Most I paid for a game subscription was the $1 3 month game pass. I don’t see myself paying for a regular priced month subscription like $10/month. I’d rather spend that buying a month of Humble monthly or a discounted game.
i reduced my plan because of the price hike. Fuck that noise. If the basic plan goes up too much more ill cancel that too. Online isn’t worth too much more than what they have it set at now.
Not sure if this is how it’s supposed to work, but someone bought me premium and I downloaded like all the good games I could fit on my drives. Now I can seemingly play them all without a membership, as it ran out months ago… so that’s neat. Seems like a loophole they might close though.
Non-endemic companies such as Google and Amazon are among the biggest threats to the games industry.
That’s according to former PlayStation boss Shawn Layden, who shared his thoughts on the future of games during the keynote at last week’s GamesIndustry.biz Investment Summit in Seattle.
The irony is palpable throughout this entire article.
They only feel it would be dangerous because they have the capital to drain talents to do experimental things while not care about the fall outs of closing subsidiaries or abandoning projects. It could also drive up developer cost and make the business more risky.(IMO, the developers are getting paid in peanuts compare to what the big publishers made. Even after considering flopped projects.)
The danger lies in once people get used to the new payscale, if big capital consider it’s not that profitable, then the better talents may not keep staying or heading toward this industry. Also less loan/venture awarded to companies doing projects not passing the “market research” phase.
Yes, and lastly Tencents also don’t like competitions bidding their potential acquisition targets.
Even ignoring he’s now working for freaking Tencent, how far are we supposed to go? Even his former company Sony was technically “non-endemic” for video games before the 90s. So was Microsoft.
Nintendo was selling playing cards long before video games, and Namco was building mall coin-op rides before arcade machines. Though I guess those two and Sony were at least in the entertainment business. But in any case they weren’t created as video game companies (of course given when they were created, they couldn’t).
Where tf the anti trust at? It’s an easy solution to a trivial problem. How do we stop a few companies from controlling everything??? Uhhh… make it illegal???
Not me - the moment when buying a game outright is no longer an option is the moment when I stop paying for video games. I already have a large library on Steam (1,700+), GoG (400+), and I’m not planning on buying any Playstation or Xbox products. I’ve never paid for Xbox game pass, or PS plus, nor do I plan to. They can scheme all day long, hike the prices every week, I already buy games only if they’re on a really deep discount or in a bundle. Never paid more than 30 bucks for a game, and I could count on one of my hands how many I paid more than 20 bucks for.
I do, of course, realize that I’m in the minority, but hopefully more people will realize how big of a scam these subscription services are.
I don’t know, I don’t think the PS Plus one is a scam. I subscribed to the mid tier one when it was cheaper for a whole year than to buy a game I wanted to play that was included with it. I’ve played a good half dozen to dozen games in the year I’ve had it. I feel like I’ve definitely got my money’s worth out of it.
I was mostly referring to the last part of the article where the author explains the entire long-term plan behind the subscription services - first they offer a large variety of games for a low price, then they squeeze the customers for every single penny after they’ve cornered the market.
See how Netflix work out their hike etc? I don’t think it would continue to work in their favor to meet the profit/sub count projection to make their stocker holder happy.
the moment when buying a game outright is no longer an option is the moment when I stop paying for video games.
That moment will not come. That would mean that every single indie developer had come under the umbrella of such subscription services and not one bigger actor would want to try to differentiate from the competition.
Gamepass isn’t a scam right now in my view. I’m able to get 50 day passes for 7 bucks right now. Once gamepass starts being more expensive than buying the games I want I’ll just go back to doing that.
Once game pass starts being more expensive than buying the games I want, I'll just go back to doing that
You may not have that option. The business model here is to burn cash, get consumers used to gamepass, then get games onto gamepass exclusively (likely in exchange for higher payouts from the service). Once we are at that point, which may be years away, prices will rise and there won't be another avenue to play most games.
This is the model right now for shows, and some movies, they are produced for streaming services and are only available on those services.
Most games already don't get physical releases. All that needs to happen to eliminate choice is that gamepass makes publishers a better offer than Steam - then there isn't a digital release either.
I think that kind of action is what would get regulators on Microsoft’s back which is why they started selling games on third-party platforms like Steam. Could be wrong though.
They are playing with fire… most games don’t require computer level graphics/cpu power. If they aren’t careful they will lose their shirt to mobile gaming and console gaming will turn into an unpopular niche thing of the past.
Is there any reason to follow game journalism outlets anymore? Reading some positive/negative Steam reviews and watching some gameplay footage on its own gives a really good impression of what a game is like IMO.
I haven’t followed professional outlets for a long time. It’s pretty obvious most of them do not have enough time to give a proper review to these massive, 120+ hour long games. I used to read Computer Gaming World. Their reviewers would often mention that their rules required them to complete the game. Most of the reviews I see today, they don’t even necessarily get the whole fuckin’ game in their review copy. Just look at BG3.
Phenomenal game, with a solid story, incredible characters, fun game play, and just… Bugs. Lotta bugs. Especially after the first act. You might not even realize you are getting them because so many are that things that should happen, don’t. The reviews for it clearly only covered the first, most polished act. And even then, they didn’t actually mention bugs there and while it’s the most polished, it is still far from perfect. As time goes on and more people push further into the game, now those same review outlets put out editorials reporting on players bitching about the bugs on social media. Things that should have been covered in their own official reviews in the first damn place.
If all they’re going to do is write a bunch of bullshit they were likely paid to say, and then rely on users to generate more “news” content for them, I’m just going to stick with going straight to other players. There are still plenty that think for themselves and give honest, detailed descriptions of the game while trying to limit their personal opinions and bias. I want to be told how the thing actually is and make my own mind up based on my opinions; reviews can be objective.
Sounds like the real problem is publishers not actually finishing their games before release, so even if reviewers did try to play the whole thing, they couldn’t. The switch to digital downloads (over pressed media) has created an opportunity to do more with a game, but the reality is that it’s simply made games more expensive (since there is no resale market) and, worse, created an entire generation of game developers and managers who think that the launch date product is like a rough draft copy of their book report for Freshman English.
A lot of the article is focused on how games journalism has adapted to meet the current business environment (read advertising). Gaming is certainly not alone in that. Newspapers were hit a long time ago, and we've seen the same issues there too.
I'm curious -- what value do most people get from games journalism? Would people really miss if pcgamer, kotaku, or eurogamer just disappeared?
I'd really love to see a detailed balance sheet for some of these orgs to see what the actual operating costs are and how much is going to exec salaries.
People always claim they wanna see reviews before they buy their games, it’s the anthem of the anti-pre-orderer. Surely some of those reviews would come from games journalists.
The problem though is that it’s not sustainable to give away your content for free. You have to get advertisers to pay you and most people interested in games journalism are probably gonna have ad blockers, so then you have to fall back to whoever will pay you. You also have to avoid getting on a publishers bad side as a smaller journalist, or you’ll be black listed and your career will be over. So what can you do besides take money to fudge some reviews?
This is the problem with all free news content also, by the way. Somebody’s gonna pay for it, if it’s not you then it’s the people who want their opinions to be the prevailing one.
The only one I really value is Digital Foundry. I like how they break down games technically and give insight on how to get the most out of them through settings and whatnot.
But outside of that, I generally trust user reviews more.
Stuff like this is why I never buy new games. Not only can you not trust the critics, but players get so blinded by hype and buyers remorse that they’ll ignore everything bad about the games they love.
It’s always wiser to wait for the hype to die down and see what the retrospective consensus is
I wrote reviews(early 2000) during the late magazine era and even back then there were taboos about local influential company’s releases.(they only sign import deal and sell/distribute games locally.) Cause they survive on the ad money instead of subscription or individual purchases. Modern website sucks even more cause you made pennies for each view and if you don’t have something that covers enough contents to drive views, you will be at the mercy of promotion partners, same for the youtuber/streamer/influencer.
I mostly write review/walk through for import games, as there was usually a couple months delay for localization, even had contacts with local publisher that consult with group of writers about maybe which game to sign and import. The US/Japan publisher aren’t exactly nice guys you know, they will ask you to sign multiple games, including the games you know might not sell well as part of the deal. It’s a risky business and if companies that import games will try to influence review scores, you know how desperate the publisher will try to defend their “investment”.
When it comes to movies and audience scores, sure, look at the rotten tomatoes score or whatever. But everyone should realize that the average score of EVERY CRITIC is just going to be a useless number.
Not only that but reviewers who represent entire companies like the people at IGN and elsewhere aren’t giving an honest opinion. I know this because a few of them have given their honest opinion before. They got fired for low scores.
This is the reason that I enjoy watching reviews from people like ACG or SkillUp. They don’t need to give a score because their opinion isn’t a number. Enjoyability isn’t a number. Both of those reviewers enjoy games slightly different than I do, but when I watch their reviews I get a sense of if I will enjoy them.
Seriously if you go to outlets who give scores on games commonly, stop. Very little time is put into choosing these numbers and they reflect nothing about enjoying a game for you personally. Go watch a review from ACG or SkillUp. Outlets like IGN or PCGamer can’t hold a candle to these guys.
They could easily all be giving their honest opinion at IGN: if the reviewers who tend to like everything are the ones who don’t get fired, the output of mostly positive (or sometimes groupthink negative) reviews would be the same, even if individual reviewers never lied.
Take a read of this summary (by IGN) of their Madden 22 review:
“ Madden NFL 22 is a grab bag of decent – if frequently underwhelming – ideas hurt by poor execution. Face of the Franchise, to put it mildly, is a mess. Homefield advantage is a solid addition, but it doesn’t quite capture the true extent of real on-field momentum swings. The new interface is an eyesore, and the new presentation is cast in a strange and unflattering shade of sickly green. It’s smoother and marginally more refined, but in so many ways it’s the same old Madden. In short, if you’re hoping for a massive leap forward for the series on the new generation of consoles (or on the old ones), you’re apt to be disappointed”
Now, I want you to read that and ask what you’d rate it based on this info (or the whole review).
IGN has a scale approximately this: 10. Masterpiece 9. Excellent 8. Great 7. Good 6. Okay 5. Mediocre
I don’t think I need to tell you that the user reviews for this game don’t even reach mediocre. Not to mention the gambling inclusion that IGN doesn’t take seriously in any sports game it reviews. But IGN still called Madden 22 a 6 or an “okay” game.
I’m not saying they’re lying necessarily but the result is the same. The honest critiques are ignored to keep receiving review codes. That score should be left out entirely but they refuse because it drives clicks. It’s a joke.
This is just one example of how boiling down a review to a number is flawed. My favorite reviewers of games in general have been Matthewmatosis and Mandalore Gaming. IIRC neither of them provides a final score of any sort. Even whether a game is “recommended” or not may come with some caveats depending on what you’re looking for in a game.
Does Starfield’s narrative cast Space Britain as the evil empire and climax with you hunting down and killing King Charles, who has been kept alive as a Futurama-like head in a jar?
I’ve only got a couple hours in but if doesn’t I’m disappointed! Keep my space tea tax free!
I was going to consider Assassin’s Creed Mirage on PC instead of PS5. Then they announced it wouldn’t be available on Steam. Now I won’t consider it on PC and likely won’t get it at all in any format.
There are reasons PC gaming is still stupid, and it’s mostly various companies fault.
Yeah that’s on Ubisoft. Third party launchers are always stupid. I bought Splinter Cell Blacklist a while ago and couldn’t get it to act right with their stupid Ubisoft connect or Uplay or whatever so I just returned it.
But the worst is how I bought splinter cell conviction years ago via steam, and can’t even play it anymore because of how they shittily implemented their DRM/launcher. Not buying any more games from them. Used to be my favorite dev back in the day.
gamesindustry.biz
Gorące