"Avowed Hates Men"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtFZvRxIffA
To no one's surprise, the game is nothing but insufferable girl bosses, thinly veiled anti-whiteness, and men who are either evil, corrupt, incompetent, cowardly, or just literally homosexual. It's a repeat of Outer Worlds, which shouldn't come as a shock to anyone because the devs are still the exact same leftist feminist dipshits who treat their game dev jobs as merely another opportunity for rank activism.
Outside of the culture war content, everything else is also terrible. The UI is garbage. The game is full of bugs and jank. The combat looks soft and boring. The game's structure is at least 15 years outdated. The story is beyond cliche. Nothing about this woke turd looks good.
An interesting phenomenon is the "console exclusive" bump we always see from such games. There are people out there praising this game for no other reason than Playstation gamers can't play it (right now). Same shit happened with Starfield, not to mention every Sony exclusive ever. These games always have lower scores and player reviews on PC because PC gamers are not ego-invested the same way that console fanboys have always been.
After one of the lead writers was open about discriminating against whites and hoping to replace them in the industry with 0 repercussions they could have made a 100% non-woke and I would still not buy it
I think that was the lead artist, and it really shows. The aesthetic is hideous.
It's basically identical to Dragon Age Veilguard. Overly saturated, lots of purple, and very ugly characters. I can see the similarities with Concord too.
Letting ugly women, emasculated soyboys, and trannies, design your game really ends up making it look awful. Who would have guessed!
"Avowed" Diversity Hire Game Director Defends Her Incompetence as "Quirky" and "Adorkable"
Carrie "Patel" is a self-hating White woman who married a pajet and openly advocates for removing White men from all media.
I wasn’t going to buy it because it seemed like it was in development hell for years and they continually had nothing to show for it. Turns out that was because it went woke.
More like AVOID
(shamelessly stolen from twitter)
That looks like ass.
Terrible models and bad environments with tons of glitter girl special effects raining down over it. The enemies look stupid and your team looks even dumber. I've never seen such bad environmental effects.
The whole thing looks made by a team of people who've never fucked anyone let alone been outside in the sun for more than 15 minutes at a time.
Jesus. This is "entertainment?" I'd rather go out in the backyard and punch myself in the nuts.
Never forget what they took from us.
I loved PoE and saw how drastically and quickly PoE2 killed the franchise. I knew Avowed would be shit the moment it was announced sadly.
I never gave PoE2 a chance. I liked PoE and played both expansions but Chris Avellone did not work on PoE2 and they did not include Durance that was written by him because him being "problematic", already to much drama to give it a chance.
Isn't Pillars 2 famous for not having a single straight white male companion?
You may be thinking of Pathfinder as both Kingmaker and WOTR had 0 human white male characters. Even the white non-human characters where either whiney bitches or gay. Strangely enough Daeran from WOTR is not that bad despite being a degenerate Aasimar, he is kind of based and has a good line: "Smile, the world's not ending just yet"
Played lots of kingmaker and yeah the story characters werent White men but it wasnt turbo mega gay. Like one the one who is a degenerate is an arguably black-coded orc and is chaotic evil, and there is a line to reply that you will knock him out if he hits on you again. The feminist warrior woman is so over the top you can treat it like satire.
Also other than a few character specific missions you can play the whole game with mercs who you configure however you want.
I've become pretty sensitive to this stuff and kingmaker didn't set me off despite a few potholes.
I couldn't stand kingmaker. I did play wotr since some companions are cool but kingmaker, I hated all the companions and the dialogue was so modern at times I just couldn't stand it - also feminism was so much in your face
unsheaths katana be careful how you talk about my wife Amiri, one of the few well-written characters in KM. Unless you mean Valerie in which case I agree completely
Not sure, did they make Eder and Aloth gay? I heard people complaining that you could not navigate without having someone trying to but-fuck you but I did not know the details.
Just Aloth, but Eder became a pale imitation of his former self who effectively renounced his faith, thereby destroying his character entirely
You're not missing much. As a fellow Durance and Hiravias lover, the writing from 1 to 2 is shockingly bad in every conceivable way. I played 40 hours and dumped it. Haven't reinstalled since it released.
Poe has had issues off and on for a while. Too much "we nerfed fun by 1000% because one streamer no lifed and used his clan to get to 100 day 2"
wrong poe. Pillars of Eternity was made by Obsidian not Path of Exile
I didn't have high hopes when it was described as a skyrim-like and I knew nothing else about it.
Skyrim was released in 2011. There are, (or at least, should have been) games to surpass it by now in terms of gameplay and fun factor.
If the best you can do is say it's kinda like a 14 year old game, that's fucking pathetic.
Trying to feed off the nostalgia of Skyrim is pathetic to begin with but I would understand it if it was an attempt to become a competitor to Bethesda but both Obsidian and Bethesda are owned by Microsoft, that makes no sense.
Only thing that comes to mind is that Microsoft is desperate and does not care anymore as long as something works.
Not like they want to compare it to Starfield.
Somebody really thought "the player character is a hideous fungus monster" was how they should distinguish themselves.
This is either hyper-self-aware self deprecation or the least self-aware thing I've ever read.
PCMR memes aside, there’s nothing egotistical about promoting an objectively superior platform. I felt the exact same way when I was restricted to a console earlier in my life.
The proof is in the pudding, btw. Full or partial console exclusives that come to PC always get lower reviews. Because no one on pc is giving games bonus points simply for not appearing on other platforms.
Or there is a frequent issue with ports. Or they have more and better things to compare it to. Or some combination of all 3.
I have used both for my entire life and I wouldn't claim either to be "objectively superior." They both have their uses.
Ports frequently suck. Go figure. It goes both ways.
/eyeroll
You shouldn’t write stuff like that. It’s really gay.
I have to ask the question then: In what specific aspects is the console superior? I know you're not saying it's superior in totality, but if they both have their uses, one must have a superiority in specific instances. So what are they? Vague fencesitting is all well and good, but examples are always going to be better.
One of the few things consoles can do which PCs can't is offer far easier and greater access to same room multiplayer gaming. The ability to pick up just the console and controllers and take that somewhere else is significantly easier than hoofing an entire PC setup.
However the cost of such mobility is often the literal loss of mass a PC can afford for hardware, meaning poorer performances for the same titles.
Easier, yes. But not exclusive. There are ways that can still be done on a PC. And that's pretty much the only real benefit of a console. Is that it's easier to use. But versatility, access, power, library, control, etc are all better on PC.
I know you're not SR388, but he's making it out that the advantages and disadvantages of both console and PC relatively equal out, and it's flat out that they don't. The ease of use of a console does not outweigh the vast ocean of benefits from a PC.
Yes, that was my point.
There may be other more subjective issues which can apply but objectively apart from the mobility issue a PC is going to stomp all over a console offering the same titles, which even then is slightly disingenuous since PCs can not only allow access to new releases but also decades old ones with emulators.
/goes back to playing Sid Meier's Colonization from 1994
Agreed.
Simplicity, at least until recent generations.
You could buy any console, plug in 2 wires (one of which color coded) and just turn it on with full functionality out the box. Minimal troubleshooting necessary for most of its lifetime (usually until hardware failures), minimal effort to use, minimal difficulty in that use for the entire age spectrum (so it could equally be a console for the kids and the adults). And for a family usage, simple to move around the house for public or private play sessions.
Whereas the opposite is true for computers, until recent generations the closest you could get to that was pre-built ones. Which we all know were both incredibly poorly made and usually filled with bloatware that would take effort to clear to be fully functional. Building your own would provide a superior and often cheaper option, but that requires considerable knowledge and effort.
And while that might seem like not a big deal, it was a very huge one before computers become "multiple to a household" norm. The balance has skewed heavily towards PC in the last decade because everyone has one now anyway, while the consoles started emulating the worst traits of PC (accounts for everything, massive install times, constant software issues).
Cool, we're talking about the history and not comparisons right here right now. Why is that? Oh right, because that's all the consoles have, is a historical advantage, not a modern one.
I wouldn't say otherwise. Consoles recently are completely dead because they emulated all those worse traits of PCs to try and become more than they were (likely spurred by the popularity of the PS2/3 as DVD/BluRay players and how much they massively pushed their sales up).
Xbox hasn't been relevant in a decade and PS5 is so dead that new games are still releasing on the PS4.
Nintendo however is still capable of providing those same advantages and went back to such after the Wii/WiiU became more complicated, while also adding simple portability. Meaning you don't even need to unhook/rehook to hand it to your girlfriend or kid, you just hand them a small console. So they point still stands entirely there, especially as the most direct competitor in that way ("gaming laptops") are a dead meme.
The most direct competitor would be Steam Decks and similar devices that use a PC operating system.
Adam, you're living in the mid 2010s for a discussion about right now.
The one superior aspect that won me over to the console faggot side is that when a game says "PS4" on it, it will run on a PS4. With a PC it's always a fucking gamble, even if you have the necessary specs. I do not have the patience after a long day of work to endlessly troubleshoot to get a game to start up that should easily run.
99.99% of the time this is not an issue with a game you've already played before on that PC. I can concede that initial install/bootup can be an issue, or even an update can cause issues. But this issue is largely a relic of years gone past. It does still happen, but it's far rarer than it used to be. And the idea that it's widespread? Nah, it simply isn't. I might as well point to the "Red Ring of Death" and suggest that consoles are prone to being bricked. It was a problem at one point, but these days it's rare.
I do get what you mean, but I disagree that it's enough of an issue in the first place. It's unlikely that I will be starting a new game of something I've never played before on a weekday, nor have I found it to be a significant enough hurdle that 2 minutes of searching doesn't find a solution for.
The first decade+ of PC gaming is basically a massive gamble to get to run whatsoever. If you don't have ScummVM, or the correct version of Windows, or this specific version of DirectX or this or that then a game from 1994 or even 2004 will just not operate unless someone has put in the considerable effort to make it runnable on modern hardware. And that often needs to be repeated on every game individually. This is why GOG is such a popular platform, because they are dedicated to solving that problem with an entire massive team instead of fan-hobbyists.
Whereas if I want to play an obscure PS1 game, it will work on any PS1 I can find that still operates short of region locking shenanigans.
I agree its not an issue everyone will run into, but its an issue that becomes more pressing as years go on. Every year dozens of software changes can just become the pin that ends a certain game's operational ability.
Or I could just use Duckstation. That thing is practically bulletproof.
But here's the thing: You cannot play a PS1 game on PS5, even with all the dicking around you might want to go after to try and get it run. It will never work. I can do that with PC though. I can even go and boot up and old system to do it if I want to, I've kept a lot of my old PCs over the years. After all, that's the one to one comparison.
Old PCs can play old games. Old Consoles can play old games. Neither can play newer games.
Modern PCs can play modern games. Modern Consoles can play modern games. Modern PCs can play olds games. Modern Consoles can't.
Doesn't matter how much extra effort you have to put in, nothing changes that.
I wasn't even really thinking of issues with hardware or updates causing the game to not run (like a game hating a perfectly fine graphics card for no apparent reason), my experience with PC gaming was reading the necessary specs for a game before buying. Seeing that I not only meet the minimum but actually the recommended ones. And then finding that it still shits itself.
I will concede that the benchmark downloads that are always available for bigger games nowadays are quite the game changer.
To be fair that's because the specs are stupid and irrelevant since most companies do nothing for optimisation anymore. They just throw out a bunch of average specs and go "yeah, that's good enough" and call it a day, expecting companies like AMD and NVIDIA to fix it on their end with driver updates.
That's developer laziness.
That said, I also haven't had that issue in a LOOOOONG time, but I also barely ever buy games at launch, meaning most of the issues get solved by the time I purchase something.
Curious enough I downloaded an evaluation copy.
-Game runs awful. Really, really bad. I can turn the graphics down to all minimum so it looks like blurry sludge and I still can't reliably get even 30fps. I have an older rig but it runs KCD2, Helldivers 2, Dying Light 2, Elden Ring, and Dragon's Dogma 2 perfectly smooth at 2k.
-Infodump barf dialogue non stop
-Level design and area aesthetics are terrible. Anyone who says the game looks good is a moron. At no point was I even a little bit tricked into thinking I was in a real location. Even Outer Worlds was better at this. Satisfactory looks better and feels more like a believable world.
-Despite all the dialogue the starting quest is super weak. You land on the island and get told you need to find some ambassador. Aren't I the ambassador? I'm the "Envoy"? Give these idiots a thesaurus. It's the same thing. "Hey ambassador, you need to find the ambassador". Wat.
-Combat should be rad. It's has a nice feel do it, weapon attacks feel solid, spells are cool, guns go KAPOW. But it has two fatal flaws: No challenge and shitty rewards.
-Challenge is all based on your weapon stats. I see why most people are gravitated towards the magic because that's the only way to have meaningful choices in fights. If you pick weapons, then your strategy is to upgrade your weapons as much as possible and then faceroll the enemies. All weapons are generic and the same, they just act as vehicles for the damage upgrades. It's like Dark Souls, but every weapon has the same moveset. Lame.
-Rewards are awful. At level 4 you need 1000xp to level, and enemies give 2 xp apiece. Wowzers. You walk up to a chest and some spiders appear. You kill them all but two more waves spawn. You fight and fight and fight and finally they're all dead. You open the chest and it contains 2 pelts and a piece of iron. That's it.
The crafting system is just an alternate xp/currency. Collecting enough materials gives you the damage bump you need to fight the next tier of enemies. Rinse and repeat. It feels like a combat system developed by a focus group of indian autists, which it almost certainly was.
tl;dr, shit game, play literally anything else.
I'm gonna try it on game pass and make the whitest motherfucker ever seen.