I think it’s specifically a PS4/PS5 thing. I couldn’t find other controllers with an Options/Share combination. And I imagine if you use a PS4/PS5 controller for PC, it handles it differently. But it makes sense since the controller wasn’t designed for that.
I haven’t played Overwatch or Minecraft but every game I’ve played with one of those options used pressing in the touchpad to do that. I’ve never played a game where the share button didn’t share somehow.
I just looked it up and for Minecraft it’s used to take a screenshot or bring up a screenshot menu. I couldn’t find anything for Overwatch though. Are you sure you didn’t remap the button? Or are you using it for PC? It might work different in that case.
I do agree that menu would’ve been a better name, but that doesn’t mean that Options doesn’t make more sense than Start which is what the original comment said.
I get being nostalgic for Start/Select but how does Options/Share not make more sense? The options button brings up a menu of options for most games and share allows you to share screenshots or video from the game. Whereas start did the same thing options does now which has nothing to do with the word Start and Select was sorta a catch all button for an action you only used occasionally, but was never used for selecting which was usually X but sometimes one of the other shapes.
Yeah I don’t understand this mindset. It’d be like saying it shouldn’t be allowed for cars to have different versions with more features because they were developed together. DLC is supposed to be an additional feature like lane assist or something. You can get just the base version for cheaper or you can get a version with more features but you pay more. If the product sucks without the extra features than the problem is an incomplete product.
I get that we want to pay less and get more, but they can’t give away stuff for free.
I dont think you’re thinking about this right. Stuff like DLC has never been funded from profits of a specific game, that’s not how company finances work. They may decide to create an expansion or extension of a product they weren’t planning if a product does better than expected, but a lot of time, it’s too late by then and you’ve missed the wave to capitalize on the success. Most things like this are planned pretty early on based on the projected success. The base game and the DLC might even have separate budgets.
And all that to say, the DLC shouldn’t factor into your evaluation of a game at all. If you would like the amount of content in the game if the DLC never existed, then they added enough. You aren’t owed more content because of when they developed it, that’s absurd thinking. And if it for some reason got coded into law, it wouldn’t make anyone add more content to the base game, they’d just wait until after the game is released to start developing it. Which would make for a worse experience for both the company and consumer.
I agree with the person you replied to: if a game feels incomplete, then that’s the problem. I’m not going to pay for an incomplete game, regardless if it has DLC or not. But if a game is complete and I enjoy it, I’ll pay for DLC to get more experience from it and it doesn’t matter to me when the DLC is developed.
Or maybe a very small bear and bear trap
I’ve done the opposite.
“So excited to do karaoke later! I can’t wait until it’s my turn!” 27 beers later, I go home trashed before my turn comes up
The joke would’ve worked just as well and not been an outright lie if they used “professional driver” or even just “driver”
And if you want to do the math fast and just get close enough, you can just do “double it and add 30”.
Yeah literally the first and the third movie are about stealing Christian holy relics, this is just Indiana Jones with a lead of South American descent