This is also my guess. Nintendo knows the demand, they’ll do $499.99 for the launch model and release a cheaper “lite” version like the original Switch in 2 years at $350 or $400 or something.
The GotY version of Morrowind feels less buggy than the original release. For example, some older PC versions frequently crashed because of some pointer error in the UI. The game detected this and created crash-recovery savegames like what MS Office does for your documents.
Star Citizen is an insane phenomenon to me. It’s a good game and a massive fraud at the same time, and one fuels the other.
Let’s give credit where credit is due - the game is incredibly immersive. The massive social element, ability to walk and explore things outside your ships and rovers, to customize them, to create all the inventive ways to make money and to prevent hostiles from doing the same is fascinating. It’s…believable, immersive, real. No other game has nailed it just so accurately, and I would invite you to experience it by yourself, but…
But once the player’s attention is caught, they become a milking cow. You want to develop in game? You have to pay up big time, lest you want all your ships and money go away with an update. They don’t go loud about their wipes, and most players face them when they’ve reached a certain point in the game - at which point they either lose all progress, or start to buy their ships for cash. For, like, hundreds or thousands of dollars per ship.
While this may sound bollocks to someone who haven’t played it, but the way it is normalized in the community combined with the element of frustration of losing everything in a universe player now cares about really drives folks to spend massive sums on the game.
Back in the pre-war era, I remember a person from Ukraine (a country with per capita GDP of ~$5000, or 1/16th that of the US) secretly stashing over $1000 to buy a new ship, adding to his ship park of $4000. His family (wife and two kids) haven’t been on a good vacation for years, and this amount of money would allow them to do so several times over in the southern Ukraine, but he bought some virtual ships. No, really. He was a clan leader, so he felt like he had to have all the nicest ships at his disposal, and his only grief was that he couldn’t afford the $8000 and $21000 ship packs.
The way community psychology works in the game is insane, and I believe a study could be made on how exactly was this all pulled off. Catch with a good premise, and make sure to never let the player go. I’mma be clear - what made me leave the game is not the sudden realization of its predatory practices, but simply the fact my computer started lagging heavily in the new areas, and me not having money to upgrade at the moment. I did consider buying a $400 ship just to have a decent hauler after wipes though, despite myself living in a not-so-rich of a country. Looking back at my Star Citizen experience though, I see how crazy it would be.
Squadron 42 is the single-player counterpart to Star Citizen. It’s supposed to release next year. Star Citizen, however, is far too complex to self-host. The server technology they’ve shown off is incredible, but it’s not a “single server” thing.
I’m hoping that many of these departures are simply because the underlying technology is finally mature and those people want to move on to new challenges, but I don’t really believe that’s true. It’s clear that Chris Roberts own shortcomings as a boss are poisoning the company and it’s once-passionate workers.
Wow yeah, I just looked into the Wikipedia entry for this game. It looks like they make a lot more money as an unreleased project than they would ever make as a fully realized game.
Curious if the middle ground has a potential win. Example: barely default + octopath + mighty #9. Boost OG soundtrack with real instruments + modern analog synths but no rewrites=just enhance, 2.5D graphics to open the current world and maybe overdue the weapon effects GFX for some “pop”, gameplay stays as is, I wouldn’t mind more dialogue but no rewrites nor removing any current script, make it easier to do multiple endings…… if anything if they want to do anything way different = make it a new ending where game+ is the new game. Everyone wins.
Honestly I would be happy if they basically made it into a Tales Of game as that’s already got dual/triple techs basically, it’s got overworld vs regular maps. It is very close to what a more modern Chrono Trigger would be. I would rather keep the original battle system but I wouldn’t be too mad. They could add all the little party talking cutscene things like in those to add more stuff without having to go crazy on the story.
HD-2D would be great. Polygonal remake done with care could work. I don’t like the idea of completely changing the gameplay, design, and key plot points one bit though.
I was hoping Cross was the start of turning it into a larger series… and I will defend that game to the end of my days because it’s really very good. Living up to Chrono Trigger is obviously a tall order, but I’m overall really happy with Cross and would like to see more games.
Honest question: Why would you want a remake/remaster when the original can be played almost anywhere thanks to emulators? Is it just the legal acquisition of the game, or would you want to see some improvements to the game?
I’ve had a great time with Remake and Rebirth. They put a lot more into it than some of the earlier spit-shines on 2D classics, which wouldn’t have worked for a game that was kinda in between generations of art and technique. But they’re really dragging this shit out. And I really don’t need a ChronoTrigger Integrade.
The franchise and the world have abundant potential. There’s no reason they couldn’t do something really creative and exciting with it. It just feels like the modders already did exactly that, only to have their work thrown in the trash.
14 crashed and burned until they brought in the A-Team to reboot it.
I’d say that had a much bigger impact on Dev cycle than a successful release on the first try with 7Remake.
If nothing else, successful releases produce more talented Devs, while failures burn them. And that gets us back to 15, which was an outright dumpster fire.
Based on the article text, it’s only citing things like how long you play. I thought most games collected telemetry like this?
Don’t get me wrong, if it was scanning your drive to sell data to harvesters, I’d be extremely unnerved. And you should definitely be able to turn this off. But I feel like even Valve has recorded things like “60% of players quit after losing to this boss”
This is what people usually mean these days when they talk about spyware. Not actually spyware, but counting how many hours you play each game or checking how long you refuse to update windows for.
But if you call it spyware you can write an article or fight on the internet.
Based on the article text, it’s only citing things like how long you play. I thought most games collected telemetry like this?
A commonplace travesty is still a travesty and metadata is still data. If my hairdresser asked me “Hey, in addition to me cutting your hair and you giving me money I’d also like you to constantly keep me updated on your sleep schedule, your vacation plans, marital status changes and the myriad of other things that can be directly gleaned from aggregate timeline data - all the other hairdressers have started doing it as well!”, I’d likely look at them incredulously for a few seconds while silently imagining stabbing them with their own scissors.
Calling it “telemetry” has somehow normalized it over the past decades, I suppose? I just don’t understand how anyone could ever accept this as normal.
More like, if you purchased an electric clipper, and it wirelessly sent a message to the company every time you used it, to let them know how long and where you’re using it.
They already have purchase info, they don’t need usage info. At least not for free with out the consent or knowledge of the customer.
That’s the thing, though. I respect the analogy, but the equivalent here would be if the game was also checking your drive for other games, for financial apps, scanning your browser’s cookies to see which sites you visit, etc.
If, while playing a singleplayer game, they’re recording what actions you take within that singleplayer game, it’s understandable some people wouldn’t even want that - but I also don’t see that as nearly so invasive as other data travesties. Worse, highlighting it here feels like a “cry wolf” situation where you’d desensitize people to the most harmful privacy breaches.
That’s the thing, though. I respect the analogy, but the equivalent here would be if the game was also checking your drive for other games, for financial apps, scanning your browser’s cookies to see which sites you visit, etc.
If, while playing a singleplayer game, they’re recording what actions you take within that singleplayer game, it’s understandable some people wouldn’t even want that - but I also don’t see that as nearly so invasive as other data travesties. Worse, highlighting it here feels like a “cry wolf” situation where you’d desensitize people to the most harmful privacy breaches.
Again, I don’t doubt that you do not see it as an incredibly invasive thing. I’m lamenting that you (and many) don’t.
You’re doing something on your computer. Locally. In your own time. With a thing that is - ostensibly - yours. Why is it even remotely acceptable that some corporate entity is watching you over your shoulder while you do it? I’m running out of words to express how nuts this seems to me.
I’m sorry, but that’s a terrible analogy. In the gaming scenario, Ubisoft is collecting the data on their own product usage, your hairdresser analogy is going outside of the service that the hairdresser is providing.
I’m sorry, but that’s a terrible analogy. In the gaming scenario, Ubisoft is collecting the data on their own product usage
Well, in the corporate software-as-a-service insane troll logic hellscape in which we live that could indeed make sense. Mind you, that’s not meant to be a rant against you but against the fact that this train of thought has indeed been completely normalized.
In the fantasy world of the past into which I’d like to go back to live happily it is precisely not Ubisoft’s product. It’s mine. I bought it - none of what I do with it is any of Ubisoft’s business. The business transaction has been concluded. If they want to know what I do with my game then they can ask me nicely about it. I’ll certainly not allow them to install a proverbial camera over the executable.
It’s not a good analogy, I agree, but I’m too angry to come up with a better one right now.
Also, you must consent to this and us potentially selling your information to interested parties or you’re not allowed to make use of our services even though you’ve already paid for them in advance.
I’d say it’s more like your hairdresser tracking how long you are in their store and what haircut you get- but you do you!
I’m not married to the analogy, just totally flabbergasted that “Using your own software on your own computer when and how you see fit without being watched” appears to be a slightly controversial aspiration for no (to me) apparent reason. Evidently I’m missing something, not explaining myself very clearly or both.
Are they just cruel for fun? Do they think that out of all the gaming communities out there this community expects deadlines to be kept? If you opted into SC then you surely don‘t mind waiting, no? Or maybe it‘s got nothing to do with customers and it‘s corporate speak and about fucking investors, Idk.
I tried to check in last week. My computer made it one hour before shutting down due to heat. It runs everything else just fine. I can’t be interested if I can’t even play the game.
I bet at first it seems like multiple consultancies, but the more they investigate, the more they realize it’s just minor variations on one consultancy copy-pasted around the map, and at a certain point, investigating each one just feels same-y and boring.
The report says that Valve has ~350 employees total, and of those employees only 80 actually work on Steam as a storefront. The rest are working on their games and hardware.
Yeah, they really went in hard with Suicide Squad, to be perfectly frank, the only good thing to come out of suicide squad was the Peacemaker show on HBO.
Yeah I mean that’s kinda how I feel about it too. Why kill the momentum of a show that popular like that? Makes no sense. And yeah, I’m in the same boat. I won’t even give a shit by the time it comes out.
What’s annoying about this is that (at least for me) the switch 2’s price is not the problem (outside of the USA, good luck to American Nintendo fans, you’ll need it), I get that it is expensive for a Nintendo console (I probably couldn’t afford one) but it has hardware worth the price (from what I have seen, feel free to correct me). The problem are the overpriced games, £75 (physical)/£67 (digital) is too much even for a Nintendo game. Do Nintendo really think they can just get away with prices that inflated in a market where most families will go “but we already have Mario Kart! Why spend another £430!!”
Not to sound like a fanboy, I mean I am but that’s not why, but I get the Mario Kart price tag.
I’ve had a switch from day 1 and look in the e-shop charts about once a week, and Mario Kart was consistently in the top 20 most sold games of the past 2 weeks.
From a switch perspective, you paid $70 for MarioKart + $25 for the DLC and got a single game a lot of people played since April 2017. In that same time you got 8 Call of Duty games for $70 each ($560) - with the later CoDs charging you $30 for chores or “Battle Passes”. Or you could have paid 95 Fortnite Battle Passes (total ~$950) since the launch of MarioKart.
if only MK, Fortnite and CoD would be the only three options for gamers then probably MK would win this round.
Unfortunately you comparing your favourite game to two vomit piles full of microtransaction and battle passes so cant see your point there.
If you enjoy the games Nintendo sells go for it, in my opinion the inflated new prices are ridiculous and will have a negative impact on the gaming industry in global as other big corpos will start copying them if Nintendo can get away with it.
MK 8 is also a previous generation title that Nintendo got to double dip on already.
MK night be a good value proposition for some folks. It’s still too expensive. I have games that I’ve paid $20, $10, sometimes even less for that I’ve gotten more play time out of. Play time to cost is not a good argument.
Let me also contrast with some of Nintendo’s worst practices, like selling 3 old Mario games with no enhancements, that are just emulated, for $60.
Also the greed. Charging for the virtual tour game (however cheap it may be), charging for performance updates to existing games (not extra content, only performance). Switch 1 games should just run better on the new console by default.
I’m not even sure hw is fairly priced. They’re able to sell the same thing in Japan for 100$ cheaper. I don’t think they’re losing money there.
If the best praise their PR people have to put forward is that it's not quite as horrifically buggy as previous Bethesda games, that's... not a great sign; Microsoft paid $7.5B for ZeniMax in large part so that this specific game would be an Xbox exclusive, if it's not the level of masterpiece that gets people to buy Xboxes just to run it then it'll be one of their biggest fails since Clippy.
Eh, I'd say that's pretty good in context. Bethesda has, for the most part, put out very successful games. Bugs and Bethesda are pretty synonymous though, and that this is on the less buggy side is something to quell hot takes of "Bugfield" before people even touch it. And I think the embargo restricts deeper comments on the game, so these may he the only comments we get for a few more days.
insider-gaming.com
Ważne