Too bad my Dualsense started drifting less than 8 months after purchasing… it’s just been sitting in a drawer ever since. I liked it, but I feel it was a waste of money.
I'm all for people buying what they enjoy playing, so if someone genuinely enjoys CoD I'm excited for them that they get some new stuff to play.
What I don't get is the constant group of people buying it every year and complaining. Like, guys, if you don't like the product you're buying, stop buying the next product from the same place until they fix what you hate about it.
There's literally tens of thousands of video games out there. You'll be fine if you don't play one of the most creatively bankrupt franchises in the industry, I promise.
DMZ in the last iteration of CoD was the most fun game that I’ve played in a long time - despite the bugs.
Zombies mode in MW3 is also good fun but it irks that I paid money for this game and it’s buggier than DMZ which it’s evidently based on, and they’ve had a year to fix it.
As someone who uses gold to buy WoW tokens for both game time and shop credit to make other Blizzard purchases, I have a hard time getting upset over this. I’ve been playing the game without spending money for years, and tokens are also how I buy both WoW expansions and other Blizzard games. Asking me to pay money for a month of sub time every few years seems reasonable, especially if this change makes it even the slightest bit annoying/harder for bot accounts.
The WoW token wasn’t introduced until WoD, so if you played that long ago it wouldn’t have been an option. If you’re ever looking to jump in again though, it’s definitely a useful system if you like to make gold in game.
As long as it’s a one-time thing I can’t get too annoyed by it.
I just hope it doesn’t turn into a frequent thing, and it’s hard not to be skeptical when the token/battle.net credit system has only become more restricted over the years.
True, if it turned into a situation where you had to sub with money for a month every time you wanted to redeem a token or something, that would definitely lessen the value for me. I’d still say it was worth it because I could use the tokens for expansions and other games, but not everyone may have the same opinion.
But somebody else has spent the real money to buy a token. The only justification for the concept is, that it allows people with less time and more money to balance things with people with more time and less money, in an effort to curb the expansive illicit gold trading that happens otherwise (and still does).
Without the motivation of the people with less money and more time, to afford playing for free, the whole concept is weakened and the token sellers are more inclined to go back to illicit gold farmers.
I guess gold farming bots were too self-sustaining? Blizzard really wanted to make sure they were getting their pound of flesh out of the exchange?
I just can’t imagine this mattering in any other instance. It’s not like you were realistically farming the gold with the free trial, this is a weird change solely to prevent theoretical abuse.
Free trials can’t farm gold anyway because they’re capped to 1k gold, so this really does only impact bot accounts for the most part. There’s likely a small number of people who use tokens because they otherwise couldn’t afford to play, but I expect that’s not terribly common.
From the article, it indicates you’ll just need to have bought something since 2017 to avoid this wave. I can’t imagine someone has been playing exclusively free since WoD while buying the expansions, but it sounds like just paying for the next xpac with money will be enough.
Oh, I’ve been doing that. This is a hot topic on the big gold-making Discord server, and there are over 10,000 people in there (and that’s just English-speaking players who even know about and opted-in to said Discord server).
No, Blizzard makes an extra $5 a month on any subscription bought with gold.
This seems intended to create an extra hurdle for people managing a large number of accounts in the hopes of making that kind of operation less profitable.
I’m gonna be really cynical here and say they’re hoping people sign up to auto sub which they forgot to cancel.
Was a long time wow played and back before tokens were a thing it was pretty straightforward to just pay for 1 month only of game time. I stopped playing midway through baf and at that point I mostly bought game time with gold but on the few occasions I did pay for 1 month it wasn’t that easy to find the 1 month game time, like the nonauto sub. Then I fired up the game like right before the last xpac, can’t remember the name now and it was near fucking impossible to find game time in the store, it kept trying to get me to buy an auto sub.
That seems a bit ridiculous since you can immediately cancel it if you’re only in it for one month. It seems like they want to link payments to account so they can ban all accounts of specific boters at the same time that are on one payment source. I’m going to guess that they also want to ban people who are using other regions accounts. Like Chinese and Korean users who play on the American realms. If they have a contract coming up for someone else in China it would be a big push they would need to get the Chinese players back off the American realms.
I don't think they did. The genre could do that all by itself regardless of Halo or CoD. It also feels like there can only be so many creative weapons. Ratchet & Clank reused the same handful of templates after only a handful of entries.
We used to have flak cannons, tri-barreled rocket launchers, railguns-a-plenty, and rifles that straight-up shot everything from super-heated(and occasionally explosive) circular saw blades to literal lightning bolts. What do we have now? Licensed out dime-a-dozen replicas of the same like 30 weapons that keep spilling innocent blood in the hands of irl barbarians; I refuse to believe that would’ve just been ‘the end game anyway’ assuming a world without military spectacle as a genre. Not knowing how much Pentagon money goes into military spectacle.
At least Halo tries to look like it didn’t jump off the weapons rack at your nearest military outpost’s armory. Fails about half the time, but it at least tries.
The sci-fi games that didn't just jump off the weapons rack gave us assault rifles with chainsaws on the end of them. Ratchet & Clank has no connection to the military industrial complex and gave us the same handful of templates within only about 5 years of the franchise. There's just only so much you can do with a weapon that's essentially a gun. Maybe you get one really unique-feeling weapon every game, but you can't get an entire arsenal of that every game.
I’d have paid 70 bucks for the zombies mode alone which is all I wanted it for anyways. Team deathmatch and domination are so boring compared to game modes like warzone, DMZ, and the new zombies.
Considering it’s the first CoD I’ve purchased since Infinite Warfare, I probably won’t. I haven’t even bought a new game since Mass Effect: Legendary Edition. I’m a patient gamer 99% of the time, I just love the idea of an open world zombies game and it was absolutely worth the money on that premise alone.
How does the open world affect it? One of the reasons I liked Zombies mode in the earlier CoDs was being able to do quick maneuvers through tight spaces and really getting the game down to a muscle memory to see how far you could go.
Well there’s definitely still places where you can flex those muscles! There’s nests that you have to go into buildings and clear out, which still requires you be able to dodge and loop through rooms. Getting stuck in a room that doesn’t have a window to jump through or a second door is a death sentence unless your gun is way over-leveled for the zone you’re in.
There’s also a couple other mission types that are “hold out” style that you have to perform in similar ways.
The open world does affect it though, in my opinion for the better. The map has three zones of increasingly difficult enemies (the ones from Cold War Outbreak are back) so you can pick how far you want to go on any given match. The goal isn’t to hold out for as long as you can until you die (though you can if you want) but instead the goal is to find and extract items that will allow you to upgrade your gear quicker (all pack-a-punch, rarity upgrades, and perk colas reset on extract) so that you can drop in and gear up fast for a high level set of missions that will earn you higher level equipment and upgrades. Including schematics so you can craft the upgrades eventually and have a little bit more to roll with from the get go.
So basically, perk sodas, P-A-P, and rarity are extractable items that you can stash and stock up (in addition to weapons) and the gameplay loop is either in building your character out for high level missions or acquiring a backstock of critical perks and upgrades so you can drop in and upgrade immediately to go straight into the hot zone. If you survive, you have to extract. Which can be done either at the least dangerous zone but based on the given match’s randomness could also be in a higher risk zone as well.
Extracting is just mowing down hordes of zombies while trying to defend the helicopter until it takes off.
It’s functionally DMZ+Outbreak, but the itch it scratches is closer to L4D than old school zombies. If you really like the idea of getting to high waves and pretzels with a ray gun it probably won’t be enjoyable, but for someone who’s always wanted an open world zombies game done right, it’s perfect.
bit wait, I do remember another differentiator. Dying light heavily discouraged frequent use of guns, preferring you to use melee. If you used guns too much, it would spawn in a bunch of 28-day-later zombies that would absolutely fuck your shit up in groups.
It requires a surprising amount of digging to really try and figure out what started all this, but from my rudimentary research, it seems to me that this is a problem that's existed for a few games now and has steadily gotten worse, stemming from high DLC prices and an equally high number of, potentially game breaking, bugs, across multiple games that don't get fixed as it's very quickly on to the next one for CA.
There's rumination that it's because the studio is constantly working on multiple games at the same time and just shoves everything out without having the proper time to go back and make sure everything works like it should.
This seems like it came to a head with a recent DLC pack's price increase while containing equal or lesser content than Warhammer 2 DLC, which was cheaper on release. This prompted review bombing from the community, which prompted a response from one of the lead devs, Rob, who basically said (paraphrasing here) "Costs are up, there's no good time to do this, but we have to raise the DLC prices and challenge ourselves to make the content better to match".
Turns out the community doesn't think the content is better to match. CA doubled down on that position, and here we are.
Right, I can't remember the Creator's name, but apparently they supported a boycott and got banned for it, removing access to their workshop account as well, and they created one of, if not the most subscribed mod for the game. Maybe you know that, I haven't played Total War since Rome 1, so I'm way out of touch
Cheap money (in the form of loans) has reduced. This means that investors are suddenly putting a lot more pressure on the top. In good companies, this is dealt with by the leadership team. Unfortunately, a lot just let the shit roll downhill.
There is also the issue of compartmentalization. In larger companies, the people dealing with the complaints have little to do with the people who actually need to change things to fix the root cause. This leads to the schizophrenic/sociopathic behaviour we see. The mouth has very little idea what the hands are doing.
I think customers forget about the, like what, 20-25% inflation in the last few years. Either they f+ck over their employees or they have to charge more
Everytime there's a change in pricing that was already a set precedent there's a hurdle to overcome like this, and it becomes extremely important to handle the situation delicately since 95% of possible ways to handle it could go very wrong.
I feel like the only way to really deal with it correctly if it truly must happen because of rising costs is to just admit that, like they did, but then stick to that and only that message, and just wait for the community to come around. If it's possible to provide any sorts of even vague math around sales and cost to produce this content then that context would help people understand, but there's almost no way to change a precedent for the worse on the consumer end without some amount of backlash.
Well it’s not very complex. A software company has a lot of its cost coming from wages. If the employees see their cost of living increasing by 20%, they’ll expect to see their wages rise to compensate.
Consumers will bitch, but eventually accept the higher cost of the software
That inflation is a large part of why consumers are sensitive to this price increase. This is fundamentally a purchase with disposable income. Inflation reduces the disposable Income of the population until (if ever) wages catch up with inflation.
Or they could lower their corporate profit margin so neither is necessary. Don’t make excuses for them and act like there’s not a huge amount of money being hoovered up by profit.
Except they have been increasing the prices this whole time... Most of the prior race packs which focused on 2 factions from Total Warhammer 2 were 10 dollars per pop. Hell the last 2 dlcs were so much bang for the buck since they basically made a pair of 19$ dlc obsolete (yes, with the new pack you only get 1 lord each but having 1 lord but a whole new faction for 10 bucks is good value and that doesn't even count that you also get a number of units from a different faction as well). So Total Warhammer 3 comes out and to say it was a fucking mess at launch is an understatement. Their first new dlc is a race pack at the price of 16 USD. So we see an increase of about 60% right there for many units that simply should have been in the game at launch since the chaos roster was very light compared to the other 2/3 factions in the game as well. So come around to when we get a new faction, prior to this factions cost around 19$ and the price increases to 25$ and personally the community was angry but I was 100% fine with this since yeah prices increase and factions have been this price since 2016. So its fucking insulting they do a new race pack and give us a bullshit letter saying I quote
To get right into it: our costs are up. Unfortunately, that means that prices have to rise. We know any increase is going to be tough, which is why our prices have remained fairly stable over the past few years. The downside is that any increase today is going to be more noticeable.
When this is a blatant lie, this new race pack that gives us less content than prior is now an increase of 150% from 10$ it used to be in total warhammer 2 but a ~60% increase from the last fucking price they had from a year prior. It also doesn't help when they haven't patched the fucking game when there is obviously broken shit. For instance they dropped a patch for the honorable frenchmen (Bretonnia) but some faction features were broken for nearly half a fucking year until after this whole. Hell Nakai the kroxigor (A big fuck off giant lizard alligator man who can do a death roll) lord for again half a year couldn't recruit his special units and kroxigors. This anger is coming from a place where obviously the money they earn is being misused on other projects that end up crashing and burning. Like a fucking new extraction shooter that was a money pit gets canned that was DOA (technically never got released but I know they were running beta test and I imagine it getting canned was based on how much engagement was around it, I remember seeing so many fucking ads that beta test). A reskin of Total war Troy (A newly released AAA priced game that had a peak of 5,424 user), which has failed by basically most margins. So its god damn insulting to hear a lead say basically if you don't buy this dlc expect this game won't be supported anymore even though it is literally CAs only cash cow right now. People want better support for this game, it is under horrid management. A ton of anger is strictly coming from how poor a game WH3 released as and the continued support it has seen. We need a proper custodian team who can actually patch this game more than once or twice in a span of half a fucking year.
Edit: I also want to hammer home how fucking bad TW Pharaoh did.
Peak users
TWW3: 166,519.
Shogun 2: 10k or 50k (can't get an accurate count since Steamcharts only goes back to 2012 but SG2 came out in 2011) was 10k (as long as we ignore when the game was given away for free then it was at 50k).
Rome 2: 118,240
Attila: 26,237
Rome Remastered: 18,407
Three kingdoms: 191,816
Considering how consistent the complaint of how much SEGA is forcing CA to act like a shittier version of Paradox, that’s not surprising.
Since the niche of players that buys Total War games will hardly budge upwards, the only way to maximize profits is to squeeze those suckers with endless DLC. No wonder every game since Shogun 2 has had blood as a separate DLC.
I think you’re thinking of Games Workshop, the IP holder for WH and WH40K. This is about Creative Assembly, the developer of the Total War RTS games, mostly historical, but also 3 set in the WH universe. They basically developed a very adversarial relationship with their core audience and failed to innovate in decades. Oh wait it is kinda similar to the Games Workshop situation…
40k is, in part, parody to make fun of fascists. That’s why it’s so absurdly over the top. The fact that fascists like it says more about them than the setting.
Yeah, Sure. Way to much hero worship and storylines where the genetically pure supersoldiers of the empire are the good guys to be a parody of fascism.
I think you might be taking this internet thing a little too seriously. We all have misunderstandings about stuff but it’s not good to stubbornly insist that you know what you’re talking about despite clearly never having actually looked in to the material. That’s the extent of my tearing in. But you are right in that I should do better about actually saying things of substance instead of trying to be snide all the time.
Protagonists aren't always the good guys. Anyone would tell you there are no good guys in 40k and everyone lives a brutal life under eternal war, showing the absurdity of facism.
They aren't the good guys. A lot (too much if you ask the community) of the fiction is told from the perspective of the imperium/space Marines, but that doesn't make them the good guys.
They go around saying things like "The rewards of tolerance are treachery and betrayal." They clearly are not meant to be the good guys, even in their own stories.
The problem is media literacy is so poor that far too many people look at quotes like that and think "that's a good point". Even the creators have put out press releases about how all the fascists are missing the point.
I had to check. They actually said this. I’ve never played Warhammer (I have been interested, just haven’t gotten around to it) and I don’t know these devs at all, but contradicting themselves with just seven words in the same sentence is actually kind of impressive.
Tone deaf company. My friend wants me to get into this series so badly, but this article details what a disgusting relationship CA has with its customers.
That’s pretty terrible and should put people off buying anything from them. They increased pricing, and when community backlash happens they just ban everyone who dares express an opinion that isn’t positive.
This is why all games should use independent forums moderated by passionate community members. If only there was some federated, open source platform they could move to in order to discuss the game anonymously and without repercussions from the devs…
pcgamesn.com
Aktywne