Bruh. Tf does a fascist audience have to do with Twitch falling off? What I was saying was that the debacle surrounding nudity was the last straw for most.
No but it’s one in a long history of siding with the most fickle and destructive of the userbase. Nobody was asking them to make a big deal out of cracker, not even actual neo nazis give a shit about cracker beyond its use as a tool to bad-faith shut down people they don’t like.
This was a time when actual slurs were being thrown around completely unmoderated, famously saying that ret–d was allowed, which is an apt descriptor for what taking that stance and then proceeding to ban a bunch of their biggest left streamers for a discussing a mild slur was. It didn’t appease the people it was supposed to appease, all it did was drive away even more of the less politically repugnant users.
I was there for the drama too. It was hilarious the people crying racism for saying cracker, and the immediately follow up with the r word the same day. Mostly the Destiny guys who intentionally are bad faith basement dwellers. It was fucked up because they gave zero context about the word and grouped it up with racial slurs like the n word, which is completely racist to do that. So I definitely agree with you there. I mean we both know why, it’s because the website is 90% white males.
What's wrong with Keighley's events? I've been enjoying them, myself. This year's Game Awards was kind of a snoozefest, admittedly, but I feel like his shows have a pretty good vibe for the most part.
I mean, that's exactly what E3 had always been in the first place, too. Developers/publishers only showed up to advertise upcoming releases. Only instead of 3 hours of ads a year, it was 3 days of ads. Yeah, we got a lot of cool insider interviews from E3, but even those are just ads.
If advertising is the issue, E3 was a far worse offender than any of Keighley's productions, imo.
Of course its ads, but the main focus was the convention and not the streams. The crowds were fans and lots of developers got to show off their games. The game awards is just the worse part of e3 amplified, the awards themselves mean absolutely nothing, they are skipped over anyway, but imo gaming doesnt need an awards show, it's silly. The rest is just publishers paying for segments and a bunch of devs and random celebrities sit and watch in the crowd. I don't know how anyone sits and watches it. E3 was fun cause you could watch anyones perspective as they walked around and did interviews, met people etc, or even better if you could make it there yourself.
It was like computex of the gaming world, where any journalist could come and take part, which is not like geoff's bs at all.
That's fair. I guess you and I got different things out of E3, then. I mostly only followed the news on the game announcements, and not so much on the experiences on the show floor.
For me, I only really tuned in for the ads, because that's how I would keep up to date with the gaming scene before I had the internet in my pocket.
I kinda have the same takeaway for Keighley's shows. I don't even really care too much about most of the awards (Like, who cares about Best eSports Coach? Why is that even a category?) except for GOTY and maybe a few others like Best Performance. I'm mostly just watching for the trailers, myself.
Yeah if you just watch the big players' streams from E3 then I can see the similarities.
Games don't need awards, it's just all subjective anyway and just gives the cringe oscars vibe of 'patting ourselves on the back'. You know if a game is good by it's player reviews and how many friends have told you to play it etc, we don't need a random set of judges deciding for us behind the scenes what the best games are.
No, the players choose the player's choice winner and contribute only 10% towards the actual winners.
The games are nominated by a committee, the committee of 'game news organisations' is chosen by the 'advisory board' of the game awards, the board consists of Activision Blizzard, Ubisoft, EA, Sony, Microsoft, Valve, Nintendo, Tencent, AMD, Riot Games, Rockstar Games, Epic Games and for some reason Kojima Productions. So they have the choice to pick their favourable 'news' outlets, which in turn will pick the nominees and the winners of the awards. There's a lot of room for bullshittery to happen and with some past winners/nominees, I wouldn't doubt there has been.
All of these award ceremonies and cons are just advertising for the latest games or games that are releasing soon. Companies aren’t building games out of charity, but because they make money for their shareholders and occasionally, a private company.
Yes... but E3 allowed smaller devs to get an audience and allow people to try their games for early feedback, it was a place for gamers to go and experience new games, meet people in the industry etc. The game awards is literally just a 3 hour long advert for the highest bidders. The game awards doesn't give a shit about anything but the money they are rolling in, they get more and more shameless with it each year, a lot of developers complained this year as they were quickly ushered off stage to make way for the next big advert.
If you think E3 was a more welcoming venue for indie studios, you'd be mistaken. Getting a booth or presentation slot at E3 was insanely expensive. If Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft didn't think it was worth their money to have even a booth presence on the show floor, you can probably imagine how prohibitive it was for smaller studios.
People like Xbox would show off more games, from smaller devs, you can do a lot more in 3 days than you can in 3 hours. It was sad when they pulled out, that was the writing on the wall for E3, but its not even comparable to the game awards lmao, which is literally just a 3 hour ad break.
Game pass as a trend poses a serious dangers for developers and publishers alike, the moment people get used to pay €2-5 for a game it will be difficult for them to compete with €60-70 a game.
For us gamers is a blessing as long as the monthly price doesn’t exceed the price of the combined games you can play in that period.
I for example get 1-2 months a year of Game Pass. I’m getting 1 month next. I’m planning on play Dead Space, Lies of P and Persona Tactica, and, since I have holidays vacations this year maybe I will able to play either Starfield or Jusant. That mean I will be paying €10 for playing games Worth €180-240. Never in history have we gamers had this kind of deal.
Generally, the value proposition of subscriptions for publishers is the lack of friction for a lot of people.
You’re managing your expenses tightly, which is smart, but I think that’s not as common as you expect. A lot of people might hear about a cool game coming to Game Pass in two months, and for simplicity just decide not to unsubscribe even though they’re not playing it for the next month.
People also make theories that everyone uses the XBLGold promotion trick, but I also think that’s not so common.
This sounds like it could work well, just hope they aren’t given short or unrealistic deadlines by NetEase. The people he’s assembled thus far have released amazing material during their careers when they were given enough time.
eurogamer.net
Ważne