I agree completely, no normal person wants that.

*clicks on another tree in my 6,000 hour Old School RuneScape account*

IGN and its consequences have been a disaster for video game journalism.

“This game barely works. I had multiple game-breaking bugs during the tutorial. The art style is ugly, the music is annoying, the gameplay is generic and not fun at all, the graphics stutter constantly, and it tried to make me drink a can of mountain dew on camera to verify my purchase. We give it a 7… point 1.”

One of the countless reasons we need to repeal the DMCA and change copyright expiration to set in after 25 years

The best part is, they already made a game with a gigantic world full of procedurally-generated content: Daggerfall, which is remembered fondly for a reason.

“Decay”

What’s left to decay? It’s dust now. Remember when Eidos used a PR firm to strongarm websites into not publishing reviews of Tomb Raider: Underworld if they were less than an 8/10 till after launch?

“That’s right. We’re trying to manage the review scores at the request of Eidos.” When asked why, the spokesperson said: “Just that we’re trying to get the Metacritic rating to be high, and the brand manager in the US that’s handling all of Tomb Raider has asked that we just manage the scores before the game is out, really, just to ensure that we don’t put people off buying the game, basically.”

That was 15 years ago, and despite the fact that Barrington Harvey went on to lie and pretend they never said that, everybody knew that kind of thing was old hat back then too. Mainstream gaming journalism is a captured industry.

I’m not a console owner, are PlayStation owners really giving Sony $60 a year to play online multiplayer? It shouldn’t cost anything in the first place. If Valve or GoG or anyone else started trying to tell me I had to pay them extra to send certain packets through my router, I’d have a good laugh.

Since everybody in this thread got themselves into a big fucking tizzy about it because they have no actual problems. People for many years now have used it to jokingly put down their hobby obsession, e.g. “normies don’t glue green foam to toothpicks to make trees for their model trains like I do”, and while some people are huge wierdos who use it as a perjorative, the fact that they exist doesn’t matter and refusal to consider context is idiotic.

Post: Uses the word normies in a positive sense and literally says it’s great that gaming is more accessible

Fediverse: Is this a neckbeard?

The reaction is a bit more like

“B-B-B-BUT THE CONNOTATIONS!!! Bro you just LITERALLY used a word that has PROBLEMATIC CONNOTATIONS because it’s ALSO USED by PEOPLE I DON’T LIKE, and that makes you GUILTY BY ASSOCIATION!!! I am PROUD of how I combine purity testing and code switching into a DEFINITELY accurate litmus test, because I think I’m a character from Dune!! I don’t know what the FUCK ‘context’ is but it SOUNDS like something the ALT-RIGHT would care about!!!”

If I ever caught myself taking an obvious self-effacing remark seriously, I would be so ashamed. Anyone coming into this thread with hurt feelings about the word “normies” is a huge dork and needs go outside.