Calling Planned Parenthood a political group is just telling on yourself. You hate women’s bodily autonomy and/or trans people enough to overlook the fact that they offer free and income cost adjusted birth control and vasectomies and hysterectomies and fertility treatments. They are a non-profit organization offering every type of sexual and reproductive health care. They, in fact, do not engage in politically driven discrimination against certain types of sexual health issues. They treat those trying to get pregnant with the same level of evidence based care as those seeking abortion or hrt or to be made infertile, without concern for public opinion or political discourse. I assume all of the above can be said of the children’s hospital mentioned, but I don’t have an ongoing relationship with them to base my comments on…
I don’t think it was a choice. Xbox did it first and that’s why I bought a ps3. Then sony introduced it. Then nintendo. It’s still less expensive than a PC hobby. Consumers don’t have much say in what these companies do or how they operate.
just with the sales and free online/cloudsaves PCs are cheaper in the long run
And mods are an added value, we can even include fanmade patches that fix what developers don't into that added value
Consumers don’t have much say in what these companies do or how they operate.
Yes, they do. Microsoft tried to incorporate Xbox live onto PC and it was a failure because PC consumers didn't bought it
The same goes with paid mods, Valve and Bethesda tried to make people buy mods and it was rejected by the consumer so the have to backtrack.
Consumers have all the power in their wallet they decide what course the companies take. If a company does something that goes against your interests as consumer is as easy as stop giving them money, if you hurt them economically, they'll have to go back to the business model that gave them profits (this works only if the average consumer is intelligent enough to protect their own interest/rights)
Used or loaned games (provided you have libraries offering them in your area) are still a huge benefit for (most, ie physical media “enabled”) consoles.
The subscription model is broken by default, regardless of Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo, and is only good and cheap until it isn’t anymore.
Agreed that consumers have a say, to some extent, however some are too far “into the ecosystem” to either care or be willing to boycott or make a change that would inconvenience them, so they’d rather give in.
100% agree with that, but even then the sharing of physical media seems like it’s being slowly replaced with sharing digital libraries. PS4 allows a hokey way of sharing libraries between two people, and Steam does offer a similar janky way of sharing libraries between multiple people. With GOG, you should be able to download a standalone installer on a USB and then give that to a friend (which now I think about it, is the PC equivalent of lending your friend the disc lol).
Wondering how long it will be until people go “remember when we used to share discs with each other?”
Oh absolutely, I know I’m already part of a minority when I favour physical over digital media.
We’re likely seeing the last (or, more realistically, second to last?) generation of consoles with physical media as an option and that’s a bummer…
GOG is great on the PC side of things, but as someone with a Steam Deck as their only PC, it isn’t always the best option (some games have been giving me a headache or end up straight up not working - eg I’ve had to rebuy Gris because the GOG version would show a white screen with any version of Proton I tried, while the Steam version was perfectly fine).
just with the sales and free online/cloudsaves PCs are cheaper in the long run
This may be true, but then i think this is just annother example of how it is more expensive to be poor. Even if PCs are cheaper in the long run, it’s hard to scrounge up the $1000+ upfront to buy a worthwhile PC if you’re living paycheck-to-paycheck. Over 60% of Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck. If you are living that way, it’s much easier to come up with the $300-500 for a console (in the US, that’s an average tax refund amount), and then the $15 a month for gamepass/PS plus. And don’t tell me you can buy a lowend PC for that price - any PC you buy for $500 is gonna play games worse than the comparable console.
In cases where our only power is in our wallet, people with bigger wallets will be the only ones with actual power.
It’s not common sense, that’s a common false judgement applied to people with less means - it’s a value judgement and diminishes their struggle. This is a reminder to be nice on our instance.
I'm not rich, I know what I'm talking about. When I'm going to spend money I have to look the best way to spend it, which is the best "invest". Being wasteful is an luxury I personally can't afford.
Fantastic, I’m great you have that going for you. I’m letting you know that making value judgements on other poor people for being poor is not okay. Don’t do that on Beehaw.
I told you that you need to change your behavior and all you’ve done is attempt to argue with me rather than understand why your behavior was not acceptable. You’re getting a 7 day ban so you can have time to think this over.
Only if you plan on either never paying for an online sub for the console or paying for an online sub for less than 5 years on the console, and also take into consideration that a PC can both game and be a computer you can use for other things.
A gaming PC has a higher upfront cost, but it’s a better long-term value. Let’s say you buy a PS5 for $500, and then pay for 5 years of PS+ for the old price, $60. That’s $800 for a friggin console already, but let’s also consider that most people either have a laptop or a tablet for doing computer-related tasks. Reasonable people would pay probably somewhere in the $400-$600 range, but let’s give the console a chance and say we got a $400 laptop. That’s $1200 now.
Using that $1200 as a budget, you can get a computer with a 4060ti, a 12th gen i5, a 1TB NVME SSD, and 16GB RAM for around $1100. Note that, say, 5 years down the line from buying this PC, you can just swap in and out parts as you want and be able to sell old parts for some money back, so staying up-to-date to play whatever current games can be cheaper too depending on the part prices.
Also anecdotally parts seem to be lasting much longer than they used to. Maybe I’m just playing fewer games, maybe I care about graphics less, or maybe there actually is a technical reason but in the early 00s when I first started building computers I was essentially forced to upgrade about every 2 or 3 years but now I’m still running on my 7 year old desktop with a 1070 – I was going to upgrade the graphics card but the crypto mining boom priced me out and lo and behold I’m still able to play whatever I want with nary a difficulty. Even Baldur’s Gate 3 runs just fine, with a little chugging.
The percentage of the industry that can afford to push modern graphics to their limit has only shrunk over time as the development time required to make games that taxing has increased. That's why most of what you play isn't particularly high-spec.
Ok. Logitech G203 for $20 and a Redragon K552 for $45 - a tiny bit cheaper than a PS5 controller which retails at $70 before tax.
Windows you can literally get for free from Microsoft directly. You’re basically paying a license to get rid of the “Activate Windows” bit and to be able to change wallpapers, but functionally you can play games and do computer things with an unactivated Windows license. You can also opt to play on Linux instead since Steam offers Proton with their Linux version, and you can also use WINE for games that won’t run on Proton. Linux is also free.
If you want a mouse with a good sensor for competitive games and a linear switch mechanical keyboard with NKRO, those are generally the two best entry-level options. Rechargeable wireless mice can be a bit pricey, which is why I’m assuming you used a vague descriptor of “quality” and specifically mentioned it just for the sake of being arbitrarily on par with what a PS5 offers. But if you want a good budget option for a wireless gaming mouse, you can with a Logitch G305 for around $50.
As for the OS stuff, that’s a good point, and it’s true - if you’re talking about 5 or so years ago. Once Steam said “hey, we’re integrating Proton into our Linux version of Steam”, it’s been leaps and bounds in improvements for Linux gaming. By the way, fun fact: the PS4 used FreeBSD for the system’s OS which is based off Unix - and surprise, Linux is also based off Unix. Wouldn’t be surprised if the PS5 OS is also based on FreeBSD.
How is that a bad faith argument? The PS5 Controller is not entry level quality. It’s not my problem equivalent PC peripherals are expensive. My Razer Viper Wireless cost $150 and the build quality is just slightly worse than a Dual Sense. It’s built to be lighter weight so that’s understandable. But it’s twice the cost, and that doesn’t include a keyboard. I tried the G305 and didn’t care for the build quality personally. Equivalent wireless keyboards with the quality control of Sony are $80-$100 too. I’d probably cheap out on the keyboard before the mouse, but every keyboard I’ve used under $85 had Quality control issues from switches stop functioning to buggy software (Anne Pro II), and Wireless was terrible on all of them.
I’ve heard issues dealing with multiplayer and anti-cheat as recently as this summer, so it’s nice to see it’s better, but until games are officially supported with no third party patches or workarounds, I don’t count it.
PS5 is FreeBSD based, so yes it’s Unix-like. But that doesn’t mean anything. MacOS is also Unix-Like and it’s terrible for gaming. It all comes down to support. At the end of the day I don’t want to have to deal with drivers, or configurations to play a game. I want to press a button, and start gaming. For me personally Consoles are going to win that war 95% of the time. But I’m dumb. I spent almost 3 times the cost of a PS5 on a Graphics card last year for some reason.
The PS5 Controller is not entry level quality. It’s not my problem equivalent PC peripherals are expensive.
You’re right - it’s the only entry in at that price point. If you just want a wireless PS5 controller, you either pay Sony $70… or you pay an approved 3rd-party retailer $150+ at minimum for a non-Sony controller. So it’s comes out the same as the Viper Wireless you mentioned.
My Razer Viper Wireless cost $150 and the build quality is just slightly worse than a Dual Sense. It’s built to be lighter weight so that’s understandable. But it’s twice the cost, and that doesn’t include a keyboard. I tried the G305 and didn’t care for the build quality personally.
How the fuck can you compare build qualities between a controller and a mouse?? Like, how do you actually do that? You’re comparing apples to oranges here at best, and at worst you’re doing a strawman argument by cherry-picking things that support your point. You also prove that enjoying build quality is subjective - I personally loved the G305 mouse and how it felt in my hand, and I have used stuff like the Viper Wireless and Glorious Model O. But you what the best mouse I have used to date is? The CoolerMaster MM720, which is a $30 wired mouse. The consumer have choices at different price points when it comes to gaming peripherals, and you are right that they can be crazy expensive at the top end - but don’t pretend $180 controllers don’t exist, either, and don’t try to conflate high-price point items as being good, because you can easily get a good quality mouse with bells and whistles in the $60-$80 space.
Equivalent wireless keyboards with the quality control of Sony are $80-$100 too. I’d probably cheap out on the keyboard before the mouse, but every keyboard I’ve used under $85 had Quality control issues from switches stop functioning to buggy software (Anne Pro II), and Wireless was terrible on all of them.
That I will give you, but you’re also deliberately shopping in the $40 range for stuff like the Anne Pro II Keyboard you mentioned. I can say every PS5 controller I used under $70 was awful, but that doesn’t mean much once I mention I was buying $20 controllers.
I’ve heard issues dealing with multiplayer and anti-cheat as recently as this summer, so it’s nice to see it’s better, but until games are officially supported with no third party patches or workarounds, I don’t count it.
Anti-cheat has also been on consoles for decades now - not as bad as PC to your point, but once again don’t act like consoles don’t experience the issue either, especially when stuff like Xim exists.
PS5 is FreeBSD based, so yes it’s Unix-like. But that doesn’t mean anything. MacOS is also Unix-Like and it’s terrible for gaming. It all comes down to support.
Good point, forgot Macs exist tbh lol. It is also only one OS that doesn’t have good gaming support, but honestly it’s a toss-up. Linux has gotten some really good support though.
At the end of the day I don’t want to have to deal with drivers, or configurations to play a game. I want to press a button, and start gaming. For me personally Consoles are going to win that war 95% of the time.
Which is a completely valid point - but that’s not the point you were making initially. Since you said right off that bat:
Need to add a good quality mouse and keyboard to your numbers at minimum. Consoles come with controllers. Should also add a $99 Windows license too.
You made it a point to talk about the price of the computer versus a console, not the ease of use of it.
I spent almost 3 times the cost of a PS5 on a Graphics card last year for some reason.
Because you deliberately chose to spend that much on a GPU that outperforms a PS5 in graphical power? I bought a $400 GPU that slightly beats the PS5 out a couple of years back, so that’s moot.
How is that a bad faith argument?
Because I’m dumb and I just learned what “bad faith” actually means lol. My apologies on that, it was the wrong usage - “cherry-picking” is literally the word I should have used.
So it’s comes out the same as the Viper Wireless you mentioned.
No, it comes with the console. So to be fair, just subtract $70 from the cost of the PS5 = $330 for the Digital Version
How the fuck can you compare build qualities between a controller and a mouse
Easy, the Plastic and Switches on the Razer feel cheaper / more brittle. There is more flex to it when squeezed. The charging dock connectors are less reliable. To be fair, the mouse did come with a dock with my model, I think it may be a bit cheaper without it.
you can easily get a good quality mouse with bells and whistles in the $60-$80 space.
You absolutely can, but you didn’t include anything originally and that’s why I made a point of bringing it up.
you’re also deliberately shopping in the $40 range for stuff like the Anne Pro II Keyboard
I paid $90 for in in late 2019. Assuming that’s not a counterfeit listing (Official site lists it for $90 with $10 off but OOO). The macros and software customization is incredible… when it works. Bluetooth was worthless, I had repeated key presses from time to time, and the config kept getting erased randomly when I would unplug it.
Anti-cheat has also been on consoles for decades now
I meant anti-cheat preventing the game from working. I stopped playing competitive a long time ago.
Linux has gotten some really good support though.
Subjective I guess. ProtonDB still lists a lot of games with issues. Not a lot are natively supported by the devs.
You made it a point to talk about the price of the computer versus a console, not the ease of use of it.
Yea I did, and the Ease of use is tied to the cost through the Windows license or lack there of. In all of these comparisons the PC side neglects to include the cost of Keyboards, Mice, and Windows.
Because you deliberately chose to spend that much on a GPU that outperforms a PS5 in graphical power? I bought a $400 GPU that slightly beats the PS5 out a couple of years back, so that’s moot.
That’s the entire cost of a PS5, and a few years back an equivalent SSD was $200.
cherry picking
That’s basically my original point. You can’t leave out a mouse and keyboard.
I used an Xbox controller for years yes. Now I use an 8bitdo with gyros. I don’t play fps games. But yes I do have a wireless m+kb for games that are better with them.
You know, you see thus argument every so often online. I’ve had an excellent and subscription free Linux gaming experience over the last three years. If you enjoy console gaming and getting nickel and dimed for increasingly shitty online services then power to you
Considering piracy equivalent to hardware theft is just intellectually dishonest. In a lot of ways, but relevant to this discussion is that piracy is way less risky, so more people do it. If you try to steal a PS5 from a store I’d go as far to say you’d probably get caught and jailed. With piracy you almost definitely won’t get caught.
I think this debate can get lost in the numbers when it’s more about the user. For some people that upfront cost is going to make sense, for others it won’t. The math isn’t the hard part. Specifically though, a PC hobby isn’t exactly a cheap hobby.
Gaming in general isn’t a cheap hobby. You can get a 320$ steam deck, dock it and plug it into an old monitor add a cheap KB and mouse and you are PC gaming. Or you can spend 3,200$ on a top of the line rig. Its whatever you want to make of it. I wouldnt say its more expensive than console gaming, but you can make it one and you will get a better experience for it. Either way personally I would consider PC the best option by a fairly large margin.
Well, I’m still using my $200 laptop from 7 years ago for my basic computer needs. And that doesn’t seem like it’s going to change soon. Also, someone who buys a gaming PC is likely going to have a cheap laptop to do their basic computer stuff still.
Also, I get my subscription for $40 on sale, mostly for the games and discounts. So it really just pays for itself in the games I get from it.
I think you’re vastly underestimating how cheap most computers are; consumer laptops are around $300-500 median, that’s what most people use. And those laptops don’t game. The enthusiast computer market, while larger than its ever been, is still a ridiculously small percentage of computers sold.
I feel the problem is not the industry but the fanbase. As of the last few years, it’s become pretty common to see videogames become target of hatred for “going woke”: H:FW’s Aloy’s “peach fuzz”, TLOU2’s Abby being too masculine, women not living to the average beauty standard, LGBT characters “shoved down people’s throats”, character editors decoupling gender and sex or using gender-neutral language, narrative being cringe because it targets millennials (as if older games didn’t target young audiences, too)… The industry is going forward, but I don’t think the fanbase is ready yet.
Sometimes I think the fanbase is regressing, even. I’ve seen people lamenting increased “politics” in their videogame, yet saying that MGS or FFVII or Bioshock are their favourite games. Gamers don’t even pay attention to what they consume, they merely parrot whatever their favourite influencer says. “Woke” is a meaningless term that gets thrown around whenever they don’t like something.
The Helldivers 2 Steam review page (edit: it’s comments on announcements) is covered with reviews from accounts that don’t even own the game begging Arrowhead to “not add WOKENESS!” to the game.
I provided a screenshot as an example. Obviously I’m not going to link to every fucking bigoted comment. Those were the top three comments; two of which were useful to my point.
Note that zero of these comments are complaining about diversity
They “think” adding more diversity in the form of inclusion and LGBT representation would make the game worse, since apparently that point wasn’t as clear as, say, a fucking foghorn.
Do you know what people are referring to when they use that word?
Yes. “Woke” means “anything that threatens my worldview of white masculine superiority and reminding me that non-white, non-straight, non-male people exist and should be represented in art hurts my fee-fees.”
But sure, explain how it’s really about “ethics in gaming journalism”.
I mean on the plusside, you always know that whenever anybody uses the word “woke” as if it were a real word, you can immediately add them to the blocklist or ban them. Nothing they can add has any value any more.
I edited my comment, but I was wrong in that it’s not the review page that gets swarmed but the comments on announcements that Arrowhead makes. Anyone can comment on an announcement (which makes sense, if [for example] it’s about an upcoming feature that isn’t out yet.)
People just want to play a game. Not have to go from a normal non sexualized zombie game to a now weirdly sexualized zombie game. And then they were made to be the bad guy for not wanting to play the game. If I don’t want to watch a LGB kind of movie that’s no problem because I’m not LGBT but when it comes to games I’m homophobic for not wanting to participate.
The problem is the industry thinks the fans owes it to them to play their shitty based game. We don’t have to play if we don’t want to. And it doesn’t make us non inclusive for not.
That has to be copium. If I don’t want to play the game then I don’t have to lmao be mad. Idc if hot twin sisters battle me with katanas if you do then… Don’t play?
So explain how? Otherwise it’s just ad hominem. I mean if two twin Butler shirtless 6 pack men or woman attacked me in some game with katanas that’s sexualized? I’m sorry but how horny are you? I don’t think that’s sexualizing I think thats time for me to play the game and defeat them like???
but when it comes to games I'm homophobic for not wanting to participate.
No, you're a bigot for publicly crying about it on end instead of just not buying it. No one would give a shit about you for you not buying a game. It's when you go to the forums and start crying woke.
I have not cried woke. In fact nobody cries about the wokeness or whatever bullshit they dislike in games. It’s actually quite the opposite. Where posts like this cry about people for not wanting to participate. It’s fine for me to have and even state my opinion that I’m not gay so I don’t want to play a game advertised as being a gay kind of game lmao. Especially on a post like this. If you truly didn’t give a shit then… You wouldn’t give a shit. Why respond here?
Are you meeting quotes or actually engaging with race on a substantiative level.
It’s undoubtable that a lot of race casting in recent times has been to appease audiences rather than and honest engagement with reality and irl race relations.
But the vast majority of complaints about a game being “woke” are just the inclusion of a character this a minority in some way. The complaint isn’t about how they’re included, just that they are, usually as a main or highly visible character.
I disagree… of course in countries like America you would have some outspoken actual racist n shit…
But the vast majority of people just don’t like casting for castings sake…
Nobody bitches about sigourney weaver in alien… nobody bitches about Denzel playing leading roles cos he’s black, calling it 'woke. ’
Why don’t people call that woke?
Because its obvious. When a project is hiring just to fill a quota, often…it is extremely obvious.
The vast vast vast majority of people don’t care what race, gender,sexuality you are, just as long as those things werent being taken into account when trying to get a job.
I would imagine a whole myriad of different reasons, some rational and logical and some bigoted and dunse.
And not to mention, I have seen many many many comments upset about race focused casting (over talent, ability, suitability to the role etc) and then people ask 'why are you complaining about race of gender of a fictional character."
So… they think they commentor is being racist because they actually engage with the subject.
Because this whole woke bullshit is a recent gamergate thing of the past decade or so, especially after US politics became even nuttier and "conservatives" completely started to lose their plot.
And please. Just go into the Steam forums of a game that has for example a poc woman as main character, or uses body type A & B instead of "male" & "female". There's literally countless of examples of people completely losing their shit over games, movies and shows over the recent years. Hell, even in this very comment section here we see people who think they as a white man are apparently underrepresented nowadays.
I feel like that’s just a very loud minority among those who play games. As you’ve so stated, the majority of people who play these games either do not care for politics in video games, and another subset prefer it that way.
If even the greediest of companies in the video game industry keep doing that, that means they’ve analyzed the market and having politics in video games might have between no to a positive impact on sales.
I heavily agree with this. If there’s one thing I’ve learned about video games and gamers, it’s that people who are happy with their games, are playing their games! The people who aren’t happy, are going to Reddit and the forums to bitch and moan. The anti-“woke” crowd is fueled by outrage. And that’s all it is: senseless outrage. There’s no substance to it. Let them scream into the void until they tire themselves out.
I disagree. The rule is “sex sells”, always has, always will be, period.
The people that complain about “wokeness” in games are a small but loud minority. The majority doesn’t care, hells seeing the steam achievements for some games the majority doesn’t even care to finish a game past the tutorial yet alone care about story or characters.
The problem is the approach to game design has changed. In the earlier stages of gaming, you would take a fun concept (finding perfect fits for boxes) and make it into a game (Tetris), that was all there was, Super Mario was literally called “Jump & Run Man” at one point. It was the essence of fun presented in a replayable form. Now games have to have a story, morals, relatable characters or some sort of overlaying message. This together with good gameplay can create a very good game no doubt. But each aspect has to be good on its own.
Take away the story from Last of Us and it’s essentially a 3rd person arena shooter, but it’s a good one at that. This alone would be a good selling point, add on top the story and you have an objectively good game.
But take Saint Row 5 as an example, take away the story and it’s a less than mediocre 3rd Person sandbox game, the fact that the story isn’t compelling either makes it objectively bad.
Rember the Hot/Crazy scale from His I Met Your Mother? Well there is also a Hot/Boring scale for games. If your game is boring it has to compensate by having hotter characters, if it’s fun it can get away with uglier ones. I can name countless examples where this is true.
Studios often overlook this connection. I’m all for diversification of the actual development environment but not the games themselves. It should always be fun first.
Never in my life have I heard anybody say “Are you going to get new game …? I’ve heard you can play as a black woman in this one. So cool.”
Studios then get upset because their model “Here diversity. Where money?” isn’t paying off.
It’s like not wanting to buy a cheaply made plastic valve for a boiler over a solid metal one and the company asks “Why are you not buying it? We made it blue.”
The fanbase is never going to change, because at some point we all realize that we want value for our money and often times studios spend so much time and effort making a game diverse, they forget to make it fun.
Never in my life have I heard anybody say “Are you going to get new game …? I’ve heard you can play as a black woman in this one. So cool.”
Hrm, anecdotally I have quite a lot of formerly non-gamer friends who were really hyped for say, Life is Strange: True Colors, specifically because they were excited about how Alex breaks some beauty norms and gets to flirt with Steph on top of that.
Of course, anecdotally.
But it’s important to keep in mind that we’re no longer an industry of 5 teams creating 20 games a year. There’s so many games that there is more than enough space for every game. From absolutely purist near-identityless gameplay-only designs (Which exist in droves) to huge mass-market hyper-produced open worlds all the way to purist story/feels only visual novels and experimental art pieces.
And each of these categories has more games each year than the entire market around the Gameboy time had. Gaming is insanely big now.
You’re blaming games not being fun on devs “wasting time” to ensure diversity in their games? You realize the people who work on the story and characters aren’t the same as the ones coding the game mechanics right? The two have almost nothing to do with one another. Studios aren’t forgetting to make games fun due to diversity lmao. They are having to spend a lot more man hours than they did in the past because of the advancements in development tenchology.
Never in my life have I heard anybody say “Are you going to get new game …? I’ve heard you can play as a black woman in this one. So cool.”
I have. It was more along the lines of, “Dragon Ball FighterZ has no waifus” or “there’s no one with any melanin in this game [until they found out about Nagoriyuki in Guilty Gear Strive]”. I would not be the least bit surprised if Street Fighter 6 is more popular with women than any previous entry after taking the bad male characters from previous entries and remixing them as women (Manon, Lily, A.K.I., Kimberly).
I definitely play a few horny games, and don’t recommend them to anyone. In the other hand, I have actually skipped certain games, and hated some others, because they were trying to tell an engaging story and got hung up on cringey sexualization of their female leads.
As you said, it’s all up to consumer preference. It isn’t just watch-dogging and shaming of sexualization, it’s also that there’s a lot of people that find lazy sexualization to be disengaging and hardly unique. Plenty of the time getting the characters to look unique and interesting is also a challenge; and diversity often helps with that.
No, the fanbase is regressing, but they’re also not getting products that suit their tastes. There’s a lot of stuff to play that’s different, and the people that removed go back to the dwindingly bad quality AAA Live Service slop. They’re not for us. When the AAA bubble bursts, they’ll fuck off to another form of media.
Sure, it is largely the fanbase, however I also think that the game industry seems to sometimes do somewhat of a “woke-washing”, meaning opically supporting the LGBTQIA movement because of financial, shitstorm-prevention or other reasons than just wanting to create more diverse and inclusive games.
For instance I like Hogwarts Legacy, but it also takes place in the Victorian era, and it seems to project the modern tolerant society ideals onto the wizarding world of that time.
Depicting the society as inclusive and diverse is somewhat history revisionist. If you play as a non-binary or trans person at that time, then you should have to deal with prejudice and marginalization, otherwise it is just “woke-wash” the history.
So, IMO there are some cases, especially in historic (fantasy) games, where injecting modern ideals and standards might not fit or needs to be better addressed, than just let it be cosmetic.
This makes more sense. The headline just says harassment which is generally a civil suit where you get sued but not arrested. Assault is criminal that you will be arrested over.
Rule 4: get fucked by better and cheaper products (Unreal/Godot)
Rule 5: make an obituary presentation on what went wrong (hint: it’s always management)
Unreal engine will probably do the same shit than Unity, Unreal engine might be opensource (not FOSS), I think there’s the same clauses about production royalties.
I think Godot will not win simply because Unreal is so much better for 3D games what most comercial games use. I think Godot will become the indie favourite for 2D. Where it goes from there I’m not sure. Is the revenue sharing not enough to carry the game engine? Unreal/Epic is a special case. But is Unity mismanaged so hard? It still has huge market share.
What’s left to decay? It’s dust now. Remember when Eidos used a PR firm to strongarm websites into not publishing reviews of Tomb Raider: Underworld if they were less than an 8/10 till after launch?
“That’s right. We’re trying to manage the review scores at the request of Eidos.” When asked why, the spokesperson said: “Just that we’re trying to get the Metacritic rating to be high, and the brand manager in the US that’s handling all of Tomb Raider has asked that we just manage the scores before the game is out, really, just to ensure that we don’t put people off buying the game, basically.”
That was 15 years ago, and despite the fact that Barrington Harvey went on to lie and pretend they never said that, everybody knew that kind of thing was old hat back then too. Mainstream gaming journalism is a captured industry.
Just a reminder that if Unity developers with pro licenses coming to Godot contribute even a small fraction of what they might have paid for those licenses on Unity, Godot can develop even faster.
Honestly, they should sue Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. The fact that we allow such restricted computers that can land you in prison for manipulating them is just absurd.
More realisticly Epic is just choosing their battles where they can see that they can make progress but they can’t say that.
They only need one big win. If they manage that, the rest would be much easier. As arguments will have been made and ruled. They can refer to the case against Google as precedent, making the subsequent court cases short, cheaper and/or not be necessary. If Google loses apple, Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo will all examine changing policy or settling any disagreements earlier.
Precisely, it would be a stupid waste of money to launch simultaneous lawsuits against everyone. Get one victory, then use that precedence to get settlements from the rest.
I mean don’t get me wrong, it’s absurd how locked down their stuff is, but I’m not aware of prison time for opening up consoles yet. You can get sued, like Sony vs Hotz, and get ordered to pay some outrageous restitution, but that road ends in bankruptcy, not prison. Still complete bullshit that they can bankrupt a person, but there’s no prison…yet.
That’s not necessarily a good example. He probably would’ve gotten arrested just for the modchip part, which does seem kinda ridiculous, but they were also (according to Bowser’s admission) more directly aiding piracy:
Bowser also admits he and TeamXecuter “created and supported ROM libraries” for its customers to use through websites like MaxConsole.com and rom-bank.com.
That’s shitty. I hope Valve goes down in this law suit but Gabe specifically asked for a remote deposition because he’s old and obese. Two serious factors for COVID or really any illness. Apparently that wasn’t enough to get them to allow remote deposition. What a really shit situation to put a person in.
It’s not even a valid excuse any more at this point. People can get vaccinated at their leisure against the current variants no problem, and other fat old dudes don’t get to bail on an uncomfortable situation either, this is just special treatment for the rich. Also all the accommodations that are already being made with everyone wearing masks. Also I’m sure they can open a fucking window or so for some fresh air
I might be more inclined to agree if there was some benefit to having him show up in person, but I don’t see why he can’t just attend this remotely. People get sick after being vaccinated too. Maybe is a minimal risk, but it seems like a pointless risk nonetheless.
It’s a court of law. People appear in person to ensure they are who they are, their answers are theirs and they fully own them, they aren’t being coerced or manipulated, and so on. FaceTimeing in from the bathroom at his home isn’t cutting it.
Why do the courts require an in person attendance? How is it okay for our government services to ignore technology? Imagine we still went with God’s will as proof of a crime. This is just the ignorance of the judge making someone take a day to come down and give their side. This whole thing could be done via text message. We just have a government that isn’t utilizing technology.
cause you would then have to dispatch a 3rd party audit to make sure Gabe isn’t reading from a teleprompter that his lawyers prep to answer any questions on the fly. You can prep your script “before” but not during, once you are on the stand you are on your own, subject to the court rules, etc.
Anything they haven’t been prepped on is just answered with I don’t know. So the end result is just who is the better actor? Who memorized their lines the best.
Did you followed the Debb vs Heard one? I know it’s kinda special case with lots of video and court recorded footage etc. Gabe isn’t exactly a celebrity that expose their private life, but if internal emails is on the table for discovery then it can also be very different. Cause they will just tell you “you said/wrote make a decision here from this email” then start off that. Like you said who is a better actor? Can you suddenly remember details with which “partial” quote are referenced without context from email 6 months ago for your argument? And then suddenly don’t remember any details making a decision 2~3 weeks ago? From neuroscience, our memory is pretty unreliable as we can fill the gap all we want. But it’s court case just how the judge/jury believed what part they saw/hear.
I hope you understand the principle of putting down names and/or title in email for paper trails is a thing, you don’t really think Valve is a “flat” structure as marketed, right? I’ve consider myself lucky that I didn’t run into much political or ethical drama thing for my career, but simply put names down and confirm the decision in writing dodge me quite a couple big bullets.
Yes but again what do those names do? They simply point a stake holder. You may put them on there stand but everyone has the ability to their 5th amendment rights. So again it doesn’t really matter and comes down to whose better under pressure which seems like an unfair justice system. Specially considering it’s a form of interrogation to force someone up on a stage and ask them a bunch of questions with tons of pressure.
I didn’t design that system, and I think it is this way because in the past without forensic evidence, the witness role basically put the burden to people who are testifying or on the stand for questions. That’s why nowadays when the suits wants to push shady things they go off record cause they don’t want to keep any evidence. It’s up to the minions to smart up to make sure you cover your own ass.
And, sometimes company make or break during trials. I don’t want to see value flop, but I also think 30% is a lot if you don’t even use steam features. (here I mean you only publish on steam, but you don’t use their DRM/Friend/Matchmaking, workshop, lobby, etc. But if a dev do indeed use those backend service I think it’s justified. )
He’s required to wear a mask. He can’t wear one while giving the deposition though. A remote deposition isn’t different than an in person one. So this argument falls flat. Why require a person to travel if we have the technology to not? Why did we even do all of this Internet building if our government services won’t use it? Technology is supposed to make our lives easier. The 80 year old judge is clearly behind the technical times and doesn’t want to learn a skill that should be required at this point.
Counterpoint: Cardinal George Pell tried to pull the same move in a child sex abuse case. Here’s Tim Minchin’s Come Home (Cardinal Pell) for your viewing pleasure.
Usually consolidation is done by expensive buy outs (which this one was). And if the company is public, the CEO’s next goal (since it now has valuable IP and has eliminated a competitor), is to make that money back and do so fast (see Disney with Marvel, Star Wars, etc.). This means exploiting its newest IP, farting out something that a known audience / fanbase will show up for (again - unfortunately - see Disney).
This doesn’t necessarily guarantee shitty outcomes (see Andor in the case of Star Wars being bought by Disney, see Overwatch after Activision bought Blizzard), but usually it comes with the territory of new bosses eventually trying to squeeze more value out of the IPs and team resources they purchased (see “Secret Invasion” by Marvel under Disney, and see “Overwatch 2” by Blizzard under Activision).
Depending on the company, they’ll also do MASS layoffs to “eliminate redundancies” - which in theory means firing people whose jobs encompass the exact same practice, but in reality means a bunch of people are about to have their work load doubled.
The people at the very top of the bought out company will get HUGE piles of cash, plus some requirements they stay on board usually for some amount of time… and then most of them will probably bail the moment their stock “vests” - allowing them to start up new companies and begin the cycle of “make stuff, then get bought out by big company” all over again.
Rarely a key person stays on board for some time (see Carmack with Facebook / Oculus for example), but eventually even the most passionate dev sees that their new bosses will never fully get behind them in the way they were able to do when they were not owned by said parent company.
From a broader “industry-wide” perspective, it’s probably not great either, because the mass layoffs at a gigantic well-regarded company means more workers competing across a mostly non-unionized industry for less jobs (and if you’re just starting, now you’ve got to compete with someone who has “Blizzard” on their resume).
Worse still - because the video game industry is already pretty exploitative of its workers, since it (like VFX) mostly came into being after the Reagan era completely destroyed the public perception of unions, the jobs everyone will be competing for will just have even worse conditions since soooooo many (younger folks especially) dream of working on video games (until they get their first industry job, get a few years under their belt, and been there for more than one studio closure and decide that - if they ever want to enjoy having time with their family, owning a home, and living somewhere for more than 5 years, they probably should change jobs to some relevant field in software dev that pays better, has less hours, and is overall more stable).
One thing missed is the fresh set of eyes on old IP.
Some of the older games / IP that is being bought over has had no or little interest with the old group, so the new company may have a team inside that says “hey we use that now”.
It doesn’t always work. But it’s better than nothing.
One thing missed is the fresh set of eyes on old IP.
Right - like the Andor example.
I feel like Andor was a result of someone talented taking advantage of the Disney Star Wars money hose that got lucky that the corporate Eye of Sauron (aka a bunch of producers and company execs) weren’t watching them too closely.
On the opposite side, look at what Microsoft did to Halo (under Don Mattrick’s leadership, btw). They decided they didn’t want to pay Bungie a nice fat thank you in their potential contract renewal, instead decided to keep the Halo IP, spin up a studio with only a handful of key people and then people who had no idea what Halo was for their LITERAL FLAGSHIP IP.
In general, I am skeptical of how companies will handle IP after big buyouts / corporate consolidation. That way when an Andor comes along, I’m pleasantly surprised instead of finally satisfied as a result of high expectations.
Layoffs have already hit this and other industries, including Microsoft, regardless of buyouts, and since this deal is fresh, it will likely happen again in the near future. But there's no need for them to squeeze value out of what they bought. They can revive dormant IPs just by making sure they run on modern platforms and putting them on Game Pass. That alone is a tremendous amount of value that Activision couldn't get regardless of how much they squeezed.
And a lot of people who leave or are let go in these situations go on to form new studios. If you think about it too, it doesn't make much sense that the jobs would disappear. The industry will support a certain number of games being produced, and someone's got to make them still.
A worse outcome to me still seems to me to be a world where Sony is uncontested in its console space.
All of what you said is true, but usually consolidation results in a net negative overall. It’s why we (at least used to) have anti-trust laws. Companies - regardless of industry - tend to be monopolistic when they can get away with it.
However, I will say that your point about “reviving dormant IPs” is just another way of framing (albeit much more charitably) what I described previously. Capitalizing on well-known or well-regarded IPs with built-in large fan bases who will likely buy based on name recognition rather than what its Metascore is or how well it runs according to technical tests run by Digital Foundry.
Also, I agree with you that as long as Sony and Nintendo exist in the console space, the industry can probably endure. That sort of consolidation would probably result in some really bad shit. Price gouging, no more owning games - just licensing with shaky terms that they can change at any time, required subscriptions, upgrades, more egregious micro-transactions… ugh… as long as there are major competitors, they will do things like this every time one of the other one makes a greed-driven decision that pisses off the consumers.
I just wish we had the number of big game companies we had in the 90s and 2000s. There used to be dozens of pretty big name independently owned game dev studios in the city where I am, and now - among those still even open - I can’t think of a single one still independently owned. The only 2 big ones I know of now in the area are subsidiaries of 2 major giant companies.
Trusts would be a very extreme case of consolidation, and if Microsoft were to qualify (they're close), it's certainly not because of its presence in video games.
I don't think I'm being charitable at all when I say these old games are dormant IPs. Star Wars Episode 3 was only a handful of years old when Disney bought Lucasfilm, and they were still making all sorts of merch and other products. Actually dormant IPs would be things like Metal Arms and Tenchu. They're not powerhouse franchises, but they're fodder for porting to modern platforms and bolstering Game Pass. Activision is reluctant to revive any of this stuff because it's money that could be spent on Call of Duty.
As to your last paragraph, it was inevitable, but we've been slowly trending toward getting that diversity back in the industry. It may not hit your town specifically, but the Devolvers, Paradoxes, TinyBuilds, Embracers, and Anna Purnas of the world are finding success catering to the customers the mammoth AAA companies abandoned.
It's all for game pass. They want to lock people into their favourite games with a subscription, that's where the money is for Xbox at the moment, all these buyouts are for securing their service as 'the one to want' before others clamber into the space. So I suspect things at ABK will continue as they have been doing for the most part, but with the games on game pass and maybe some more Xbox ports.
The interface gets a little better and that’s it basically? (Alternatively: They try to spin a social medium around it and fail somewhat and succeed somewhat?)
big published reviews don’t mean anything to me and I’m surprised they do to most people. everything is an 8-10 out of 10. how do people not find an issue with that
The only conclusion to make is that the video game industry has matured to a point where only masterpieces are released. Bad games just don’t exist anymore.
I think you can explain much of the lack of lower scores by the fact that the games that would get lower scores are also likely to be ignored by just about any established reviewer.
There are thousands of games released every year that a site like IGN will never review. Would you find it valuable for IGN to scour Steam or the Switch eShop for terrible games just to use more of the score scale?
Find an independent critic you respect and listen to the tenor of why they say a game is good. Or ignore critics and develop your own taste and sense of which studios, directors, artists, composers, or otherwise will compel you to buy a game.
i use word of mouth mostly but its not that all critics are bad, just what seems like most, but if you find that you consistently align with a critics opinion I’d trust them
Exactly, it feels like 50/100 is the baseline and 75/100 is mediocre. 75/100 tells me I have to be a fan of the genre to enjoy it. This rating inflation really shows how dependent reviewers are. This is one of the reasons I like organisations like Stiftung Warentest instead of depending on some biased product comparison blogs.
You may notice that this parallels the american school grading system to a T. Most major gaming review sites and such are done by americans that spent anywhere between 4-10+ years with that being the what grading/reviewing/scoring was done in almost every interaction they ever had past childhood, there’s no wonder it’s the standard here even if it’s changed the scoring paradigm.
Exactly this. 50/100 looks like an F, because that’s what it would be on a school paper. Often we’d even be given points out of a hundred just like that. So giving a 50 to a middling/okay game feels really harsh, vs 70 (aka a C) or 80 (B).
Even gollum, by far the buggiest and most boring AAA game to come out in a few years was given a 64% by pc gamer. At least gamespot was honest and gave them a 2/10
gamesindustry.biz
Ważne