A game for everyone is a game for no one

[Hon]

ahahahaha

[ReBootXD]

Amen

[brett bunsen]

That must be why no one plays chess, soccer, cards. etc. Or why the Nintendo Switch is one of the worse selling consoles of all time. /s

The most popular games/sports on earth tend to be the most accessible. so I think you might be confusing your own biases for an objective truth.

[𝙈𝙚𝙜𝙖𝙡𝙤]

Originally posted by notimpressive:

That must be why no one plays chess, soccer, cards. etc. Or why the Nintendo Switch is one of the worse selling consoles of all time. /s

The most popular games/sports on earth tend to be the most accessible. so I think you might be confusing your own biases for an objective truth.

calm down

[Aethrys]

Originally posted by notimpressive:

That must be why no one plays chess, soccer, cards. etc. Or why the Nintendo Switch is one of the worse selling consoles of all time. /s

The most popular games/sports on earth tend to be the most accessible. so I think you might be confusing your own biases for an objective truth.

Those games are for: Nerds, Europeans, and gambling addicts. They have their niche.

[Sirre]

Originally posted by Megalo:

Originally posted by notimpressive:

That must be why no one plays chess, soccer, cards. etc. Or why the Nintendo Switch is one of the worse selling consoles of all time. /s

The most popular games/sports on earth tend to be the most accessible. so I think you might be confusing your own biases for an objective truth.

calm down

Woah woah woah take it easy bud no need to get riled up here

[KarlThorsten89]

It depends really on the type of game, notimpressive.
Some games are designed to allow everyone to enjoy them, if they so wish, but isn't forced, not mandatory, it's choice.

What he means here is when a game is made with forced inclusivity quotas, being woke or something - when it's deliberately and repeatedly nagged about being SPECIFICALLY FOR EVERYONE, to apply to every audience at once, not just one - then it really is a game for no-one, because such a broad, enforced targeting focus doesn't give ANYONE any serious focus.

Making games the most accessible is different from "EVERYONE *MUST* BE INCLUDED, YOU MUST ACCEPT THE INCLUSION! Except race or gender or ideology X Y Z, those must be banned from everything. including being alive." Which is what activists and woke extremists are all for - which in the end results in almost no-one wanting to be part of it - but sometimes they're forced to be part of it, at some level, because they won't leave others the hell alone.

Helldivers 2 became Wokedivers 2. Inclusivity enforcement, pride, LGBTQ, all that stuff is pretty much MANDATED. And such extreme behaviour and madness drives people away more than attract others. It does attract attention, because dozens of YouTube channels and many streamers cover this ongoing HELL, but a lot of players have quit permanently for varying reasons.

Arrowhead and Sony went off the deep end and into a free fall, of sorts. Most people don't want to follow them down into that free fall - because eventually, you'll hit the ground at terminal velocity and die from the impact.
Or in an online sense - your game, industry and company crashes and never recovers.

There, I just went off my own deep end to overexplain it. Is that better?

[Holden Bloodfeast]

Originally posted by KarlThorsten89:

It depends really on the type of game, notimpressive.
Some games are designed to allow everyone to enjoy them, if they so wish, but isn't forced, not mandatory, it's choice.

What he means here is when a game is made with forced inclusivity quotas, being woke or something - when it's deliberately and repeatedly nagged about being SPECIFICALLY FOR EVERYONE, to apply to every audience at once, not just one - then it really is a game for no-one, because such a broad, enforced targeting focus doesn't give ANYONE any serious focus.

Making games the most accessible is different from "EVERYONE *MUST* BE INCLUDED, YOU MUST ACCEPT THE INCLUSION! Except race or gender or ideology X Y Z, those must be banned from everything. including being alive." Which is what activists and woke extremists are all for - which in the end results in almost no-one wanting to be part of it - but sometimes they're forced to be part of it, at some level, because they won't leave others the hell alone.

Helldivers 2 became Wokedivers 2. Inclusivity enforcement, pride, LGBTQ, all that stuff is pretty much MANDATED. And such extreme behaviour and madness drives people away more than attract others. It does attract attention, because dozens of YouTube channels and many streamers cover this ongoing HELL, but a lot of players have quit permanently for varying reasons.

Arrowhead and Sony went off the deep end and into a free fall, of sorts. Most people don't want to follow them down into that free fall - because eventually, you'll hit the ground at terminal velocity and die from the impact.
Or in an online sense - your game, industry and company crashes and never recovers.

There, I just went off my own deep end to overexplain it. Is that better?

So many words just to say nothing.

What exactly about "Wokedivers 2" is woke and how exactly did this wokeness drive players away. Be specific.

[Kortek]

Helldivers 2 has limited conten that can get repetetive after roughly 50 hours, it is not a competetive game so the decrease in player numbers was to be expected. The drama had very little to do with the decline in playerbase, not that it did not have impact, the fall in player count was ineviteble due to the repetiteveness of the core gameplay.

[Gabriel]

He's just making fun of the once CEO, you guys need to calm down

[brett bunsen]

Originally posted by KarlThorsten89:

It depends really on the type of game, notimpressive.
Some games are designed to allow everyone to enjoy them, if they so wish, but isn't forced, not mandatory, it's choice.

What he means here is when a game is made with forced inclusivity quotas, being woke or something - when it's deliberately and repeatedly nagged about being SPECIFICALLY FOR EVERYONE, to apply to every audience at once, not just one - then it really is a game for no-one, because such a broad, enforced targeting focus doesn't give ANYONE any serious focus.

Making games the most accessible is different from "EVERYONE *MUST* BE INCLUDED, YOU MUST ACCEPT THE INCLUSION! Except race or gender or ideology X Y Z, those must be banned from everything. including being alive." Which is what activists and woke extremists are all for - which in the end results in almost no-one wanting to be part of it - but sometimes they're forced to be part of it, at some level, because they won't leave others the hell alone.

Helldivers 2 became Wokedivers 2. Inclusivity enforcement, pride, LGBTQ, all that stuff is pretty much MANDATED. And such extreme behaviour and madness drives people away more than attract others. It does attract attention, because dozens of YouTube channels and many streamers cover this ongoing HELL, but a lot of players have quit permanently for varying reasons.

Arrowhead and Sony went off the deep end and into a free fall, of sorts. Most people don't want to follow them down into that free fall - because eventually, you'll hit the ground at terminal velocity and die from the impact.
Or in an online sense - your game, industry and company crashes and never recovers.

There, I just went off my own deep end to overexplain it. Is that better?

Only people who are afraid of competition are afraid of inclusion, and that just screams weakness to me. Well, weakness and simplicity; whats more basic than judging books by their cover?

[Smooth Operator]

Let's face it: these turds made a gem of a game without any intention of creating it the way it came out, then they started to "fix it" in order to make it as intended and the result is a frustrating joke.

These kind of edgy little developers should really learn something from more mainstream games instead of trying to act like the propeths of my ass.
Cod devs get tons of hate but I still have to see their game dropping players.

[Plagen]

When you say this, do you mean in terms of difficulty/gameplay or do you mean this in terms of not wanting certain people to play the game?

[ReBootXD]

Originally posted by Plagen:

When you say this, do you mean in terms of difficulty/gameplay or do you mean this in terms of not wanting certain people to play the game?

It’s always meant in terms of difficulty/gameplay. One can’t make a game that everyone enjoys. Because whenever you make a design that one group of people likes, another group of people will dislike it.

By trying to please every group, you will end up pleasing none of them.

[Koala 4peace]

Originally posted by KarlThorsten89:

What he means here is when a game is made with forced inclusivity quotas...

With all due respect, but until OP clarify their stance, it's far more simple to think that they refer to the game balance and difficulty.

At least for a gamer, since this is a videogames forum.

Originally posted by Sirre:

Originally posted by Megalo:

calm down

Woah woah woah take it easy bud no need to get riled up here

Dude, take it easy! No need to be this emotional.

[tom tomorrow]

Originally posted by Koala 4peace:

Originally posted by KarlThorsten89:

What he means here is when a game is made with forced inclusivity quotas...

With all due respect, but until OP clarify their stance, it's far more simple to think that they refer to the game balance and difficulty.

At least for a gamer, since this is a videogames forum.

Originally posted by Sirre:

Woah woah woah take it easy bud no need to get riled up here

Dude, take it easy! No need to be this emotional.

Clarify their stance? This isn't OPcs stance. This is the motto that is on the front page of ArrowHeads website.