|
Czech Republic12115 Posts
On January 14 2019 02:37 Rodya wrote: Breath of the Wild is only notable as the game that made Nintendo glad that the Zelda CDI games exist, because thanks to them, BotW is not the worst Zelda game of all time.
People just want games to be easy with little challenge. They want games to be relaxing - they like the open world designs because they can walk around and relax in nature (virtually of course, not in real life). Why is The Witness so popular, despite being a bad take on the genre that Myst created? Because most of the game you literally walk around in nature and look at it without any mentally taxing tasks.
Gaming, as it used to be, (that is, as a place to challenge your mind and test yourself against your friends) is definitely dead (aside from Brood War which lives on).
I guess it's for the best though, because gaming is a waste of time, and we would be better off starting businesses and developing new technologies. There are challenging games. Actually I listed some of them in my previous post.
If you think you're a gamer and you think games are a waste of time then you're not a gamer. Games are a hobby, it's your responsibility to use the time in games properly. If you enjoy the game the time wasn't wasted. Similarly if you read a book and it's a good* book and you enjoyed it it wasn't wasted time.
Edit> *by your standards, it can be a shitty book otherwise, similarly for games. SOme people really enjoy even shitty games. In the end you cannot write enjoy without the joy part and that's all - gather the joy and be happy with your life
|
On January 14 2019 04:54 golpo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2019 04:49 RandomPlayer416 wrote:On January 14 2019 04:13 HornyHerring wrote: I, for one, am excited to see what's in store for Blizzard under the new leadership, it doesn't have to be all doom and gloom. Are you aware of whats happening? What is happening? No Fanfiction. Post ALL the future projects with evidence
I was referring to all the blizzard employees who are leaving the company because of Activisions influence.
Basically all their bonus incentives were taken away which drastically cut the salaries for many of the programmers. It would be very wishful thinking to expect anything big to come out of blizzard/activision.
IMO it feels like the end of the starcraft franchise, hopefully that isnt the case. .
|
On January 14 2019 05:20 RandomPlayer416 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2019 04:54 golpo wrote:On January 14 2019 04:49 RandomPlayer416 wrote:On January 14 2019 04:13 HornyHerring wrote: I, for one, am excited to see what's in store for Blizzard under the new leadership, it doesn't have to be all doom and gloom. Are you aware of whats happening? What is happening? No Fanfiction. Post ALL the future projects with evidence I was referring to all the blizzard employees who are leaving the company because of Activisions influence. Basically all their bonus incentives were taken away which drastically cut the salaries for many of the programmers. It would be very wishful thinking to expect anything big to come out of blizzard/activision. IMO it feels like the end of the starcraft franchise, hopefully that isnt the case. . All the? How many are leaving? Arent those leaving responsible for all the terrible things that happend? Arent they going to hire new ones? All the Blizzard North developer quit Blizzard as well. Was that the end of Blizzard? End of Starcraft? Is that why they keep on working on Starcraft: Remastered? What Activision influence? You have to name them. Or are you getting all your information from those Youtuber?
|
On January 12 2019 15:39 gababa wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2019 15:34 StasisField wrote:On January 12 2019 14:59 gababa wrote:On January 12 2019 14:58 StasisField wrote:On January 12 2019 14:36 gababa wrote:On January 12 2019 10:58 NoS-Craig wrote: Shame to see more of the OG guys go. Guess these things happen. Yeah, its a damn shame. What are those OG's up to nowadays? All of them have massive projects going, or? Chris Metzen is still voicing characters for Blizzard, but other than that, I'm pretty sure he's retired and spending time with his family. I don't know about the others He wasnt the only one who left. What are those other developer GODS doing? I know he wasn't the only one who left, but idk what the others are up to. That's why I said I don't know about the others lol So why do you say that its a shame that they are gone? What if i tell that they did nothing but shit after they left Blizzard?
I didn't? Check who you're replying to please
|
On January 12 2019 00:28 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2019 20:30 abuse wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Honestly, I stopped respecting Blizzard since the "do you really want chat channels thing" and shown that they have no idea what their customers want.
Everything they've done afterwards has been bad in my book, and my heart has gone completely cold towards them. When Starcraft Remastered turned out being unfinished, and left at that state this entire time, I didn't even care much soon enough, while normally I would have been devastated. What I think of Blizzard these days is "The company that did their best to ruin the game I loved while growing up", I don't even associate them with the company that made SC:BW or Diablo. Honestly, take away WoW from Blizzard, and they're a completely dead company. The games industry as a whole has gone really downhill these past few years, due to becoming much more mainstream. Thereby it gets more interest from investors, more money starts going around, and it understandably became more about money than it is about games, with bigwigs taking over the reins of the companies from the people who had the passion and love for video games to make the companies and the games in the first place. It brings great sadness that so far CDPR are the only developer worthy respect these days.I just hope they stay worthy. CDPR making a proper RTS some day is a dream. + Show Spoiler +Morhaime is better off this way, and so will we. The sooner people fully realize that Activision Blizzard is NOT Blizzard anymore, the sooner we can move on. WHAT?!NieR-Automata. Persona 5. XCOM 2. Uncharted 4. Horizon Zero Dawn. God of War. Red Dead Redemption 2. South Park - The Fractured but Whole. Doom. The Legend of Zelda - Breath of the Wild. Divinity - Original Sin II. Pillars of Eternity 2. Some games in the recent years(2016 - 2019) that come to my mind. Can you identify which of these games were done by CDPR as they're the only developer worthy respect these days? All of these games belong to the top and are not just multi-player title. All of them have a proper SP campaign that will take some time to beat it. This isn't me shittalking them, they make great games, but FFS - people, realize that they're not alone. Gaming world isn't just EA and ATVI.
Okay - Nier-automata was a very niche title for a niche audience and was a game that HAD to succeed, or the company would have gone bankrupt - which proves my point that the game industry is failing. Persona 5 is an overhyped game that is way too long and is also for a niche audience. Uncharted is a series I've never touched so can't really have an opinion, but judging by Joseph Anderson's reviews, the last uncharted's story made no sense, which kind of sucks for a game that is pretty much only about the story. Not interested in HZD. God of War was nice, but was also heavily scrutinized by everyone for changing the GoW formula before it came out. It was a massive surprise to everyone that it was an actually proper game, and is being used these days as an example of what games should be precisely because the gaming market currently sucks. RDR2 - the single player is great but the multiplayer is a complete shitshow and a shining example of what gaming companies have become these days. South park 2 isn't even a good game. Doom - decent single player, shitty multiplayer, Zelda-BotW had a ton of issues itself, with the dungeons being shitty being the main one, but it was a good game by many other margins. Divinity and PoE are not my kind of games so I can't comment. I hear they're good though.
You know what else all of these games have in common? None of them will be still played 3 years from now.
It's not just EA and Activision. Pretty much every single large publisher and developer only care about monetization these days. Hell - look at what Bungie and DICE have become. Look at Bethesda. Ubisoft has proven time and time againthat they are shit when it comes to caring about the gamer and absolutely support loot boxes and monetization for AAA games. All of this is also during the last few years. Compare these companies to what they were before monetization happened. Hell, people don't even release games these days. You get them pushing for preorders, leave games in early access without releasing them for years or at all, while people have already paid. Half-done games get pushed out with the promise of being finished later. You have to pay for the priviledges of playing in 2 week long "betas" which don't even qualify as one by any definition of the word. What the fuck is that.
On January 12 2019 01:49 Nakajin wrote: I don't get why you would want CDPR to do an RTS they have 0 experience in the genre, I mean I love the Witcher series but making 3 (well 2 and a half W1 wasn't that great let's be honest) great rpg isn't the same a good RTS or platformer or whatever.
As I said, I wish they'd make a proper one. CDPR had 0 experience in any genres or game making at all for that matter, yet they made the Witcher games.
On January 12 2019 14:59 gababa wrote: The sooner people fully realize that Activision Blizzard is NOT Blizzard anymore, the sooner we can move on. Yeah, thats why Hearthstone is so unpopular. No wait. Thats why Overwatch is so unpopular. No wait.
What people really want is: 12 Unit selection, NO MBS and shitty pathfinding!
How many people do you even know who still play overwatch? The game's balance is a mess, and it is one of the main reasons why loot boxes even became a massive thing. Hearthstone is a shitty "but pretty" game, which has shit support and balance and pushes you to spend spend spend. Compare it to other F2P games like Eternal or Gwent. Much better games that can actually be played without spending a ton of money or grinding your balls off.
|
Czech Republic12115 Posts
On January 14 2019 16:42 abuse wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2019 00:28 deacon.frost wrote:On January 11 2019 20:30 abuse wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Honestly, I stopped respecting Blizzard since the "do you really want chat channels thing" and shown that they have no idea what their customers want.
Everything they've done afterwards has been bad in my book, and my heart has gone completely cold towards them. When Starcraft Remastered turned out being unfinished, and left at that state this entire time, I didn't even care much soon enough, while normally I would have been devastated. What I think of Blizzard these days is "The company that did their best to ruin the game I loved while growing up", I don't even associate them with the company that made SC:BW or Diablo. Honestly, take away WoW from Blizzard, and they're a completely dead company. The games industry as a whole has gone really downhill these past few years, due to becoming much more mainstream. Thereby it gets more interest from investors, more money starts going around, and it understandably became more about money than it is about games, with bigwigs taking over the reins of the companies from the people who had the passion and love for video games to make the companies and the games in the first place. It brings great sadness that so far CDPR are the only developer worthy respect these days.I just hope they stay worthy. CDPR making a proper RTS some day is a dream. + Show Spoiler +Morhaime is better off this way, and so will we. The sooner people fully realize that Activision Blizzard is NOT Blizzard anymore, the sooner we can move on. WHAT?!NieR-Automata. Persona 5. XCOM 2. Uncharted 4. Horizon Zero Dawn. God of War. Red Dead Redemption 2. South Park - The Fractured but Whole. Doom. The Legend of Zelda - Breath of the Wild. Divinity - Original Sin II. Pillars of Eternity 2. Some games in the recent years(2016 - 2019) that come to my mind. Can you identify which of these games were done by CDPR as they're the only developer worthy respect these days? All of these games belong to the top and are not just multi-player title. All of them have a proper SP campaign that will take some time to beat it. This isn't me shittalking them, they make great games, but FFS - people, realize that they're not alone. Gaming world isn't just EA and ATVI. Okay - Nier-automata was a very niche title for a niche audience and was a game that HAD to succeed, or the company would have gone bankrupt - which proves my point that the game industry is failing. Persona 5 is an overhyped game that is way too long and is also for a niche audience. Uncharted is a series I've never touched so can't really have an opinion, but judging by Joseph Anderson's reviews, the last uncharted's story made no sense, which kind of sucks for a game that is pretty much only about the story. Not interested in HZD. God of War was nice, but was also heavily scrutinized by everyone for changing the GoW formula before it came out. It was a massive surprise to everyone that it was an actually proper game, and is being used these days as an example of what games should be precisely because the gaming market currently sucks. RDR2 - the single player is great but the multiplayer is a complete shitshow and a shining example of what gaming companies have become these days. South park 2 isn't even a good game. Doom - decent single player, shitty multiplayer, Zelda-BotW had a ton of issues itself, with the dungeons being shitty being the main one, but it was a good game by many other margins. Divinity and PoE are not my kind of games so I can't comment. I hear they're good though. You know what else all of these games have in common? None of them will be still played 3 years from now. It's not just EA and Activision. Pretty much every single large publisher and developer only care about monetization these days. Hell - look at what Bungie and DICE have become. Look at Bethesda. Ubisoft has proven time and time againthat they are shit when it comes to caring about the gamer and absolutely support loot boxes and monetization for AAA games. All of this is also during the last few years. Compare these companies to what they were before monetization happened. Hell, people don't even release games these days. You get them pushing for preorders, leave games in early access without releasing them for years or at all, while people have already paid. Half-done games get pushed out with the promise of being finished later. You have to pay for the priviledges of playing in 2 week long "betas" which don't even qualify as one by any definition of the word. What the fuck is that. Show nested quote +On January 12 2019 01:49 Nakajin wrote: I don't get why you would want CDPR to do an RTS they have 0 experience in the genre, I mean I love the Witcher series but making 3 (well 2 and a half W1 wasn't that great let's be honest) great rpg isn't the same a good RTS or platformer or whatever.
As I said, I wish they'd make a proper one. CDPR had 0 experience in any genres or game making at all for that matter, yet they made the Witcher games. Show nested quote +On January 12 2019 14:59 gababa wrote: The sooner people fully realize that Activision Blizzard is NOT Blizzard anymore, the sooner we can move on. Yeah, thats why Hearthstone is so unpopular. No wait. Thats why Overwatch is so unpopular. No wait.
What people really want is: 12 Unit selection, NO MBS and shitty pathfinding! How many people do you even know who still play overwatch? The game's balance is a mess, and it is one of the main reasons why loot boxes even became a massive thing. Hearthstone is a shitty "but pretty" game, which has shit support and balance and pushes you to spend spend spend. Compare it to other F2P games like Eternal or Gwent. Much better games that can actually be played without spending a ton of money or grinding your balls off. Well if you're looking solely for multiplayer games then you have to ask somebody else because I can't help you. I play single player games mostly. I don't care about multi-player besides SC2 or CS as the rest is not for me. (and I don't play CS that much anyway)
Just go and see the history of CDR. Even The Witcher 3 was do or die for them. That's how this works for many companies FYI NieR is so niche it sold over 3m copies. While this seems like a small number, the game still sells for quite a high price for its age and I agree that it doesn't meet the fullsize mainstream(F4 etc.), but I see a niche game as rogue-like games(e.g. FTL) Uncharted 4 story made so few sense it received praise almost everywhere, maybe start listening to someone else ACG gave it "of course it's a buy, this game's fantastic" and 93 in metacritic from critics and 83 from users. I don't think Persona 5 is overhyped anymore. Well, maybe a little, but it's still a great game Discuss the quality not the hype(and it's 2019 nowadays so the hype isn't a thing anymore anyway). Just for lulz since I had the site open - 93/87 RDR2 - as I said, I don't care about its multi-player. Single player wise it's one of the best games.
"None of them will be played in 3 years" - first of all, NieR:Automata will be in its third year when the Spring starts and the last time I played it there was a shit ton of dead bodies which suggest it's still being played and what more - it still sells
But why would they? Again, if you're looking for a good multi-player game that will be played for ages, you either need to stick with the old gods(DotA, CS, LoL) or go for the new gods(which is mostly just Fortnite). Good multi-player games which are not killed 2 years after the release are few and far between. You may want to look at The Division 2 but considering the shitshow which was the release and a year long fixing of TD1 I wouldn't buy it at the release date. What single-player story-driven game is still being played en masse?
@monetization - as long as PLAYERS buy the shit the companies would be retarded to not use it. YOU, YOU YOURSELF, mentioned it - it's mostly do or die for many companies(not everyone has WoW to cancel a game after 3 years of the development). If you don't agree with monetization don't buy it. It's this much easy. Listen to Patrick Soderlund, he may be a bad person but he said it really well! If you don't like it then don't buy it!
The gaming market sucks yet we get every year at least 5 games with top notch quality. Isn't that contradicting? And I don't follow the independant developers, every year we get tons of new games from which you can select.
But again, if you're looking for a new multi-player game - the spots are already taken. Going into the MP market without a new genre is a suicide unless you have a really good approach to something that's already out there(e.g. Fortnite)
|
On January 14 2019 16:42 abuse wrote: You know what else all of these games have in common? None of them will be still played 3 years from now.
It's not just EA and Activision. Pretty much every single large publisher and developer only care about monetization these days.
On January 14 2019 16:42 abuse wrote: Compare these companies to what they were before monetization happened.
In the 70s and 80s "monetization" was getting players to pump $0.25 into arcade machines as fast as possible. Game designers altered the game mechanics and setting to make the player die as fast as possible. Designers/Creators had onerous game design requirements placed upon them by the video game arcade industry due to each arcade machine having to pull in lots of $$$ during the limited hours the Video Game Arcade was open for business. Despite the constraints placed on game designers many all-time classic great games were created in the 70s and 80s.
Publishers like EA only cared about monetization in the 90s which is why so many games were sequels of previous successful games. EA invented the annualized sequel in the 90s. Despite the onerous requirements of an annualized sequel and short game design cycle this decade resulted in a few all time classic games. Hundreds of games made in the 1990s were fun for a few weeks and/or months and forgotten forever.
I think every decade saw the birth of dozens, if not hundreds of "1 hit wonders". Most games that were fun for a few weeks or months and then forgotten forever after. Each decade sees the production/creation of a very small handful of timeless classics. I think it'll be the same this decade.
TL; DR : almost all games don't last a year man... i think its always been that way.
|
On January 11 2019 17:50 MattyClutch wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2019 16:29 FFW_Rude wrote: Valive also produced steam machines and OS which were an ultimate fail and i believe cost them a lot of money This is true, but when you are basically printing the stuff I doubt those costs sting too much
Printing is not what cost the most i would assume R&D would cost a LOT more.
|
I always say to myself that these shitty and money-grabbing business practices are here and are becoming worse because they work. The customers can be goaded into over-paying, pre-orders, buying dishonestly designed DLC-s, buying the same game repackaged each year, etc. The customers/ communities dont punish them for these, but reward them. + Show Spoiler +I for one was a fan of Bioware games, and i am not a fan of RPGs in general, always preferred RTS and turn based games. I think until the release of the Witcher 3 my opinion about RPGs could be summed up as "Bioware rpg = good, others = bad) Yet, once I've seen what they were starting to do with DLCs (or what EA forced them to do i guess?), i havent spent a dime on their games after that. Likewise, I let go of all the EA sports games in the early 2000s I dont hate on DLCs in general, like Witcher 3 DLC-s, omg, fantastic value, but if you make a game and take 10-20% of it, cut it out, snap a separate price tag on them and call it DLC.
The change starts with us, the customers. A couple of general guidelines that if more people would follow, the creator would get the memo that they shouldn't be doing it. (Obviously these arent universally applicable, like if you're a huge fan of the game, you know you're buying it anyways no matter what, by all means, go ahead. If you have a friend-group with which you only ever play the latest NBA/NHL/Fifa whatever title, I'm not saying break contact with them.) 1. Dont pre-order games. 2. Dont buy games that have (big) release-day DLCs 3. Dont buy a game if it's the same as last year, but repackaged and sold as a new title (cough, EA, cough) 4. If a multiplayer game seems to be pay-to-win, or wasnt at first, but is becoming pay-to-win, quit 5. Take a few extra seconds, before you authorize micro-transactions in a game. At the end of a week/month make a calculation about how much did you spend in micro-transactions. 6. Do not set up a streamlined paying processes (when such option exists) that lets you skip confirmation phases of the payment process. 7. If you play a monthly subscription game that is becoming shitty for the above mentioned reasons or other reasons, cancel the subscription, most of the times there's an automated questionnaire, in which you should politely explain that you decided to cancel because of those disappointing new things, and you would consider coming back if it was fixed.
I realize that this is never happening, but still, felt the need to get it out of my system.
|
On January 18 2019 19:46 Geo.Rion wrote:I always say to myself that these shitty and money-grabbing business practices are here and are becoming worse because they work. The customers can be goaded into over-paying, pre-orders, buying dishonestly designed DLC-s, buying the same game repackaged each year, etc. The customers/ communities dont punish them for these, but reward them. + Show Spoiler +I for one was a fan of Bioware games, and i am not a fan of RPGs in general, always preferred RTS and turn based games. I think until the release of the Witcher 3 my opinion about RPGs could be summed up as "Bioware rpg = good, others = bad) Yet, once I've seen what they were starting to do with DLCs (or what EA forced them to do i guess?), i havent spent a dime on their games after that. Likewise, I let go of all the EA sports games in the early 2000s I dont hate on DLCs in general, like Witcher 3 DLC-s, omg, fantastic value, but if you make a game and take 10-20% of it, cut it out, snap a separate price tag on them and call it DLC. The change starts with us, the customers. A couple of general guidelines that if more people would follow, the creator would get the memo that they shouldn't be doing it. (Obviously these arent universally applicable, like if you're a huge fan of the game, you know you're buying it anyways no matter what, by all means, go ahead. If you have a friend-group with which you only ever play the latest NBA/NHL/Fifa whatever title, I'm not saying break contact with them.) 1. Dont pre-order games. 2. Dont buy games that have (big) release-day DLCs 3. Dont buy a game if it's the same as last year, but repackaged and sold as a new title (cough, EA, cough) 4. If a multiplayer game seems to be pay-to-win, or wasnt at first, but is becoming pay-to-win, quit 5. Take a few extra seconds, before you authorize micro-transactions in a game. At the end of a week/month make a calculation about how much did you spend in micro-transactions. 6. Do not set up a streamlined paying processes (when such option exists) that lets you skip confirmation phases of the payment process. 7. If you play a monthly subscription game that is becoming shitty for the above mentioned reasons or other reasons, cancel the subscription, most of the times there's an automated questionnaire, in which you should politely explain that you decided to cancel because of those disappointing new things, and you would consider coming back if it was fixed. I realize that this is never happening, but still, felt the need to get it out of my system. Customers don’t have that much influence. The future is that publishers will prey on certain types of players (say, children, depressed people, completists, fans) that can be milked for cash with endless overpriced content. Studios will keep becoming bigger, and salary for designers will go down. Most new games will be sequels to franchises that can be reliably marketed. You can’t change this, because most gamers are dumb and are easily manipulated. You can see this everywhere, gamers will be vaguely discontent and unhappy, but they are still fiercely protective of franchises and studios. They’re only really angry once the developers add a playable black or female character, that’s when lines are finally crossed and they rebel. Otherwise they will happily hype themselves up for omghypereleasedayofnewCODFIFA.
And this doesn’t even mean that the content will become worse, because underpaying developers doesn’t necessarily decrease game quality. And it doesn’t necessarily mean that players will have less influence on games, since studios are eager to make use of fan involvement; which is after all unpaid labor they can profit from. And certainly it’s good marketing. And it doesn’t mean that gaming will die out as a hobby, since after all the process is oriented towards growth. All in all the situation is not hopeless, but it does mean that niche games, or artistic games, or creative games etc. will have difficulty finding institutional support.
Compare the film industry and the toxic influence of superhero movies. At the same time the fans are happier than ever and there is more content than ever.
I think the most obvious example, relevant to our community, is the fact that Warcraft IV does not exist yet. Or really any high quality RTS game that might move the genre forward. It is not that there is no money in it, just that there is more money in other games. Also, developers don’t understand RTS, but that’s another topic.
I used to play a lot of platformers in my childhood, and I became aware last year that there are dozens of high quality traditional 2D platformers released last decade, just mostly as Indie games or hacks of Mario or Megaman and such. Big studios won’t touch it.
|
Diablo 4 job posting?
The job posting, which was spotted earlier this week by VGCultureHQ, isn’t particularly notable by itself. The ideal candidate will be helping to “create play areas, quests, characters, and dialogue for an upcoming project.” They’ll need to know their Diablo, understand quest design, and be fans of gothic fiction. None of that is very surprising, but the existence of the posting would seem to confirm that Blizzard are indeed working on a new Diablo game. Given that there are 19 other Diablo-related jobs on Blizzard’s careers page, I’d say that’s a pretty safe bet.
|
On January 18 2019 19:46 Geo.Rion wrote:I always say to myself that these shitty and money-grabbing business practices are here and are becoming worse because they work. The customers can be goaded into over-paying, pre-orders, buying dishonestly designed DLC-s, buying the same game repackaged each year, etc. The customers/ communities dont punish them for these, but reward them. + Show Spoiler +I for one was a fan of Bioware games, and i am not a fan of RPGs in general, always preferred RTS and turn based games. I think until the release of the Witcher 3 my opinion about RPGs could be summed up as "Bioware rpg = good, others = bad) Yet, once I've seen what they were starting to do with DLCs (or what EA forced them to do i guess?), i havent spent a dime on their games after that. Likewise, I let go of all the EA sports games in the early 2000s I dont hate on DLCs in general, like Witcher 3 DLC-s, omg, fantastic value, but if you make a game and take 10-20% of it, cut it out, snap a separate price tag on them and call it DLC. The change starts with us, the customers. A couple of general guidelines that if more people would follow, the creator would get the memo that they shouldn't be doing it. (Obviously these arent universally applicable, like if you're a huge fan of the game, you know you're buying it anyways no matter what, by all means, go ahead. If you have a friend-group with which you only ever play the latest NBA/NHL/Fifa whatever title, I'm not saying break contact with them.) 1. Dont pre-order games. 2. Dont buy games that have (big) release-day DLCs 3. Dont buy a game if it's the same as last year, but repackaged and sold as a new title (cough, EA, cough) 4. If a multiplayer game seems to be pay-to-win, or wasnt at first, but is becoming pay-to-win, quit 5. Take a few extra seconds, before you authorize micro-transactions in a game. At the end of a week/month make a calculation about how much did you spend in micro-transactions. 6. Do not set up a streamlined paying processes (when such option exists) that lets you skip confirmation phases of the payment process. 7. If you play a monthly subscription game that is becoming shitty for the above mentioned reasons or other reasons, cancel the subscription, most of the times there's an automated questionnaire, in which you should politely explain that you decided to cancel because of those disappointing new things, and you would consider coming back if it was fixed. I realize that this is never happening, but still, felt the need to get it out of my system.
These are some very fine points and I urge people to live by them.
Maybe add some finer points: - If there is a DLC for about 20-30$ and you get 20-30+ hours of gameplay out of it, totally worth. - If there is a F2P game and you invested 100+ hours in it. Why not buy some shiny diamonds to get the skin you like and support the devs. Again totally worth - If you feel obligated to buy those bosters to stay "competitive" and continue to have fun. STOP RIGHT THERE
|
On January 18 2019 16:12 FFW_Rude wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2019 17:50 MattyClutch wrote:On January 11 2019 16:29 FFW_Rude wrote: Valive also produced steam machines and OS which were an ultimate fail and i believe cost them a lot of money This is true, but when you are basically printing the stuff I doubt those costs sting too much Printing is not what cost the most i would assume R&D would cost a LOT more. RnD can cost a lot... if you pay. Blizzard™
|
On January 18 2019 21:10 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2019 19:46 Geo.Rion wrote:I always say to myself that these shitty and money-grabbing business practices are here and are becoming worse because they work. The customers can be goaded into over-paying, pre-orders, buying dishonestly designed DLC-s, buying the same game repackaged each year, etc. The customers/ communities dont punish them for these, but reward them. + Show Spoiler +I for one was a fan of Bioware games, and i am not a fan of RPGs in general, always preferred RTS and turn based games. I think until the release of the Witcher 3 my opinion about RPGs could be summed up as "Bioware rpg = good, others = bad) Yet, once I've seen what they were starting to do with DLCs (or what EA forced them to do i guess?), i havent spent a dime on their games after that. Likewise, I let go of all the EA sports games in the early 2000s I dont hate on DLCs in general, like Witcher 3 DLC-s, omg, fantastic value, but if you make a game and take 10-20% of it, cut it out, snap a separate price tag on them and call it DLC. The change starts with us, the customers. A couple of general guidelines that if more people would follow, the creator would get the memo that they shouldn't be doing it. (Obviously these arent universally applicable, like if you're a huge fan of the game, you know you're buying it anyways no matter what, by all means, go ahead. If you have a friend-group with which you only ever play the latest NBA/NHL/Fifa whatever title, I'm not saying break contact with them.) 1. Dont pre-order games. 2. Dont buy games that have (big) release-day DLCs 3. Dont buy a game if it's the same as last year, but repackaged and sold as a new title (cough, EA, cough) 4. If a multiplayer game seems to be pay-to-win, or wasnt at first, but is becoming pay-to-win, quit 5. Take a few extra seconds, before you authorize micro-transactions in a game. At the end of a week/month make a calculation about how much did you spend in micro-transactions. 6. Do not set up a streamlined paying processes (when such option exists) that lets you skip confirmation phases of the payment process. 7. If you play a monthly subscription game that is becoming shitty for the above mentioned reasons or other reasons, cancel the subscription, most of the times there's an automated questionnaire, in which you should politely explain that you decided to cancel because of those disappointing new things, and you would consider coming back if it was fixed. I realize that this is never happening, but still, felt the need to get it out of my system. These are some very fine points and I urge people to live by them. Maybe add some finer points: - If there is a DLC for about 20-30$ and you get 20-30+ hours of gameplay out of it, totally worth. - If there is a F2P game and you invested 100+ hours in it. Why not buy some shiny diamonds to get the skin you like and support the devs. Again totally worth - If you feel obligated to buy those bosters to stay "competitive" and continue to have fun. STOP RIGHT THERE It’s not that clear that buying skins supports the developers, since that money is foremost funneled to shareholders, secondarily to the people that create skins, and not necessarily to the people that designed the game. If you buy a football shirt with the name of Messi you can probably guess that Messi will be compensated for it, as well as the team and the shirt manufactorers, but the exact way that money is divided is not transparent. Giving money to a corporation in order to fulfill some sort of moral duty is fundamentally unreliable, because corporations are not moral actors.
|
On January 18 2019 22:24 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2019 21:10 Harris1st wrote:On January 18 2019 19:46 Geo.Rion wrote:I always say to myself that these shitty and money-grabbing business practices are here and are becoming worse because they work. The customers can be goaded into over-paying, pre-orders, buying dishonestly designed DLC-s, buying the same game repackaged each year, etc. The customers/ communities dont punish them for these, but reward them. + Show Spoiler +I for one was a fan of Bioware games, and i am not a fan of RPGs in general, always preferred RTS and turn based games. I think until the release of the Witcher 3 my opinion about RPGs could be summed up as "Bioware rpg = good, others = bad) Yet, once I've seen what they were starting to do with DLCs (or what EA forced them to do i guess?), i havent spent a dime on their games after that. Likewise, I let go of all the EA sports games in the early 2000s I dont hate on DLCs in general, like Witcher 3 DLC-s, omg, fantastic value, but if you make a game and take 10-20% of it, cut it out, snap a separate price tag on them and call it DLC. The change starts with us, the customers. A couple of general guidelines that if more people would follow, the creator would get the memo that they shouldn't be doing it. (Obviously these arent universally applicable, like if you're a huge fan of the game, you know you're buying it anyways no matter what, by all means, go ahead. If you have a friend-group with which you only ever play the latest NBA/NHL/Fifa whatever title, I'm not saying break contact with them.) 1. Dont pre-order games. 2. Dont buy games that have (big) release-day DLCs 3. Dont buy a game if it's the same as last year, but repackaged and sold as a new title (cough, EA, cough) 4. If a multiplayer game seems to be pay-to-win, or wasnt at first, but is becoming pay-to-win, quit 5. Take a few extra seconds, before you authorize micro-transactions in a game. At the end of a week/month make a calculation about how much did you spend in micro-transactions. 6. Do not set up a streamlined paying processes (when such option exists) that lets you skip confirmation phases of the payment process. 7. If you play a monthly subscription game that is becoming shitty for the above mentioned reasons or other reasons, cancel the subscription, most of the times there's an automated questionnaire, in which you should politely explain that you decided to cancel because of those disappointing new things, and you would consider coming back if it was fixed. I realize that this is never happening, but still, felt the need to get it out of my system. These are some very fine points and I urge people to live by them. Maybe add some finer points: - If there is a DLC for about 20-30$ and you get 20-30+ hours of gameplay out of it, totally worth. - If there is a F2P game and you invested 100+ hours in it. Why not buy some shiny diamonds to get the skin you like and support the devs. Again totally worth - If you feel obligated to buy those bosters to stay "competitive" and continue to have fun. STOP RIGHT THERE It’s not that clear that buying skins supports the developers, since that money is foremost funneled to shareholders, secondarily to the people that create skins, and not necessarily to the people that designed the game. If you buy a football shirt with the name of Messi you can probably guess that Messi will be compensated for it, as well as the team and the shirt manufactorers, but the exact way that money is divided is not transparent. Giving money to a corporation in order to fulfill some sort of moral duty is fundamentally unreliable, because corporations are not moral actors.
The very basic definition of company/corporation/etc is organization that generates profit. That's the sole purpose of any unit on the market.
I can't imagine why would anyone trust a company.
If people are looking for transparency there are community initiatives and people willing to invest their time in developing something for the greater good in given area. Unfortunately people are getting lazier handing over this power to corporations who on their side state that they are doing good by press releases and other PR stunts.
People should stop fooling themselves and start thinking about who has interest of doing something and what is their interest.
Blizzard aren't helping the community because it keeps their game alive. They do stuff to keep a community alive in order to generate word of mouth and earn more money from this game.
P.S. Forgot to mention - companies are ran by shareholders and executives, not employees.
|
On January 18 2019 22:24 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2019 21:10 Harris1st wrote:On January 18 2019 19:46 Geo.Rion wrote:I always say to myself that these shitty and money-grabbing business practices are here and are becoming worse because they work. The customers can be goaded into over-paying, pre-orders, buying dishonestly designed DLC-s, buying the same game repackaged each year, etc. The customers/ communities dont punish them for these, but reward them. + Show Spoiler +I for one was a fan of Bioware games, and i am not a fan of RPGs in general, always preferred RTS and turn based games. I think until the release of the Witcher 3 my opinion about RPGs could be summed up as "Bioware rpg = good, others = bad) Yet, once I've seen what they were starting to do with DLCs (or what EA forced them to do i guess?), i havent spent a dime on their games after that. Likewise, I let go of all the EA sports games in the early 2000s I dont hate on DLCs in general, like Witcher 3 DLC-s, omg, fantastic value, but if you make a game and take 10-20% of it, cut it out, snap a separate price tag on them and call it DLC. The change starts with us, the customers. A couple of general guidelines that if more people would follow, the creator would get the memo that they shouldn't be doing it. (Obviously these arent universally applicable, like if you're a huge fan of the game, you know you're buying it anyways no matter what, by all means, go ahead. If you have a friend-group with which you only ever play the latest NBA/NHL/Fifa whatever title, I'm not saying break contact with them.) 1. Dont pre-order games. 2. Dont buy games that have (big) release-day DLCs 3. Dont buy a game if it's the same as last year, but repackaged and sold as a new title (cough, EA, cough) 4. If a multiplayer game seems to be pay-to-win, or wasnt at first, but is becoming pay-to-win, quit 5. Take a few extra seconds, before you authorize micro-transactions in a game. At the end of a week/month make a calculation about how much did you spend in micro-transactions. 6. Do not set up a streamlined paying processes (when such option exists) that lets you skip confirmation phases of the payment process. 7. If you play a monthly subscription game that is becoming shitty for the above mentioned reasons or other reasons, cancel the subscription, most of the times there's an automated questionnaire, in which you should politely explain that you decided to cancel because of those disappointing new things, and you would consider coming back if it was fixed. I realize that this is never happening, but still, felt the need to get it out of my system. These are some very fine points and I urge people to live by them. Maybe add some finer points: - If there is a DLC for about 20-30$ and you get 20-30+ hours of gameplay out of it, totally worth. - If there is a F2P game and you invested 100+ hours in it. Why not buy some shiny diamonds to get the skin you like and support the devs. Again totally worth - If you feel obligated to buy those bosters to stay "competitive" and continue to have fun. STOP RIGHT THERE It’s not that clear that buying skins supports the developers, since that money is foremost funneled to shareholders, secondarily to the people that create skins, and not necessarily to the people that designed the game. If you buy a football shirt with the name of Messi you can probably guess that Messi will be compensated for it, as well as the team and the shirt manufactorers, but the exact way that money is divided is not transparent. Giving money to a corporation in order to fulfill some sort of moral duty is fundamentally unreliable, because corporations are not moral actors.
Of course you don't know how the money is divided. You never know that, be it food, a car or the mentioned Messi jersey. You just know that someone who is connected to the game you love will get some of that money.
Moral duty is pretty much the exact opposite of what i meant. You buy the skin because you want to, not because you are obliged to. You can just continue playing without it and nothing would change. You do it because you want to reward someone for doing a good job. Voluntarily
|
On January 18 2019 22:42 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2019 22:24 Grumbels wrote:On January 18 2019 21:10 Harris1st wrote:On January 18 2019 19:46 Geo.Rion wrote:I always say to myself that these shitty and money-grabbing business practices are here and are becoming worse because they work. The customers can be goaded into over-paying, pre-orders, buying dishonestly designed DLC-s, buying the same game repackaged each year, etc. The customers/ communities dont punish them for these, but reward them. + Show Spoiler +I for one was a fan of Bioware games, and i am not a fan of RPGs in general, always preferred RTS and turn based games. I think until the release of the Witcher 3 my opinion about RPGs could be summed up as "Bioware rpg = good, others = bad) Yet, once I've seen what they were starting to do with DLCs (or what EA forced them to do i guess?), i havent spent a dime on their games after that. Likewise, I let go of all the EA sports games in the early 2000s I dont hate on DLCs in general, like Witcher 3 DLC-s, omg, fantastic value, but if you make a game and take 10-20% of it, cut it out, snap a separate price tag on them and call it DLC. The change starts with us, the customers. A couple of general guidelines that if more people would follow, the creator would get the memo that they shouldn't be doing it. (Obviously these arent universally applicable, like if you're a huge fan of the game, you know you're buying it anyways no matter what, by all means, go ahead. If you have a friend-group with which you only ever play the latest NBA/NHL/Fifa whatever title, I'm not saying break contact with them.) 1. Dont pre-order games. 2. Dont buy games that have (big) release-day DLCs 3. Dont buy a game if it's the same as last year, but repackaged and sold as a new title (cough, EA, cough) 4. If a multiplayer game seems to be pay-to-win, or wasnt at first, but is becoming pay-to-win, quit 5. Take a few extra seconds, before you authorize micro-transactions in a game. At the end of a week/month make a calculation about how much did you spend in micro-transactions. 6. Do not set up a streamlined paying processes (when such option exists) that lets you skip confirmation phases of the payment process. 7. If you play a monthly subscription game that is becoming shitty for the above mentioned reasons or other reasons, cancel the subscription, most of the times there's an automated questionnaire, in which you should politely explain that you decided to cancel because of those disappointing new things, and you would consider coming back if it was fixed. I realize that this is never happening, but still, felt the need to get it out of my system. These are some very fine points and I urge people to live by them. Maybe add some finer points: - If there is a DLC for about 20-30$ and you get 20-30+ hours of gameplay out of it, totally worth. - If there is a F2P game and you invested 100+ hours in it. Why not buy some shiny diamonds to get the skin you like and support the devs. Again totally worth - If you feel obligated to buy those bosters to stay "competitive" and continue to have fun. STOP RIGHT THERE It’s not that clear that buying skins supports the developers, since that money is foremost funneled to shareholders, secondarily to the people that create skins, and not necessarily to the people that designed the game. If you buy a football shirt with the name of Messi you can probably guess that Messi will be compensated for it, as well as the team and the shirt manufactorers, but the exact way that money is divided is not transparent. Giving money to a corporation in order to fulfill some sort of moral duty is fundamentally unreliable, because corporations are not moral actors. Of course you don't know how the money is divided. You never know that, be it food, a car or the mentioned Messi jersey. You just know that someone who is connected to the game you love will get some of that money. Moral duty is pretty much the exact opposite of what i meant. You buy the skin because you want to, not because you are obliged to. You can just continue playing without it and nothing would change. You do it because you want to reward someone for doing a good job. Voluntarily If donating money on twitch worked out to give 1 cent to the streamer and 99 cents to Jeff Bezos' personal checking account you wouldn't call that rewarding someone for doing a good job, instead you would call it a scam that profits off your gullibility to transfer money upwards. Because buying skins is not transparent and you don't know where the money ends up, and because they seem to be a vastly overpriced money making scheme to prey on children, it's not a good idea to buy skins to reward developers. At most you should buy them if you (rationally) think they have value to you personally, while hopefully being a bit cynical about their broader impact and about your (minor) personal impact as a consumer.
|
On January 18 2019 22:41 BlueStar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2019 22:24 Grumbels wrote:On January 18 2019 21:10 Harris1st wrote:On January 18 2019 19:46 Geo.Rion wrote:I always say to myself that these shitty and money-grabbing business practices are here and are becoming worse because they work. The customers can be goaded into over-paying, pre-orders, buying dishonestly designed DLC-s, buying the same game repackaged each year, etc. The customers/ communities dont punish them for these, but reward them. + Show Spoiler +I for one was a fan of Bioware games, and i am not a fan of RPGs in general, always preferred RTS and turn based games. I think until the release of the Witcher 3 my opinion about RPGs could be summed up as "Bioware rpg = good, others = bad) Yet, once I've seen what they were starting to do with DLCs (or what EA forced them to do i guess?), i havent spent a dime on their games after that. Likewise, I let go of all the EA sports games in the early 2000s I dont hate on DLCs in general, like Witcher 3 DLC-s, omg, fantastic value, but if you make a game and take 10-20% of it, cut it out, snap a separate price tag on them and call it DLC. The change starts with us, the customers. A couple of general guidelines that if more people would follow, the creator would get the memo that they shouldn't be doing it. (Obviously these arent universally applicable, like if you're a huge fan of the game, you know you're buying it anyways no matter what, by all means, go ahead. If you have a friend-group with which you only ever play the latest NBA/NHL/Fifa whatever title, I'm not saying break contact with them.) 1. Dont pre-order games. 2. Dont buy games that have (big) release-day DLCs 3. Dont buy a game if it's the same as last year, but repackaged and sold as a new title (cough, EA, cough) 4. If a multiplayer game seems to be pay-to-win, or wasnt at first, but is becoming pay-to-win, quit 5. Take a few extra seconds, before you authorize micro-transactions in a game. At the end of a week/month make a calculation about how much did you spend in micro-transactions. 6. Do not set up a streamlined paying processes (when such option exists) that lets you skip confirmation phases of the payment process. 7. If you play a monthly subscription game that is becoming shitty for the above mentioned reasons or other reasons, cancel the subscription, most of the times there's an automated questionnaire, in which you should politely explain that you decided to cancel because of those disappointing new things, and you would consider coming back if it was fixed. I realize that this is never happening, but still, felt the need to get it out of my system. These are some very fine points and I urge people to live by them. Maybe add some finer points: - If there is a DLC for about 20-30$ and you get 20-30+ hours of gameplay out of it, totally worth. - If there is a F2P game and you invested 100+ hours in it. Why not buy some shiny diamonds to get the skin you like and support the devs. Again totally worth - If you feel obligated to buy those bosters to stay "competitive" and continue to have fun. STOP RIGHT THERE It’s not that clear that buying skins supports the developers, since that money is foremost funneled to shareholders, secondarily to the people that create skins, and not necessarily to the people that designed the game. If you buy a football shirt with the name of Messi you can probably guess that Messi will be compensated for it, as well as the team and the shirt manufactorers, but the exact way that money is divided is not transparent. Giving money to a corporation in order to fulfill some sort of moral duty is fundamentally unreliable, because corporations are not moral actors. The very basic definition of company/corporation/etc is organization that generates profit. That's the sole purpose of any unit on the market. I can't imagine why would anyone trust a company. If people are looking for transparency there are community initiatives and people willing to invest their time in developing something for the greater good in given area. Unfortunately people are getting lazier handing over this power to corporations who on their side state that they are doing good by press releases and other PR stunts. People should stop fooling themselves and start thinking about who has interest of doing something and what is their interest. Blizzard aren't helping the community because it keeps their game alive. They do stuff to keep a community alive in order to generate word of mouth and earn more money from this game. P.S. Forgot to mention - companies are ran by shareholders and executives, not employees.
Those community initiative that you talk about eventually sell their work to companies (and no one force them) or they turn into those companies.
Shareholders discussion is tricky because it's because of their initial investments that those companies exist. Is that fair ? That's something else. But shareholders don't just appear out of thin air to get money. They put something in the first place.
|
On January 18 2019 22:41 BlueStar wrote: I can't imagine why would anyone trust a company.
I don't think its a digital ON/OFF light bulb switch. It is not merely trust or distrust. It is a degree of trust.
For example, I trust, to a certain degree, that Blizzard will continue to support SC2 for the next year. I trust in Blizzard's support of their RTS game TO A GREATER DEGREE than I trust Gearbox to provide quality support for their RTS game Homeworld: Deserts of Kharak.
I have a higher degree of trust in Blizzard than I do in Gearbox.
When I have zero trust I spend zero dollars.
On January 18 2019 22:41 BlueStar wrote: Blizzard aren't helping the community because it keeps their game alive. They do stuff to keep a community alive in order to generate word of mouth and earn more money from this game.
I highly suspect Blizzard is maintaining SC2 support to keep the Starcraft franchise strong so they can sell future games using the Starcraft IP. Based on Adham's comments at BlizzCon we know one of those games is a mobile game.
Blizzard's level of support for their RTS games is orders of magnitude higher than any other company. Thus, they're in a better position to use Starcraft than other companies are to use their RTS IPs in other areas.
|
|
|
|
|