I don’t wish for game developers at Ubisoft to lose their jobs, I want them to be employed somewhere that doesn’t torpedo the end product of their talent.
It’s moreso because of the actual specs itself, “priced like a PC” is anywhere from $300 to $10,000(at least semi-reasonably on a consumer scale) which isn’t a good metric if you could guess. However, based on the specs it should be somewhere from $500 to $800, and realistically because they were working with manufacturers for it they should be getting a good deal on the parts and therefore it should ere more towards $500 than anything, which would be console pricing. Of course excluding any peripherals. The issue is the way they’re wording it, and the way they have reacted to people like Linus asking if the price will be around $500. It seems like “PC pricing” means more like $1000, which is honestly overpriced for the specs and if it is said price I highly recommend no one buy it, just build your own, it’s easier than you think.
I believe that’s correct. And as others have pointed out this is likely an anti-scalping measure which changes my view on it.
I do however hope they will keep a good stock of them. Having to be a subscriber is annoying enough but even when I was one I was never able to be quick enough when N64 ones went back in stock.
I think the author missed the mark here by talking about game preservation, as many are already pointing out in these comments.
The real benefit of buying a physical disc/cartridge copy of a game nowadays is the ability to resell it when you’re done playing. That’s actually a huge boon if you buy a lot of newly released games at full price, and play on consoles where sales are less common than PC. Reselling games can save you a LOT of money over time.
Nope. When was your last time bought physical game disk for your PC? In fact, do your PC still have an ODD? Physical disk mush not be the reason why PC gaming is growing and consoles are strinking. That’s a wrong attribution.
I do have an optical drive in my PC, for Blu Rays and music CDs. The thing I was calling out was, “they want to have you buy it over and over again until the end of time,” which isn’t really a thing on PC. Sure, there are remasters and such, but the copy you bought 20 years ago largely still works on your new PC.
Great to hear you still have an ODD installed, but that game disc you bought 20 years ago won’t contribute to today’s growing PC market. Even then, I don’t think the “it” in the line refers to remasters but “new” or “first party” in the eyes of the publishers.
I would understand that original as, “But the publishers don’t want you to resell games. They want to have you buy games from their first party sales channel over and over again until the end of time.”
I’m struggling with your English a bit, but basically yes.
“But the publishers don’t want you to resell games. They want to have you buy games from their first party sales channel over and over again until the end of time.”
This is a problem that doesn’t really exist on PC due to forward compatibility and competing marketplaces. That forward compatibility has now been easily observed for decades by people who’ve been slowly losing the advantages that consoles used to offer.
I disagree. DRM breaks “forward compatibility” especially with online auth, and Steam dominates PC game sales. Not to mention some publishers avoid releasing on Steam but on their own platforms. PC gamers lost the ability to resell games long before the console gamers did. Still, I digress.
None of your poins help nor prove PC gaming market grows and cause console’s to shrink.
Steam isn’t always DRM, and even with its DRM, the vast majority of those games have continued to work without repurchasing them for over 20 years now. The premise at the top was basically that people are willing to give up the ability to resell their games when competition on PC has led to deep sale discounts, and I’d agree with that as well. On consoles now, you’re rapidly headed toward a future where you can’t resell your games and there’s no competition to drive prices down.
While it’s (probably) not the case for Valve, I think it’s pretty clear that Microsoft’s end goal is endless subscription fees and you owning nothing. And there’s a good chance of them succeeding at that as long as the primary OS for PC gaming is Windows.
Game Pass is already plateauing in subscriptions. I’m sure that while it’s far fewer subscribers than they thought they’d have, they’ll be happy to keep making money this way for some time, but it’s not going to turn in to the primary way people play games.
Yup. Waiting on those Skywind and Skyblivion mods to finish up, then I’m gonna put them into the base game and sell you a Tamriel Through the Ages bundle of joy.
Lmao what. The only reason the Xbox wouldn’t be successful is, well, Xbox. MS aren’t doing a great job with their consoles, but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be possible for competition to exist.
I’m sure that if Microsoft was allowed to do that Sony would have bought up a Japanese studio with the backing of the Japanese government like a Capcom or Sega. Probably the only reason Sony didn’t buy a bigger share of Kadokawa is because MS isn’t a real threat.
I’m hoping most of that money was spent on developers and salaries since it would appear they didn’t spend shit on advertising. Silver lining to a failure is that at least people had jobs for a good while
I think if we are strict on the definition, BG3 is definitely the better roleplaying game. The Bethesda games are better at the go here and do anything,but their world connections has always been far more gamey that what Larian is doing. I think if Bethesda really wants to make ES6 the undisputed best again, I think they need the NPCs improved to at least Oblivion standards, better town to town(power Dynamics), better so that remembers what you have done contextually, and then probably 2 or 3 very well fleshed out companions, and a really good story which I think they have set up already. Their gameplay is undisputed imo, but their reason to care about the world can sometimes be a mile wide but an inch deep.
Only in the context of the specific set-pieces provided within the game though. You have no way to work outside of the very specific rails that BG3 provides for interacting within the game.
If Skyrim is a mile-wide but an inch deep, then BG3 is an inch wide but a mile deep.
I think that’s part why BG3 has taken off so much, honestly. We’ve had so many open world games with ridiculously large maps that a lot of people are disillusioned with the lack of depth.
BG3 with its narrower scope makes for a much deeper experience. I would love a game that can do both depth and breadth, but these games already are a massive undertaking.
Well, the USD is worth 15% less today than it was when the consoles launched. As such, keeping the price the same is the same as discounting it with a stable currency. The price today is the same as $425 at launch, so prices have come down we just don’t see it reflected in the dollar price.
In addition to that we’ve passed that era of Moores law. New hardware is coming out with diminishing returns unless it’s big and expensive. We’re long past the era of every 2 years hardware is released with exponential returns in power and efficiency rendering everything that came before obsolete.
Hell even from an aesthetic point of view Red Dead Redemption 2 came out almost 5 years ago and with higher settings on PC still holds up as a pretty game. The biggest factor holding graphics back these days is development time and money.
Also fab production is a fundamental limitation to a greater degree than it was in the past, prices typically fell quickly as a process node gained better yields and could be made on less busy production lines but you have a much higher fixed cost just to convince TSMC or whoever to put you high enough up in priority to get your wafers made at all.
How can you say that when they haven’t made a game in a decade? Its like saying the beetles are culturally irrelevant. GTA continues to influence other games and is relevant to society even if they never made another game. I think fortnite is a dumb capitalist nothing game but I can’t deny it’s relevance.
Eh, each game had a very different feel. I didn’t play GTA 1 or 2, so I’ll start after that point:
GTA III - caricatures the mafia and the FBI, but otherwise is somewhat light on satire (good setup for the franchise though)
GTA VC - lots of satire about the 70s and mafia in Miami
GTA SA - lots of satire about a wide range of topics, from 90s gang culture to the burgeoning tech scene in San Francisco
GTA IV - lots of statements about the immigrant experience, with satire along the way
GTA V - satire about middle class life in LA, the excitement of tech getting stale and turning bad, etc
Each has a fair amount of satire and something to say about the world, I just found GTA V a lot less interesting than previous titles. GTA IV is my favorite for a playthrough, GTA SA is a close second (I love exploring SA).
So far we’ve gotten good single player games along with those online modes, including RDR2 after GTA5, so it’s at least plausible that GTA6 will have good single player still.
Won’t be playing it until it’s on PC anyways, so I’ll for sure have found out by then.
You’re right! But the hype exists. It will reach peak for the four months post the launch, creating fomo. Peer pressure with such launches are a human problem
I get it’s a massive franchise, like Madden or Call of Duty… don’t buy those either.
whew, I’m trying to understand your comment, but this is kinda coming off pretty…holier-than-thou? Which, I do get that because I can find myself like that with movies/tv, but still…we gotta let people like what they like.
In this case though, I honestly think this is a pretty terrible comparison. Madden and CoD don’t have massive single player appeal that GTA or RDR have. They are total schlock in that regard (though, I hear CoD’s recent campaigns are actually good).
GTA and RDR on the other hand very skillfully mix elements of RPG, immersive sim, and adventure game. They’re huge sandboxes for the player to explore and discover new things, within which are nestled very well written stories that critique modern life and touch upon themes that, yes, you could find them in various indie games if you look a bit, but are somewhat unique in the blockbuster gamescape. It’s difficult to find other single player games with the scope of Rockstar games, though I think it is getting easier.
But comparing GTA to Madden or CoD is kinda whack unless you’re looking at GTA Online in isolation.
Still, there’s very little overlap in GTA Online and Madden/COD. GTA Online is still very much sandbox-y, caters somewhat well to playing alone, and has a team gameplay loop. People tend to play this periodically but probably don’t have it be their main/only game.
Madden and COD are both highly competitive games with pretty much no sandbox, and their appeal is pretty limited after a couple years when the next one comes out. People tend to stick to these franchises as their main game, playing very little else.
The main similarity is that they’re AAA games, but that’s really it.
I think GTA online could be compared to Madden and CoD in that they all have aggressive(-ly lame) monetization tactics. But the way jordanlund frames it (sorry jordan, I don’t mean to rag on you – like I said, I can also be like this) sounds more to me like a “i only listen to artists with less than 1000 monthly listeners” type of statement
Jordanlund’s comment could be read/interpreted that way sure, but personally I read it more as “yes gta is a big/popular/genre-defining game, but not my cup of tea” kind of vibe.
I have played and enjoyed previous gta titles, but I myself am partial to slower more thoughtful games like Baldur’s Gate (I suspect same could be said for jordanlund as well).
For sure for sure. I definitely read it that way, in part, because I have to consciously remind myself that my taste is my own and I should try not to dismiss people who like their art to be more…palatable, i guess? Because I have the capacity to be that guy, unfortunately. So I try to watch a blockbuster every once in a while, so to speak.
I think it was probably the comparison between GTA and Madden and CoD that threw me, because they have almost no similarities besides being AAA.
Their comment kinda reminded me of how the Kingdom Come: Deliverance fandom can be. I mean, I fucking love KCD and KCD2, they’re two of the best games I’ve ever played. They can slow AF though, and frustrating at times. But whenever someone mentions that, or that they didn’t like it, someone else invariably comes along and completely dismisses their opinion, like “You just don’t understand it,” or “Maybe you just don’t have the attention span to really immerse yourself.” It’s like dude, you don’t need to make someone feel bad for not liking a game.
Wow, I gave you a lot of benefit of the doubt in my comments, but you’re really out here to just denigrate other people’s tastes, aren’t you? How refined, how cultured your game library must be. How sweet your shit must smell. How does it feel up there, where you’ll never touch a game frequented by us Dorito-eaters and us Mountain-Dew-drinkers? Feels good, huh? Feels better.
I enjoy it, I don‘t (allegedly) 100 bucks enjoy it though. I‘ll wait for a few years and grab it on sale. And ngl, I‘ve grown pretty tired of triple digit playtime games anyway.
I’ll still want it, I’ll feel a strong sense of FOMO if I don’t, but I don’t really care any more. After seeing how much money GTAO was making I strongly suspect they’ll put a lot more focus on that. In my opinion gta online sucked a lot of ass. It was fun as a playground to hang around with friends in, but as an actual game I’d rather we’d have agreed on any other game to play. I would never load it up to play by myself.
I hope I’m wrong and the story mode slaps, but at the super-premium price it’s going to end up costing i won’t justify it.
videogameschronicle.com
Ważne