it’s incredible that pitchford is still allowed to talk. there should be a bot that auto-responds “shut the fuck up” to everything he says, tweets, or even thinks.
hey I’ll let you price this 80 bucks if you fully refund me for the scam that was borderlands 1. fucking unfinished piece of shit, i can’t believe i played that game for multiple hours hoping it would improve beyond the first.
and later i learned that i was completely right to quit that shit because the bullshit throwaway story of this “rpg” doesn’t even conclude properly. it literally ends like Geraldo Rivera’s fucking Al Capone vault.
fuck you pitchford. shut the fuck up and go back to “storing porn for the purposes of researching magic tricks” or whatever. literally never speak again.
There is a diverse inclusive story by someone with an underrepresented experience who partially lived that story and has a unique perspective and ideas.
And then there is a “diverse” story constructed by an all white male board of execitives who think “wokeness” is trendy.
Movies like I Saw The TV Glow, Parasite, Sinners, etc are fantastic “woke” stories coming from the former group.
The latter group comes up with stories like “Ghostbusters but all women” or “Oceans 11 but all women” which I think should rightly be criticized.
The problem with Ghostbusters (2016) didn’t have anything to do with having an all female cast, it was more about the timing of the jokes, the lack of slow quiet scenes to build atmosphere, and the effects being crappy unmemorable CGI
The problem with Ghostbusters (2016) didn’t have anything to do with having an all female cast
That’s what I just said.
If women arent the ones greenlighting these movie, directing them, or even writing the script, how could they possibly be the problem?
I listed a bunch of actually good “woke” media. They were made by a trans and black creators but if you want examples of women being funny look at Veep, the Good Place, 30 Rock, Parks and Rec, etc.
The problem as I pointed out is a predominately white male board member of business grads who feel having an all female cast is all they need to market a movie, so they can skip giving a shit about the product.
it was more about the timing of the jokes, the lack of slow quiet scenes to build atmosphere, and the effects being crappy unmemorable CGI
Because Sony can’t make a movie to save their lives. Look at Morbius, Kraven, Madame Web, etc.
There was a time in the early 00s/10s where society said “any representation is good representation”.
Movies like Black Panther and Get Out were inherently going to do well because they catered to an audience demand that had been long underrepresented.
Nowadays there are actually good movies in competition. We dont have to settle for bad representation. If you want a horror movie that’s an allegory for not transitioning you can watch it, if you want a vampire movie where the vampires are an allegory for racism and white exploitation that’s in theaters right now.
Spotting background character 1 and 2’s gay kiss in Disney’s reboot of Buzz Lightyear feels a lot less exciting to me.
When a bunch of white board members decide to make a movie “for women” and resurrect a dead IP and start forcing a script, that will be inherently more shallow than going to Amy Poehler and asking if she has an idea to pitch.
This is why Marvel succeeded in giving Ryan Coogler a higher degree of creative control for Black Panther than Sony did for any of the female cast in Ghostbusters.
While I’m enjoying diverse films like Sinners and I Saw the TV Glow, if you’re more interested in Disney’s live action remake of The Little Mermaid, or Disney’s live action remake of Snow White, go right ahead and watch it. I’m not saying you can’t.
But the idea you have to “support it” is nothing but marketing. I don’t think you’re really supporting diverse stories, I think you’re supporting corporations who exploit diversity and intentionally rage bait the worst racists imaginable for free marketing instead of investing the areas that you point out would make the movie better.
You’re not going to play Witcher 4 because you don’t like the games, I’m not going to play because my PC is aging and I feel new GPUs are so ridiculously overpriced, I don’t want to replace my RTX 3060 ti anytime soon.
For real, the battle mechanics are just so clunky and slow. And the magic is just 5 times the same spell but with different colors.
Not to mention that you are shoehorned into a character that you don’t get to decide, and the NPCs laugh at you if you choose dialogue options that don’t fit this characters mold.
Rather play an actual RPG than this action adventure akin to Tomb Raider.
I feel like we keep seeing this headline. “AAA studio says current prices can’t support current budgets”
I almost never buy games at $60. I buy everything on sale, and there are constantly sales and way more games than I can play. They can charge whatever they want, I personally will be paying less.
Will the market bear $80 games? Maybe. I feel like a better strategy would be to reign in scope and budget and sell games at prices most people can afford. But who knows?
Yeah, I joke with my friends that game quality is inversely correlated with install size. 100GB+ open world or multiplayer game? Probably mid. 50MB indie game? Probably stays installed for the next 10 years.
are they still working on it? yes? then it will come out when it comes out. There’s enough content in my backlog to keep me occupied for another 5 years at least, and more new games release every day. I can wait.
I would pay $10 a month (ongoing, MRR) to be able to fly their home base ship to different asteroids and occasionally have the bugs invade it. I would play the fuck out of that game.
[ For years we’ve seen an encouraging pattern. Hit new releases are excellent at generating new first-time purchasers, and we’ve tried to build many platform features to encourage those new users to stick around, find more great games, and play with friends. To gather data illustrating the effectiveness of that approach, we went all the way back to 2023 and identified the biggest 20 releases of that year. We looked at every new first-time purchaser generated by those products (that is, an account making a purchase, or redeeming a Steam key, for the first time) for a total of 1.7 million new users. Then we followed that cohort of new users. The stats below represent what those players did from January 2024 through early March 2025.
…
That cohort of players has gone on to spend $20 million on in-game transactions across hundreds of other games—plus another $73 million on premium games and DLC across thousands more products. ]
So they are not average gamers, more like new blood in steam, and the numbers are for money they spent additional after the reason they came to steam.
just did the math, I’ve averaged about $165/yr on steam, with very little (though not none) microtransactions. like maybe less than $50 total in 15 years.
I think I probably have a similar average on my 18 yr old account, except the only microtransactions on my account are credits from selling any hats, skins and duplicate weapons I unlocked for free in TF2 and CS 😅
gamesradar.com
Ważne