安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题

版主
Yes this is definitely not centralizing on the idea of difficult games per se. The best easy games are conceived as such in their core-design, so nothing is really lost. The problem is bypassing the core-design for trivialization purposes, which doesn't differentiate between the initial difficulty design.
So we're rather against the postmodern (and sometimes intersectional) mentality that the player is entitled to control the game however they wish for, as this leads only to a decline of potential valuable videogame experiences.
basically, this group appears to be totally against assist modes and features as a blanket opinion, which i feel is rather unfair to the games you are reviewing and harming your credibility as a curator.
i'll stay in here for now, because it would be nice to see this group develop into something with a bit more nuance, but currently i offer no support.
(3/3)
(2/3)