time and platform, so I'm not sure that category is very useful. Maybe "Free on release" would be better?

Yeah I don't like the category either. I might just bundle the price up with microtransactions. Like put (F2P) in the comments.

Anyway, I want you guys to give me an example game (with true information) so I can put the website up.

Personally, I'd debate that there is some grey area with paid content being bad or good. So yes or no might fail in maybe a rare case in which a game releases an expansion with sizable updates to their content.

Yeah I originally wanted a sliding scale but some anons didn't like it. I still haven't decided. But yes or no might be more suitable for normalfags.

Simple solution: Label as 'Gambling with real currency' instead of 'Loot boxes'. This argument is entirely semantic and gets blown apart effortlessly.

That's why you have the detailed explanation in the game's page.
Trying to cram shit in there is going to make it hard to understand. It's better to keep it simple with a mostly "yes or no" then explain what you mean by yes.

What about people with red/green color blindness? That's not very inclusive.

Next you'll tell me that capitalism and communism are two sides of the same coin

Keep it concise and professional, good.

Maybe make the graphic say pass or fail in side the green or red box.

He's probably shitposting, but if you want to do it then just put black text inside the colored box. It's better not to occupy much space with needless stuff.

I did a really quick, lazy edit to show how I think the information could be most easily conveyed. Show people what all the possible options are for each category and highlight the ones that apply to the game.

Hmm. Yeah that's probably better.

So you guys got an example game?

I think that a grey area for special cases is actually necessary, like DRM, steam has it's own DRM, so every game on steam will be red? and if the game has a GOG version that do away with it? a orange level for those exceptions are a good idea.
Also it would be good if there was a short version of the category comments and a dropdown tab from it with the long and detailed version for people that want to know what is up, like warframe having a gigantic cash shop but you can easily earn cash by selling shit to other players and the fact that the community made items can't be bought by cash and have to be paid directly with real money.

If you do make this database i would join in filling for the games i have played and know enough about it.

remember when the base gameand expansions costed $60 total

That's good. Better than the color thing since it shows what other options are there.
Only thing I'd say it to put censorship as yes/no, since it's pretty subjective, put a DRM (yes/no/optional) line and a paid(free/paid/subscription/paid and subscription) line.

Information like this is why I think a game page for each game is needed. Steam is DRM, so yes, you put "yes" on DRM, but then you explain what the DRM is in the detailed game description.
There are various DRMs, besides many games use more than one. I think it'd be better to simplify first, then detail it on the detailed game page.
That's what the "optional" is for.
You can buy a steam or gog version? "Optional".
You can buy a steam or gog version, but all versions have denuvo for some reason? "Yes".
Then you explain what you mean.

Reminder that by allowing the game industry to conflate lootbox regulation with censorship, you're opening the door for the government to censor games in the process of outlawing lootboxes.

Hope you're ready for the return of "points" on XBL, PSN, and probably their implementation on Steam as well. That's a giant, gaping loophole everyone will use to avoid the stigma of an extra warning label.

The DRM line could still cover the big ones, though. Like:

DRM: Steam uPlay Origin Denuvo Other

Also, a 'None' line.

Excellent start, please continue, this could get huge if done right.

I guess that could work.
How about an "unknown"option, or would it be better to mark it as "other" then have the description explain that it's unknown?
There are some games like, I believe, Okami , whose EULA only talks about "a third party DRM".

I've said it before, you shouldn't be inviting the government to regulate games at all. It never stops with just the things you want them to do. Government offices get the minimal funding to accomplish their work, so the only way to get more in their budget is to create more work. The best case for games is that they will "only" waste a shitload of taxpayer money trying to ban things covered by the first amendment, but it's a lose-lose proposition if you're one of those taxpayers, and eventually they will find technicalities and loopholes to use to that end anyway.

just gave me a laugh, so how about a "cracked" line?
Just a simple "Cracked| Yes No " line, maybe with some casual banter in the description like "-Cracked 4 days prior to game release despite denuvo" or "-cracked despite three layers of DRM"?

There needs to be much more emphasis on this side of the discussion. A lot of the people demanding action against lootboxes are Stalinist /r/socialism faggots who will use this to clamp down on games. I've already seen them spewing their "free speech doesn't apply when my feelings are hurt" shit on other sites in reference to lootboxes. Don't let them co-opt this. Lootboxes are not art. There are ways to deal with lootboxes without the government.

Square Enix doesn't get nearly enough credit for their jewery. Say what you will about loot boxes, but at least you keep the shit you get from them.

Mankind Divided is the most jewed up shit there is.

Better to put it in the description, since some things under 'Other' won't be unknown. It's just that not everything about it is understood, correct?

Wow, I didn’t know you could see into the future!
Honestly, you are right to a degree. Persona 5 only had costume DLC and I finished that game without paying a single cent. But then again I have self-control, we’re talking about whales here.

Please stop using Mr. Belt's visage for shit threads about stupid people.

Damn straight. At this point it's the only way to fix this system.

This industry has bled a little, but obviously not enough. If a game pushes any form of lootboxes, it simply shouldn't sell.

OK, I think this layout will be final unless some anons still have issues with it (of course new categories can always be added). Now I will need an example game so I can actually put the website up. Maybe you can provide one?

I'd also like if we could see whether the game has been made by known Marxists. If the whole point is to know what games to avoid, then that is also an important factor.

"Previous developer fuckups" can be a category, but you guys will have to provide the descriptions.

why would I want to buy anything? To have these devs cuck out on me later? I don't support that shit, I hope they die in agony.

Who hurt you, user?

Looks good, the coloring is shit, but that can be changed later.
Here's what I'd change

Also, two other categories I think would be good to add

Again, people may react differently, depending on the type of payment needed, if at all.
If there has been any incident with the devs, publishers, or some individual strongly involved in the making of the game.

I'm not good with naming though, so you should probably find a title for both of those, if you'll use them.

Haha, why would you buy anything? Just let normalfags dictate what games get made.
If there's no reason to not support a developer, you like the game and you have money, there's no reason not to support them. In most cases there's a clear red flag that they are going to cuck out later, and in that case there is a reason not to support the dev.

The obvious solution here, if the ESRB weren't just a puppet of the big publishers, would be to create a second rating for monetization, displayed just as prominently as the content rating. Four levels: no monetization beyond the purchase price (or subscription fee, if it's an MMO–from what I understand that's already required to be on the packaging), purchases of a finite number of specific items, repeatable purchases of consumable items, purchases of a chance at obtaining a random item.
What this ignores is that these are for gambling minigames using in-game currency obtained by playing the game. A game that involves actual gambling, with real money, needs to be distinguished from those. ESRB does that in theory, but if they're not going to apply the "Real Gambling" content label to games with lootbox mechanics there's no point. As far as I can tell from searching their site the "Real Gambling" label has only been used once and means an automatic AO.

Are they trying to memory hole DLC being hated cancer?
This is some serious bullshit.

That's not the image I meant to post and I also failed to get dubs so it's a lose-lose on all sides.

Why the fuck is Holla Forums full on marxists when it comes to the economy of gaming and libertarian nationalists everywhere else? Free market has spoken. The minute you ban gambling (Which is close to being ruled unconstitutional in general with no plans to challenge the Bradley Act) and let the government in, then the government has an in to ban lewds. Let the idiots spend their money on lootboxes.
Tough shit commiefag. Back to Holla Forums

This thread is advocating Marxism and restricting the flow of capitalism. Don't be a retard

It is even simpler: if it has ANY ESRB seal, it is a scam. Don't buy it.

That happens regardless.

Yeah, user. I am sure that if I support a game it will get made with me in mind. Not that inclusiveness garbage all devs do for more sales. Remember Rimworld? Yeah, that turned out very well. How about yandere simulator? Spore? I don't give a shit about some faggot who will cuck himself out the moment he gets a chance. I have better things to spend my money on, though personally I'd prefer to charitably buy MLP figures for autists than buy another game.

Government already has an in to ban lewds. You put porn in a video game, and it's subject to all the laws porn normally is. That's how things already work. You put gambling using real money in a video game, it should be subject to all the laws gambling normally is. Right now the trick companies are using to get around this is that you can't get real money back out of lootboxes. This makes it worse, not better.

How about this?

It's your turn now guys. Pick a game, fill the table with information and I will put it up.

he is probably a leftypol faggot himself trying to false flag.

The MT section needs to distinguish between systems that let you buy the item you want directly and those that make you roll for it with a lootbox.

Mankind Divided is full of pozz itself, from faggots to "muh religion of peace". Also, ugly niggers instead of cute tomboy pilots.

That can be a category, but I don't know what to call it.

So "lootboxes" as an additional option? Or "Pay to win - direct" and "Pay to win - lootboxes" ?

Reversed the quotes.

Pushing political agenda? Yes / No.

For now. Even normalfags are getting increasingly tired of the bullshit of current year games.
Remember all the recent flops? That's normalfags not buying games.
What's wrong with that? I only heard the game was fun a couple years ago, but never looked into it
Mr. pay me before my game is complete, create a cult of personality around me man? Yeah, totally not a giant redflag.
They completely fucked the concept and released a shit game. So? You don't buy it, don't support their shit, simple.
Again, in most cases it's obvious the devs are going to cuck.
I bought Factorio early access, but I'm already happy with the current game and Ruiner. I have fun with both. Neither dev seems to be going to cuck in the future and I'm supporting them, showing there's market for that kidn of product.

I missed the microtransction thing, put "none" option in that as well.
Also, get a better name for previous fuckups. Fucking normalfags will completely disregard anything the moment someone uses a bad word.
If no one else picks a game I can look something up.

How about
for brevity purposes?

Wasn't it supposed to be a site to get normalfags to stop supporting bad shit then defending it because of consumer bias? If so, I'd recommend against that. All goldberg needs to do is to tell normalfags not to trust that ebil nazee site that pushes for" white power and nazism and holocoaster" and it'll be enough to discredit us. If we're going for a non-politically affiliated purely informational site, it'll hopefully inform some normalfags.
That said, there's no problem with puttintg that stuff in if it's going to be a by us for us type of site, but that seems kind of pointless since most of us search for that kind of stuff before buying anyway.

I can start with a game I like.
Cortex Command
Category: TPS/RTS
Micromanage units and shoot shit. Entire terrain is destructible and features novel engine.
Censorship: None
DRM: Steam/DRM free options available
Microtransactions: None
Online req. No
Payment system: Single pay
Previous fuckups: Developer
Developer released updates once every two years and never updated the engine to be less shitty and unoptimized after ~10 years, added new update recently to shill his new, shittier game.

A game I dislike-
Retail WoW
Category: MMORPG
Censorship: Moderate
Moderators in-game significantly more active than before, lots of changing of character models to be more PC despite lore still being 1980's kitsch
DRM: Other (battle.net)
Microtransactions: Pay to win+cosmetic
Can buy level boosts, experience boosts gained from inviting others to play (and pay), can buy in-game currency via WoW tokens, can buy racial changes allowing for new character abilities if your preferred race isn't meta anymore. Mounts purchasable. Other cosmetics purchasable.
Online requirement: Yes
Payment system: Sub+pay
Previous fuckups: Developer, Publisher, Individual
Can't be fucked to write a dissertation on everything Actiblizz has done over the past decade.

The microtransaction tab needs work. There are degrees of pay to win. EDF 4.1's first mission pack DLC introduces a level that's insanely easy to farm for gear and armor, more so than any other level in the base game. Is this pay to win? I think so, but it's not a heinous as, say, "level 110 boost" or some other bullshit.
Should still be labeled as pay to win, no sugarcoating bullshit, but a slider/ranks would be good.
Online requirements needs a "multiplayer only" tab too. Demon's souls would be in that category.
A "forced updates" option would be good too, since people should be allowed to play previous versions of their games. Cortex Command has a lot of mods that got broken from updates, but the previous versions are still available for download.

That format is going to be a pain in the ass to include any comments of real worth or to expand if things like new DRMs become popular. The information also may not be clear enough on its own and you'll end up with different subjective opinions. Instead it would be clearer to only have the field value, a description of what that field means which is consistent across games and then an optional source/comment field. Like pic related.

Dubs agree with that sentiment.

It wasn't obvious Chris Avellone was going to be an SJW too and yet here we are.

I hadn't thought about that. How about this for censorship
Content would be censored content, either in certain versions or all versions, includes only content that was released on a public build(including alphas and other early releases) and then removed from following versions/other releases, e.g. that one game that literally changed indians to cowboys for the western release.
That would be censored chat. Either that the game has a chat that is censored in any way, or you can get banned for saying stuff in either chat or voice chat.
The game has no censorship whatsoever.

That's why I'm shilling my idea of having two pages.
One being a general overview with optional search modes, that only shows the thing.
The other being a detailed page for each game that explains in detail what each thing means for this game in particular, citing sources as well as having an archive because we all know it'll get deleted in due time.

Maybe
That should finish it.

Wasn't Divinity good though?
I didn't actually play it, but I heard good things about it.

This.
How about this
DLC: Expansion | cut content | cosmetics | Entities | other | none
Expansion being a good sized DLC that can be called an expansion.
Cut content being content that was obviously meant to be in the game, including day ones.
Cosmetics being purely cosmetic DLCs.
Entities being a temporary name for general new items/NPCs because I'm bad at naming stuff.
And other being DLCs that don't fit into any of these for brevity purposes.
How about a
Game status: Early access | platform exclusive | timed exclusive | unfinished | other
Pre order stuff goes into DLC description .
Most of these being self explanatory and unfinished being blantantly unfinished stuff, as in the dev literally promised something and didn't put it in the game/sold it as DLC, the first example that came to mind being Numan's Sky's multiplayer feature.

I can't agree with giving WoW only a moderate rating on the censorship scale. They can and will ban you from all their games even if enough people flag you and you're shit out of luck unless you're some famous streamer.

Fuck you reddit normalfaggot piece of shit.

Just popping in to remind you, not that you'll listen, that localizing a game (usually by softening the overt sexuality of characters) with the intent to sell more copies (to people who are frightened of the bare female form) is not censorship and that every single time you call it censorship you soften the term. Soon it'l be so meaningless no one at all will care when you use it. I know I certainly don't think of anything at all when I see you folk using the term, except to remind you that you are wrong. Perhaps this is the goal.

Source: en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/censorship
That is literally censorship. You are censoring the clothing of a certain character because you deem it to obscene for the audience of a certain country.
Besides, most times it is an useless effort. People who are offended by the content of the game usually won't even buy the game after it caves into their demands, it'll only alienate the actual userbase and make them not buy future games. Normalfags will still buy anything, however, unlike the actual userbase, they'll stop buying the game, regardless of content, once it stops being the new fad.

How is it not, and if it isn't then what is it, exactly?

The site is up! honestgaming.neocities.org/

Possible changes:
- Additional sections, like DLC or some others.
- Style change.
- Separate page for every game.

Tell me what you think so far. I'm going to sleep and will read the thread tomorrow (or maybe this should get a new one?).

Guess you could make a new thread centered around it, yeah.

Hope it won't be considered "shilling", heh.

Maybe make a new thread tomorrow when you're fresh, then you can get feedback while you're awake without having to scour through a bunch of unrelated posts later.

Yes it is. This isn't ambiguous at all. Even if you're the "only government action counts as censorship" sort of retard, granting a monopoly on distribution of a work via copyright (and so preventing the distribution of an intact translated version of the work) is a government action.

Just popping into this thread to say this, fuck you with a rake, you fucking censorship apologist.

...

There should be a warning that when the servers shut down, the game may not be playable. Or just ban multiplayer only games from hard copy.

Nice.
I still have some suggestion, but I agree that it's best to leave it for another day.
When you wake up start a thread explaining the site and linking it.

no surprises here, it's been that way since they were established. It must be the cushiest job on earth though because you don't even have to play the games, developers send you footage iirc for you to judge what sticker to slap on it.

Reported.

here i localized your post

Who is this faggot?

...

...

...

He is that fat bastard that makes cringey LOL-thread tier comic strips, right?

...

...

This must be the funniest defense if dodgy corporate actions I've ever seen.

tbh this kind of sofist scum should get jailed

I hate liberals and leftists to a degree I didn't think I could hate a group of humans a few years back. I'm basically at a point where I am willing to condone any level of depravity, violence and abuse of rights and freedoms so long as it gets them and their Jewish masters exterminated, and the normalfags beaten and brutalized into compliance.

It's sophist.

Beautiful.

for what reason do you link polygon when numerous other outlets who aren't as completely fucked have covered the lootbox jewry and their apologists as well

...

So is Vanguard Princess any good? The art style has kind of caught my eye, but I know pretty much nothing about it except for it has a moderately warm reception on Steam.

May I suggest adding a line on whether or not a game has Dual Audio?
Using Senran Kagura as an example. Not only allows users to change the language spoken by characters, but can also change the subtitles.

it's a wonderful little kusoge that's worth playing at least once. don't buy the steam port though, netplay only works with the freeware version.

wiki.mizuumi.net/w/Vanguard_Princess/Netplay

trash

POTTERY

In any other industry they'd get their ass fired for that kind of unprofessional behavior.

I don't know man. Movies, TV and comics are almost as bad.

Well, I don't do a lot of online gaming, so Netplay isn't a big deal for me. So long as it has local competitive mode and solid mechanics, I'm down for it.

I'd probably avoid the Steam version anyhow just because Steam.

...

Oops. Regardless, I believe there should be a language line added, would help if certain companies like NISA popped up on the fuckups.

tbh at this point the industry has gotten so scummy that if a game has DLC ready to go at launch (which will get you that tag) it deserves to be shoved into the same boat of "don't buy this fucking game you jackass"

My criteria was more along the lines of content censoring+chat censoring. Overwatch would get severe for cutting content plus banning you for misgendering streamers.

Is banning you for doing the /violin emote after killing a guy being an obnoxious idiot not considered chat censoring?

Yes, it's fun.

It's chat censoring. Dunno where you're going with this.
I'm under the impression that this website also wants to cover games which have been heavily localized and maybe having two different categories for censorship (content removal and suppression of player agency?) might help.

There is a difference between having $60 of launch DLC and digitally releasing an expansion pack two years into the game's life cycle. There is a difference between using an unlimited CD key and Denuvo. You may disagree, as I am sure there are people who will refuse to seperate them into different categories. The average person, however, does not consider them the same.

When you display a list of games (before clicking on one to gather more details) it would be beneficial to have an icon or table entry next to each game to display the rating of the worst score the game qualifies for. People will skim the list and want to see at a glance how bad something is, and this will make it more user friendly to gather base information quickly.

Removing the severity of each category makes the information useless.

Are you talking about Dobson, Ronnie or every male cartoonist ever?

You watch your mouth about Bill Watterson and Dilbert guy.

...

...

It's moments like this that make me love our mods.

And moments like this that make me want the Western industry to die off entirely

Or just stop making multiplayer at all.

If it was just one single person, that'd be one thing, but there is no such thing as a good (((localization))). You also don't need to be fluent, just good enough to play video games, which isn't that hard.

Fucking majestic.

There are Scott Adams image macros? Oh baby, I remember reading his blog.

holy shit

If Nintendo gets involved, DLC will stay.

All localization are censorship and they must end.

The best way to combat lootboxes is to appeal to parents by claiming they introduce children to addictive gambling. It has worked in the past.

Good idea.

Uh, no it's not. Everyone understands the concept of gambling. You and the ESRB are making this much harder (or making parents seem much stupider) than it really is.

Are these new labels going to be obnoxiously huge like those labels Nintendo puts on switch games that require internet connections to play? Are games in north America gonna start looking like the shit in Europe (the uk mostly), where basically every box art cover is ruined by like four huge rating labels?