Calling Warcraft Rumble an RTS is like putting a hamburger patty on a plate and calling it a steak. You're technically correct, but you've also completely missed the point in what people want.
Glide
She isn't even the most interesting or well-written character in Origins. /shrug
What an insane take. If both sides are equal on one completely undefendable thing, then you vote based on other issues. One of the two parties are going to be in power at the end of this election cycle, regardless. Both are permitting genocide, and it's a fucking problem, meanwhile only one of those parties are actively working to strip the people's right to do something about that.
All this "both sides" bullshit feels disingenuous. If you were really concerned, you'd be focused on paths to solutions, rather than focusing strictly on trying to devalue Democratic votes. I certainly don't see any path to stopping this genocide that starts with permitting a Trump presidency.
No satire here; I genuinely think it's a great example of a remake done well.
There are some major breaks from the original plot, which in itself would be neat, but they introduce an entire plot element that interacts with this derivation. The spirits I was talking about, "Whispers" (had to look up the official name, tbh), appear whenever the story attempts to break from the original story from the original release. In universe, this is explained as pre-determination, or destiny. Thanks to our meta knowledge, we know in reality that these spirits are attempting to maintain the timeline from the original release.
As an early example, after the events at the first Mako reactor, Cloud decides to collect his pay and go his own way, which is not the original intended path of the game. To correct this, a group of Whispers attack the party, and ultimately injure Jessie, preventing her from going on the mission. Needing another body, Barrett is forced to rehire Cloud for Avalanche's mission to the next reactor. Without spoiling specific details, the whispers slowly become a form of antagonist as the characters try harder to get away from the original plot of FFVII.
This is interesting in a few ways. First, we've introduced a new major conflict in the form of the characters fighting against a physical embodiment of destiny. They do not want the outcome of their struggles to be predetermined, particularly as that predetermination involved the death and suffering of some specific characters. This is, in my opinion, an interesting new plot element beyond being "the same game again."
Second, stepping back, and examining this with a wider lens, we can look at the Whispers for what they are to us, the players, rather than what they are to the characters. We know they are not maintaining "destiny," but instead trying to reestablish the original story we loved. As a result, I see the Whispers as the collective voice of the "change nothing" remake ideology. When a community asks for new content of IPs they love, there will always be diehard essentialists who want their loved stories to remain untouched; the Whispers, then, are these people.
So if the Whispers are a physical representation of the "change nothing" remake ideology, then what is there to make of the fact that they're largely an antagonist? This seems to me that the writers were critical of this culture, so much so that they ask you to fight it to earn the different take on the story. Of course, it's far from the only derivation from the original game, but that's exactly my point: FFVII remake was so far divorced from the conceptual, soulless "let's pump out the same game again" remake that they literally wrote that culture into a new antagonist.
But isn't it featured in the list of games being given a short film via Secret Level? I kind of assumed the goal was to promote it via that episode and re-release the game around the same time.
I feel like people are taking this commentary a little too literally. I don't think it's intended to suggest that all remakes are always bad and we should be ashamed of ourselves for enjoying them. Mankind has a habit of romanticising the past, and that's led to something of a modern obsession with nostalgia. These are fair, and interesting, statements.
That said, the choice of pairing the statement with an allusion to FF7 is probably not a great choice. The remake is fantastic, and isn't at all symptomatic of the problem of quick cash-in, nostalgia driven remakes. Hell, the first game specifically tackles themes of pre-determination, which functions as a pretty on-the-nose metaphor for nostalgia. And fascinatingly the meta-analysis of this is critical of exactly the same thing: there are literally spirits of sorts which attack the player and manipulate events to ensure the original story remains untouched, and they become a prominent antagonist of the game as the player works to tell a story that is different from the one told in the original. Perhaps there's something counterproductive about attaching this message to a remake that's critical of soullessly telling the same stories we've already heard.
Pre-empt: Everything I say is in regards to the original release. I have not played the pristine cut.
It is definitely intended to be deeply uncomfortable. It has a very "cosmic horror" vibe to it, while playing on themes of relationships, love and romance. Both the player and the princess will die, repeatedly, in sometimes gruesome ways, and sometimes absurd ways. Body horror will happen. You will read descriptions of flesh and bone seperating. But despite all that, it ultimately is an emotionally endearing experience.
It's good, but not great. The story is impactful and meaningful, and it does a great sort-of incidental meta commentary on literature.
An opinion which I find most players don't share with me: the ending was incredibly weak, to the point that I felt it really detracted from the experience, which led me to my "not great" assessment. It has a bad case of "the only decision that matters is the last one," which isn't the way I like these seemingly heavily malluble visual novels to go, and none of the endings feel genuinely satisfying. Worse, my first ending set up for something of a second attempt towards a "golden ending" of sorts, only to pull the rug out from under me and just kind of... end, instead.
The storytelling is great, the writing is engaging, the voice acting is fantastic, the art is gorgeous... There's a lot to like about the game, so I don't want to make it sound "bad," because it's quite good. It just sold itself to me as a kind of "choices matter" game, where I'd find myself digging for information and answers, so I can learn more and make better decisions on multiple, short playthroughs. I hoped to eventually either discover everything I want to discover and feel good about my explorations, or use my growing knowledge to find the "right" ending, whether that's a "golden" ending or an ending that I find satisfying and rewards me for my effort. But, for it's variety choices, it's not really that kind of game. It is, at its heart, a linear game, with some variation in the experiences you have between where you start and where you end up, with a couple choices in the last moment determining which page you flip to before the credits roll.
Maybe I expected too much, and the problem is with me. I can't deny that my opinion could be based on a failure of expectation. But, I restate, it's good, but it's not great.
"I'm a gamer myself, and therefore I know what I'm talking about"
Should we call it a fallacious call to authority, meme on it for being a "how do you do, fellow gamers" moment, or simply mock the guy for whoring himself out in favor of daddy corporate? I could write an essay on the ways this is an absurd statement.
Gamers hate Denuvo because it doesn't "simply work". It limits paying customers from accessing their content, bogs down mid-range machines that are already overtaxxed by poor optimization and, in admittedly uncommon cases, full on breaks some games until patches and fixes roll out. Stop pretending that "gamers" are out here rioting because they're too cheap and immoral to pay for content. Quit your fuckin' lying.
Fucking real, though. The cultural group responsible for checks notes "shaming people who have the wrong bubble color in texts"?, suddenly think they're the one's being unjustly preached to? The joke in this image is not the one OP thought they were making.
Second. The guillotine.
Everyone always talks like defeating Trump in the election is the end-all be-all of the disussion. Voting Democrat and preventing Trump from taking the white house should have been an obvious step. It is not the best outcome for the election, nor is it the end of the ongoing decay of late-stage capitalism into wealth-based fascism, but all this whataboutism and strawmanning Democrat voters as believing Kamala was going to single-handedly save democracy is disingenous. It was never "Plan A". It was one minor, marginally better compromise in the collective of shit we should be doing.