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
I'm glad you found it helpful.
A review is, after all, the fact paired with your opinion on it.
I will admit, that you also wrote this part, but it feels like more of an afterthought here.
Another point I often wonder about myself is the "you have to play through the game" - if after 2h you can tell, that the game is shit and you have some actual points for it, then why would you waste another 8h or so, before the game maybe gets better - that's on the game to be good from start to finish.
Then again, sometimes the game may just be bad because you played it "wrong", which begs the question "should it have explained itself better?".
I still haven't found a real answer for myself :D