Jump to content

The steady corruption of the AAA gaming industry


Zenpai

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

Do you even know how addiction works? To say they're not forced to buy them is pretty silly. Of course they aren't, but neither are people addicted to drugs, and that doesn't stop them from ruining their lives. It's not so simple to say they should just stop; it's an addiction... You think the drug dealer is free of any accountability in this situation? Even if they knowingly take advantage of someone's addiction? It's an extreme example, but you can draw some similarities between this and a publisher such as EA's relationship with whales. They know all the ways to subtlety manipulate these people and keep them spending. These big publishers have turned their games into virtual casinos.

 

This article really opened my eyes to the issue: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-10-23-manveer-heir-bioware-mass-effect-ea-monetisation

 

So yes, I think when a publisher knowingly takes advantage of someone's addiction to get them to spend upwards of $15,000 on useless in-game items, it's unethical.

Yes I do know how addiction works and it's kind of disturbing how black and white you are making such a complicated personal problems.that millions of people deal with every day.

People can be addicted to anything not just drugs or gambling, they can be addicted to food, games, sex, or any number of things, but just because someone could become addicted to something does not make it or the industry that makes whatever unethical. 

As I said addiction is complicated, You think it's a disease and when you have it you lose the ability to choose/ control yourself.

I'm have different opinions that are not the opposite of yours, but the ability to choose is never lost even with addiction.

Comparing Illegal drug dealers and game companies is so absurd i'm not even going to bother with that point, but I'm sure you know using an extreme example to make a point doesn't really help make a good point because it is extreme. 

Loot Boxes are not comparable to gambling because even if you hate what you get from the lootbox you still got something unlike pachinko & slot machine, card games, and other gambling related things where you could spend X amount of money and get nothing.

Also in that article did they talk to the person who spent $15,000? Do they know how much that persons makes or if they are so rich that amount of money is meaningless (and yes some people make so much a year that $15,000 over the course of ME3 MP lifespan is nothing) 

The phrase "I've seen people literally spend $15,000 on Mass Effect multiplayer cards." only tells you that he saw it, not that those people were addicted to the game.

While that article may have affected you it doesn't really say anything about game companies manipulating people with addiction. It's about game companies seeing that some people will spend their money on Loot Boxes which is not unethical.

The Addiction issue is not something you can use black and white morality on. It's too complicated for that and you can't blame/ call companies or people unethical just because of other people's personal problems.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, jrdemr said:

 

Yes. That is exactly what I'm saying. You're treating personal choice as if it's some absolutely sacred right that cannot be curtailed or restrained. It's because a lot of people are stupid and cannot make their own decisions that we have laws in order to function as a society

 

You're making lots of good points, but this bit in particular made me recall a bit from Jim Jefferies, so I'll take this chance to make some more people aware of him. The clip below is basically saying the exact same thing as the bit I quoted here.

 

 

If you (any person reading this) like the clip, his two latest shows are available on Netflix. I really like his shows, he does a lot of crude humour and adds a couple of ideas on society that are often very insightful.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Simple Rick said:

 

You're making lots of good points, but this bit in particular made me recall a bit from Jim Jefferies, so I'll take this chance to make some more people aware of him. The clip below is basically saying the exact same thing as the bit I quoted here.

 

 

If you (any person reading this) like the clip, his two latest shows are available on Netflix. I really like his shows, he does a lot of crude humour and adds a couple of ideas on society that are often very insightful.

 

Well, that was a very... interesting way to illustrate my point xD

(But it does illustrate it very well, nevertheless ?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Started editing my last post but I was already quoted so here goes the rest. To bring the thread a wee bit back on track after it got derailed by a certain "microtransactions are not unethical" post; I'm currently very much in conflict with myself about whether or not to drop AAA gaming altogether.

 

If I think about the last year and which games I enjoyed the most, I don't think any AAA game that wasn't a Nintendo first party game would make the top five. Maybe Fractured But Whole would make the cut, which is another game to add to my feeling that other than Nintendo and Ubisoft (and Rockstar whenever they bother with releasing something new instead of rereleasing their current library), I am quickly losing interest in anything that's AAA. Shadow Of War? The first game was my first platinum but I still haven't bothered with buying the sequel. Another God Of War? Who cares, I'll get it on a sale. The Last Of Us 2, the new Spider-Man game, a Shadow Of The Colossus remaster, Days Gone... All big, bloated titles that really caught my interest but these days I can't get into the thought of these games, whereas I'm very excited when a smaller dev says "We're doing Grand Theft Auto, but like it's a SNES game, LOL!" or "We're doing a game half the length and half the price of AAA, but with awesome graphics and tou play a Pict but there's Norse mythology and also the main character struggles with psychosis". 

 

Long story short, I get the feeling more and more that AAA devs (or, better put, the AAA publishers) are trying to find some magic formula for selling loads of games, while they forget that a game with less sales but that is amazing for its fanbase is a good thing too. Nintendo was always doing their own thing and they're not that into big MP games so it feels like they can be excluded from this generalisation. Ubisoft seems to be actively trying to be better. Rockstar might be doing a bit "same-old same-old", but seeing as they practically invented the "GTA clone" genre... I'm still not happy with how much they bother with rereleases instead of just producing a new game every now and then. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think Red Dead Redemption 2 from this year is their first new game since Grand Theft Auto V from 2013, while according to wiki they have no less than ten(!) active subsidiaries now.

 

Other than those three (mainly Nintendo, but Ubi and Rockstar still make me turn my head), whenever a big AAA publisher comes withtheir big new title, my first thought these days is "why would I even bother?" instead of the joy I usedto feel. There's been way to many carbon copies, to my taste.

 

 

2 minutes ago, jrdemr said:

 

Well, that was a very... interesting way to illustrate my point xD

(But it does illustrate it very well, nevertheless 1f609.png)

 

Exactly my point - Jim Jefferies may be a bit shouty-cursy, but he does have some good points.

 

Honestly though, his entire gun routine is comedy gold.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Most Western AAA offerings are becoming way too cookie-cutter and their willingness to sacrifice actual good gameplay for the sake of uncapped monetization is starting to wear thin on me. Whenever I see a new big Western AAA project announced, I barely even give it a second thought. The vast majority of them are unoriginal and focused of multiplayer (which I thoroughly hate), anyway, so... I do have a few AAA games in my backlog but they're all either old (and hence untainted by these greedy monetization practices) or focused on single-player (which makes those monetization practices more unlikely and a lot harder to implement).

 

Besides Nintendo, Sony has also been having a great stance with their first-party titles. Japanese games in general have been having a much better track record when it comes to creating fun and original experiences, untainted by these greedy AAA moves. Not to say they haven't existed over there (we can all remember how Street Fighter V was super bare-bones at launch and how BlazBlue Cross Tag Battle is going to have half the bloody roster cut off and sold later as DLC - especially considering that the vast majority of the DLC characters have already been made for previous games and they're just importing them) - but even when they pull these greedy moves, they're still nowhere near as bad as the ones Western publishers pull.

 

Still, one thing that's been bothering me is the increasing appearance of Season Passes in Japanese games. Bandai Namco has long had them and Nintendo has been implementing them as well - though Sony hasn't done so yet, as far as I know. The number of DLC packs in Japanese games has also been worrying me a lot. The Persona games, for example, have been having an alarming number of them (and they're expensive, too!) and the upcoming Dragon Ball FighterZ also has some very expensive DLC coming up, which makes me worry for the future, wondering if they're ever going to implement microtransactions and loot boxes later down the line as well. Dragon Ball Xenoverse 2, for instance, has already implemented microtransactions. But then again, since most Japanese developers focus more on single-player games, this might be rare.

 

(I hope).

 

40 minutes ago, Simple Rick said:

Exactly my point - Jim Jefferies may be a bit shouty-cursy, but he does have some good points.

 

Honestly though, his entire gun routine is comedy gold.

 

Jim Jeffries is really good. He uses the kind of comedy I like the most - it makes you both laugh and learn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Simple Rick said:

 

Actually, you'll find that it's in the definition on "addiction" that it is compulsory - being able to make a chose on the matter is lost on people with an addiction, it has become an irresistible urge for them.

 

And let's not forget that companies like EA and Activision are actively researching how to get people to spend more money, to the point of having patented matchmaking algorithms that take "willingness to spend money" into account.

 

As I said addiction is an issue that is complicated and currently being debated in the scientific and Psychology communities.
That definition only works if you are on the side that says addiction is a disease. if you are on the other side that definition does not work.

Since it is an issue that is still being contested trying to say one definition is correct isn't logical sound. 

I could get into why definitions of certain things have to be contested but I really don't want to right now. 
 

4 hours ago, jrdemr said:

But I hope I could shed some light on your arguments.

No, neither you nor anyone else who has argument against my points have shed any light on anything.

Most of the counterpoints to my arguments have only showed me the following things:

  1. Most of the counterpoints have been logically unsound.
  2. Made by people who have shown unethical Tendencies.
  3. Who don't understand why you shouldn't use logical fallacies.
  4. That make tangential points that have almost nothing to do with anything. 
  5. Lack actual researched data to back up their points.
  6. Confuses personal opinion with logical fact.
  7. Still really doesn't respect other people's opinions at all
  8. Uses Black or White morality on complicated issues such as addiction and parental responsibility 

Look I get your point, you don't like loot boxes and stuff and I respect your opinion on it even if you haven't Logically proving your point yet. I don't much care for them either but that doesn't make them unethical.

I will say this you really need to work on your argument skills. Every time you trying using something that is only tangentially related to prove your point, you open yourself up for Counterpoint a and as shown in this thread your responses to those counterpoints are pretty weak and based on your personal opinion.

 

5 hours ago, jrdemr said:

 I don't want my topic to become a giant, negative back-and-forth. 

You think a simple conversation of opposing views is a negative back and forth  However, you are okay with a echoing chamber of negativity as long as it agrees with your points

:hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, soultaker655 said:

As I said addiction is an issue that is complicated and currently being debated in the scientific and Psychology communities.
That definition only works if you are on the side that says addiction is a disease. if you are on the other side that definition does not work.

Since it is an issue that is still being contested trying to say one definition is correct isn't logical sound. 

I could get into why definitions of certain things have to be contested but I really don't want to right now. 

 

Completely wrong, I never claimed addiction to be a disease and if you try to justify your other post like this then you don't know WHY people challenge the assumption that addiction is a disease.

 

Addiction is a compulsive symptom, and that's not what people try to challenge. What the "is addiction a disease" argument is about, is not that it is not compulsory, but that it does not qualify as a "disease" in the technical sense - it not being an infection, degenerative disorder or any of the other disease subsets. Saying addiction is not a disease and saying that addiction is not compulsory are two completely different things.

 

So: you're free in saying that addiction is not a disease (my opinion is that it shouldn't be classified as a disease either) but you're wrong if you try to claim that 'true' addicts still have a real choice in their actions. They don't, that's why they're addicts.

 

4 hours ago, jrdemr said:

Agreed. Most Western AAA offerings are becoming way too cookie-cutter and their willingness to sacrifice actual good gameplay for the sake of uncapped monetization is starting to wear thin on me. Whenever I see a new big Western AAA project announced, I barely even give it a second thought. The vast majority of them are unoriginal and focused of multiplayer (which I thoroughly hate), anyway, so... I do have a few AAA games in my backlog but they're all either old (and hence untainted by these greedy monetization practices) or focused on single-player (which makes those monetization practices more unlikely and a lot harder to implement).

 

Besides Nintendo, Sony has also been having a great stance with their first-party titles. Japanese games in general have been having a much better track record when it comes to creating fun and original experiences, untainted by these greedy AAA moves. Not to say they haven't existed over there (we can all remember how Street Fighter V was super bare-bones at launch and how BlazBlue Cross Tag Battle is going to have half the bloody roster cut off and sold later as DLC - especially considering that the vast majority of the DLC characters have already been made for previous games and they're just importing them) - but even when they pull these greedy moves, they're still nowhere near as bad as the ones Western publishers pull.

 

Still, one thing that's been bothering me is the increasing appearance of Season Passes in Japanese games. Bandai Namco has long had them and Nintendo has been implementing them as well - though Sony hasn't done so yet, as far as I know. The number of DLC packs in Japanese games has also been worrying me a lot. The Persona games, for example, have been having an alarming number of them (and they're expensive, too!) and the upcoming Dragon Ball FighterZ also has some very expensive DLC coming up, which makes me worry for the future, wondering if they're ever going to implement microtransactions and loot boxes later down the line as well. Dragon Ball Xenoverse 2, for instance, has already implemented microtransactions. But then again, since most Japanese developers focus more on single-player games, this might be rare.

 

(I hope).

 

Yeah I hate (online) multiplayer too, I don't get the appeal at all. 

 

I think Sony is much better than Microsoft when it comes to exclusives but in my opinion it's still nothing compared to Nintendo. There's no upcoming Sony exclusive I just had to have day one, nor hve I ever bought a Sony exclusive day one. Horizon Zero Dawn was a close one but they released in the same month as the Switch and Zelda - sorry, no contest.

 

Nintendo has a wee bit of DLC but not that much, and only rarely is it story DLC. Don't think any Switch Nintendo game has DLC except for Zelda, actually. I mean, Super Mario Odyssey has a little bit but that is free.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Simple Rick said:

I think Sony is much better than Microsoft when it comes to exclusives but in my opinion it's still nothing compared to Nintendo. There's no upcoming Sony exclusive I just had to have day one, nor hve I ever bought a Sony exclusive day one. Horizon Zero Dawn was a close one but they released in the same month as the Switch and Zelda - sorry, no contest.

 

Nintendo has a wee bit of DLC but not that much, and only rarely is it story DLC. Don't think any Switch Nintendo game has DLC except for Zelda, actually. I mean, Super Mario Odyssey has a little bit but that is free.

 

I'm personally not that big of a fan of Nintendo first-party titles. I have bought all of their handhelds plus the GameCube, but never for Mario or Zelda, etc. I bought Ocarina of Time a few years back and found it unbelievably boring. When I went to Japan last year I got the one Nintendo game I ever enjoyed - the original Wario Land. I borrowed it about 20 years ago (!!) and remembered really liking it. When checking out the stores in Akihabara, I found a cheap used copy and thought "why not?". I have yet to play it, though - my backlog is huge.

 

As you know, I did get a Switch last month, though. The system seemed appealing, there's a lot of good games coming out for it and I always said that if they ever announced a port of Bayonetta 2, I'd immediately get one. Well, not only did they announce a Bayonetta 2 port, they also announced the sequel, so... ? (Well, Bayonetta kind of is a first-party Nintendo game now, so... I guess you can count that?...) That and I always got every single one of Nintendo's handhelds so far, and no matter what they themselves say, the Switch is their next handheld - that much got confirmed as soon as the next mainline Pokémon game was announced exclusively for the system. This particular handheld just so happens to connect to your TV.

 

I'm more of a Sony Pony, to be honest. I really like their exclusives, their consoles and their entire stance on the industry. Nintendo may innovate a lot on their hardware, but Sony also takes a lot of gambles on their software and releases a ton of new IP. Not to say that they don't make mistakes, but all three major manufacturers do, so...

 

Oh, and Mario + Rabbids also has a Season Pass.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, jrdemr said:

 

I'm personally not that big of a fan of Nintendo first-party titles. I have bought all of their handhelds plus the GameCube, but never for Mario or Zelda, etc. I bought Ocarina of Time a few years back and found it unbelievably boring. When I went to Japan last year I got the one Nintendo game I ever enjoyed - the original Wario Land. I borrowed it about 20 years ago (!!) and remembered really liking it. When checking out the stores in Akihabara, I found a cheap used copy and thought "why not?". I have yet to play it, though - my backlog is huge.

 

As you know, I did get a Switch last month, though. The system seemed appealing, there's a lot of good games coming out for it and I always said that if they ever announced a port of Bayonetta 2, I'd immediately get one. Well, not only did they announce a Bayonetta 2 port, they also announced the sequel, so... 1f61d.png (Well, Bayonetta kind of is a first-party Nintendo game now, so... I guess you can count that?...) That and I always got every single one of Nintendo's handhelds so far, and no matter what they themselves say, the Switch is their next handheld - that much got confirmed as soon as the next mainline Pokémon game was announced exclusively for the system. This particular handheld just so happens to connect to your TV.

 

I'm more of a Sony Pony, to be honest. I really like their exclusives, their consoles and their entire stance on the industry. Nintendo may innovate a lot on their hardware, but Sony also takes a lot of gambles on their software and releases a ton of new IP. Not to say that they don't make mistakes, but all three major manufacturers do, so...

 

Well, there's no accounting for taste... ;)

 

It's probably just because I grew up with Nintendo that I can get so excited for a new Kirby or a Tropical Freeze port. Objectively speaking, Nintendo is a big "same-old" offender on the software side. Then again, it's the kind of "same-old" I can get behind, especially if it's complemented with stuff like Fast RMX, Mario+Rabbids and other second party titles.

 

I guess in the end, I'm much more into platforming, karts and stuff than in huge open world games, which is probably why I was so hesitant about starting Breath Of The Wild. Glad I did, though.

 

So, with you being labeled a Pony and me a Drone... At least we can agree that Xbots are the real losers :D

 

There is a limit to how much I accept from Nintendo though... Even did not get a Wii U.

 

6 minutes ago, jrdemr said:

Oh, and Mario + Rabbids also has a Season Pass.

 

Didn't count that one as it's not first party, it was made by Ubisoft, otherwise known as King Of The Season Passes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/23/2018 at 3:44 AM, Simple Rick said:

Started editing my last post but I was already quoted so here goes the rest. To bring the thread a wee bit back on track after it got derailed by a certain "microtransactions are not unethical" post; I'm currently very much in conflict with myself about whether or not to drop AAA gaming altogether.

 

If I think about the last year and which games I enjoyed the most, I don't think any AAA game that wasn't a Nintendo first party game would make the top five. Maybe Fractured But Whole would make the cut, which is another game to add to my feeling that other than Nintendo and Ubisoft (and Rockstar whenever they bother with releasing something new instead of rereleasing their current library), I am quickly losing interest in anything that's AAA. Shadow Of War? The first game was my first platinum but I still haven't bothered with buying the sequel. Another God Of War? Who cares, I'll get it on a sale. The Last Of Us 2, the new Spider-Man game, a Shadow Of The Colossus remaster, Days Gone... All big, bloated titles that really caught my interest but these days I can't get into the thought of these games, whereas I'm very excited when a smaller dev says "We're doing Grand Theft Auto, but like it's a SNES game, LOL!" or "We're doing a game half the length and half the price of AAA, but with awesome graphics and tou play a Pict but there's Norse mythology and also the main character struggles with psychosis". 

 

Long story short, I get the feeling more and more that AAA devs (or, better put, the AAA publishers) are trying to find some magic formula for selling loads of games, while they forget that a game with less sales but that is amazing for its fanbase is a good thing too. Nintendo was always doing their own thing and they're not that into big MP games so it feels like they can be excluded from this generalisation. Ubisoft seems to be actively trying to be better. Rockstar might be doing a bit "same-old same-old", but seeing as they practically invented the "GTA clone" genre... I'm still not happy with how much they bother with rereleases instead of just producing a new game every now and then. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think Red Dead Redemption 2 from this year is their first new game since Grand Theft Auto V from 2013, while according to wiki they have no less than ten(!) active subsidiaries now.

 

Other than those three (mainly Nintendo, but Ubi and Rockstar still make me turn my head), whenever a big AAA publisher comes withtheir big new title, my first thought these days is "why would I even bother?" instead of the joy I usedto feel. There's been way to many carbon copies, to my taste.

 

On 1/23/2018 at 4:38 AM, jrdemr said:

Agreed. Most Western AAA offerings are becoming way too cookie-cutter and their willingness to sacrifice actual good gameplay for the sake of uncapped monetization is starting to wear thin on me. Whenever I see a new big Western AAA project announced, I barely even give it a second thought. The vast majority of them are unoriginal and focused of multiplayer (which I thoroughly hate), anyway, so... I do have a few AAA games in my backlog but they're all either old (and hence untainted by these greedy monetization practices) or focused on single-player (which makes those monetization practices more unlikely and a lot harder to implement).

 

Besides Nintendo, Sony has also been having a great stance with their first-party titles. Japanese games in general have been having a much better track record when it comes to creating fun and original experiences, untainted by these greedy AAA moves. Not to say they haven't existed over there (we can all remember how Street Fighter V was super bare-bones at launch and how BlazBlue Cross Tag Battle is going to have half the bloody roster cut off and sold later as DLC - especially considering that the vast majority of the DLC characters have already been made for previous games and they're just importing them) - but even when they pull these greedy moves, they're still nowhere near as bad as the ones Western publishers pull.

 

Most of the AAA games I own are on the PS3, with a select few on the PS4. 

 

I bought Wolfenstein II and Assassins Creed Origins a few months ago but apart from those the only AAA game I’m looking to get is God of War. Because I’m a fan of the franchise. 

 

Don’t care nor like the Need for Speed games because EA is the publisher. Never understood the hype for the Destiny games. Can’t stand Star Wars Battlefront nor it’s sequel. 

 

Anything to me that isn’t published by Sony Computer Entertainment that is AAA I have a very cautious eye. Because in all honesty the games have lost their charm. 

 

Right now the games I’ve been focusing on are mostly indie and retro (older) games. 

 

I found Hotline Miami 2 and Velocity 2X to be more enjoyable than Horizon Zero Dawn. I made Horizon my 100th platinum and I tried to sound like I was praising it because it was a big milestone. But in all honesty I found little to be excited about because it was simply another big open world game. 

 

Horizon is a clear example of where the AAA industry is heading. Make these games that cost millions of dollars to have outstanding graphics, but have little originality and little in innovation. 

 

I plan to get Grand Theft Auto III, Vice City and San Andreas but mostly because I loved playing the trilogy on the PS2. It was also a time when DLC and lootboxes were a twinkle in someone’s eye, because the game had to be presentable without any patches or DLC. 

 

These days you can guarantee a game like Madden 18 by EA has not only had patches, they also have forced microtransactions and/or DLC. In some cases the DLC is necessary to enjoy the game, which to me is just sad. 

 

Western AAA games are in the same boat as Hollywood and much of the music and television industry. Throw out the same formula over and over and x1000 it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I always really liked Extra Credits. Their videos are fun and enlightening essays about the video game industry. Sadly, they crossed the line for me with their last two videos, in which they defended the Industry's "need" for Season Passes, DLC, microtransactions and loot boxes. I never thought the day would come, but I thoroughly disagree with their arguments on the matter. I do think their hearts are in the right place, don't get me wrong, but they're completely forgetting some very crucial points on why that "need" is actually greed masquerading as need.

 

Thankfully, Jim Sterling exists.

 

I will leave all three videos here for you to see:

 

.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm only sad that people are just now catching on to this.

 

AAA games have huge budgets. But only part of that budget is for development. The rest is to pay every single person in the company that publishes the game. Again - just look at the credits following games now. There are lots of slices of pie going out to lots of people.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, starcrunch061 said:

I'm only sad that people are just now catching on to this.

 

AAA games have huge budgets. But only part of that budget is for development. The rest is to pay every single person in the company that publishes the game. Again - just look at the credits following games now. There are lots of slices of pie going out to lots of people.

 

It's like one of several episodes from South Park where either the gang or Eric Cartman by himself becomes "management"/"agent" for someone else, blatantly expecting to get money for doing nothing.

 

Except in real life it's not funny at all.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I'm not sure if this is entirely relevant or not, but I have a story.

 

A friend of mine on Steam is playing Metal Gear Survive.  He apparently genuinely enjoys the game... but he posted on the friend feed yesterday that he was getting bombarded with upwards of 50 messages in one gaming session from his Steam "friends" harassing him for playing it.  Saying things like "wanting to know if I was going to refund it soon and write a negative review, why was I supporting a bad company, why did I buy a crappy game, etc. etc".

 

This seems to be the way it goes nowadays.  I think the "cause" and concern people are taking up against microtransactions, lootboxes, etc... is justified.  Along with many of the myriad of "causes" people take up these days (not even necessarily gaming related).  But holy hell do people go about "fighting it" the wrong way.  Thinking their childish, passive aggressive, harassing of others en masse for perceived indiscretions is in the right because of some twisted "ends justifies the means".  And that fact that, unfortunately, that boorish behavior works as companies buckle under the PR nightmare they become through sheer volume, deservedly or not.

 

Hypocritically childish as it may be, it's almost enough to make me... someone with no particularly strong feelings on the subject, since games I like are rarely impacted by them... root for the AAA industry's f**king over of these buffoons.  I hope their worlds fall apart when their favorite game/series gets hit by the microtransaction/lootbox wave, if it hasn't already. xD

Edited by Dreakon13
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dreakon13 said:

He apparently genuinely enjoys the game... but he posted on the friend feed yesterday that he was getting bombarded with upwards of 50 messages in one gaming session from his Steam "friends" harassing him for playing it.  Saying things like "wanting to know if I was going to refund it soon and write a negative review, why was I supporting a bad company, why did I buy a crappy game, etc. etc".

 

 

Honestly, one of the biggest issues with gaming right now IMO is all the toxic dudebros who'll harass you with memes about games they don't like. I had one person see me playing Borderlands 2 (back when I used Steam) and remove me instantly. At this point if someone starts harassing me about a game I'm liable to just defriend them on the spot. Really tired of having to deal with people spamming memes my way because I like a game I like.

 

1 hour ago, Dreakon13 said:

But holy hell do people go about "fighting it" the wrong way.  Thinking their childish, passive aggressive, harassing of others en masse for perceived indiscretions is in the right because of some twisted "ends justifies the means".  And that fact that, unfortunately, that boorish behavior works as companies buckle under the PR nightmare they become through sheer volume, deservedly or not.

 

I was active in the Mass Effect community, and the outrage during the ME3 ending fiasco was absurd. Yes, sure, it wasn't the well written ending you could think of, but outside of the issues with the Star Child and the Synthesis ending (what the fuck???) it wasn't nearly that bad. And yet people were calling for Casey Hudson to be fired en masse.

 

I think the problem is that with the way social media works, people basically get their outrage second hand and have this sort of stampede mentality. Where even if they don't care about something, if they see enough bad things about said thing, they'll jump on board even if they have no personal investment in the matter whatsoever. You see this all the time with online personalities getting doxxed and harassed. I mean, Star Wars Battlefront 2's developers ended up getting death threats, which somehow is completely normal in this day and age. 

 

You also see this kind of going the other way, with certain companies being treated as godlike. For example, it's almost impossible to criticize Nintendo. And CD Projekt Red are treated like gods despite the allegations of extremely poor workplace management and mistreatment of their employees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay people,

 

So we're talking about how AAA games are getting worse, and @StrickenBiged has raised a point here (and in a few other threads) for Hellblade, and its developers talking about how there should be more people trying to fill the gap between low-cost indie and big-budget AAA, or as they call that gap, "Independent AAA".

 

Well, I think it's time I made a point here about Elite: Dangerous.

 

Trailer:

Spoiler

 

 

 

Trailer is a bit action-packed but it fits the feel, remember though that if you don't want to go the action route you're free to do whatever else in this game.

 

Elite: Dangerous is a space simulation game. It's been made by Frontier Developments, who struggled for more than a decade to get enough funding for the game and only managed to make it after going onto Kickstarter.

 

The game looks beautiful...

 

Screenshots I made:

Spoiler

sTBfYRVh.jpg

 

xqy1AN7h.jpg

 

Aprd5vw.jpg

 

It's set in our galaxy, on an unfathomable 1:1 scale. The stars that we know of are there, and the rest has been generated using speculative functions derived from how scientists currently think the galaxy is made. There's a lot of beauty in the galaxy to see; black holes, ringed planets, nebulas... The ships and space stations look amazing too. And let's not forget the music...

 

OST:

Spoiler

 

 

 

A lot can be done in the game: a few different activities are basically flying from space station to space station (like trading of goods (either legal or on the black markets), taking in passengers, shipping goods or data for factions) but there's also money to be made from exploration, mining or combat (all of which can also be done for other reasons, naturally). Of course, this being a simulator, MMO and RPG, expect a lot of grinding if you want anything done (my trip to Sagittarius A* and back made me just over 80 million credits, which is in between a fourth and a fifth of the way towards an Elite rank in Exploration).

 

The in-game time is UTC +1286 years, and since the game's release a story has been unfolding. There's three major factions (Federation, Empire, Alliance) for which players can attempt missions, and depending on player activity factions can gain/lose territories. Currently, the humans have united in a war against the Thargoids (the only known non-Earth sentient species in the galaxy).

 

As a space simulation, there's a plethora of control options to keep in mind and what's likely to be the most difficult thing to do in the game is making a decent landing on a space station. Get through it all though, and you get a very rewarding experience.

 

I think Elite: Dangerous definitely fits the Independent AAA label. If you like this sort of game (read: if you're into the theme and gameplay but more importantly also patient) it can give you hundreds of hours of play (definitely if you wish to go for the platinum, which has you do a lot of stuff for a lot of different gameplay options), it looks great and it only costs €50, and that's including the season pass - bare game costs only €25 but I very much recommend buying the complete package, it adds a lot of stuff like landing on planets and driving around in an SRV.

 

Here's Zero Punctuation's review, which as always, focuses on the negative (that he highlights a couple of times how much he likes the game is saying something).

 

Zero Punctuation:

Spoiler

 

 

 

Edited by Cool Rick
typo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cool Rick said:

Here's Zero Punctuation's review, which as always, focuses on the negative (that he highlights a couple of times how much he likes the game is saying something).

 

Did you ever see his Demon's Souls "review"? xD He played one level, and called that a day, but I think he regretted it later when he got into the series. Probably one of the laziest reviews of him I ever saw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MMDE said:

 

Did you ever see his Demon's Souls "review"? xD He played one level, and called that a day, but I think he regretted it later when he got into the series. Probably one of the laziest reviews of him I ever saw.

 

According to TV Time, I watched that episode but I don't remember anything of it. His Dark Souls review was one of my favourites though, very funny how he talks about the "you have to try it, it can't be explained" crowd.

 

Totally not the point of my post by the way, to end up discussing the Souls series again. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Having loved The Talos Principle, which I waited on until it was under €10, and having waited on sales on other games from independent developers, I think it's curious how subconsciously where not willing to pay as much for independent games as we are for AAA games.

 

I decided in the last months or so, after stuff like The Talos Principle, Hellblade and Elite Dangerous, that I should take a closer look at indie titles and not immediately dismiss those that 'dare' ask more than €15 for their game.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just going to keep writing indie and independent AAA recommendations here :) though I still recommend people to read through my wall of text for Elite Dangerous a few posts before.

 

Point for this time is The Fall and The Fall Part 2: Unbound. These are the first two games of a planned trilogy, the second game was released in February. The games combine surroundings puzzles with a bit of action and a great science fiction story. They're just €10 and €17 and there's a bundle of the two for €22, and I'd say you're getting your money's worth at full price. 

 

If you like science fiction stories, especially AI related ones, you should not pass on these games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Bringing up an old thread here, but I just find it fascinating that Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 Remastered and Final Fantasy VII Remake are both getting a lot of money and attention, despite the fact that they're basically remakes/remasters of old games that already gained an audience years before.

 

Resident Evil 3 is basically a remake just like Resident Evil 2 when it released last year.

 

The most popular games this week have basically been either sequels or remasters/remakes. Everyone who loved and played Nioh is already playing the sequel. DOOM Eternal, while it looks fun and exciting, is basically a continuation of DOOM 2016.

 

There are virtually no new IPs that have really gained a big following these past few months, but we all know all the big developers are putting their time and money into making their AAA games for the upcoming PlayStation 5 console.

 

I honestly don't know what's going to happen when the new generation comes around, because anything can happen. But should the microtransaction/lootbox trend fully take effect and we're having to pay for more DLC, I may consider dropping out after the PlayStation 5.

 

I just miss the creativity and passion that gaming used to have. Supposed new IPs feel like an amalgamation of trending ideas that were thrown together. The indie market is chock full of crap, mostly shovelware that Steam couldn't care less about that somehow gets onto that platform. Sometimes some of those games get approved on the PS4, which explains all the garbage we have gotten these past few years.

 

We're trailing close to the end of the PS4 era and just about to kick off with the PS5 era. Definitely a weird time to be gaming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Spaz said:

I just miss the creativity and passion that gaming used to have. Supposed new IPs feel like an amalgamation of trending ideas that were thrown together. The indie market is chock full of crap, mostly shovelware that Steam couldn't care less about that somehow gets onto that platform. Sometimes some of those games get approved on the PS4, which explains all the garbage we have gotten these past few years.

 

To be honest, I think you're being too negative.

 

The Playstation 4 era has brought us some of the best games of all time - to the point where I actually think it supplanted the PS2 as my favorite console of all time. There was a time, especially during the 7th generation, where your statement might have been true, what with everyone trying to copy each other and get a piece of the latest fad, but I just don't think that's the case anymore. Granted, yes, there is still a lot of greed in the gaming industry, namely with loot boxes, microtransactions, excessive DLC and the like - but that's mainly in the Western gaming industry. If you look towards the Japanese side of things, however, you'll find things just as good (if not better) than back in the PS2 days. Granted, we do still have excessive DLC every now and then... but I think that's made up for with the amazing quality the games themselves have been having recently.

 

And I have no idea what you mean by "the indie market is chock full of crap". The indie market's absolutely crushing it with great gems one after the other. Sure, if you go to Steam you might see a lot of crap... but that's just because Steam allows every single thing in there. If you go to a more curated storefront, like the PS Store or the Nintendo eShop, I can guarantee you'll have so many good choices you'll beg for them to stop!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...