EA should split itself up or sell off some franchises. The current situation makes nobody happy: investors don’t like the profitability of single player games, players don’t like the live serviceification of single player games, and I’m sure devs don’t like that they can’t work on projects that likely inspired them to become game devs in the first place.
The Sims franchise could support a medium sized studio on its own.
I played the Sims 1&2 as a kid, and love the fuck out of them. As an adult with disposable income, I would have gladly dropped even $100 on a proper modernized rerelease of these games I love. Instead, I saved my money and downloaded them for free. Because why the hell wouldn’t I? The pirate versions are literally better. EA is squandering the potential of this and many other IPs
I feel like I’m the target audience for this and I have no interest. Ive bought every PlayStation, including the PS4 pro, though I did wait for the 3 to hit $400. I’ve had ps+ since the PS3.
I still have plus until july as I’d always buy a year or 2 on black friday sales. They’ve jacked the price of plus so much that I’m very unlikey to renew now. And $700 for the pro is fucking stupid. If the PS6 continues on this trend, I might just be completely done with them even though I really do like the exclusives.
I hear you. I’ve had every playstation since the PS1. We even own a PS4 and PS4 Pro. Mythbusters was the beginning of the end for me. When they yanked Mythbusters without warning or recompense it drove home what I already knew: my digital library was only as good as the whims of Sony. I haven’t made a purchase on their platform since.
And like you I also have Plus for a while, but I’ve noticed more offerings are starting to be PS5 only. And maybe it’s bias informing my experience but I could swear they’ve already begun enshitifying the PS4 store the same way they degraded the PS3 store when the 4 came out. They removed some of the browsing options, like browsing by category.
I fully agree, I’ve been slowly drifting away from consoles since the tail end of the PS3. For the price it just really isn’t worth it anymore for how much I use. This time around I ended up going the X through they’re all access pass because it came the 3 years of Game Pass ultimate, and that was pretty cool not 200 plus dollars a year cool but it was pretty cool, and then when the PS5 became available I got that against my better judgment because I have been Sony my entire life and I wanted Ragnarok (which I ended up never finishing).
I was juggling two different subscriptions for a while a PlayStation Network and a Microsoft Game Pass subscription, but since I still use both of them it was kind of worth it, then Sony increased their price without offering any competitive reason for doing so for any benefits so I canceled and moved over to almost exclusively Xbox until my ultimate ran out,
Now I have neither subscriptions and both consoles collect dust because neither console has a subscription that I feel is worth paying for, or offers any content that I can’t just use my computer for without the need of paying a monthly sub. Last generation was iffy, this generation there’s no way it’s worth.
The developer of Fist Puncher has an insightful “Promoted Comment” now on the Ars Technica article:
therealmattkain I’m one of the creators and developers of Fist Puncher which was also published by Adult Swim on Steam. We received the same notice from Warner Bros. that Fist Puncher would be retired. When we requested that Warner Bros simply transfer the game over to our studio’s Steam publisher account so that the game could stay active, they said no. The transfer process literally takes a minute to initiate (look up “Transferring Applications” in the Steamworks documentation), but their rep claimed they have simply made the universal decision not to transfer the games to the original creators.
This is incredibly disappointing. It makes me sad to think that purchased games will presumably be removed from users’ libraries. Our community and our players have 10+ years of discussions, screenshots, gameplay footage, leaderboards, player progress, unlocked characters, Steam achievements, Steam cards, etc. which will all be lost. We have Kickstarter backers who helped fund Fist Puncher (even some who have cameo appearances in the game) who will eventually no longer be able to play it. We could just rerelease Fist Puncher from our account, but we would likely receive significant backlash for relaunching a game and forcing users to “double dip” and purchase the game again (unless we just made it free).
Again, this is really just disappointing. It seems like more and more the videogame industry is filled with people that don’t like and don’t care about videogames. All that to say, buy physical games, make back-ups, help preserve our awesome industry and art form. March 7, 2024 at 12:51 am
As much as I don’t like it (I think art should be something hand crafted by humans) nothing Valve can do. It would take an insane amount of resources to vet all these AI games coming.
Fuck me what a horrifying/exciting time to be a computer science student. I feel like I’m either going to be obsolete by the time I’m handed a degree or my job will basically be doodling and asking a robot butler to do everything for me.
So I went to college in the early nineties. I had a friend who was vacilating between a cs degree and math degree because cs did not look like it was going anywhere given how mature the mainframe systems were. Needless to say that changed by 1995.
I hope to see a bigger push across all tech for this. We can’t possibly do better in the fight to improve the climate if we keep using gadgets that have to be replaced every two years.
I think I’m the only person who played through the entire game and didn’t like it. Yes, yes, I should probably have quit but I’m a bit of an optimist and hoped it would get better.
It felt to me like the game really didn’t want me to kill anyone. However it had any number of fun ways to kill people and then scolded me when I was naughty enough to (gasp) use them!
Also the rats were bizarrely low poly compared to everything else. Odd gripe, perhaps, but given how crucial they are to the setting it felt strangely shit.
It was unfortunately a product of its time where moral systems ultimately amounted to binary good guy/bad guy outcomes which was the style at the time. The system was designed to make you want to play it twice. If you’re used to the more modern moral ambiguity in today’s RPGs I don’t think anyone can blame you for disliking it.
I grew up playing Fallout 1/2, Deus Ex, stuff like that. Dishonored framed its morality system as “chaos” rather than good vs. bad but ultimately I had characters complaining about my methods. You brought in someone to specifically be an assassin and then you’re outraged that he kills people? I shot the damn traiterous boatman in the head at the end of the game.
IIRC you still get the low-chaos ending if you only kill the targets. It’s just by going wild and killing everyone that you get high-chaos, and I think this fits in the moral framing of the game.
I do agree with your gripe that D1 gives you a lot of fun ways to kill people and challenges you not to use them, while at the same time giving you very little nonlethal tools. They addressed this well in the sequel IMO, but I did also love the challenge and the temptation knowing that these enemies would be so easy to defeat with a rat swarm but I just shouldn’t. Like I said, keeps with the moral framing about the slippery slope of mindless revenge IMO
I’m reminded of a show I was watching and lampshading. One of the characters is exhausting to watch and the other characters comment on how much the character sucks. That’s great an’ all but I’m still stuck watching this character suck. Commenting on it doesn’t make it go away.
Similarly I could not use the tools the game gives me but they’re there for me to use. If I’m not supposed to use them then I might as well instead play something that wants me to play it!
I understand what you’re saying (I think) but you know that… you can kill everyone, right? The worst the game does is throw a few more enemies at you (to kill) and some moral characters say mean things to you. Pretty standard RPG mechanics, IMO. It’s just a choice and like I said, the narrative framing sets you up to be a highly-trained stealthy assassin, not some mass-murdering juggernaut. But you can do that if you want
Similarly I could not use the tools the game gives me
Offers* you. There’s even an achievement for completing the game with just a sword and pistol, no upgrades or powers ;) Choices!!
Much like in Spec Ops: The Line the player can just stop playing. I mean, you’re not wrong, but it seems silly to me.
Some games handle this by making it the ultra-violent approach essentially non-viable but that’s not how Dishonored decided to roll.
the narrative framing sets you up to be a highly-trained stealthy assassin
I quietly took out guards rather than avoiding them. No alarms were raised, etc.. Seems pretty stealthy to me.
Ultimately I just didn’t appreciate the mixed messaging of “here are tools for extreme violence” and “why did you commit extreme violence?”. If non-lethal means were such a priority why was I given tools that heavily favour lethality?
Well an assassin kills his targets. He doesn’t kill every innocent bystander he sees. In the first game, the guard enemies you see are your colleagues who are fully under the impression that you are a traitor who killed the empress. They are functionally your enemies during the game, but they are ultimately the good guys.
The rebel leaders, especially the admiral are going to complain about you killing who are also basically his men.
That’s true, it is a game where each choice has a direct consequence. Going along that train of thought, do you see the “star system” in GTA as the game scolding you for your choices? If you’ve never played it, in GTA you are a criminal and as you commit crimes you get a star rating. The more stars means the more law enforcement that attempts to subdue or kill you. There really isn’t a way to complete the game in a non-violent manner though.
A better equivalent would be a GTA game giving you a mission with a tank and then the mission givers seriously, not for comedy, giving the player shit for doing anything but driving on the road avoiding all cars.
My problem is with the tonal dissonance of giving the player weapons designed to be fun only for the game to complain when they’re used.
The opposite being a Bond game. Really he should only be using sneaky spy weapons but he’s given a ridiculous arsenal and expected to use it. If you give me a machine gun then why would you expect me not to use it?
I think there is a difference between what the developers expect and what characters expect. In Fallout3 a settlement builds their town around a deactivated nuclear bomb. There is an opportunity very early in the game to detonate it, which most characters understandably react poorly to. But I wouldn’t rate the game poorly because the surviving NPCs of that settlement become hostile to the player afterwards. The developers don’t really expect anything from the players as there is the choice to do either thing. I thought Dishonored did that as well. NPCs who cause havoc to the city by killing people and spreading disease will hear complaints from the surviving citizens. Also the story of the game sets up the player to be framed for murdering the empress so most NPCs by default already hate the player character. I liked that the game gave players the choice to remain noble and try to actively prevent further chaos or say fuck it and slaughter everyone who stands against you even if you are technically in the right.
Some enthusiasts would have you believe that with prices adjusted for inflation the switch 2 is actually a deal at $450 and get mad when you say other wise
But then they won’t tell you that switch 2 uses the same type of capacitive analog sticks cursed with stick drift instead up updating to Hall effect sticks. Or that you really really don’t own the games because the games are actually just download keys.
Edit to add: Pro controllers also cost more than last gen and they’re lower craftsmanship and aren’t repair friendly because they weld plastic instead of using screws
I’m not implying there aren’t any improvements this time around I just feel like the improvements and corner cutting cancel each other out but that’s just my opinion
Existing switch owners can use any wireless controllers they already have with the switch 2. The pro controller 2 does have much nicer joysticks IMO, but you don't need one unless you really want the dedicated button for GameChat or the grip buttons
That’s not what this article is talking about though. It’s talking about how single generation consoles don’t get any price drops anymore. The comparison isn’t Switch 1 vs Switch 2 prices, it’s launch Switch 1 vs current Switch 1 prices.
Like let’s vent about Nintendo all we want, but at least let’s read the article first.
You misunderstood: current gen isn’t getting price drops while previous gen usually did. Current gen PS5/Pro and Xbox Series S/X are all actually more expensive now factoring in inflation (excluding the impact of the tariffs) than at launch. Since the Switch 2 literally launched two months ago, we can’t really talk about price drops for it, so we compare the Switch 1. The article headline is correct, and all of this is in the body of the article.
fair enough. I didn't scroll past the first graph in the article, which was comparing switch 1 prices. That plus this part of your previous comment had me thinking current-gen consoles weren't the topic.
The comparison isn't Switch 1 vs Switch 2 prices, it's launch Switch 1 vs current Switch 1 prices.
I used to have an early VR headset. With 3DoF headtracking, 640x480 at 60 Hz (combined, so actually every eye got only half of that). Descent supported stereoscopic 3D and the headtracking could be added to almost every game with a mouse driver. It was bad. Really bad. Descent alone could be nausea inducing. In VR it was a literal pukefest. Still I had to try it every few months or so, because it was so cool on paper.
arstechnica.com
Ważne