He was the CEO of Electronic Arts when the controversial loot box monetization was added to FIFA 09. He made news when he called developers “fucking idiots” over some developers’ reluctance to introduce monetization schemes earlier in the development process. There’s also the infamous clip of Riccitiello talking during a shareholder call about charging Battlefield players a dollar to reload their guns.
Look at this guy...I couldn't read all of the Bloomberg article due to paywall, so I don't know if this jackass actually provided proof of these "death threats."
While I don't condone them, it seems awfully convenient that an executive who's known to stir controversy with his monetization strategies received "alleged" death threats. I have a hard time believing it without proof because this guy is a sleaze ball greedy mofo.
In any group of people there will always be a tiny subset of the population who will pull this unhinged bullshit. It's unfortunate, but now the CEO gets to play the victim, and anyone who's against his bullshit gets to be painted with the same brush as the unhinged guy.
I never understand freaking out about death threats. If someone actually wanted to murder you, they’d be quiet and methodical about it, not grandiose. To be fair, I’ve never received a death threat so perhaps I’m not theeeeeeeeeeeee
I mean you are assuming the person who is trying to murder you is a rational actor but you can't really be a rational actor if you are threatening death to someone because of their shit monetization policies on your entertainment. Hell some people throw "Death threats" at people because they decide to change a reload speed by a fraction of a second. So yeah "gamers" can be quite unhinged. Hell you had idiots in Jan 6 who loudly stated their intention and beat a cop to death. Hell we have seen situations of weirdos getting close to celebrities (in their heads) then trying to kill them, and I imagine cases like that will only get worse with parasocial relationships getting a bit out of hand with modern influences and streamers.
That's the fallacy of trying to understand criminal acts. For the most part, if someone were as smart, logical, and thoughtful as you are when you imagine the best way to commit murder, the kind of person to actually try and commit the murder would not be as smart, logical, or thoughtful to have gotten into that situation in the first place.
There are exceptions, of course, but it's enough of a possibility that it's probably better to take them seriously than not.
Edit: typed all that, scrolled down, some other dude already said it
For comparison, best I could find is Xbox Series X|S selling 21M units. Link. This means Sony outpacing Xbox by a 2:1 ratio, or market share is 66% vs. 33%.
@alyaza I really don't support GOG enough, I should get GOG's versions of RE2 and 3, the originals were better than the REmakes anyway (the exact opposite of how the original REmake and RE1 worked)
As long as you keep a pc with the specs and OS of the time the game was released. GOG is also making an effort to patch these games to make them run on current hard- and software without the hassle of finding and downloading fan patches, running emulators/virtual machines and all the other hoops one might have to jump through to get an old game running.
Of course you could theoretically pirate the gog version after they made it run, but given that these games usually cost about 5-10 bucks and some go as low as 1-2 when on sale, i think that’s worth it to support these efforts.
www.gog.com/en/gog-preservation-program direct link to GOG, because the link provided in the The Verge article is goskimresource that is blocked by my browser extension uMatrix. From the original articles FAQ at GOG:
What about macOS and Linux?
The GOG Preservation Program is currently Windows-only. Our priority is to preserve as many games as possible under the Program, before expanding to other operating systems.
Sad. How about supporting Linux? This would be the right direction to preserve games, as they are no longer tied to the Windows operating system. That’s why I use Steam and do not buy on GOG.
I can understand that their priorities lie with Windows initially. I also prefer Steam for their amazing linux support, but for preservation Steam is also a mess: delisting of games / the fact that the games are not DRM free. A copy you buy on GOG is yours forever, a copy on Steam is less certain. Also know that GOG operates at a fraction of the budget that Steam has, so they don’t necessarily have the money to put someone on linux support too. But hopefully in the future this will change!
Yes, the DRM free games is a huge win for preservation. I’m not discounting the value of GOG. But that’s something we had already. My critique was about the focus on Windows only, which is not the best idea if games should be preserved “forever”. Because Windows 11 will be the only supported one soon.
But any efforts trying to make games work forever is always good. At least they didn’t rule out other OS in the future. While my initial reaction was a bit negative in the nature, because I was very disappointment, I’m still happy they do something about it. It’s even more bitter because they supported Linux in the past… But let’s see how this is going. I don’t want to end this in a negative note. I mean it can only get better with such a goal.
I think, if they are preserved for windows DRM and anti-cheat free, it should be no problem launching them using wine / proton. In the other hand, a native Linux game will not run as smooth on WSL as a comparison.
I’m not suggesting to preserve a Linux version only. If anything, I meant to test and make sure the Windows build works with Proton on Linux, in addition to making sure it works on Windows. Some games have Linux versions, they just do not care about them either. And maybe make a Linux version of the GOG launcher as well.
Wait, why Steam? GOG only sells DRM-free games. Any Windows game that works through Steam on Linux, works downloading it from GOG with standalone WINE. Or via things like Heroic Launcher, Lutris or Bottles.
Off-topic: do you have a guide on how to get uMatrix to do this blocking? That sounds great but it looks to be all manual. Do you run it with uBlock Origin?
Yes, I have uBlock Origin and uMatrix active at the same time, on Firefox. Maybe if you are using a Chromium based browser, it does not work the same? After all Google made changes. Otherwise, I’m not sure which setting in uMatrix will cause to block this. Therefore I’m not sure how to help with that at the moment.
I’ve looked again and it’s probably one of the lists that contain hostnames to block. skimresources appears in all of these three, so enable them manually if they are not enabled: Dan Pollock’s hosts file, MVPS HOSTS, Peter Lowe’s Ad and tracking server list
Edit: In the addon menu you can enable or block the domain dynamically when you are on the page. Unless you save the setting this is only temporarily changed.
Why is everyone here pretending like palworld isn’t a straight up Pokemon clone that went a bit too close with the designs? I mean the game was basically marketed as pokemon with guns. I know you guys have this new hate for Nintendo, but this isn’t even them.
If I made a game about an Italian contractor with a red hat and mustache that fights mushroom people and turtles, you guys would defend it and claim it isn’t a copyright issue lol
Why is everyone here pretending like palworld isn’t a straight up Pokemon clone that went a bit too close with the designs? I mean the game was basically marketed as pokemon with guns. I know you guys have this new hate for Nintendo, but this isn’t even them.
Because it doesn’t matter. Palworld isn’t getting sued for copyright infringement, it is being sued for patent infringement.
If I made a game about an Italian contractor with a red hat and mustache that fights mushroom people and turtles, you guys would defend it and claim it isn’t a copyright issue lol
Again, Nintendo isn’t suing for copyright infringement, but for patent infringement. It’s more like Nintendo suing Monster Hunter Stories for allowing you to ride your monsters (this is literally one of the patents Pal World is getting sued for).
I will never understand when people engage in volunteer (i.e. unpaid) PR work for some random company.
Criticizing a company for lazy patent trolling (a patent for riding a mount?) is not engaging in “hate crimes against video games”.
Nintendo is welcome to release good products on multiple platforms (Palworld runs on PC) to compete with Palworld. Crazy idea, I know!
One would think I should patent the concept of releasing good games to compete with other companies, but out of the goodness of my heart I will release this unique idea into the public domain.
If your opinion is identical to the corporate sourced PR copytext (not to mention the condescending style - “everyone knows”), then yes it is de facto PR work.
Even if it were an exact clone I don’t think a single company should have a monopoly on the idea for almost 30 years. Pokemon red was released in 1996, 28 years ago. Why should they still be able to be the only company that releases pokemon-type games?
Seriously? Are they gonna go after TemTem. Coromon, Cassette Beasts, or any number of Pokémon clones for being too similar? The only thing i can see as a legitimate thing to sue on is if they find out palworld did use AI based off of Pokémon models to generate their models, but I think that was just a rumor anyway.
The difference between palworld on the ones you listed is Sony made a move to start a “Pokemon company”-like business with the Palworld devs (named Palworld Entertainment) and Nintendo feels threatened by the potential damages Palworld Entertainment would be able to cause being backed by Sony to the pokemon franchise. In-depth look on this theory: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8apzrwv75i0
But code subject to copyright (which I agree with the concept of but it needs a reform). While concepts and ideas in computer programs and games can be patented (which I think is tremendously stupid)
5 mil yen is about $32k. In total they’re suing for about $100k.
I would imagine the 3rd patent at the very least should be invalidated - riding characters in video games predates Pokemon (MegaMan riding Rush comes to mind, as well as World of Warcraft [although I don’t know if the patent predates WOW mounts]). However the nature of patents is that once they’re granted they are very difficult to dismiss.
The other two are more tricky. Throwing balls at something us a uniquely Pokémon idea, I think, and the aiming one would come down to the technicalities of the patent itself, which is all Japanese to me.
Yeah the newer they are, the more frivolous they are - especially since you could argue the release of games using those patents amounts to public disclosure.
However, you’re still left in the situation where an established patent is very solid and difficult to challenge, even when it should never have been granted in the first place.
From the translation of the claims, they appear to describe Pokémon-style activities, with ‘191 focused on the act of throwing a ball at characters in a field, ‘117 tied to aiming, and ‘390 on riding characters.
If this is indeed the case, the lawsuit is clearly illegitimate (in the real sense, can’t speak for legal nuances). Not surprising.
That’s not exactly it. I read the description of '191 and it seems to be more like “throwing a ball to capture a character and place it in the player’s possession or throwing it to release a captured character”. You can see the patent drawings also depecting that, so it’s basically a patent of the Pokeball.
Not a lawyer so I have no idea how it’ll go in court but it does sound like Palworld infringes on this. It’s kinda funny that they could’ve avoided this by being a bit more legally distinct, like how TemTem throws cards instead of balls.
The second one is an older application of the first patent (pokeball again). The third one is literally just being able to mount an object or creature with some caveats like a flying one having to come down and carry you up, that one is ridiculous and a lot of games do something similar all the time.
Skyrim did it first with dragons. Honestly I bought palworld specifically to spite shitendo and ended up pleasantly surprised by a very playable game. Shitendo is just mad that someone else did it better on a shoestring budget
It would be funny if a legal defense would have been using an n-sided 3d polygon that definitely isn’t a sphere. Is a tetrahedron legally distinct enough? How about a truncated isocohedron? Seems silly for the shape to matter.
The one thing about patent law I know is that you can’t patent something that already exists in the wild (“prior art”), so surely that can’t be the case, and if it is then it’s open-and-shut, right?
theverge.com
Gorące