Not in the sense we’re discussing it here, they don’t.
There’s a list of about 20 games said to have DRM in Gog and when you actually read the list rather than just it’s title it turns out none of them has what we would call DRM - any sort of phone-home validation or anti-piracy measure.
It’s mainly things games with add-on content that requires you use Gog Galaxy or register online, some that send analytics to a server and stuff like that.
Whilst it’s still nasty and still shouldn’t be happening, none of that makes the game unusable in the future after the servers are down if you still have the offline installer.
The info is here and none of that “DRM” means you can’t in the future, after the servers are down, install the game from your copy of the offline installer and play it.
None of that is DRM in the sense we’re talking about here: the kind of mechanism that allows the game to be taken away from you or won’t let you install it or play it in single-player anymore when the publisher decides they don’t want to pay for servers anymore.
It is, none the less, a deviation from the No-DRM promise, IMHO.
I’ve been playing more GoG games with Lutris + Wine in Linux than Steam games with Proton and I even have one situation of a game were the copy I bought in Steam doesn’t work with Proton, but the pirated copy I downloaded to see if that would work runs absolutely fine with Lutris + Wine.
For me at least it’s actually easier to sort problems out with games when using Lutris + Wine than it is with Proton and I can even make sure all games I run from Lutris are wrapped in a “firejail” sandbox, which amongst other things blocks all network access, something I can’t do with Proton.
It’s a vendor-tied solution meant to keep you in the Steam ecosystem, so for all the great work they did in past getting it to have broad compatibility, the future is not Proton, it’s Wine.
Lutris has GoG integration and it’s exactly that same 2 step process if you use it (I believe it passes you through 3 screens of options were you invariably do nothing but click “Continue”, so strictly it’s 5 steps were 3 of the are just “Press Continue”)
The difference is that when it does NOT just work, it’s easier to figure out and there are more options to fix it with Lutris + Wine.
I even have some weird weird cases on Steam - like Borderlands 2 were Steam would often and randomly, before actually starting the game spend almost 1h doing shader conversions that if you stopped it the game would fail to start (the solution was to force an older Proton version and now you just get random downloads from the Internet that last a few minutes before the game starts).
IMHO, here too what one sees is the general design philosophy difference between open source software and corporate solutions - the former gives you tons of options and lots of ways to tune it so it looks more complicated to use and has a steeper learning curve but that also means when things go wrong you have a lot more ways to try to fix it, whilst the latter is click & play until things go wrong and then you have very little info and just a few things you can change to try and fix it.
Mind you, Lutris itself seems to be an attempt to also be click & play (hence why you generally get a steam-like experience if you use its GoG integration) but all the “buttons and knobs” are still there (those 3 screens of options that’s usually fine to just press “Continue” on that I mentioned above) just in case you want to muck about with them, making it look daunting to use.
Proton too just automates the work that somebody did in the form of install instructions, same as Lutris.
The difference is that those making the install scripts for Proton are paid for and you don’t get the option to fix them or make your own, which means that there are in fact fewer games with Steam install instructions (i.e. Steam Support) than games with Lutris install scripts.
Further, there are fewer things you can tweak in Proton and they’re all either changing the proton version or some badly documented text parameters that get fed to its command line, whilst Lutris actually has most such options in menus: the learning curve for just starting a game is lower in Steam that in Lutris when it works but the learning curve for fixing it when it does not work is lower in Lutris and sometimes you simply don’t have access to change what’s needed to fix it in Steam but you do in Lutris.
If you use Lutris with its GoG integration the experience is generally the same kind of Click & Play as Proton of Steam and whilst the rate of problems seems to still be a bit bigger in Lutris, surprisingly (at least for me) it’s not by much.
For me in Lutris having to go and install Microsoft components using Winetricks is generally only needed for some standalone installer executables, not when using GoG integration.
Steam is great when it works and a massive headache and pretty limited on what you can do when it doesn’t, whilst at least with GoG integration Lutris is great when it works and still a headache when it doesn’t but not as much as Steam and it gives you a lot more options to try and get it to work, plus the coverage of pre-made installer scripts in Lutris (which is what makes games “just work” in it) seems to be broader than in Steam, including covering older and more obscure titles, plus that coverage is probably growing faster because the scripts are user contributed rather than the work that can be done adding support being limited by how many people Valve (who are notorious for having very few employees for a company that size) hired to work on it.
The point I’m making is that with its process Lutris + Wine are scaling up much faster to seamlessly make all sorts of Windows games Click & Play in Linux, than Steam can or even will try to (don’t expect Steam to get around to cover older games that aren’t successful AAA titles).
It’s the same old same old, open source software solution vs closed corporate software solution that happens in so many other domains: the open source one starts clunky and quirky and it will always tend towards the side of “giving users enough rope to hang themselves with” (too many option, many very powerful) whilst the closed corporate one will from the very start be slick and easier to use but very limited when it comes to what users can do to customize it or even fix it when it doesn’t work, but over time and if it manages to survive the open source one will be better and far more capable and flexible than the corporate one simply because contributions to it scale up with interest in it and number of users whilst that’s not so for the corporate one.
It’s what you see with for example Blender vs Adobe’s suit of 3D modelling programs or Linux vs Windows (if it weren’t for the well entrenched ecosystem of Windows-only applications, I doubt Windows would still be around).
That’s why I think something like Lutris + Wine are the future, not Proton integrated into the Store application of Steam.
Valve is a much, much bigger company than GoG, plus Valve’s Linux strategy is really a “have our own console on the cheap” strategy.
But yeah, GoG should be doing more for gaming on Linux, maybe not as much as Valve but proportionally so. At the moment they’re doing almost nothing at all: they have Linux offline installers available for games which do support Linux directly, but that’s it.
So whilst I find it unrealistic to expect that GoG should be contributing to gaming on Linux as much as Valve, I do agree they should be doing more.
PS: Mind you, I’m not trying to make the case that GoG is perfect and Steam is shit, I’m trying to make the case that open and flexible to use is better than closed and tightly integrated with a specific store, which is why I generally prefer GoG with their offline installers, as well as Lutris + Wine (quite independently of GoG) and would be happy enough even if Lutris had no GoG integration since long before moving my gaming rig to Linux I had the habit of downloading and using the offline installers and did not at all use GoG Galaxy.
If there’s one thing that 30 years of being a Software Engineer have taught me is that you want your system to be as decoupled as possible from any business, because even if they are nice at the moment that’s no guarantee that at a later date they won’t leverage people having their systems integrated with theirs to take advantage of their customers (the phenomenon of enshittification being a good example of that).
Calling them “prefixes” is about the total of the confusion. Call them “instances” or even just “boxes” and it’s suddenly clear what they do.
(The only reason I’m not using “sandbox” is because they don’t really provide sandboxing from a security point of view, only a kind of separate instance with its own configuration but with access to everything via the Z drive)
Once you figure out that using a different “wine prefix” only really means a separate “Windows” with it’s own config and file structure there’s nothing confusing about it.
I have so far avoided that specific pit, but that’s because for maybe decades now and still whilst using Windows as my main I’ve avoid proprietary solutions (except for games) and went for Open Source ones instead, which has yielded the benefit that since I moved over to Linux for good a few months ago, I have yet to be faced with needing something I used to use in Windows and not finding a Linux native version.
I’m sure I’ll end up in the same kind of situation you describe.
By the way, have you tried “Bottles”? From what I’ve heard (but did not test myself yet) it might help there and it’s not specifically for games.
If you don’t retain some kind of actual ownership, they will not be allowed to use terms like “buy” or “purchase” on the store page button. I hope there aren’t huge holes in this that allow bad actors to get around it, but I certainly loathe the fact that there’s no real way to buy a movie or TV show digitally. Not...
If there is one think we should all have learned by now in this Era is that talk means nothing at all: there have to be hard contractual clausules along with personal punishment for those who break them or some kind of escrow system for money meant to go into that “end of life” plan for it to actually be genuine.
“Valve reps have said” is worth as much as the paper it’s written on and that stuff is not even written on paper.
It’s even more basic than that: if there’s no escrow with money for that “end of life” “plan” and no contractual way to claw back money for it from those getting dividends from Valve, then what the “Valve representatives” said is a completelly empty promised, or in other words a shameless lie.
Genuine intentions actually have reliable funding attached to them, not just talkie talkie from people who will never suffer in even the tinyest of ways from not fulfulling what they promised.
In this day and age, we’ve been swamped with examples that we can’t simply trust in people having a genuine feeling of ethical and moral duty to do what they say they will do with no actual hard consequences for non-compliance or their money on the line for it.
PS: And by “we can’t trust in people” I really mean “we can’t trust in people who are making statements and promises as nameless representatives of a company”. Individuals personally speaking for themselves about something they control still generally are, even in this day and age, much better than people acting the role of anonymous corporate drone.
To add to your point, it’s amazing that so many people are still mindless fanboys, even of Steam.
Steam has restrictions on installing the games their customers supposedly own, even if it’s nothing more than “you can’t install it from a local copy of the installer and have to install it from the Steam servers” - it’s not full ownership if you can’t do what you want with it when you want it without the say so of a 3rd party.
That’s just how it is.
Now, it’s perfectly fair if one says “yeah, but I totally trust them” which IMHO is kinda naive in this day and age (personally, almost 4 decades of being a Techie and a gamer have taught me to distrust until there’s no way they can avoid their promises, but that just me), or that one knows the risks but still thinks that it’s worth it to purchase from Steam for many games and that the mere existence of Steam has allowed many games to exists that wouldn’t have existed otherwise (mainly Indie ones) - which is my own posture at least up to a point - but a whole different thing is the whole “I LoVe STeaM And tHeY CaN DO NotHInG wrONg” fanboyism.
Sorry but they have in place restrictions on game installation and often game playing which from the point of view of Customers are not needed and serve no purpose (they’re not optional and a choice for the customer, but imposed on customers), hence they serve somebody else than the customer. It being a valid business model and far too common in this day and age (hence people are used to it) doesn’t make those things be “in the interest of Customers” and similarly those being (so far) less enshittified than other similar artificial restrictions on Customers out there do not make them a good thing, only so far not as bad as others.
I mean, for fuck’s sake, this isn’t the loby of an EA multiplayer game and we’re supposed to be mostly adults here in Lemmy: lets think a bit like frigging adults rather than having knee-jerk pro-Steam reactions based on fucking brand-loyalty like mindless pimply-faced teen fanboys. (Apologies to the handful of wise-beyond-their-years pimply faced teens that might read this).
Well, as the guy falling from the top of the Empire State Building was overheard saying on his way down: “well, so far so good”.
Or as the common caveat given to retail investors goes: past performance is no predictor of future results.
“So far” proves nothing because it can be “so far” only because the conditions for something different haven’t yet happenned or it simply hasn’t been in their best interest yet to act differently.
If their intentions were really the purest, most honest and genuine of all, they could have placed themselves under a contractual obligation to do so and put money aside for an “end of life plan” in a way such that they can’t legally use it for other things, or even done like GoG and provided offline installer to those people who want them.
Steam have chosen to maintain their ability to claw back games in your library whilst they could have done otherwise as demonstrated by GoG which let you download offline installers - no matter what they say, their actions to keep open the option of doing otherwise say the very opposite.
This really does not sound healthy. The game is released, for a certain amount of money. If people don’t like what they get for their money, they simply should not buy it....
PC/Console games take massive amounts of man hours to make and as I see it the point of Early Access is to give smaller Indie Developers the funds to hire more people and get the entire game made in an achievable time frame (though some of these things still take almost a decade to get there).
It’s a bit like Kickstart, but for Early Access there needs to be enough of a product to appeal to gamers (and hence quite some time invested into creating it up to that point, plus a decent idea and an actual game play which is deep enough and has at least a good enough basis of gameplay design that it’s actually fun to play), which also means scams are far less likely because just getting the game all the way to a level that qualifies it for Early Access is already quite the investment in time and possibly money plus worse comes to worse and the developer stops development immediately after caching in with Early Access, buyers still got themselves immediatelly a small game at a cheap price, though not the “dream” full game they were promised they would eventually get.
The architectural decisions are at the engine level and that stuff has a massive influence on the likelihood of bugs in the code running in that engine.
For example, traditional Unity (not ECS) runs all game code (so the code provided by those coding the game) in a single thread, which avoids A TON of multi threading bugs (as that’s one of the hardest parts in programming to master) but is very bad for performance in multi-core CPUs. Game programmers can fire up separate threads using the standard libraries of the programming language itself and manage them, but everything in the development framework that’s part of the engine pushes them to use that single-threaded model, so only advanced devs bother and only for very specific things.
Also the choice of programming language forced by the engine itself has a huge impact in the likelihood of bugs, but since I don’t want to start a Holy War I’m not going to star pointing fingers at specific languages and criticizing them ;)
Different, high level software designs (i.e. architectural designs) which are normally imposed by the game engine, have different probabilities of the developers who are making the code for those to produce bugs, because of lots of factors including things like of how they approach error validation and handling in the engine itself and in which domains does the engine leave the most freedom to coders and which ones does it leave less - some things are pretty safe to leave in the hands of even bad developers, others are not.
The example of multi-threading in Unity should’ve been clear: put a game engine that doesn’t impose a single thread pattern in front of somebody with little or no experience in multi-threaded programming and you will have a huge rate of bugs (mainly critical race conditions) and as it so happens most developers out there have little or no experience in multi-threaded programming. Yet multi-threading can yield far more performance in modern CPU since they’re all multi-core. For that specific game engine a software architectural choice was made to go with a structure that is not as performance but significantly less likely to lead to a higher bug rate when used by the average coder, probably because Unity targets less experience coders.
Good Senior Designers and Technical Architects don’t design the high level structure of the software for themselves as coders, they do it for the kind of coders that are likely to be coding for it.
Of course the developers themselves also have different capabilities and hence different baseline rates of creating bugs, hence why I said “both”.
The fishy part is the “taking in account the EULA” since EULAs are not legally valid documents in most of the World.
Licenses explicitly accepted by the buyer before the purchase, sure, EULAs, no, since they’re treated as an attempt to, after the implied contract which is the sale, unilaterally change the contract.
The court order makes some sense because that’s basically to do with inheritance and who gets to inherit what, but the EULA “consideration” is complete total bollocks.
I game only on the PC and favor buying games from GOG over Steam, partly since one of the former’s core selling points is no-DRM (also you can directly download the games with no need for using GOG Galaxy and play offline for ever and ever), so I’ll just check the user reviews before buying and if there is some kind of mandatory account creation somebody will have complained and I will simply not buy that game (tends to be a pretty aware crowd on those subjects over there).
I’m reading here of people buying it and then not playing the game because of this and thinking: people doing that makes the decision to add this kind of thing a can’t-lose for the game makers - either way they get paid for the game and the with most people they do some extra money by selli gbtheir private information whilst for other the don’t but they still got a game sale, same as if they had not added this crap.
Best to check a few user reviews before buying and denying them a purchase if they’ve added such crap to the game, IMHO, as that changes the ROI equation and can make it a net negative to have this in a game.
You can go to GOG, buy some really old game, install it on a PC, play it and after a few minutes go: “How the fk was I so dazzled with this shit back then?!”
At least for me, whilst most such game were A LOT of fun back then, almost all of them feel kinda meh nowadays, the graphics-heavy ones because they look like shit now compared to even games from 10 year ago and the other ones because their game mechanics are so shallow and simplistic (and often oh so reliant on reaction times) compared to even what Indie companies have been doing in the last couple of decades.
Yeah, the memory of the fun that was had survived the passage of time, but most of those games pale in comparisson to games I’ve played in the last 2 decades. Beware of confusing the two like the sterotypical old person who complains “Music was much better when I was young, before Rock-n-Roll”.
PS: I’m not even especially big on fancy graphics but instead prefer complex multi-layered game mechanics, so the kind of games from back then I still can enjoy today are things like Civilization.
Mind you, the biggest hindrance the create something special back then was technical, nowadays it’s time: codebases are far more massive nowadays and the work that goes into making assets (sprites, models, audio, animation and so on) that go with the code in a modern game is gigantic compared to back then (or, alternativelly, if done with reusable assets you get just another of hundred of similar-loooking low-buget indie games).
Even something like Bioshock with it’s unique vision was already a massive piece of work when it comes to game assets, though artistically (and as a game too) it’s a masterpiece, IMHO.
I actually made a handfull of games back in the early 90s (a minesweeper clone for the ZX Spectrum done in Assembly and never published, and a Tic-Tac-Toe game for the PC done in C that I sold to a small magazine and did got published) and then started working on game making a few years ago, and definitelly the programing work has expanded in terms of size (with still some down-to-the-metal technically complex stuff like shader programming) but the asset creation work has massivelly exploded (no wonder AAA games have bugets in the hundreds of millions of dollars range).
The closest to sexuallity the character I’m playing at the moment can get is necrophilia (gay, straight, group sex - up to the player really) and I need to abuse the engine a bit and use my imagination.
Granted, in single player Project Zomboid there aren’t any other living humans.
I’ve been thinking a lot about this of late, mainly around TV series and movies.
(As a side note my own morality on all of this is comes from having lived my early adult years in The Netherlands: for me all sexual orientations are normal things, same as eye colors, height and so on, so there is no “right” or “wrong” sexual orientation, just like there is no “right” or “wrong” eye color, and sexual orientation is not even important outside a sexuality context)
I agree with you on that: show it as normal and people will start seeing it as normal rather than give some disproportionate importance to what is just another human characteristic that varies from person to person, which IMHO the best way for everybody to treat people equally independently of sexuality - only a nutter would treat somebody differently because of, say, eye color, and as I see it in the ideal world it would be just the same for sexual orientation.
That said, forcing displays of sexuality or sexual orientation isn’t the way to go, IMHO, because it keeps the whole thing in this special pedestal and goes against normalization of it because it does not treat it as normal.
Unfortunatelly a lot of TV series and Movies of recent have forced displays of non-majority sexual orientation rather than just having it as just as normal as all else - say, some otherwise asexual character is made to explicitly be gay or some other non-majority sexual orientation for no actual story-related reason - although there are a few that just portray it as “just another bunch of people” (say, one of the couples in the neighbourhood happen to be gay, and they’re living life like everybody else or somebody just happens to be attracted to somebody else of the same gender and it makes sense to show it as part of the story) which is how it is in real life, at least in civilized countries.
It all feels like the makers are preaching to us through this medium rather than the whole thing just being a representation of “normal life” (in the story setting) with all the range of normal characteristics that humans have (which naturally includes a range of sexual orientations).
(Mind you, I also think unecessary emphasis on the sexuality of straight characters is ridiculous: beyond what is relevant for the story in terms of how it affects how characters relate, I don’t see why straight people’s sexuality has to be highlighted).
I think we should strive to display the variety of the human condition without actually putting things like sexual orientation in a pedestal and treat it all as special (hence, by implication, not normal). It’s not easy though, especially in countries like US where morality has been picked up by Politics and thinks which are absolutelly normal human characteristics have been fetishised beyond all logice and turned into battlefields.
All that said, in story-driven games and other media, were there is emphasys in human relations, you’ll almost always end up with sexuality involved, if only because sexual attraction is a frequent drive for the how people relate and act around each other so it’s a bit harder to have a normal range of human behaviour there without seeming to be forcing anything.
The launcher (GOG Galaxy) is entirelly optional, so I don’t use it at all and just download the installers for my games (and keep local copies in an external HD in my NAS).
Steam will stop working in Windows 7 from the 1st of January.
So decades of games that run perfectly fine on older computers (some lauched as little ago as a couple of years) will stop working if you got them on Steam.
Meanwhile in GOG you can get offline installers which will keep on working forever and ever in the hardware and software the game is compatible with.
Have Steam = be forced periodically to update your computer to keep on playing something you’ve had for ages. (Mind you, the workaround is to use Linux to play steam games, but people should not be forced to install it and deal with it just to play games from the previous generation - which are still fine as games go, since the gameplay is great and the additional eyecandy for more recent hardware does little to improve gameplaying fun - and in fact are not forced to if they got the games from GOG).
You most definitelly traded something quite big for the moderate convenience from Steam, it’s just that you pay it in a delayed way and think “this is great” all the way till then.
You don’t even need one for GOG - GOG Galaxy is totally optional and you can download absolutelly run of the mill offline installers for all games on GOG which do not require the installer or any network access, and you even keep the forever and ever (so all your old games are still installable and run on an old gaming computer with the old OS, so long as the hardware hasn’t died).
I am waiting to see what happens, since we’re not yet at the 1st of January (it’s for 2024, not 2023 - sorry for forgetting to point it out)
This is about games that check with Steam when they start to see if you’re authorized to launch them, even though it’s not the game itself that needs anything from Steam, and Steam is just the DRM layer.
Steam says they will stop supporting the Steam Launcher for Windows 7, so does that mean only the application frontend stuff (the store, downloading of games you bought and so on) or does it also include the components used by games with Steam as DRM to check if you’re authorized to run them?
I suspect it’s the latter (since Windows 7 is now all of 5% or so of the installed base and the legislation about digital purchases is crap so they’re not forced to refund your for removing your access to the games you bought, so they could get away with it), but hope it’s only the former.
It would be hilarious (in a near insane wierdly laughing kind of way) if I had to use a pirate hacked steam DLL to play my own games from Steam.
So far it’s just a warning from Steam that it will happen on the 1st of January 2024, and it’s definitelly not an issue with Windows: Valve is chosing that the Steam launcher will not be supported in a specific Windows version anymore, and because most games bought via Steam check with Steam on startup in order to start - even when that’s not at all required by the game itself - it might mean (depending of how they do it) that games will simply refuse to start even though the game itself was and still is 100% compatible with that version of Windows.
Over three decades of gaming and almost as much of software engineering means I’m pretty weary of things with unecessary dependencies on an external 3rd party, because they’re bound to stop working when that external 3rd party decides to stop supporting it and/or goes bankrupt.
In my experience this is not a “might happen” thing, it’s an “it always happens” one.
(This was actually a well discussed subject around Steam back in the day when it first came out: all games with DRM that depend on a server on the Internet maintained by a 3rd party will sooner or later stop working when that company doesn’t feel like supporting it anymore, and this is inherent to that DRM architecture rather than Steam specific)
I would hardly call “dying on a hill” to prefer to not be dependent on some external company’s mid-level manager’s decisions about what’s “outdated” for stuff I would like or need to keep on working.
SAN FRANCISCO–(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Unity (NYSE: U) (the “Company”), the world’s leading platform for creating and growing real-time 3D (RT3D) content, today announced that John Riccitiello will retire as President, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman and a member of the Company’s Board of Directors, effective immediately....
It’s one thing to bet “$50” on “it’s going to be fine” like lots of gamers did after what EA did with this guy at the helm, it’s a whole different thing to bet “my company and livelihood” on “it’s going to be fine” after what Unity did with this guy at the helm.
Unity is in B2B, not B2C, so the stakes are way higher for customers and so are the guarantees that customers require to keep on doing business with Unity after such an outrageous attempt at screwing them.
The incompetence level of the Board of Unity must be trully world-beating given that they’re still acting as if the stakes for their customers in trusting Unity again were anywhere near the same as the stakes for teenage gamers to keep on buying games from EA after being basically scammed.
There’s going to have to be some ironclad legal guarantees that this will never happen again and a purge of the Unity Board before at least those customers with the most to loose (i.e. the ones with successful games, either paying Unity directly or indirectly by using their Ad network) walk back from their decision of protecting their businesses from future similar actions by the management of Unity (such protection being mainly ditching Unity for future or early-stage projects).
Or taking advantage of that happenning with the competition, to enhance profitability.
Make money is the point of pretty much all companies, and financially there are only 2 thinks stopping them from upping their prices:
If there is competition it will lead to losing customers (though thinks like branding subvert this quite a bit) which means the money they make with higher prices might actually be less.
If prices get too high people will choose the “do without” option.
Anyways, the point being that if there is a broader shift in pricing in the market, even companies that are not under the same financial pressures to up prices will still do it as the 1st of those price limitation is relaxed so they can make more money.
You’re presuming the contributors to Lemmy are just the same in their choices of gaming as the broader market.
It doesn’t take that much reading of posts in Lemmy to conclude that it’s heavilly biased towards adults, techies and lefties.
In Statistics you can only make presumptions about a subset of subjects from statistical distribution data from the whole universe of subjects if the subset has been randomly selected, which this one most definitelly hasn’t - if only because of the “Reddit migration” Lemmy is filled with people with a certain kind of mindset (the ones for whom the actions of the Reddit CEO were displeasing enough to make them want to move and who actually had the will to do so) which isn’t at all the average person’s behaviour (the “average” just stayed there) plus even the Reddit population was already not representative of gamers generally (older in general).
The general market share of GOG might give you a hint that here too it’s likely going to have fewer customers than something like Steam, but judging by comments I’ve read here it’s probably more than 2%, at least amongst commenters (no idea about lurkers).
Gotta monetise to the max that personal brand recognition!
(Whilst in a video game like that I do expect his work was proper acting rather than merelly being famous, he’s still the one there doing it for the big $$$ rather than somebody else because of brand recognition: as in my personal experience there are tons of just as good actors in Britain who simply are not widelly known, as Britain has a massive thing for Theatre thus good acting schools and lots of people going into performing arts).
It makes sense for those who are big enough in the Game Industry (which is now several times the size of the Movie Industry in terms of revenue) to try and do the same as movies and leverage that sweet brand recognition of celebrity actors to sell more copies of the game.
However I suspect it doesn’t work quite the same in practice as the “main character in the story” in games is almost invariably the player him/herself and those famous names will never be more than secondary characters with limited interaction possibilities.
In all fairness it makes more sense for a film, same kind of setup as the animation films we’ve been having of late about what’s going on inside people’s minds and such.
With maybe the notable exception of multiplayer games, all games will be at least just as good a year after launch as they are at launch day.
Add to it that in a year’s time there will be enough reviews out there from people who actually played it longer than 5h and the heavy marketing phase will be more than over so it’s actually possible to get a hype-free overview of it, AND the game itself will likely be better than at launch due to bug fixing in the meanwhile and maybe even some content added, and it’s the logical thing to never buy before or at launch and just wait.
However most people have problems with “reward delaying” (and actual psychological term for the ability to wait for something to be more ‘rewarding’ before going for it) and “just have to have it now!” and that just overrides logic (assuming they even took the time to think about it in the first place).
I’ve had this question looking at the Quake con sale, and Call of Cthulhu Dark Corners of the Earth is for sale on both platforms. I ended up buying it on GOG. What is your opinion?
GOG, because if you don’t use GOG Galaxy (and you can as is not at all required and ALL games have offline installers) you never fire up a game and have to wait for Steam to update or are on vacations running it on a notebook with mobile paid data, forget to disable “cloud saves” or some stupid shit like that and run out of data.
Also GOG is 100% DRM free.
Oh, and did you know that Steam is about to switch off Windows 7 support?!
Why should games that work perfectly in older computers with Windows 7, bought and paid for because of supporting it, stop working because Valve wants to keep on controlling your usage of games you bought but doesn’t want to spend money for even a basic launch clienf supporting that OS?
There is no such problem with GOG and there will never be if you download the offline installers for your games - as long as the machine works, the games will work, period.
Oh, and GOG goes out of their way yo support old games: it’s in their name Good Old Games.
If people buy it anyway at the full price, then the game publisher will correctly deduce that it indeed worth at least that much money for enough people (otherwise those people would not part ways with that much money to get it) to get that game as soon as it comes out.
In Economics, perfect pricing (which is not yet possible but, damn, they’re really trying hard) from the point of view of a seller (i.e. for maximum profits) is when they get exactly as much money from each individual as that person is willing to pay for it, so the “ideal” world for them would be individually-tailored prices going as high as it could possibly go for each person whilst still managing to sell to that person.
As they can’t as of yet sell at different prices to each and every individual, they’ve gone as far as they can (regional pricing, different prices in different stores with different audiences and, maybe more importantly, time-from-publishing pricing) and then push prices up and up slowly whilst checking if in total the price increase has yielded more money or not (they have no issue with loosing customers due to higher prices if in total they still make more money at the price point than at a lower price point).
IMHO, in the face of this, the easist and best reaction for somebody who wants the game but does not think it’s worth $70, is to wait until the price falls down to how much they’re willing to pay for it (even better, let it fall some more and buy a couple more games with the savings). In fact if enough people do it the price will fall much faster as the publisher’s sales data analysis will signal to them that they’ve put the game at too high a price point and they’ll lower it trying to pick up the “money left on the table” from those who are interested but not at that price point before those people lose interest.
So you just had to write what in your eyes is “obvious” for everybody as a comment, which hence is redundant, about how some other comment is “redundant and obvious”…
Steam's new disclaimer reminds everyone that you don't actually own your games, GOG moves in for the killshot: Its offline installers 'cannot be taken away from you' (www.pcgamer.com) angielski
[Tom Warren] The PS5 Pro still hasn’t sold out in the US or UK. Looks like the $700 price point will mean this console will be readily available this holiday (lemmy.world) angielski
California’s new law forces digital stores to admit you’re just licensing content, not buying it (www.theverge.com) angielski
If you don’t retain some kind of actual ownership, they will not be allowed to use terms like “buy” or “purchase” on the store page button. I hope there aren’t huge holes in this that allow bad actors to get around it, but I certainly loathe the fact that there’s no real way to buy a movie or TV show digitally. Not...
Devs should not be "forced to run on a treadmill until their mental or physical health breaks", says publisher of Manor Lords, citing how gamers seem to be trained to expect endless content work now (www.eurogamer.net) angielski
This really does not sound healthy. The game is released, for a certain amount of money. If people don’t like what they get for their money, they simply should not buy it....
Starfield’s Paid Mods Ignite A Review Bombing On Steam (kotaku.com) angielski
GOG will let you bequeath your game library to someone else as long as you can prove you're actually dead (www.pcgamer.com) angielski
Deflated (lemmy.world) angielski
I truly don't know how to explain this to anyone who wasn't around then without them thinking we were out of our minds. (startrek.website) angielski
Then vs Now (startrek.website) angielski
Oh trust me. I know your frustration better than you do. (lemmy.world) angielski
Bethesda Is Responding to Negative Reviews of Starfield on Steam (www.ign.com) angielski
I just love collecting them all! (startrek.website) angielski
John Riccitiello is stepping down as CEO and president of Unity (investors.unity.com) angielski
SAN FRANCISCO–(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Unity (NYSE: U) (the “Company”), the world’s leading platform for creating and growing real-time 3D (RT3D) content, today announced that John Riccitiello will retire as President, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman and a member of the Company’s Board of Directors, effective immediately....
Epic Games to update Unreal Engine pricing for devs not making games (www.gamedeveloper.com) angielski
Excerpts:...
Epic says it's 'looking into' it after pigeon dating sim maker says she's not received royalties in 2 years (www.pcgamer.com) angielski
Epic Games Cutting 870 Jobs, 16 Percent Of Its Workforce, also selling Bandcamp (kotaku.com) angielski
Idris Elba: Actors in video games like Phantom Liberty is 'sign of the times' (www.bbc.com) angielski
Idris Elba, who stars in Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty, sees a future where films and games converge.
Diablo 4 Twitch viewership continues to drop as Diablo 3 overtakes it (www.charlieintel.com) angielski
If the same game is available and on sale on GOG and Steam, on which platform you rather buy it?
I’ve had this question looking at the Quake con sale, and Call of Cthulhu Dark Corners of the Earth is for sale on both platforms. I ended up buying it on GOG. What is your opinion?
Madden should not be 70$ (lemmy.world) angielski