how the fuck is it impossible for me to get a decent, not taken, username in most online games or launchers but these scammers can change their games to whatever the heck they want?
Shouldn’t be hard to implement a check if the game name and other info is already listed in the store somewhere else…
Display name vs actual user ID, right? You can change your display name to whatever but the actual account name will be the same. Kind of insane that Steam lets you change quite so much in one go without flagging suspicious behaviour though.
I just started typing in common video game title words in Steam's search, and I found several games just called "Void". We can extrapolate that scenario out and say maybe a new game is the first one on Steam to be called Void, but maybe there was an old DOS game called Void that came to Steam later after rights issues have been resolved. There's also the very common situation of a remake and its original version both being available on Steam, and maybe different companies own the rights to each one, like Star Wars: Battlefront. Perhaps these and other reasons are why those checks don't exist, but maybe they will now if these sorts of scams become more common.
So there will not be a way to play it when they eventually turn off their online service for the console. Uh huh. They were what we thought were the last bastions of protecting content/games, now… yeah, okay, they are just shooting themselves in the foot again and again here.
Then they’re all shocked Pikachu that people are so determined to emulate them. You know what games aren’t being jailbroken en masse right now? Steam games. Because the store has been trustworthy since day one. They may break that trust but it hasn’t happened yet.
I think that’s my point, that they’ve built such a easy to use trustworthy store that everyone just buys it because what’s the point of stealing anything from them. Vs Nintendo when that’s the first thing people start working on.
I mean, PC games are constantly pirated across the world, but Steam has done things right. Switch games somewhat, although the difficulty means it’s not that popular.
Sony owns 14% of fromsoft and 10% of their parent company’s parent company. I bet that’s enough for them to push some shitty things but it still gives from some room to push back.
Hey I was a skeptic too but got to play it for an hour during the network test and am actually cautiously optimistic. I could still be wrong but it seemed like they put a lot of thought into the new systems.
I have also expressed doubt about nightreign in the past but am on board now. And calling elden ring part of the enshitification process is absolutely ridiculous. I dont care if you’re a “fromsoft purist”, elden ring is a phenomenal game by any metric.
I cannot wrap my head around how Elden Ring is a good game. The world is empty and dull. The bosses are copy paste. The dungeons are copy paste. It was so boring for me from beginning to end. The story was dumb. I don’t remember one character because they’re all boring and there’s no reason to give a shit about any of them. I will probably die not understanding why Elden Ring was considered good instead average at best.
and there’s no way Rockstar is going to be paying $99 million dollars for just songs.
GTA V/Online produced $8.5 billion in revenue.
I mean, I guess you’re not wrong, (how else could they be milking it for this much money but being cheap?) but it still makes them fucking cheap bastards.
I think it’s really clear that Rockstar is trying to avoid a repeat of past soundtracks and licensing issues and they want these up-front with no royalty payments to make in the future, so they don’t have to keep re-negotiating licensing (and having to remove/replace songs in old games).
I still think this guy was being smart for asking more, even if he asked too much. You’re right, he shouldn’t have high-balled, but he was smart enough to understand getting a percentage or royalties was probably almost assuredly out of the question.
I’m glad Rockstar is taking the route of trying to only get songs that they won’t have to remove down the line. Should be the move forward for all games. Wish same would happen for racing games too. Would rather have knock off brands over delistings.
Actually, yeah I can. Every time a fucking bean-counter makes a living humans life worse at their job to save the company a buck is a great time to blame accountants for doing their fucking jobs.
Accountants don't make decisions, they are just paper bitches for real people along with shit like lawyers and marketing. They just present the numbers to business leadership who makes decisions on which expeses to approve.
If they’re a 1-hit wonder, maybe that’s why they want more up front: In case they gain no new listeners from the GTA 6 soundtrack and continue to be a 1-hit wonder.
It’s like why football players have insane-sounding contracts: Because in the future they won’t be able to make the same kind of money.
Sounds to me like homie was smart and thinking long-term.
I just heard some of their tracks and I feel like it wasn’t a huge loss not being able to hear a Duran Duran or Depeche Mode wannabe band while I’m murdering hookers in GTA6
I don’t see the logic in that though. They can’t really expect to be paid so much more than groups who offer greater recognition. It’s like charging more for the Walmart brand over the name brand product.
I love Lemmy, but the general consensus of “fuck big corpo no matter what” attitude is kinda tiring. This is completely reasonable for Rockstar to reject the counter offer. Not to mention, Heaven 17 is not some big band to begin with.
Agreed. As I understand it, $50k-$100k is on the high end for a TV show to use a clip from a very well known song in an episode. Some band I’ve never heard of being paid $22k for their song to be played in the background of a game might be a little on the low end, so it’s totally reasonable for the band to counter, but it’s also totally reasonable for Rockstar to turn down a 10x counter. Publicly crying about it seems childish. The game is gonna happen with or without your song.
“We’ve updated this article to note that Nintendo has made similar disclaimers with its previous retro controllers, which have ended up working with other Switch games. While this is no confirmation that the same will be the case with the GameCube controller, it does at least provide some hope that it won’t be as locked-off as Nintendo says.”
I genuinely can't tell if milking outrage is more prominent in gaming than elsewhere. I guess not, because... I mean, look at the planet in general, but it does feel like gamers got to that state of mind first and do it best, at least.
It’s somewhat misleading. It’s not providing the additional background information, and it leads the headline with the claim (not that Nintendo is making a claim).
I don’t think it’s a bad headline. It’d be hard to include all the information in the headline. But if someone only reads the headline (something like 73% of people), they could end up with a mistaken conclusion. And those people will have been lead in that direction (so, mislead).
To clarify, I don’t think the writers did anything wrong. The headline will be misleading because Nintendo’s being somewhat misleading.
I don’t know how much the headline could be improved, if at all.
Nintendo says NS2 GC controller will only “officially” support GC games
Or if they can’t quote “officially”, they could quote “only”. Which could arguably be more clickbaity, but also clue in a casual reader that there’s more to what Nintendo officially says.
They could just update rosters and wouldn’t even need a new game. It’s pointless now that graphics and gameplay are not enhanced enough to justify a new $60 game
I was so happy he got to return for that Ghost Recon cameo. I was pissed at Ubisoft for a while for replacing him for Blacklist, but then it turned out he couldn’t do it for health reasons and just wanted to keep it hush-hush.
I’m glad he’s doing better now, can’t believe he beat three different cancers.
Sony: we’ll let the whole world pay astronomical amounts of money because it makes us rich! And if someone calls us on it, we’ll say it’s all because of the US!
Sony: we‘ll make it a little more expensive for everyone else, so no one feels left out
Let me fix that for you:
Sony: We‘ll make it a little more expensive for everyone else so our US sales don’t sink harder than a brick in a pond.
Companies really don’t care about people feeling left out. Company’s fear loss of sales. And that Trumps senseless antics by proxy of Sony make the PlayStation more expensive in my end of the world low key aggravates me, even if it’s only 50 bucks.
videogameschronicle.com
Ważne