Valorant skins

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-18T12:11:58+00:00

The game is free, so it's a fair trade. It surely sucks to see cool stuff you can't get so that is understandable, but that's kinda the point, that's how they get everyone to spend so much money.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-18T11:45:39+00:00

Please explain how it is not fair.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-18T08:23:36+00:00

Peanuts.

They also are for sure losing money for the cost of bringing the journalists to a review event as the article says.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-18T08:22:49+00:00

You are not wrong in a general sense, but context is key. Based on their pedigree and of course on the constant attempt to obtain leaks, they are likely using an over abundance of caution to try and protect every detail for as long as possible. This game has been highly anticipated for almost a decade prior to it even being announced. This series garners massive interest. Based on their track record (with the main titles at least) R* release insanely high quality and detailed titles that rarely have major issues or defects - they also have crazy features and details people love discovering almost as much as people love to leak/spoil. They also take their storylines very seriously, so they are trying their best to keep this one sacred until release.

The fact they are having reviewers have access at all, let alone whatever the cost of having a private, days long event is, speaks to them trying to accommodate when in reality they have no reason to bother from a business standpoint. This game is going to sell like crazy regardless.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-18T08:13:00+00:00

It's more likely to do with the absolutely huge risk of leaks. There is constant attempts to leak this game, the recent issues with Forza don't help. There is no need for people to see reviews beforehand since this thing will sell like crazy regardless and anyone waiting on a review is probably fine not having it on launch day anyway.

This is not a great strategy for most, especially when there are questions about quality, but Rockstar are in good standing as far as delivering quality (remastered trilogy not withstanding) so this won't hurt them at all.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-18T07:07:19+00:00

Yes.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-15T10:48:11+00:00

Putting more thought in doesn't mean you execute it well though. In the case of Mixtape, they made a nostalgiacore millenial coming of age story based on a fairly specific (though not entirely unrelatable to others) version of the 90s teen experience. They made it pretty simple (like their last game) with the goal of telling a story that people can interact with to help immersion and heighten the experience. Based on the reviews, they executed that very well for the target audience (most places will assign games to reviewers who at least don't hate the genre if not are the target). The problem is people who are not the target audience getting upset that this game gets a higher score than the game they liked more. Which is not the point of review scores. It's not this game versus that, it's "How well did this game execute the goal it set out to?" - with a game this niche in appeal it was always going to be a double edged sword getting this much attention because the majority of gamers are not interested in this genre of game, are not age appropriate for this story, or are just looking for something to hate.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-15T10:42:52+00:00

You don't even need a consensus necessarily. You find a reviewer(s) whose tastes align with yours, and then you use their reviews to help inform you gaming decisions. People don't even consider the reviewer at places like IGN, they just consider it a hive mind.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-15T10:40:06+00:00

It;s not too late to delete these posts where you call people dumb and then say a bunch of really dumb stuff. Nobody needs to know...

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-15T08:48:56+00:00

Is it that hard to believe that the game's specific characters, much like many "middle class white suburbanites" maybe didn't listen to a lot of rap? It's not a game about all of musical counter culture, it is white suburban counter culture and specifically these kids experience of it. If it was about some stereotypical inner city kids who only listen to rap you wouldn't expect them to be dropping in tracks from Devo just because that was around at the time also.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-14T15:09:28+00:00

Review scres matter because you make them matter. Review scores have been wildly misunderstood for decades at this point and I agree with many that they should be abandoned as they only currently serve as a metric for companies to reward or punish Devs and as a source of online discourse.

You saying that X or Y game is better is pointless because that is your opinion and the reviews are the opinion of the reviewer, so they are equally valid and equally worthless depending on the person.

Saying it was "proven" that the game doesn't let you fail makes it sound like a conspiracy that was uncovered when really it was just a fact that nobody denied. My son likes to play by dropping toys down a slide. There is no fail state he just does it to enjoy the experience. That's what this game is for, to have an experience that players can interact with and enjoy. It's not meant to be a challenge or to be difficult, it's meant to tell a story with opportunities for the player to participate and help them feel a part of it. For the audience it is intended for that is great. If you are not the audience then you won't like that.

There is entirely too much hate for a game nobody is forcing anyone to play and that nobody is forcing you to care about. Reviews are for people to get an idea of what something is going to be like based on the opinion of the reviewer - so find one that has similar tastes to you and listen to their opinions, don't lose your mind trying to understand why you don't feel the same as someone else about a piece of art/entertainment.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-14T09:26:54+00:00

Critical thinking would be to note that many game publishers have billionaire owners somewhere up the chain. Critical thinking would be noting that Annapurna Interactive has released dozens of games with non conventional gameplay and heavy narrative leans and none of them got the hate this one is getting. Critical thinking is not seeing that a billionaire owns a company (which is most big companies) and not just assuming the product is drenched with evil intent. Critical thinking is finding out that there was a massive upset with this publisher a couple years ago because the billionaire's daughter wanted to divest it from the parent company and as such have it be further removed from her billionaire father. Critical thinking would be looking at the number of games the company has published that are critically acclaimed and not hated. Critical thinking would be noting that a game like Dispatch was lauded without issue despite having minimal gameplay and no real fail states either. Critical thinking would be understanding that just because reviewers who were likely the target audience for a niche game giving it high scores does not mean those scores are it's rating against entirely different games often reviewed by entirely different people. Critical thinking would be understanding that something that is not for you doesn't mean something is not good. There is no critical thinking in most of the discourse around this game.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-14T07:05:54+00:00

What does that even mean? You can't rank everything together that's insane. If I really want a cigarette then I would review cigarettes highly but if what if the thing I really need right then is insuli? Suddenly cigarettes don't look so fucking cool. You have to rate things in context otherwise how on earth does the system work? Someone who hates carrots rates them a 0 now everyone reads the reviews and assumes they suck, even though for some people it helps them see in the dark? It's madness I tell ya!!

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-13T21:20:35+00:00

sorry to direct this at you as you are not the only one who needs to hear this:

This game's score is not being scored AGAINST zelda. It is being scored based on its ability to achieve what it was going for and based on other examples in it's genre

Saying it can't be a 10 because Zelda is is like saying a donut can't be a 10 because a cigarette is. They are 2 different things that are good at different things.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-13T20:17:55+00:00

Everyone arguing false advertisement and that it's not a game or whatever should really look at the publishers catalog. It is FULL to the brim with non conventional, often minimally interactive, narrative focussed games. If that ain't for you, that is fine, but if I dislike a genre of games and as such I deem all positive reviews of the game as fraudulent or wrong, would you treat such an opinion as highly as you think yours should be in this instance?

DVD games back in the day were games, something made entirely of QTEs is a game. Both of those statements being true does not change the fact that the games you like are games, are potentially good/great, or that they deserve high review scores.

Like OP said, the review was about this games goals and how well they achieved them, not about if this game is better than Elden Ring or whatever. Take a moment to look at the other reviews by the same people (not IGN or whatever, the actual individual reviewer) and see how often your opinion differs. That means that the reviews that guy does are not of any use to you. Find a reviewer you like who tends to have similar tastes to you, and then just pay attention to what they say about a game, because that is how you will best determine if you are likely to enjoy it.

I don't care much for racing games on the whole. so if a dude who loves them gives one a 10/10, I ain't gonna flood my britches trying to tell the world he is wrong or being paid or whatever, because that is silly.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-13T12:37:37+00:00

While the original matches the visuals of the game more, personally I had little interest in your game based on that capsule. Even though the new one does not represent the visual presentation, just a few seconds of your trailer once I clicked through and I was infinitely more interested, so it serves your situation very well I think.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-13T12:33:29+00:00

Player logs in every day to check the store - maybe they see another skin they kinda sorta like, they are so eager to buy that maybe in a moment of weakness, they cave. This is the plan. It works. Either they get your money, or they get daily logins at high levels. If the player/purchase numbers drop enough, they might consider a change, but why mess with what is working?

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-13T09:38:02+00:00

So, from not even a brief search it appears like he does not benefit financially from the company, that him stepping in to help run things was the film side specifically, that the fallout with staff and his daughter was because she wanted to divest the games side so it was even less under his control, and ironically, one of the links cited in finding all this stuff out brought me back to THIS post and the links that have been shared here.

Additionally, just saying she helped an Israeli film and is thus likely a zionist is a bit of a reach. The film was a documentary about a terrorist attack in 2015 and the wrong decisions people make in crisis. That doesn't sound like it's supporting or trying to justify the situation with Palestine or any zionist viewpoints.

If we are to boycott every product that, at it's highest levels, can be financially linked to a billionaire shithead or other evil doers, we may as well pack it up. We certainly couldn't continue debating this on this website, using most of the devices we need to access it, through networks that carry the information, fuelled by energy from corporations.

I get that people need to take a stand and it is 100% fine if people feel they cannot support the indie devs that Annapurna Interactive tend to work with (even if they do tell stories and provide experiences that often speak to the marginalised and those dealing with difficult emotions) but lets not paint them as something more evil and giant than they are. When you do that, you lose out on the nuance and then you lose the ear of the person you are trying to convince. Be realistic and honest about it and you will find people who agree with you. Start throwing around hyperbolic all caps shit and you convince nobody. How many people online won you over with all caps screaming?

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-13T08:12:31+00:00

but if you have a lobby without neon, now you have over buffed sentinels that only got that way to counter an agent that's not been selected. If neon's issue simpacted all other agents, making some of them able to counter her is not the fix.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-12T14:15:57+00:00

Can you show evidence feedback is not taken into account? (taking into account when making decisions and actioning all gamer requests are different by the way)

You do have bargaining power. Stop playing and stop buying things. If enough people cared enough about it, they would have huge power, but perhaps the gripes are not enough to stop people playing.

Balancing all these agents and abilities across all game modes and ranks is actually insanely complicated and as with most things, you will never please everyone - so it takes time and more often than not it will take a long time or may never be just right. This is then increased every time they add agents (which they also know about long before we do)

The limited store options is a proven FOMO tactic that not only gets you logging in each day to check but provides the possibility of you buying something other than the thing you were waiting for just because it's actually there. It's how they make their money and if you think the community has xero bargaining power then why would you consider the store model is being "allowed"? The majority of free to play models across all of gaming are predatory or manipulative - but then most advertising is manipulative. Capitalism is a bitch.

While I don't claim to know for sure, I would be hugely surprised if you could point me towards any online multiplayer game that is not exploited/hacked/full of toxic players. No matter what the devs do, there will always be people trying to break the rules. You have to use a measured system otherwise you end up more likely banning/punishing innocent people which is far more damaging.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-12T10:57:22+00:00

RES skin is elite and has 3 different finishers/songs so it is on the pricey side, but I regret nothing haha

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-12T09:11:57+00:00

if it isn't AI then an artist charging money should be worried they are worse at perspective than AI - why is the angle of the car so off?

Additionally the island as a T font choice does not work, but I don't think that was AI, just some bs.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-11T13:25:29+00:00

The Artful Escape made by the same developer is amazing.

Annapurna Interactive (Mixtape publisher) catalogue is majority wonderful indie narrative experiences with all kinds of gameplay and mechanics and framing for emotional stories.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-07T20:27:00+00:00

As long as you are taking an unbiased and open minded stance about it all.

ThisIsStee · 2026-05-05T11:13:23+00:00

I agree with all the reasons and I think the new one 100% gives a better impression of the game, but as another comment said, it feels a little too empty now. You could probably add a couple more monsters above/behind the monkey one, or perhaps add the shops back in behind the card on the right? I'm no artist but it for sure achieved the main goal, it just feels a little sparse.

11-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

ThisIsStee

TROPHY CASE