FullMetalWesker

Got 12/15, and one of the three I got wrong was a bit of a tricky question (I mean, who’s going to be looking at the number of reviews a game has on Metacritic, let alone take that into consideration) so not bad all things considered.

So, this is only for those who purchased a digital copy and if you do, you can’t carry over your save data?
If that’s the case, then I’m not really sure what the point of these are. More to the point, why did Sega bother with an upgrade path at all, if they weren’t going to do them properly?

I guess Kiwami 2 being essentially a free 60fps patch is kinda nice, but even then, if you’re forced to start from scratch, I can only see it being worth it if you haven’t played it in a while.

Also, what exactly does the upgrade do for Kiwami? 0 adds the extra stuff from the Director’s Cut, and 2 adds 60fps support, but afaik, neither of these things apply with Kiwami, so what exactly has changed?

Still haven’t gotten around to trying out Obscure Expedition 33 (I may end up liking it, but that title not so much) so I can’t really comment on how the two games actually compare, but crossover content is (almost) always nice to see. Wonder if we’ll end up seeing something more substantial in the upcoming FFVII Part 3?

While I understand taking an optimistic approach to your work as a way to ensure you’re giving it your all, the comments here alone unfortunately highlight that ultimately his goal of pleasing both newcomers and veterans likely won’t happen. Even if the final product is the best it could be (and going by the two prior installments there’s a decent chance it’ll get reasonably close to that) there’ll be people mad about it for not being “turn-based” (either using the exact same atb system as the original 7 or just a turn-based system in general) while others will criticise it for other changes it’ll make to the original. Even when it’s adapting elements faithfully, there’s potential problems due to either imperfections in the source material (sorry og FFVII fans), or complications with being adapted into a three-game story (I should add I’m actually overall in favour of the multi-game approach here, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to ignore any challenges it brings) so either way, it’s going to annoy a few people.
Still, trying to look on the bright side, if he feels like this will “please everyone” that at least implies he’s satisfied with the game overall, so at the very least it sounds like the development process wasn’t a particularly hazardous one, which is at least something imo.

@Gaia093 - I don’t know about that: 86 for a game is good, but I think it needs to be at least a 90 to have “critical acclaim”, or “rave reviews”, to use the articles words.
———
Honestly surprised it beat out Silksong, considering the latter not only is (I assume) more widely known, but also got better reviews, but going by the recent comments, maybe Silent Hill had more resonance here specifically?
In any case, nice to see a decent game win; interesting to see what the remainder of the year gives us.

@Dragon83 - I’m aware, my point was that gameplay-wise, V is pretty much a remake of PW already. Nothing PW does isn’t also done (sometimes much better) in V, and once you take that out, you’re really not left with much outside the story (and given how barebones that is, I don’t think you really need a remake for that). Ultimately, I just don’t feel like you’d get much out of a PW remake, especially compared with the titles I mentioned in my other post.

At this point I feel MG1&2, MGS1&2, and PW are all fair game for remakes (though personally I don’t see much point in remaking PW when V exists), so the cleanest option would probably be to start with MG1 and just do the first four in a row, though really (almost) any of these would be a good choice imo.

That said, I agree with those who say don’t use the Twin Snakes as the basis for the MGS1 remake; give that version a remaster instead, and base the remake on the original version so you get the best of both worlds.

@pyrrhic_victory - “ Welcome to Raccoon City fumbled the ball because Johannes Roberts, for some reason, decided to cram BOTH RE1&2 into a single 107 minute film, ”
To be fair, I think the problem there wasn’t that they tried to do a 2-in-1 (after all, the Resident Evil games aren’t exactly detailed stories) but more they picked the wrong two games*. Instead of tying 1 and 2 together, they probably should’ve tried 0 and 1, or 2 and 3. Not only do these games happen at the same time, but their stories are more closely related to each other.
*That said, having read through the film’s synopsis, the way they went about adapting the two wasn’t the best either. It really reads like they just crammed the events of 1 inside the events of 2, whereas they really should’ve been relegated 1 to flashbacks explaining why the outbreak happened.
—
Considering how acclaimed Weapons has been, having the director involved does sound promising and this being a “original story” hopefully means there’ll be somewhat more creative freedom available here for him to actually play to his strengths. That said, I’m still not entirely sure what can be gained from making a Resident Evil movie at this point, since anything you can do with a movie you can also do in the games (in addition to having that interactive element games intrinsically have).

@Pacific - Take a look at the actual categories it’s being nominated for: pretty much all of them (outside one for best series) are for either acting, or the production (e.g. makeup, sound, etc.). Nothing for writing, or even directing, which, considering all these other nominations, is quite telling on which parts they thought was good and which parts weren’t.

@yazzika - All the info you need is in the article, so if you take another look it should make sense which is which.
————
If this is accurate (taking it with a grain of salt since it seems a tad unbelievable) that’s a new low in low effort, to the point where I have to ask “why bother?”.
That this is coming after the seemingly never ending controversy this game has attracted since the launch of S2 makes me wonder if they”ll be asking that same question with the game itself before long (a shame, since the game was pretty fun to play for a while).

Unfortunately, I haven’t played any of the favourites so far (except Blue Prince, and even then, I haven’t played enough to get a good impression as yet) so my picks were for the few games that I have played so far: Indiana Jones, Nightreign, and Pirate Yakuza. All reasonably solid titles, but outside of maybe Indy, not ones I’d normally consider GOTY material.

Didn’t realise solo play was even possible, might have to look into that for when I’m having trouble finding a game (or just looking to experiment). Nice that they’re making sure it’s a somewhat viable option (though I understand being hesitant about making it overly so).

I guess it’s time to try out Inscryption then, see if it was as good as I’d heard.
Also nice to know only a small amount of titles are going next month, after losing a ton this month.

Looking at the lineup, you’d think it’d be a somewhat tight contest between at least a few titles, but instead, it seems the anime-JRPG-of-the-month has so thoroughly captivated the voters here that it’s beaten everything here by a country mile. Personally I don’t see the appeal (nothing I’ve seen so far has convinced me it’s anything more than your average JRPG game) but if that’s what people like, then that’s how it is, I guess.

As for me, I was prepared to vote for City of the Wolves, but it hasn’t been the hit I was expecting it to be, and since I haven’t played much of Blue Prince that left Indy as my pick of the month.

Here’s a page with a bit more info on the game: https://www.starwars.com/games-apps/star-wars-zero-company

Notably, it mentions that it will feature “authored and custom characters” meaning it’ll have fixed, “canon” characters, as well as generic mooks you can give a name and face to ala XCOM. That, combined wih the mention of base building makes it seem like this will in fact be closer to XCOM than Midnight Suns, which is a bit of a relief for me, as I much preferred the former to the latter. Interested to see how it turns out now, hopefully it meets the hype.

@ShogunRok - *sigh * Seriously? They’re no worse now than they’ve been in the past.

@Colour - “we keep getting bad Star Wars games”
Which games are you talking about? Last I checked, we haven’t really been getting many at all (unless you’re talking about mobile titles?) and what few games we have been getting (Squadrons, Jedi: Survivor and Outlaws for this decade) have been generally good (unlike half of the games we got in the 2000’s) so I’m not sure where you’re getting that from (unless, again, you’re talking about mobile games, in which case, that’s probably to be expected to be fair).
—————
Was interested in the concept, but after seeing this picture I’m having second thoughts. Based on the characters shown here, I’m guessing we’ll be getting something closer to Midnight Sun (i.e. pre-existing characters) than X-Com, which isn’t quite as interesting to me. I’ll check out the full reveal to see what it’ll actually look like, but if it turns out to be not actually be like X-Com, then I’ll probably skip it.

@SMJ - “Can we all agree that no-one wanted this…”
Actually, I did, as I didn’t have either, but I got the impression it wasn’t coming and bought them separately when they were on sale.
Also, not sure why you seem to be under the impression that this bundle coming out means fewer new 1st party games are being developed? Pretty sure you can have both pretty easily, Especially since the physical is only being released on Sony’s own store.

@Drago201 - It is an option, but pretty much no-one’s picking it (myself included).
———
As much as I wish I could say Bleach, unfortunately the game didn’t quite turn out as well as I hoped it would (though I’d still say it’s decent overall) so that leaves me with the sole other new game I played this month; Assassin’s Creed Shadows, which, while not a revolutionary game, is probably one of the better entries in the series, and a gorgeous looking game in general.

@PuppetMaster - From what I understand (haven’t finished many AC games post III, but have dabbled in all of them) after III, the present day story got put on the back burner; stuff still happened in them, but they weren’t as important and I don’t think even did a whole lot to move the overall story forward. Then, Origins, Odyssey and Valhalla attempted to actual do something with the present day setting by giving you a new character in Layla, who is given a story spanning those three games, but from what I’ve read, her story ends in Valhalla in much the same way Desmonds did (sacrificing herself to stop some big disaster from occurring). Mirage, being a DLC expansion originally, doesn’t have a present day story segment at all, so where this stuff is at now is dependent on what Shadows is doing with it, but considering Ubisoft want to continue making these games until the end of time, I would guess the “main story” (as in, the conflict between Assassins and Templars in the present day) to be something that just continues until the series dies (and considering most play these games for the historical part, I wouldn’t be surprised if they just ditched it entirely at one point).
—————
Bought the game online yesterday, waiting for it to arrive. Interested in seeing how it goes, though disappointed that the RPG stats are apparently still a thing (one thing I loved about Mirage).

A shame they weren’t able to do one more, especially if they had a clear idea on what they wanted to do with it, but I do agree that, given how saturated the market was at the time with FPS and post-apocalyptic games, the timing probably wasn’t right (a factor that likely contributed to the previous game’s low sales).

That said, if anyone at Insomniac wants to do one now, it might do alright.

Feeling a bit mixed on this one: on the one hand, I’m pretty impressed I managed to get 12/15, considering I skipped every entry between Gladiator/Deadlocked and Rift Apart but on the other hand, it could’ve been 13 if I had chosen to read through all of the choices for the first question, rather than seeing Vita and immediately thinking it had to be that one -_-

I still feel like the effort spent on these projects would be better spent on a full-game version of Mercenaries. An RE engine entry, with a massive cast of characters and locations from across the series, a variety of modes and both offline and online co-op would be an excellent side game imo, and a much better way to celebrate the series’ 25th anniversary than…whatever this was.

@mountain_spider @JohnKasarinlan - *sigh * I could keep trying to clarify what I’m saying, but I get the feeling I’d just be repeating myself, so I might just end it here. You guys can re-read my previous comments if you want answers.
That said, one final point before I go; I personally have no problem with difficult games, or high difficulties in games, in fact I tend to gravitate towards them. That doesn’t mean I’m going to refrain from calling out a game’s particular difficulty mode for being easier than the equivalent mode in other games of the same type.

@mountain_spider @JohnKasarinlan - I’ll respond to you both since you’re both basically saying the same thing (which is “the intended experience of these games is at their highest difficulty”) and just say, no, it’s not. Just like with any other game type, higher difficulties are an optional extra for those who want to take a more challenging run, that’s it. They’re not the intended experience. You may see it as the “definitive experience “ and sure, maybe you’re right, but that isn’t the same thing. And when it comes to a professional critic review, especially a quick one like this is, it’ll be the intended experience, for the average player, that will be considered, not whatever one person considers the “definitive experience” (to borrow your fighting game analogy, a review for, say, Street Fighter 6, isn’t going to be targeting the pro tournament gamers who will mine this game’s potential till it’s dry, but the more casual crowd who probably won’t rise higher than Platinum).

@JohnKasarinlan - “you and the reviewer were probably…”
You know, if you actually read both the review and my comment properly you’d notice that we both specifically said we played on hard mode, which means Path of the Warrior. Also, whether it was called that in a prior release doesn’t really matter, what does is what it’s called in this release (though it certainly wasn’t just this release, as Sigma 2 uses the same difficulty naming scheme)
Edit: So, out of curiosity, I tracked down what the original game called these difficulties…..and they don’t. They just list the “path of the…” names and that’s it. And the descriptions seem to line up with what they’re called now (for example, Path of the Warrior starts with “Those adept at battle…” which fits in more with hard mode than normal imo) so I’m not sure where you’re getting your info from, but it doesn’t seem to line up with what I’m seeing.
“Come back when you play Mentor and Master Ninja”
I probably will at some point, but doing so won’t change what the game is generally. The strategy will likely still be the same: slash at enemies till they lose a limb, then press triangle to finish them off. Rinse and repeat (maybe use a ninpo spell every now and again if you get too crowded).
Also, if I have to play what the game calls “very hard” and above to get a good challenge, then at best, the difficulty names are a bit off. For the average gamer, normal and hard are what the game should be putting forward as the “intended experience”.

@PuppetMaster - Out of curiosity, where is the skill issue here? Unless I’m mistaken, skill issue implies a lack of skill (at least, that’s how I always see it used) yet the reviewer stated they had no difficulties at all, even though they were playing through on hard mode (which lines up with my experience, I was expecting hard mode to be pretty challenging much like the first game, but it ended up no different than Sigma 2).
Also, regarding your second comment, as mentioned before, I played through the entire game on Warrior(hard) mode, and I at least never really had to make that much use of the game’s mechanics. Heck, once you get some weapons, like the scythe, you can almost turn the game into a Warriors game the regular enemies are that easy to deal with. And that might be how the game is supposed to work, as it does feel very much like it’s main goal is to make the player feel like a badass by allowing you to pull off lots of cool moves that tear through enemies like butter. But it does mean that it can come across as shallow and “breezy” if you aren’t playing on the two highest difficulties since….that’s all the game is.
————
I pretty much agree with the review (outside of the camera, which didn’t bother me at all) though I’d bump the score up to either a 7 or 8, since it is pretty fun all things considered, but at the same time, it does feel like what it calls hard mode is actually normal mode for some reason, so if you’re expecting a challenge from it then yeah, you might end up somewhat disappointed.
Overall, it’s good if all you want is a simple, straightforward action game where you spend 95% of the game tearing through enemies with cool moves, but if you’re looking for anything more, you might be better off looking elsewhere.

@Dalamar - Have you seen the sales figures for the series? The critic scores? Every main GTA game is a big thing at the time it came out, even spin off games like the two PSP games usually rank among the best selling on their platform. GTA V is still a strong seller, over a decade after release. When taking those things into account, of course GTA VI is already being considered a big thing.
—————
If what Mat is saying is accurate, then yeah, I’m not sure there’s a great reason for raising the price of the base game that high (unless you’re wanting to increase the price of the collector’s editions as well, but I’m not sure how many will buy those if you’re raising those by the same amount). If this has anything like the same level of budget and care as RDR2, then I can understand $70 USD, even maybe $75-80, but not $100. Especially since it’ll most likely include the monetization machine that is GTA online.

Been playing Ninja Gaiden Black 2, gone through the first seven levels so far, and I’m surprised at how easy the game has been so far, even on the game’s equivalent to hard mode. Still fun though, which is a far cry from my experience trying to finish Turok 2 on Switch -_-

Ragnarok and Gaiden are both great games for those who haven’t played them, and Sayonara Wilds Hearts is supposedly pretty good as well, so a good selection overall this month for Extra, just not much for me personally (though I’ve got a few games on my backlog atm, so it’s no problem).

@rjejr - It’s not really a GaaS game to be fair, just a game that’s had some bonus content released haphazardly afterwards. A GaaS is designed from the ground up to support a steady stream of content (usually with a road map), where the launch content is merely a starting point. Astro Bot doesn’t really have that: at best it has a minor GaaS component with the speed run levels, but those are clearly a bonus tacked on, as opposed to a core part of the game experience, as it is with games like Suicide Squad, or Destiny (and even then, from what I understand, most GaaS involve either a subscription or paid microtransactions, neither of which apply here).
So ultimately, when you see people dunking on some games for being GaaS, they’re dunking on games that are clearly unfinished on release, that have extensive monetised content drip-fed over the course of years, that abruptly end when it’s time to move on to the next thing. Astro Bot, on the other hand, has a complete story experience straight out of the box, with a few extra free bonus levels released afterwards. That’s it.

P.S. Oh, and a lot of GaaS games are multiplayer focused endeavors: Astro Bot is purely single-player.

Surprised to see Ghost of Yotei go toe to toe with a juggernaut like GTA VI; guess people really liked Ghost of Tsushima.
Personally a bit disappointed to see fighting games continue to prove unpopular, since there are some pretty good ones coming out this year, but I guess no-one cares much. Even 2XKO, the (I thought) highly anticipated LoL fighter (though one I’m not personally interested in) isn’t anywhere in the top 20, whereas some obscure games (including one literally called “Clair Obscur”) I’ve never heard of are.
Oh well, in any case, there’s a pretty decent selection of games this year, so, provided they mostly turn out as expected, things should be good for the next few months.

@Fishnpeas - I thought the same after seeing Half-Life: Alyx, that it was a step forward for video gaming as a whole, but unfortunately, it seems very few (admittedly myself included) actually play VR games regularly and so these games tend to get overlooked in favour of more ‘traditional’ video games.
————
Just got the Platinum and yeah, I can see why this is GOTY. An absolute joy to play from start to finish, and a wonderful way to cap off PlayStation’s 30th anniversary.
I only wish Square weren’t quite so stingy and at least allowed Cloud and Sora into the game (other FF and KH characters would be nice as well, but those two are particularly big absences). Other than that though, this is an excellent follow-up and realisation of what was already a pretty good (if small) game (and presumably the original VR game as well).

Yeah, I had a feeling this was one of the reasons why VII Rebirth was ranked so low. And tbh, I still don’t see why that is. From what I’ve played of Stellar Blade (i.e. the demo) the game overall seems decent, with good combat during the boss fights and…….that’s it. Admittedly that’s only from the demo, but unless the game gets significantly better afterwards, I’m having trouble seeing this game as a #4 as opposed to a #7 or 8.

Yeah, I’d like to know the reasoning behind why this game isn’t at least at number 5, because outside of Astro Bot and Metaphor, I can’t see any game being placed above it, really. Maybe Balatro and Silent Hill, to put it at number 5, but that’s about it.

Never had a PS1 (started with PS2) so I’m pretty happy with my 10/15, even if the Crash question kind of annoying me at first (since when was there a Crash Mario Party game?)

Got 12/15 (though I forgot to sign in first, so it’s somewhat null and void unfortunately), which isn’t too bad considering I’ve only played through about half the series, but still a bit disappointing considering I got the first 8 right.
On a side note, I’m kinda surprised it took till the Ishin remake to line up the Japanese and Western release dates: would’ve thought they’d have reached that point by Y:LaD at least.

A good week this week: only question I got wrong was the GOTY one (and tbh I think you’d be forgiven for thinking none of the above was the answer).

Got 7/10 this time: Would’ve been 8/10 if I’d gone with my first instinct on the borderlands question, but *shrugs * oh well (on the plus side, the three I did get wrong were in the first four questions, so I at least managed to turn things around and finish on a better result than I might’ve done).

Surprisingly satisfied with the Premium selection this time thanks to Timesplitters, but since I’m not a fan of SAO, Extra’s lineup doesn’t do much for me (though having The Witcher 3 is at least a nice novelty, and might entice me to try the DLC’s I never got round to).

@DrVenture69 - I’ve found four bosses so far, and out of those, only one I’d say is that bad. The others are tricky, but not overly so.
@get2sammyb - Out of curiosity, which bosses are we talking about specifically? Are we including the optional bosses like Malenia and Mohg, or just the story bosses?

———
Yeah, I dunno about review bombing because a game/expansion was too hard. Even if it were (and from my experience so far, it isn’t really) why not just…..stop playing, and move on to something else? (Especially if it’s part of a series that’s known for high difficulty.)

To be fair, what are the chances of your hardware lasting long enough for inheritance to be a question? If you have, say, a PS3, how likely is it that it’ll still work 50+ years later, or that it will even be compatible with modern TV’s (or whatever device equivalent we have then)?
Admittedly with PC stores like Steam and GoG you could make a decent argument for preservation and inheritance, but for those on consoles, it seems a bit moot to think about game libraries living beyond us, when they usually don’t last beyond the console generation they’re on.

@themightyant - To be fair, it’s a Playstation account that’s required, not a Sony one, so it’s not quite the same thing: A Playstation account is one that is tied specifically to the Playstation console (and should therefore not be required on another video game system) whereas a broader Sony one wouldn’t have such connections (neither do almost all other accounts that publishers try to foist on customers).

@DaniPooo - This type of response is pretty much what I'm talking about. You say you don't want more, but then specify that you want "better story, better characters, better music" which, last I checked, counts as wanting more than is being given. But the thing is, both 16 and VII Remake/ReBirth have been pretty good at these areas, generally speaking, so if even these games fail to meet expectations, then how good does it have to be to be considered "good enough"? Or is it that 'good enough' isn't actually, and it has to be perfection or bust?
But perhaps the problem lies elsewhere. You also mention "a traditional formula" which I have to interpret as meaning purely "turn based ATB combat" because XVI is really a FF game in every aspect except combat. Is this change colouring your analysis, preventing you from properly assessing the recent games on their own merits? But the biggest problem with this, is the assumption that FF needs this system in order to be 'legitimate' to which I ask: why? Yakuza/Like a Dragon is a recent example of a game series completely changing its gameplay style (going from a 3rd-person beat-em-up to a turn-based JRPG) and coming out the other side completely unfazed. Why can't Final Fantasy be allowed to do the same? Especially since: 1 - it's a series that has historically changed a lot of stuff with each installment, from setting, to style, to story (just look at how different each game has been from V onwards) and 2 - It's a series that has been trending towards action ever since the introduction of the ATB system in IV.

I dunno man. While I could see the criticisms for XIII and, to a lesser extent, XV, I don't see how XVI and the VII Remake Trilogy are bad enough to justify treating them as failures.

@Mikey856 - Pretty much, which is a shame, because the games recently have been pretty good imo.

Judging from these comments, it sounds like the problem is a relatively simple one: Exaggerated expectations, from both SE and the community as a whole. Everyone seems to expect more from the series and seems to always find fault with whatever the series ends up doing, even when it delivers some pretty decent games, which can't be good for anyone looking to get into it. But at the same time, as has been pointed out earlier, the series as a whole isn't as popular as SE seems to think it is, which leads to statements like "it performed below expectations" even though the recent games have actually sold pretty well all things considered.
So yeah, maybe everyone needs to chill out a bit and not expect the series to redefine gaming or sell CoD levels of copies, because chances are, neither of those things is happening. Not from this series.

@get2sammyb - To be fair, most publishers who do this don’t make hardware (e.g. Square-Enix, Capcom) so it makes a little more sense there to have an account for logistical purposes. Here though, the publisher is Sony, who are using their Playstation account system for people playing on PC, which to me doesn’t make sense. Why not create a Helldivers account system, or use their more generic Sony account system for this sort of stuff? Why add a requirement for a Playstation account, to play a game on PC?

@ED_209 - The number of monthly users sounds like a metric used to quantify success (e.g. “our service has 3000 monthly users this month, that’s a 30% increase over last month, isn’t that great?”) which is then used to incentivize more investment. That would make it valuable to companies, and seems the most plausible (though not logical) reason for the requirement.

@UltimateOtaku91 - Well, the honest answer to that is probably they didn’t see it, but putting that aside for a second, what I want to know is why this requirement even exists? Last I checked, PSN accounts were for Playstation players, so why is there a requirement for PC players to get one, to play a game on PC?

Honestly surprised this isn’t done more often, considering how easy it is to spend hours in these things.

Will definitely give it a try; even though I hadn’t planned on getting the game, I do like a good character creator, and it’s possible that by the time I finish my first character, the game will be on sale, so I might end up changing my mind at that point

Assuming this has any legs, I’d kinda wish they’d redirect their efforts to remaking the Jak and Daxter games instead (assuming it has to be a ND game); Uncharted 1 might be a bit simpler than it’s successors, but I don’t see a remake doing that much for it, (unless they decide to completely flesh it out into a much bigger game), whereas the Jak and Daxter games could probably benefit at least somewhat from an overhaul and expansion (though a new game might be a better approach even then…)

@NathanKang - They don’t usually, (unless they’re Super Smash Bros or to a lesser extent Mortal Kombat); Street Fighter V is currently the best selling SF game and it managed 7.4mil (as listed in the article), Tekken 7 is the best selling in its series, and even with 7 years on the market only managed 10 mil (it also took a full year to reach 3 mil). So for SF6 to sell 3 mil in 6-7 months is actually pretty good for a SF game, and I can imagine those numbers will get a decent boost when Akuma is added to the game.

I’m all for subscriptions playing a part in the gaming ecosystem, but as a supplement, not a replacement for physical (and digital) media. To say gamers need to essentially “get over it” and accept a sub only system, while at the same time downplaying (if not ignoring) the drawbacks of said system, is not only tone deaf, but outright disingenuous.
Ultimately, we should always have the option to purchase an individual story, whether that be as a book, UHD, digital file or game disc. While I understand the convenience of “all you can eat” subscription services like gamepass and Netflix, it’s still too limiting to work as the only option.