12 Awesome Gifts for Your Favorite Blizzard Fan > 자유게시판

• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Meanwhile, The CW's Arrowverse crossover this year had perhaps the most consistency of any of the network's crossover events. In previous years it's been abundantly clear which larger series each section of the crossovers have belonged to, for better or worse - though usually for worse. This year, however, Crisis on Earth-X had the most consistency in tone and story across the board of all four of The CW's DC series. Certainly, there was still some differentiation in tone between Supergirl and Arrow on night one, and it was clear which episode was Legend of Tomorrow's since the remainder of the team suddenly appea

Perhaps the biggest point of contention, and the biggest criticism, plaguing Justice League is that it feels like the product of two directors - which, of course, it is. Though Justice League was meant to be the capper in Zack Snyder's DC Films trilogy that began with Man of Steel and continued through Batman V Superman , the director stepped away from the project due to a personal tragedy. After reports that an early cut of Justice League was "unwatchable," Warner Bros. brought in Joss Whedon to helm reshoots , though he'd already done some work on the scr

As someone who plays Dota 2, I thought "'worth'? What do you mean 'worth'?" It hit me pretty quickly that they meant worth money. The concept of paying real money for a hero eludes me, as a Dota 2 player, with a game that has more than 100 heroes available to everyone, free of charge. While League of Legends is technically free to play, players can get a better experience by buying access to better champions - champions that have "worth." Dota 2, not so. There's not a single item in the game that can be purchased in any way to give players an advantage. This got me thinking how Dota 2 really is the only MOBA game meta that does Free to Play right, that is, in a way that benefits the player as much or more than the company.

I admit that Dota 2 has the benefit of an established fan base unmatched by almost any free-to-play game (League of Legends excluded). Not many games have fans who are willing to pay for something that doesn't benefit them in any way. Taking that into account, though, there still is no good excuse for free-to-play micro-transactions that benefit the company more than the player. Honestly, the solution is just to make your game cost money. Remember that? When games cost a flat fee for the entire thing? This was a largely successful model, and the only reason I can see for the shift is pure greed, especially by a company like EA that already has boatloads of money to roll in.

I saved the best for last on this list. While many folks pointed out Nintendo’s lack of original titles, Splatoon made a splatastic debut and made up for the last few decades. The cute, colorful, simple online shooter is a friendly way to introduce players to the genre. Clever weapon designs and fresh gear to wear makes Splatoon a uniquely designed game. It’s not serious or violent like many others, which appeals to players of all ages. Friends, parents, kids and squids can all enjoy this game together and not have to yell or scream about campers. Inking the entire level and fending off the other team is a big task, but Nintendo made it enjoyable. Plus, you might run into a Squid Party and those are always fun to mess with. Splatoon is my choice for best game of 2015.

Blizzard Entertainment has had a pretty successful 2016, starting with Overwatch releasing to stellar reviews on its way to becoming the next big thing in eSports. Hearthstone has again seen multiple popular updates this year, ranging from the dark Old Gods expansion to the more fun-filled Karazhan adventure . Even the old flagship World of Warcraft is experiencing a bit of a return to glory, with the nostalgia-filled Legion expansion breathing new life into the game after the disaster on Draen

The same goes for League of Legends, bringing it back into the discussion, and they have shown no sign of ever stopping this practice. They release a new champion every week, some of which cost money to play, and many of which are "worth," leaving the players who don't have the money behind. I was this close to trying out Orcs Must Die: Unchained before I found out that it uses the League-of-Legends-style system for hero purchasing. These games are no better than the cable company. In fact, they may be worse. Imagine if every week, Comcast started a new channel with new and amazing shows, but made you pay a new fee if you wanted to experience it.

Plants vs. Zombies 2 already has 10 "premium plants" for a total cost of more than $30 altogether, tax included. And that's just plants. You can also pay for upgrades and in-game coins. To my knowledge, Plants vs. Zombies never went higher than $20 for the whole game, with no micro-transactions, so I can only assume PopCap is making a truckload off of this. Now I know people like to point out how less than 10 percent of people who play free-to-play games participate in micro-transactions. This makes it seem like the companies are doing what's best for the player by offering a portion of their game for free, while only making a small chunk of change on the side to get by. It's a compelling narrative that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. This number conveniently leaves out how much money they're actually making from those ten percent of people who want a full gaming experience.