I’ve only bought one $80 game thus far (And that was during a 30% steam sale so only $55) and from my years of experience of buying games, I can confidently say that my enjoyment in games goes down as price goes up.
Although weirdly all of the $80 games that released so far have been pretty bad so that’s strange.
That’s basically what I’ve been saying ever since the switch 2 announcement, I’m glad I can just copy the Sources from this article to support my intuition. Thank you, Superjoost!
But it still spooked Wall Street, as parent company Take-Two Interactive Software Inc.’s shares plummeted as much as 10% following the news.
I think our economy might be predicated entirely on stupid.
Also, $80 is a lot when typical people’s buying power is decreasing. I think like half of americans can’t tank a $500 surprise bill, and they want people to blow nearly 20% of that on a video game? Fuck off, capitalists.
Those systems are literally designed to be psychologically addictive and prey on those weakest to such tactics. It’s not stupidity; it’s literal brain washing via Pavlovian response.
Basic human psychology has been weaponized against us, and they’ve been getting better at it faster than we’re getting better at resisting it, for decades.
I don’t think I’ve ever bought a microtransaction or cosmetic. I’m doing my part!
*Ok, i think I paid like $5 into warframe after 200 hours, and I used some fake money from google surveys on pokemon go, so I’m not entirely without sin.
(Which from my perspective is very silly — what’s the difference between them making a kajillion dollars in the fall and them making a kajillion dollars in May?)
This “article” was written by a moron who doesn’t seem to know anything about the stock market. I guess it shouldn’t be too surprising for Bloomberg.
Jason Schreier is not a no-name. I would expect the guy to figure it out, if he thought about it for a moment. But yeah, the whole article seems a bit rushed…
I made a rule that I can’t spend over $10 on a game until I’ve played through my entire backlog. I haven’t bought a game over $10 in 10 years and I’ve spent $6k on Steam since I started using it.
I think Titanfall 2 is still on sale on steam for uh… 5 dollars.
Its got Northstar, a custom client that allows for private multiplayer servers… also works on linux, literally has its own custom proton version.
Oh and there are mods as well, guided installers, mod managers, etc, for windows and linux.
Runs great on a steam deck!
… and looks … basically the same as a shooter from 10 years later, at least at 1280 x 800?
(its built on a custom forked version of the portal 2 source engine, so it actually runs efficiently and looks good =D)
Doesn’t have a huge playerbase, but it is decent enough that you can probably find a few well populated servers, at least in NA region.
… looks like titanfall 3 got turned into an extraction shooter and then cancelled.
So anyway yeah, hilariously its time to return to tradition for enthusiasts of many old school competetive games from before the bullshit of endless battlepasses and MTX kicked into high gear… and as others have pointed out, the indie scene is full of gems.
I just like to add that it has an oft forgotten 4 player PvE coop mode. Also low on players, but not dead, and if you’re lucky enough to have some friends you can guarantee a match. And there are usually populated Northstar servers for it as well. It’s a great mode with progression and the signature combat experience in Titan and as a pilot.
There are so many options out there that asking for $80, or whatever the equivalent is, is just ridiculous. I really hope people stand up against this bulshit.
Generally, I don't buy games over $18 CAD. I've made exceptions (Temtem, Civ 6, Super Mega Baseball 3, My Time at Portia, Satisfactory, a couple of others) but never paid more than $40 unless it's a gift for someone I really like (I pre-ordered Fallout 4 for my ex for her birthday).
I will happily wait years for something to come down in price. I have 600+ games on Steam: I always have other options.
For the last 10 years I’ve only paid full price for one AAA game: Elden Ring. I’ve gotten something like 200 hours out of it. It may be the best value for a AAA game ever, in my book. (And I haven’t yet played the expansion.)
I’m happy to wait for sales on everything else, including the secondary market for Nintendo games, but after their recent fuckery in multiple arenas, I’m not keen buying anything they produce. (Not that it matters. Their stuff will sell regardless.)
I’ve said this elsewhere before but video games are a commodity and an impulse buy. Very few people view the next video game as an essential purchase for themselves. So sure people can have them and haha about how much the cost of developing a video game has gone up till they’re blue in the face but that is not going to change how the consumer will feel at the register buying the game. If the person at the register does not feel that the price is justified they’re not going to pay it they’re going to wait for a sale, borrow it from a friend if they can get access to physical media, or pirate it.
There are very few games I would spend $80 on. Actually, at this point I don't buy a lot of new games to begin with, I'm mostly just grinding the same old favorites now.
But for the games I really care about, I'm willing to spend on games I know will be worth it to me. I've waited 22 years for a sequel to Kirby Air Ride and if I have to pay $80 for it, I will pay $80 for it.
There are a few franchises that still have me day 1 even if they went to that price point (The Witcher, Persona, Trails). Those are always 80 hours minimum, though.
and yet, there’s plenty of dogshit apologists in this thread arguing to “just let people play games” because they have zero self control. this place is literally no different than the other.
If you respected the rules it wouldn’t have to be moderated.
Calling Rowling a terf is OK (you are stating the obvious in such case), telling another user to fuck off, or for specific group of people to die isn’t.
Ah, “rules” that can’t be really learned from because you removed the comment from even my own comment history. You’re obviously insinuating something with that last sentence but, frankly, i can’t recall what i wrote at the moment.
These people LITERALLY want to dehuman and take rights from trans folk, but i’m required to tolerate that without calling them names?
and before any miserable “bothsides” fuck cries “you’re doing the same”. i didn’t start this shit. i’m not taking womens rights away. i’m not also trying to ship people off to foreign prisons.
You’re right, both sides aren’t the same. One side has devolved into foregoing what we like to think of as humanity because they have a boner for hate and the other makes excuses on why degrading themselves to the same level isn’t the same.
It’s a play on words. I’ll skip the nuances and get right down to the core, “they started murdering people, so I’m murdering them back”. But here’s the thing, killing is still killing, even in self-defense. No matter how many justifications, running away from this concept only serves to bring you ever closer to the mentality of the other side.
The very simplified “both sides” is alluding to the idea that both are very much willing to give up empathy, ethics and law if it means getting rid of the opposite side. The selective application of these three concepts is what bridges you together in a way that makes an outside observer say “so similar, they might as well be the same” a.k.a. “both sides”.
No exception to empathy, no exception to ethics, no exception to law, no matter how saintly and no matter how evil.
so you advocate rolling over and letting literal genocides occur because killing is bad. that’s what your logic naturally leads to.
trolley problem is all about this shit. and your stance is that millions can get ran over by the trolley as long as you don’t have to pull the handle to decide. because of your cowardice.
bloomberg.com
Aktywne