I was thinking about this in another thread where someone made this joke: With how much stuff Valve does outside of gaming, are we sure they have never done a 3rd iteration of something before? Like, they do business stuff too and are into a ton of random tech related things like BCIs. We only ever really hear about the game related stuff, tho. Or possibly when Gabe gets a new boat since they interview him on it.
You can’t typically get punitive damages for contract disputes. Also, there is a very real possibility that the contract hasn’t been breached by the new owners’ actions. It sounds like they used their superior bargaining power to put a lot of questionable yet enforceable provisions in the contract.
Ive heard of it once where the defendant litterally wrote a book on how to use overseas buisness to pull off scams like the one he was being accused of
Typically, conduct would have to rise to the level of fraud to justify punitives in a contract based dispute. That’s a very high hurdle in most jurisdictions. Also, at that point the conduct complained of would likely be based in tort, not contract.
yes, but mobile games now are literally casinos, with research going into making them as addictive as possible to maximise in app purchase and advertisement revenue
source: worked in ad tech for several years, specifically in the mobile gaming industry, monetisation/ad optimisation. a job I regret doing and which feels very scummy in retrospect.
Because they all come with microtransaction stores, including several of the ones you’re specifically lauding, ya numpty.
Just because YOU haven’t wasted money on microtransactions does not magically make them unsuccessful in getting many children to blow loads of their parents’ money.
No, they don’t. It’s not hard to find premium, paid mobile games without microtransactions—I’ve already listed examples. And I’ve cited hard data: there are 14,139 such games on iOS alone.
If you can’t find even one of them, the problem isn’t the platform. It’s that you’re not actually looking.
To be fair, the iOS app store will show the top 200 paid games, and that’s it. There are a bunch of categories for games, but ‘paid’ isn’t one of them; there is no other way to see or filter just paid games. It’s always sucked and Apple has never fixed it.
I honestly don’t know how any developer is supposed to be successful on there with a paid game, because if it’s not already in the top 200 list, most people will never be able to see it in the store without specifically searching the name.
Ah, the classic “world hunger is a myth, I have eaten today.”
I’m not saying there are not the rare gems in mobile games (just bought Don’t Starve on Android last month!), but like 99% of games for mobile are just s money making scheme using dark patterns to influence your brain to give them money.
And congrats on not spending on micro transactions! You do realize the world doesn’t revolve around how your perceive things, right? If young people are exposed to micro transactions like that, it alters their brains and not in a good way. And that’s science, there really isn’t much you can argue with.
You do realize that iOS alone has more paid premium games—without microtransactions—than the entire combined library of NES, SNES, N64, and GameCube, right?
Your premise would be true if kids were compelled to spend money. But I watch my kids’ spending habits like a hawk. If what you were saying were true, I’d notice transactions being made.
Which leads me to believe that you’re either exaggerating or deliberately engaging in moral panic because others are having fun in your non-preferred way.
My kid has spent more money on new Switch games than Roblox.
So because you do it correctly, everyone else should get fucked or what? Like, you know how many people have bad parents?
So, congrats, your kids won’t suffer from that (or maybe they will once they have their own money because the path way of “spend a $1, get an in-game item, get an instant rush of feel-good hormones” is forming even with moderation). But other kids may, unless of course you think that it’s somehow their fault they have shitty parents.
So no, I really don’t want this around kids whose lives will be ruined just so your kids can have a fun time (which they can have in other ways, including other games).
I just spent the last two weeks in San Diego and hated it.
I hated the freeways, the strip malls, and the car-centrism. More than that, I hated the complete and utter hostility towards walking.
There were places that were 0.5 miles away. It would take three minutes to drive there yet an hour to walk because the assholes who designed the city couldn’t be bothered to build a pedestrian overpass.
I feel very strongly that cities like this are everything wrong with the USA, and that the reason so much shit happens in the USA are because cities are simply unlivable.
But Americans—specifically American voters—have decided this is what they aspire towards, and being antagonistic towards the average American is ultimately unhelpful.
Now why do I mention this? Because there’s a host of things that suck, and there’s only so much bandwidth to give a damn.
The real problem you’re talking about isn’t games. It’s financial literacy. Schools don’t teach it. Employers are hostile towards it. Governments just want you to spend—they don’t want you to save.
Financial literacy is what saves people from making terrible financial decisions.
Specifically worth pointing out the research and refinement of the skinner boxes in mobile games today is a continuous and ongoing process, with revenue also being continuous and ongoing. Any games and moral panic of 80s to 2000s were about products that didn’t change after release and were one-time only purchases.
Modern mobile games vs. shareware are incomparable in terms of harm they could do, real or perceived.
Moral panic is unrelated to games having addictive elements.
A better comparison would be how retro games would be designed for you to die/lose over and over because they were based on arcade dynamics, where the customer has to keep putting in quarters to continue playing.
Because the games are intentionally made with micro transactions as the main feature.
Like, if you play Witcher or Control or whatever, the focus is on you enjoying the game. If you play Fortnite, the main focus is on getting you pay. The game is probably still fun, but every single thing in the game is meant to make you pay.
It’s absolutely not the same thing. I used to play a lot as a kid (still do) and I have no problem with today’s kids doing the same. But I want them to be able to enjoy games without constantly being manipulated into spending as much money as possible.
And it’s not just about kids either, I think these predatory tactics affect adults too.
It’s not a moral panic, the problem is capitalism.
I was going to say outer worlds as well (outer WILDS is a fantastic game IMO) the game was entirely competent, just unimpressive in every way. Except Pavarti, she is a precocious sugar dumpling and must be protected at all costs.
Actual conversation had with my wife, who was watching me play near the end:
“That chick is cute. I bet her romance is adorable!”
“She’s aromantic and asexual, you can’t romance her.”
“I bet her quest line is fun”
“Nope. It’s a really boring fetch quest where you set her up on a date with some bland woman old enough to be her mother. She is also very obviously sexually and romantically attracted to this woman.”
“…huh.”
I love Parvati but Drinking Sapphire Wine is a terrible quest.
I thought The Outer Worlds was violently mediocre, and yeah, its really long uninteresting fetch quest, but:
Parvati says she’s not interested in physical affection, but I don’t recall her ever saying she was aromantic. The closest thing I remember is that she feels like she’s better at dealing with machines than people, which definitely doesn’t mean the same thing.
I also don’t recall her ever saying anything sexual about Junlei?
how old does this woman look to you that you think she could have a 28 year old daughter?
The quest was nothing new sure, but the reason I’m doing the quest? I want her to have the best dam date ever. I just wanted to see her happy and help her get ready for her date. Not sure what they were talking about with her being aromatic, don’t remember that. And about the age thing? not sure what they meant by that either, she looks the same age as Pavarti to me.
Haha yea I always check out the negative reviews first - either they quickly show that I’d be wasting my time with the game, or the negatives they highlight are actually neutral or positive for me, either way I generally find them better value/time than positive reviews. (Especially when a significant portion of positive reviews are memes, award-begging copypasta, or “best game ever” with no further details.)
I do the same. If the negative reviews highlight a consistent issue that I have an issue with and hasn’t been fixed, then I doubt I’ll be buying the product. Doesn’t have to be distinct to steam, either
I think Valve severely escalated the problem when they introduced the award system. Now people are extra motivated to cash in a quick laugh, or provoke outrage for the Clown awards. What boggles my mind the most is that hundreds of people give awards to the same copypaste comments that appear under every major game. I sometimes try to report the reviews of the spammiest accounts, but Valve is really hands-off with their moderation. At the end of the day they profit from the points system, and as always, user experience takes a firm second seat to profits :/
Goldeneye. Revolutionized the FPS genre at the time. Nigh unplayable now. Tried recently using both NSO and on an original N64, it just hasn’t aged well when compared to something modern.
I played Goldeneye at an arcade recently that had an N64 set up and actually had a great time. But people who hadn’t grown up with it and tried to join in found it pretty frustrating. So I can see that going either way tbh.
Yeah it already had inferior controls at the time if you were familiar with FPS gaming on computers. But it was still a ton of fun and when I went back to it some years ago I fell back into the n64 controller muscle memory no problem
Yeah you can use two controllers to mimic the more modern twin stick ones that have become standard, but I don’t think too many people figured that out back then. Still though, controller will never be as good as mouse + keyboard for FPS games.
Perfect Dark, on the other hand, totally still holds up today in my opinion, and there’s a decompilation project that works great on PC and Steam Deck.
Yeah, I felt that way about GoldenEye after getting used to PD. GoldenEye was one of the GOATs in its day, but that day passed pretty quickly. Halo then further improved on the controls and CoD improved on the multiplayer mechanics.
When that GoldenEye for PC project released some years ago, I was excited to download and install it (because PC port meant it would get PC controls, which have always been superior to console controls, even after Halo fixed them) but I think I only played one game before remembering that you start with nothing and have to find guns and the port was more crowded than the 2-4 player games back in the day where you could at least spawn away from the action and get a chance to arm up before others made their way to where you were.
I love love love perfect dark. But it’s uhhh it does not hold up. The campaign starts fairly strong and craters pretty quick. It really feels like they just weren’t able to really… Finish the game when it came out.
Also, like GoldenEye, a huge component of Perfect Dark was multiplayer.
With the N64, it helps if you can hook it up to a TV from around that era too. Games like Goldeneye look terrible on a modern LCD. I had that experience myself - “Man, I know I’m used to modern games now, but I don’t remember these games looking this shitty”. Then I dragged out my old CRT and hooked it up, and instantly it was “Now this is how I remember these games looking like”.
Man, I managed to completely forget about that. My dad was really, really into that game. Like, that’s about all he did for most of 4 years and ended up leaving my mom for someone he met in game.
I guess SL wasn’t really any worse about that than any other game, plenty of people meet and get married in MMOs, but I think the raging custom-content sex parties in SL probably didn’t help matters at the time.
Wonder how that game is doing these days. Cursory web search says it’s still alive. I probably would have found it to be pretty interesting if I wasn’t so turned away from it by my family experience.
I mean we have tons of anticheat games working on Linux. More than people realize. Elden Ring, The Finals, Overwatch 2, CS2, Apex Legends, xDefiant and more that I can’t remember right now. It’s not that bad even as a multiplayer gamer. The ones that don’t work R6S, Val, LoL, Fortnite, CoD and Destiny pretty much.
Yeah, quantity over quality right here. If my favourite game doesn’t run on Linux, Linux is dead to me. Even if I had 5 favourite games and 1 doesn’t work, it’s still dead.
So for a lot of people it’s either 100% or it might as well not exist.
Are you cherry picking the good games out of older libraries? I find people do that a lot when remembering. It’s a survivorship bias thing. The good ones get remembered more and the bad one forgotten, so they seem like the population is better.
My guess is that they just want to separate GOG and their game accounts from each other because they are easier to manage that way. I think in legal sense GOG is still a separate corporate entity even though it’s owned by CD Projekt.
They are legally separate entities, but why should that affect customers? Why are CDPR games no longer being sold on the GOG store? This almost would be like if Valve stopped selling Half Life on Steam.
I don’t think it has anything to do with being “easier to manage”. I think the corporate structure is purely for financial reasons. Valve never spun up a second business for Steam.
I also suspect it has something to do with the fact that GOG is a staunchly DRM free platform. It sounds like either CDPR want to sell games with DRM (which means future titles similar to Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous and Baldur’s Gate 3 would no longer have a DRM-free option, as CDPR would simply have them on their main store rather than GOG), or CDPR want to include DRM in their own games.
I understand your concern based on how corporations tend to run these days, but this is a lot of speculation. It’s good to be skeptical though.
My guess is that they want to use a single account across more services unrelated to GOG, akin to the way google SSO works for gmail, YouTube, drive, etc. If the account is owned by a subsidiary that might not be possible for other subsidiaries to use the same account per data regulation rules.
I’d like to think I’m not so much speculating, but rather concerned about what this might mean. There’s certainly no apparent reason why splitting CDPR games away from GOG would be good for consumers.
My guess is that they want to use a single account across more services unrelated to GOG
The specific reasoning they’ve given is pretty clear:
You are receiving this email due to your use of online features, including Cross Progression and My Rewards, in CD PROJEKT RED games, as well as your participation in platforms like the CD PROJEKT RED Forums.
None of these things have a clear advantage in being separated from GOG. GOG is owned by CDPR, GOG is a CDPR subsidiary. CDPR have full authority to dictate how their games are sold on the GOG platform. The only unique thing about GOG is the DRM-free position.
By separating CDPR games from GOG, they can separate CDPR games from the DRM-free position, without facing the inevitable backlash that doing so would normally face. Then, newer CDPR games won’t be bound by the GOG philosophy, while GOG can die off somewhat naturally and without such significant backlash. This could be seen as commercially preferable over the current situation for a publicly traded company such as CDPR.
I am making assumptions, but that is the very nature of future predictions. I ask if you could make any other assumption that really challenges mine.
Their games might end up on both, but when it comes to a new 3rd party game being put on CDPR store with DRM or GOG store without DRM, which do you think will happen? Long term, do you think GOG would survive if CDPR shift their focus to another store?
It’s not really the same as Rockstar Launcher and Steam, because Rockstar don’t own Steam.
They are legally separate entities, but why should that affect customers?
Because they are not doing it because of customers, they are more likely doing it for themselves. It’s easier to manage things on a corporate level when the data is also separated similarly as their companies are.
I’m not confusing anything here. For clarity, CPD is the parent company, CDPR is a department within the parent company that develops games. The two are basically synonymous.
What I’m doing is inferring that their statement “online services including…” is in no way an exhaustive list, and directly implies that other things are migrating also. Furthermore, when I logged into GOG Galaxy I could no longer shop for new games (not just CDPR games, but recent games from other publishers - only old titles were available), which further leant into the idea that games were being removed from the GOG store. I’ve since checked gog.com and they’re still there, though.
In any case, even if it doesn’t happen right away this move absolutely is a step towards CDPR games not being listed on the GOG store and potentially even coming with DRM.
I’ve created a support ticket with them asking for further details about the change.
I disagree but I understand you… I don’t know why it didn’t click for me as an old Yu-Gi-Oh! Player (that is the only card game I have ever played… And several minutes of a “Duel Master” card game for GBA… Perhaps that one would trigger some old memories for some it was based on an anime too).
It suffers the same problem every trading card game does: if you don’t have the best cards, you lose. Skill and strategy and even luck are nothing compared to just having better cards.
IMO pay-to-win mechanics work really well for a game-within-a-game since rather than exploiting the player for money, they are exploiting the player character for effort, which can lead you to go on more epic quests
Personally I found it really annoying that halfway through the game when I decided to give gwent a go, i got absolutely trashed and was basically tole to go back to the beginning of the game and redo a bunch of areas I’d already spent too much time in.
Not to mention none of the gwent quests were epic in the slightest. They were literally “play these people, if you win you get a card”.
That’s a really superficial take. For instance in MTG every format has “must have” cards, like fetchlands or shock lands (or dual lands), but beyond that there’s no “best” cards. There are “meta” cards that go into a specific meta deck and when you have one meta deck playing against another that’s when skill and strategy come into play. And it’s not like you must build a meta deck to play, you can build anti-meta decks or lab out a completely new meta deck. The problem is that such a level of deck building skills go way beyond what 99% of players are capable of doing. Even some of the best players in the world suck at deck building, because is an entirely different skillset to playing the game.
But it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. The modern meta looks very different to when I got into MTG 10+ years ago. Some are still around in some form, like regular Tron turned into mono-g tron and burn turned into boros burn. But the bans on Twin and Pod have killed those decks while Jund and Affinity have dropped out of the meta. In those place we have brand new decks like amulet titan or 5c Omnath. Somewhere in that timeframe we also got Eggs that was literally jank cards thrown into a pile of meta-defining solitaire playing, and then it got banned for being too boring.
You can get meta cards to build a meta deck but you can’t explicitly buy “best” cards because a new combination of “bad” cards can create a meta deck and then those become the new “best” cards.
The one with a better deck wins. If a homebrew deck goes against a meta deck then it’s likely the meta deck wins, but if you homebrew a deck with meta cards vs homebrewing without meta cards it comes down to how well the deck is built. A homebrew with all the meta cards but without any game plan or poor mana source distribution is going to do worse than a homebrew without meta cards, but with a clear plan and cards that support that plan.
People not building their own decks and instead just copying meta decks is another discussion.
bin.pol.social
Ważne