This isn’t a problem. For the first time in a very long time, I actually have a queue of games I want to play and din’t just mindlessly scroll steam store or wait for big releases. In fact, I no longer follow game releases, there is something at any given time I can find to play
Statistically, if more than half of a random sample of steam games are rated to be good, the standards for evaluation are shit.
And the people that were supposed to let us know if a game is good or not, the “professionals”, have a median score around ~75% according to open critic data, otherwise they wouldn’t have a job because sponsors would gfo.
We’re on our own shifting through a pile of de facto shovelware to find anything of worth nowadays.
It’s a problem not exclusive to games, mind you. Music, scientific publishing and other content for profit industries have the exact same issue: Vetting quality requires work so for profit institutions offload the vetting to the user.
The things getting reviewed already have a selection bias that makes them more likely to review well. It’s not a problem that reviewers focus their time on the games that their audience is most interested in, as opposed to reviewing every asset flip published to Steam.
I’m sure Kane and Lynch are audience favorites. No reason not to think only the best games get reviewed and thus, shifting the mean 25% in the favor of the companies that just so happen to be the ones paying for advertising. It’s more likely outlets, on average, only review good games, that sounds more reasonable.
It does shift review coverage, generally, toward the ones with the most advertising. Kane & Lynch is a weird one to pull out to support your argument, because despite the advertising, they got fairly poor reviews. (Also, as someone who’s played Kane & Lynch, those games are underrated.) The games with the big advertising budgets typically have a degree of confidence behind that spend, which again creates selection bias toward games more likely to review well, but that doesn’t mean that Redfall and Suicide Squad still can’t happen and review poorly.
It does shift review coverage, generally, toward the ones with the most advertising
but that doesn’t mean that Redfall and Suicide Squad still can’t happen and review poorly
Thank you for arguing in my favour. Both Redfall and Suicide Squad reviewed well above 50%. For people on Lemmy arguing about statistics it’s obvious the mean is shifted so anything around 75% is mediocre, however, to the average consumer, that is not the case. Furthermore, I mentioned Kane and Lynch because that game was the reason giant bomb exists and everyone nowadays knows big publishers strong-arm outlets.
Above 50%, but do you have any idea how much lower the bar can be for a bad video game than Redfall and Suicide Squad? Those are the games that typically aren’t getting coverage. Redfall and Suicide Squad, again, had some confidence behind them. When that much money is thrown behind a game and there’s no confidence in it, it usually doesn’t even come out.
I haven’t finished half of my backlog because I’m mainly playing Fallout 76 and No Man’s Sky. I don’t have time to play every game I want just like I do not have time to watch every show on TV.
And these fuckers were trying to “celebrate” the Rare anniversary on social media recently like they didn’t just cancel Perfect Dark and have done nothing with any of the other properties in years.
I still have so many games I’ve picked up on Steam sales that I’ll happily wait for those $80 games to go on sale while going through my back catalogue
I remember paying $10 for an Atari game. I know it’s not a great comparison, but I got hundreds if not thousands of hours of gameplay out of Qbert. Can any of the leading games in the last decade do that?
It’s funny I mention Atari. They had so many games to play. the choices you had were bonkers. best part was you could take your carts to a friends house and trade or share.
can’t do that today since most games are digital downloads that need 32gb day-0 updates.
perhaps the problem isn’t the gamers, but instead it’s the greedy corporate interests that are poisoning the game industry requesting $80 single owner games.
Can any of the leading games in the last decade do that?
Satisfactory, Dyson Sphere project, Factorio, Minecraft, Dreamlight Valley
Arcade games were great because it’s what we had. Sit a kid in front a Q-Bert now and try to get 1000 hours out of it.
Stuff is getting too big, there’s too much emphasis on making it pretty to sell it rather than making it fun, but I don’t know that we could go back to arcade games. I fear our nostalgia is a half-dose of Stockholm’s syndrome.
$50-60 based on what? Adjusted for inflation in 1982, it’s more like $33 and distribution costs are way lower than back then. Truth is you just need to find a compelling gameplay loop but companies don’t like taking risks- not every game needs to be a massive endeavor like skyrim. Look at games like slay the spire and see how a cheap game can be compelling without having to be a AAA behemoth. And at that note, is there even anything wrong if a game only takes your attention for a hundred hours? I don’t see the need to extend the player’s attention with poor side quest grinding. These things add unnecessary cost
Wow, shift goalposts much? You said “$10 in qbert days” which was the 80s and now it’s not $10 it’s $30. You can just admit you got it wrong and it was never $10 (though I do think prices right now are actually well aligned at $60 because of the far lower costs in distribution and marketing). Also I’m NOT the OP who played thousands of hours on qbert. Great job quoting someone else.
The other thing is that there was simply fewer games back then so you either continue to play the good games you own or you don’t play games. I loved Ocarina of Time, but I’m not going to pretend it was God’s gift to mankind just because I played it tons in my youth. I played it tons in my youth because it was one of the best games that I owned, and even then I had plenty more options than I’m sure this person had on the Atari for good games
Give it a year. Thankfully Toys for Bob was able to buy themselves out, otherwise surely they would have either been shut down or put to work in the Call of Duty mines.
Edit: By “it works” I mean the link can be clicked on. If the formatting looks wrong, check to see if the client you are using supports subscript/superscript fonts.
Looks like Lemmy has decided to use a flavor of Markdown which is inconsistent from Mbin’s. That’s a shame.
Weirdly enough, different Lemmy Android clients for Lemmy also work differently with the scripts formatting, each having their own quirks. One person though did fix their problem by upgrading their client app to the latest version.
I had thought it was all one single standard, when first started using the formatting. My original intent was just to have a smaller font, as I was at first just using the link format without any subscripting, but people were complaining about that, so I was trying to compromise and make it smaller.
That isn’t how anything works. This is like those people on Facebook posting their voodoo chainmail posts about their comments and profiles. You don’t own your comments to transfer a license in the first place.
You truly have no idea what you’re talking about. Multiple times now you haven’t even been able to grasp something as stupidly simple as different people talking to you.
You sir, are a moron.
It must be a strange feeling to be the current laughing stock of Lemmy right now. I hope you’re able to learn from this.
“I DO NOT GRANT PERMISSION TO LAW ENFORCEMENT TO READ THIS COMMENT. ANY USE OF THIS COMMENT BY LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR ANY REASON IS ILLEGAL. THIS COMMENT CANNOT BE USED AS EVIDENCE AGAINST ANY NON-LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONS IN RELATION TO ANY CRIME.”
Aha, so you actually read it? Thanks for clarifying.
I have. Both versions. I was just linking to the easy to read version (canonical), but by declaring my comment as licensed means it is covered by CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, and you can get to the legal version from the canonical version.
So you didn’t reach the conclusion that this license is incompatible with posting on Lemmy?
Are you a lawyer? No? Well then be sure to come back here once you get your degree and let us know the final word on this.
bloomberg.com
Ważne