This only works because it’s like $30. If this was a $60-70 game, I don’t think it goes over well with the public. Nintendo is the only one that seems to get away with that
I think that’s exactly the point though. “We didn’t mark it up to mark it down, the price is just the price”. As a chronic patient gamer part of me hates that (I love finding older classics for like $10) but I don’t mind shelling out for a good game. The biggest expense is my time, and if a bunch of years later the price hasn’t moved it’s probably worth my time.
Yeah a lot of these entertainment companies forget that they need to earn my business with high quality product AND services, otherwise I will take matters into my own hands.
This aint like housing and work, where they can just fuck you as if they are your prison guards. We got options baby!
I got starfield for free with my video card, and I still feel ripped off and wish I could refund lol.
But yeah, I’m not dropping a single goddamn penny on Starfield. It feels like a game that was made for the xbox 360 or something, with all the loading screens and shit.
Who cares? The community will have player made expansions in a year that will likely be free and of higher quality.
Regardless, BGS is a shell of its former self. Whenever I see people clamoring for TES 6 I just scratch my head and ask why?
Starfield was the final straw for me, I will never get excited for another Bethesda game again. They’ve shown that they refuse to truly shake up their game design. When people asked if Starfield would have the same magic as FO3 or older TES games, they said, “it’ll have the same DNA.” I assumed that meant it’d have fun exploration and interesting quests. While it has some decent quests, the exploration is utterly tedious and just unfun. I truly wish they’d had just focused on fleshing out 2 or 3 planets in one solar system, maybe some instanced, hand-crafted dungeons/whatever outside of it. I have zero interest in exploring proc gen worlds, it’s not that fun in No Man’s Sky and it’s not fun here. At least with NMS, it’s all relatively seamless.
FO4 is why I waited and ultimately didn’t buy starfield. I LOVED elderscrolls, and FO:NV is like my alltime favorite. I didn’t hate FO4, there’s some fun to be had, but you can see pretty clearly from it where FO:76 came from. From what I’ve seen and read, I’m not missing anything with starfield.
NMS is tough. They did an amazing job trying to salvage it, but it will always be a game that was never meant to be that big. It’s not bad but at somepoint in the loop you just go “wtf am I doing?”. I give that team all the credit in the world, but that game never belonged where it is.
New Vegas is notable for not being a Bethesda game per se. It uses something very close to the Fallout 3 engine, but the actual content has little to do with Bethesda. They did publish it, though.
Oh I’m well aware lol. The game is a godamn miracle. But thats the thing, Bethesda has been on this trajectory for a good lonnnnnng while. Like the whole “obsidian good bethesda bad” thing isn’t quite right, but what is true is Bethesda has been incredibly strategic about shittifying their games: there’s always just enough there to keep you going “ok… one more”.
Starfield is the first one I just didn’t even bother with.
For myself and many people Skyrim is the best game they’ve ever played. It was the first fantasy game I played since Runescape to have multiple cities spread out through an open world, with long narrative multi stage quests involving a number of locations and NPCs. Both games also have a leveling sytem based around you get better at what you use ie “skilling”.
I want “TES 6” in that I want another game that hits those marks, but I no longer trust Bethesda to make it.
Edit: note I know a lot of people dislike skyrim and think calling it a great game is absurd, and I get the criticism but I love the game anyway
To me that was oblivion, when I got skyrim I just felt burnt out because it felt so similar but at the same time missing some of the stuff I liked like the custom spells etc, then fallout 4 came out and I sort of shelved it but once I got into it I spent soo many hours on it. Maybe it’s like cod now where if you skip a few years it’s fun again but not every single game because they just aren’t that different
Seven dollars to loading screen to your ship, watch an animation of your character sitting down, loading screen to space, loading screen to the system it’s in, Dodge some pirates, loading screen to the surface, hop along the completely barren landscape to go to a copy pasted outpost, loading screen back to your ship?
I feel like you could get all of the value of that dlc by just playing a mission over again.
This…this right here is the reason I quit playing this game, the reason I couldn’t quite put my finger on. It was just too fucking disjointed, you are so right.
I didn’t make it very far in to the game, I’d held on to my game pass subscription just waiting for it to come out, and cancelled my game pass after a few hours in Starfield. I made it to like the first big city a few small settlements after that, and everything felt so fucking lifeless. NPCs just didn’t seem to belong in the space they inhabited. Oblivion and Skyrim NPCs really seemed like they owned the space they inhabited. Fallout 4 even once you got your settlements going really felt like they were home. The constant loading screens just made everything feel like it’s own little universe, apart from the rest of the game. I did have fun raiding some base around the moon, one of the few times I had fun exploring. One of the few times I had fun, honestly.
The most fun I had in Starfield was probably a zero-G fight at one point, can’t remember if it was the main storyline or not. But I got as far as the final main quest line fight, after which New Game+ would become available. I realized before going into it that…I just didn’t care. And I am not one to experience the sunken cost fallacy. So I just logged out, canceled Xbox PC Game Pass, and did something else.
I haven’t played this so take my 2 cents with a pinch of mixed metaphor.
My assumption for this game was that DLC would be new copy pasted outposts, weapons, etc. That’s the way a lot of procedural games go. It’s not bad really, you take a good core game and pump it full of new set pieces and toys til hell freezes over.
But it’ll actually cost players $10 because they must purchase 1,000 Starfield creation credits to afford it.
At first, I read this as if you needed to ingest a verification can before you’re allowed to make a purchase. But alas, it is the usual shit where you have to buy their fake money.
That shit is never going away, and for one simple reason: it’s incredibly profitable. By converting real money into some nebulous fun bucks that doesn’t directly correlate in value, they obfuscate how much money you’re actually spending and make it more likely that you’ll spend more than you intend to. The same reason that casinos have no windows and pump extra oxygen into the air so you feel less tired, all so you don’t realize how long you’ve been in there.
Sure it’s profitable, but it’s also (correctly) seen as a manipulative, and some companies have stopped using those.
As I said Nintendo and Xbox store used to do that, but they transitioned to prices in real money quite some time ago, and if they got a wallet, they let you fill it with the exact amount of what you’re buying. Same with PS store, most PC game stores, even freaking playdate catalogue and itch.io where the average payment must be like $3.
I expect that from shitty mobile games, because I know mobile gaming monetization is fucked forever, but I didn’t know major publishers still used that garbage unemptiable wallet strategy.
yep. Never underestimate how stupid the average gamer is.
Then realize half of them are even dumber than that.
Which is why gaming is in the state it is right now, cause a bunch of drooling mouth breathers keep throwing their wallets at problems because god forbid they do without or make a single sacrifice.
Except it’s even worse than that. Because these companies hired psychologists to tell them exactly how to tweak the levers in people’s brains to get them to pay.
So you have the stupid people, but also the people whose brains are naturally wired to be played like a fiddle by these companies, and then on top of that, you have the new generation of gamers who have simply never known a world where you didn’t pay for skins.
Except it’s even worse than that. Because these companies hired psychologists to tell them exactly how to tweak the levers in people’s brains to get them to pay.
Which is where the whole concept of using real money, to buy fake money (and never in the exact amounts that they charge for items), so you obfuscate the actual cost, especially once people start carrying a balance of fake money due to never being able to get the exact amount of fake money for the item came from.
Like Dave and Buster’s play cards and games that cost 7.8 credits (at least right now, higher weekend evenings because of dynamic pricing) and needing to get out a fucking calculator to do the conversion from dollars to points to figure out you are spending $3.72 or whatever to play a single shitty game.
Eh, skill up had a great take on this. The thing is it’s wayyyyy easier to be a small indie developer than it ever was before. Making a game (or any art) still isn’t easy, it never was and never will be, but it’s viable without a giant publisher in a way it just hasn’t been before.
Its the AA titles that are on the most precarious footing, but I bet even those do ok. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy some AAA stuff time to time, I’ve got a stupid amount of hours in overwatch, but I’ve never once paid for a skin because… why would you?
The thing that’s going to suck is losing the studios like Arkane. Their games weren’t perfect but they were freaking cool, and they basically always got the raw end of the deal. Even Prey(2016), their masterpiece, is the product of corporate bullshitiery they had nothing to do with. So we’re probably going to miss studios like that for a while (as they get re-tasked to fortnite/cod support teams) but “indie” stuff has already been stepping up to fill that void, and is less indie all the time.
Look at Dave the Diver. That’s not exactly an indie studio. They had resources. There’s going to be a gap for a bit, but there’s still a demand for good games and art. Those AA breakthroughs are what people want. Again, I continue to spend dumb amounts of time on overwatch, but it’s not where I spend my money. Microsoft hovelled themselves by buying all these studios and not taking the leap with supporting them. Distribution just doesn’t have the value it once did. So if microsoft wants to become CandyCrush, feeding an addiction loop to grab the whales, sure, whatever, but there’s plenty of bread out there for studios doing other stuff.
The one and only point that I disagree with you on is your take on mtx. They may not affect you, but everything about them is designed to be psychologically exploitative, and the wealthy whale is largely a myth. The vast majority of money from mtx is made from people with addiction issues and other mental health issues or atypical neurology, like people with depression or ADHD.
Microsoft bought up all those studios and didn’t support them, but that’s business as usual for Microsoft, and the money that they’ll make from mtx like this will more than make up for it. I recently watched a former Blizzard dev who was talking about how a single $15 mount for WoW made more money than StarCraft 2 did.
The big issue I see is that most people largely don’t know about anything beyond the big AAA releases, and as we’ve already established, that’s an exploitative wasteland nowadays. There’s plenty of demand for good games and there always will be, but while the indie scene is the best that’s it’s ever been, the majority of indie companies go under after their first game. It’s still hard out there for them, too. There’s just enough of them popping up and putting out truly great games that they can actually compete with the AAA space.
It was Thor from pirate software on Twitch talking about the mtx beating SC2 for folks who care great guy to watch if you want to chill and hear some good life advise.
oh yeah, I didn’t want to be dismissive of the mtx stuff. It’s absolutely predatory and awful, but I don’t think it fully stands in the way of developing good games.
Which is related to what you’re saying about indies going under even after success. Game development takes time, and you need money to underwrite that time. I just think there’s going to be a split; right now AAA studios are shitifying their games, turning them more into CandyCrush skinner boxes. But the demand for good games hasn’t gone away, there’s just less financial upside than making CandyCrush. My point is, even though it’s less money, there’s still a good amount of money to be had there. Eventually the gaps going to be filled. Microsoft cant fill it because on the balance sheet, things like COD and anything from King are where they should be focused. And it sucks right now because they sucked up a stupid amount of talent and thanos snapped them, but thats not a sustainable practice.
But yes, it’s going to be painful. It’ll suck seeing really nifty indie stuff have to struggle so hard. Like I said I’m also going to miss the polish that comes with AA stuff. I’m going to miss the hell out of Arkane. Their games weren’t perfect, but they had so much soul. They didn’t deserve to have Redfall be their epitaph.
I kind of feel like anyone who spends $20 on a video game skin shouldn’t be allowed to make any financial decisions for themselves. Like, it was a test and you failed.
Except that shit is designed by literal psychologists to prey upon people with poor fiscal responsibility, like people with ADHD, depression, addiction issues, and kids.
It’s like blaming people for smoking cigarettes after they got addicted from secondhand smoking.
It’s fucked because there are people buying that shit, in numbers that turn a profit over the cost of developing it. And it’s a very low cost because the skin support is something they put in when they make the game, and then get an intern to shit out a gaudy skin.
If you don’t like it you’re obviously not the target demographic anymore. It’s mobile gaming tactics creeping their way on PC.
If its a single player focused with no (or very minimal) live service bullshit then great.
If not then well there’s bunch of indie or classic boomer shooters I’ve not yet tried that are just that.
Yeah I mostly agree with you. Except there was plot and lore in 2016, it was just minimalist as you said, but more importantly it was executed really well. It had the “doom” feel. In addition to awesome gameplay and soundtrack.
Eternal was great for the gameplay, and even an improvement in some ways. The lore and plot was ridiculous though. Way overdone, didn’t feel like doom.
I say go back to 2016 style with the gameplay improvements of eternal.
To me the essence of 2016 is the scene in the beginning where an info screen tries to dump exposition on you and you chuck it into a wall.
There is plot, but you don’t need to pay attention to it. Doomguy is angry and needs to kill demons.
To me a big fumble in Eternal was trying to explain why doomguy is angry and so good at killing. He’s like an inverse Cthulhu, terrifying, unknowable and mysterious. Trying to explain or understand him breaks the basis for the character.
On gameplay, I didn’t mind the changes, but I thought the embellishments were a little on the nose. The technicolor rainbow explosion of ammo when you chainsaw someone, and the increased focus on using abilities to replenish resources scream “This is a video game!” in a over the top way that I felt took away from the immersion and grit that I associate with Doom.
Agreed on all points. I tried getting into Eternal a couple times and still haven’t finished it. It’s more than likely a good game but it doesn’t have the flow of the first.
Yep, agree to agree here. I just thought the gameplay improvements in eternal were fun. But I agree the way you put it, kind of a departure from what doom should be.
I felt like the decision to make jumping and mobility more a factor in Eternal hurt it a lot. Jumping puzzles and jumping mechanics in FPS games don’t really work for a lot of reasons (see: Half-Life) and it made the levels feel much more linear than 2016, the arenas much more smaller and less mobile. id did invent this genre, and even they can’t make it work. What does that tell you?
Also the changing of the ammo metaelements to prioritize chainsawing felt dumb. Having to pinata every so often was the most obvious thing that felt straight up wrong compared to 2016, and that’s a sign of a garbage core loop.
The writing was pretty good, but I have the attention span of a summer ant when I play Doom.
Eternal actually made my hands hurt. Still haven’t gotten very far in it. Having to constantly cycle weapons, jump, dash, and do precision shooting, often all at the same time, was murder on my hands.
It may be but the engine team is mostly Ex-Crytek folks carrying over from Carmack’s work with OpenGL. Even the Raytracing support is just a Vulkan Extension. They could change gears.
gamespot.com
Najnowsze