you get a lot of publicly traded companies that are in the industry that have to show their investors growth—because why else does somebody own a share of someone’s stock if it’s not going to grow?
I thought the way it was supposed to work was, a company starts out investing in its growth and during this period shareholders get gains from the price of the stock going up, and then when it has maxed out just switch to shoveling the profits into dividends instead? If the industry has stopped growing, I don’t see why there isn’t a path to acknowledging that to investors, what am I missing?
It makes sense financially if the game is expected to have a big spike of sales initially, and after a while have very few sales, so the expected additional lifetime revenue is less than the cost difference between a temporary and perpetual license.
Yes, but they are made by different people and all those bugs have been worked out over time. The people actually making the games are doing so at a higher level with more safeguards and it shows.
Very rose tinted glasses. I remember horrifying cache corruption bugs that locked you out of certain game areas permanently on that save, random illegal operation exceptions crashing games (no autosave btw), the whole system regularly freezing and needing to be completely restarted, games just inexplicably not working to begin with on a regular basis because of some hardware incompatibility and the internet sucked for finding fixes then and patches weren’t a thing so you were just screwed.
I would say that games not all being written in C and assembly trying to squeeze out every possible performance efficiency with nothing but dev machismo as safeguards is in fact a good thing.
I haven’t played for a couple years but from what I remember out of thousands of hours playing I only heard a woman speak a small handful of times, it was always very surprising
Such AI integration will be separated into categories of “pre-generated” content that is “created with the help of AI tools during development” (e.g., using DALL-E for in-game images) and “live-generated” content that is “created with the help of AI tools while the game is running” (e.g., using Nvidia’s AI-powered NPC technology).
Both are covered by the policies the article talks about, and both were arguably against the rules previously
If you filter out the noise and ignore the omnipresent hate, there’s still cool stuff there. The technology still works. The prevailing narrative doesn’t change that. But the problems were inevitable, for the simple reason that the world is full of pent up financial desperation, and crypto is an incredibly powerful tool for letting people do what they choose with money in a way that isn’t locked down by some payment provider or banking middleman. Borderless, permissionless. So naturally the main thing people went to do with it is competing to take each other’s money somewhere on the spectrum between gambling and theft. It’s non-crypto problems finding an outlet, and no amount of pushback from whatever non money crazed “scene” was out there could have done anything to stop that.
I don’t think that’s the reason, I think they’re using the game as an outlet for unrelated frustrations in their lives, but I agree that toxicity still exists in games without votekick. But personally I find it infinitely more tolerable playing a game with toxic people when they don’t have the power to kick me out of the match, because that means I’m not obligated to try to appease them.
I think it’s more of a votekick problem. There’s always going to be people whining about their teammates regardless of skill differential. People will also find ways to accuse same and higher ranked players of being bad at the game, because it’s more about ego and them being in a bad mood.
Well at least they could make a game that expands on the story, since the story is based on the IP, even if they couldn’t use things specifically from the previous game or call it a sequel.