Next Xbox Online only. No Used Games....again.

[Hatta]

Hey do you guys remember the discussions on here in 2004 about microtransactions destroying games?

 

And, have they not? Is there any game where "free to play" doesn't really mean "pay to win"?

[Hatta]

What's really amazing is how the consumer has become the enemy in the video game industry. The corporate giants are just getting more open about how much disdain they have for us. It used to be they needed our business, now they act like they we can't live without them.

 

It's not just the video game industry...

[Starscream]

 

And, have they not? Is there any game where "free to play" doesn't really mean "pay to win"?

 

lol microtransactions haven't destroyed games. all this doomsday stuff constantly is humorous and silly. they are games. entertainment. how do you react to the important things in life?

[cimerians]

lol microtransactions haven't destroyed games.

 

Are you kidding me man?

 

Check out the prime example of microtransactions meticulously designed to simply take money from your bank account and give nothing to you in return:

http://www.destructoid.com/review-final-fantasy-all-the-bravest-242882.phtml

 

It's not "entertainment", its clever theft from those who have more money than common sense. They (the wrong ones) KNOW people will dish out money stupidly and now its starting to hit them in the face when sales don't meet their inane expectations.

 

2K games does it the right way. Square as the review above does not.

 

Its a problem within this hobby and its not going to go away.

 

Check this out ...yeah its the same guy Sterling but it really is the truth:

[Atarifever]

lol microtransactions haven't destroyed games. all this doomsday stuff constantly is humorous and silly. they are games. entertainment. how do you react to the important things in life?

Depends on who is doing the monetizing. DLC map packs for a game as robust as a Halo Reach add to the experience. I can already use the Forge stuff, the built in maps, the awesome replay thing, Firefight, the campaign at various difficulties, etc. No problem giving them more money after getting that for $60. I paid for a pose for TF2 as a way of giving them a tip for making such an incredible, incredible, incredible, perfect game. This is only true because they have balanced the "pay to own" weapons so that they are side grades and not upgrades, meaning you can be 100% competitive with the default weapons against anyone who bought or earned anything else.

 

Then there is stuff like "All the Bravest," where microtransactions really are evil. I guess in the end it is going to depend on which companies win out. if there's one thing network TV has taught me, it is to expect other people to make the worst possible choice, making good stuff a more and more niche market.

[Starscream]

Are you kidding me man?

 

Nope, I'm serious. For that 1 crappy game you used as an example, I could rattle off 50 that DLC has added to the experience without even really getting started. Atarifever gave an example of what most DLC has been about with his Halo example. The doomsday prediction of what DLC was going to do 8 years ago never happened. Yes it's not perfect but should we have a zero tolerance policy on something like DLC? Not any allowance for growing pains? Experiments? It's silly. I'm a few days younger than dirt and I still don't get everything right on a daily basis. Why is it that other things that don't hit the mark 100% of the time are a ripoff? I mean, if you misspell a word in your post, I wouldn't think you are a failure. Mistakes and imperfections just kind of happen.

 

As for the video, yea, I don't really have much to say..... but the video's of angry video game players who post videos for video game players to watch that always complain and moan about the state of video games but yet both the narrator and his/her audience spend a great deal of time playing video games, don't leave an impression on me.

 

Seriously, I googled some knitting stuff and knitting forums and websites seem to have much less angst. I'm thinking some people on here just picked the wrong thing to, ahem...."enjoy" during their lifetimes. Knitting may be a good thing for some peeps on here.

[cimerians]

Nope, I'm serious.

 

No....your not.

 

[Starscream]

It was the knitting right?

[+wood_jl]

Both 360 and PS3 can output 1080p BUT 99% of games render in 720p or lower resolution. (for example, Black Ops 2 renders in 880x720 resolution)

 

Yeah, I realize that, but they're still "HD" or "pseudo-HD." The point is, they look friggin' fantastic.

 

Back in the pre-HD days of consoles, yeah, things looked better on the PC. That's not to say that there weren't some good SD graphics on stuff like the original Xbox. At least, I think they were. I remember gathering 4 or 5 friends when the original Xbox Halo (Halo: Combat Evolved) came out and having a blast on multiplayer. One of the fellas was an avid PC gamer, and couldn't quit shitting on it, because it was "only 640 x 480." True, it was. I think it still looked pretty good, and it certainly looked good for its day, and it certainly was fun. But he wouldn't like it, or at least wouldn't ADMIT to liking it and having fun, because it was "only 640 x 480." I decided to call this sort of fellow a "spec man." That is, whether or not it's fun and looks good is irrelevant. Megabytes, Megahertz, Megapixels.....that's all that matters to a "spec man." Therein lies the formula for determining what sucks and what does not suck, and that's all there is to it.

 

So consoles looked pretty good then, but since they moved to HD, the graphics look closer to PC. I don't see fat scanlines on a 36" TV anymore. Black Ops games are pretty visually-impressive, to me. I'd like someone to point out the shitty parts on the screen, because I don't really see any. But you'll never NEVER NEVER convince a "spec man" that the game looks good, and that's it's fun. NEVER. It's a waste of time to even try.

[GadgetUK]

Are you kidding me man?

 

Check out the prime example of microtransactions meticulously designed to simply take money from your bank account and give nothing to you in return:

http://www.destructo...st-242882.phtml

 

It's not "entertainment", its clever theft from those who have more money than common sense. They (the wrong ones) KNOW people will dish out money stupidly and now its starting to hit them in the face when sales don't meet their inane expectations.

 

2K games does it the right way. Square as the review above does not.

 

Its a problem within this hobby and its not going to go away.

 

Check this out ...yeah its the same guy Sterling but it really is the truth:

 

 

LOL, that guy has summed up the feelings I have for the industry at the moment, and my friends. We've been saying this stuff for a good 18 months now. If the industry keeps going the way it is there's going to be a collapse like the 80's - in fact it's already started.

[onlysublime]

gaming has been cheaper than it's ever been in the history of the gaming. definitely much cheaper than in the 80s. not only do you have more sales now at much greater sizes and greater intervals, you have much better choices of places to make your purchases. You have lots of free games and cheap 99 cent games on the mobile devices. You can buy blockbuster titles brand new on sale for $2-20 only months or weeks after they're first released. you can buy arcade-sized games for $1-15 and have a very large variety of them. you have a used game market that never existed to the same degree before. Gamestop, GoHastings, Redbox, etc. have far greater reach and far better pricing than the old mom and pop rental places or places like Blockbuster.

 

The library of today's systems are larger than what was ever available on the old systems like the Atari 2600 or SNES. Not only a bigger library but a far bigger range of prices. people forget how expensive games were in the past. I remember my Activision games were over $20 each. My dad also spent a lot on games like Berzerk.

 

And with today's prices and size of library, I know most people have a glut of games in their library that they haven't even opened yet. it wasn't like that in the days of the 2600. You had to spend wisely because of the price of the games. And you ended up beating the games to death because you had a small library of games. I forgot how many titles I had for the 2600 in its heyday. Maybe 40, 60 of them. that pales in comparison to what you accumulate with today's systems. as the size of libraries have grown, the percentage of a game being completed has dropped dropped more and more over the years. nowadays, a game is lucky to be 30% done before a gamer moves on to playing the next game. You can't get a breather between new game releases nowadays. In the past, you were lucky to get 20 new titles released a month. Heck, if you had a Jaguar or Lynx, you'd be lucky to get 3 new titles a month. Nowadays, especially if you own multiple platforms (which is far easier to do than in the past due the sheer amount of choices nowadays), you have choices that you could never keep up with.

 

if you're looking at it from the view of either the industry or the gamer, this is far more of a golden age than the 80s. there is simply more money in the gaming industry than ever before. more money, more people, more jobs. now anyone can write a game if they wanted to with the mobile platforms and XBLIG. you couldn't say that during the heydays of the 2600 or NES. people are pointing out the number of companies that have fallen but they fail to point out the number of companies there are in general and how many pop up to replace the old ones. again, just a shuffling of the turtle shells.

[cimerians]

Yeah it is but in my opinion publishers are in trouble which = consoles are in trouble. Some programmers get the shaft and then flock to the PC or other platforms to get there game done. (Via Kickstarter, Steam, themselves (self published etc))

 

Whats happening as I see it is that big name publishers will shrink and panic...they will continue to close studios they "own" and also continue to release sequel after sequel to stay afloat. The safety of whats successful.

 

I think the mobile\tablet industry has finally stuck a dagger into publishers and at the same time hurting consoles. (Which I still like obviously). Myself for example, I switched to PC gaming. My kid plays on an Ipad where two years ago she was into the Wii and the DSi.

 

There's a huge shift going on to things other than consoles thats why these next consoles from Microsoft and Sony can destroy the console industry as we know it or maybe just sink themselves and others eventually take their place. Valve, Nintendo....companies that don't treat the gamer\customer like a bank account.

 

edit: I think this thread topic changed.

 

Another thing that onlySublime mentioned. Most people now have gobs of games. Another reason they aren't making as much money anymore. My budget now includes more than just video games but downloads and DLC as well. It sucks. I want them all but I cant have them.

Edited February 10, 2013 by cimerians

[Starscream]

Valve, Nintendo....companies that don't treat the gamer\customer like a bank account.

 

Wait...wut? Nintendo? The company that's repackaged the same hardware in 2 markets for the past decade and has been reselling the same games on different media some of which is 2 1/2 decades old? Yea, Nintendo doesn't treat anyone like a bank account lol.

Trust me, if they had enough knowledge to set up an online network that mattered and worked they'd be selling the dots for the mushrooms to you for another few decades.

[cimerians]

Wait...wut? Nintendo? The company that's repackaged the same hardware in 2 markets for the past decade and has been reselling the same games on different media some of which is 2 1/2 decades old? Yea, Nintendo doesn't treat anyone like a bank account lol.

Trust me, if they had enough knowledge to set up an online network that mattered and worked they'd be selling the dots for the mushrooms to you for another few decades.

 

Ok. I tempt myself to ignore what they are doing with the Wii U....and its re-releases.

Maybe they need more yarn so they can knit more sequels to Kirby's Epic Yarn? Which I'm sure they are doing right now. Furious knitting.

 

edit: For more and more Yoshi

 

By the way. Your complaining about Nintendo. Stop the knitting!

Edited February 10, 2013 by cimerians

[Starscream]

lol

[TheGameCollector]

Wait...wut? Nintendo? The company that's repackaged the same hardware in 2 markets for the past decade and has been reselling the same games on different media some of which is 2 1/2 decades old? Yea, Nintendo doesn't treat anyone like a bank account lol.

Trust me, if they had enough knowledge to set up an online network that mattered and worked they'd be selling the dots for the mushrooms to you for another few decades.

 

 

I actually like sequels more than games that aren't related to things I know. At least then I know it's usually good (in the case of Zelda) or I at least care to see what happens next in the story (in the case of RPG sequels).

 

When it comes to re-releases of old games I just see those as ways for new generations to get to try the old games without them buying up the classic systems and making them more expensive to us, the generation they used to belong to. If we ever decide to get those old systems back when we have enough money on the side, digital re-releases and compilation discs keep the prices down for us. We don't have to pay $40 to get Sonic the Hedgehog for Sega Genesis because it's been re-released on so many platforms.

 

The re-releases aren't for us when we already have the old original carts. They're for our younger cousins, nephews, nieces, brothers, sisters and such. The only time I see buying these ports as a good idea is if you sold your originals and want them back cheaper or you just feel like you could pay the price for convenience of playing it on your new hardware even though you kept your old hardware.

[+wood_jl]

While I wonder how many more Mario Karts the world needs, the Mario games are well-warranted sequels. To use an over-hyped term, they're "epic." The unbelievable level design and superlative artwork in the "Mario Galaxy" games on the old Wii are just unmatched by anybody else. Even with old SD graphics, I think the "Galaxy" games are jaw-droppingly beautiful. If Nintendo can keep that up with the Wii U, they will always have that edge. But once again, how many Mario Karts does the world need? Ha ha!

[Austin]

But once again, how many Mario Karts does the world need? Ha ha!

 

Seconded.

[Starscream]

 

 

I actually like sequels more than games that aren't related to things I know. At least then I know it's usually good (in the case of Zelda) or I at least care to see what happens next in the story (in the case of RPG sequels).

 

When it comes to re-releases of old games I just see those as ways for new generations to get to try the old games without them buying up the classic systems and making them more expensive to us, the generation they used to belong to. If we ever decide to get those old systems back when we have enough money on the side, digital re-releases and compilation discs keep the prices down for us. We don't have to pay $40 to get Sonic the Hedgehog for Sega Genesis because it's been re-released on so many platforms.

 

The re-releases aren't for us when we already have the old original carts. They're for our younger cousins, nephews, nieces, brothers, sisters and such. The only time I see buying these ports as a good idea is if you sold your originals and want them back cheaper or you just feel like you could pay the price for convenience of playing it on your new hardware even though you kept your old hardware.

 

I totally agree. I have no issues with sequels myself. I also have no issue with reissues of games.

 

But Nintendo doesn't love anyone, just their wallets.

[cimerians]

Obviously Gamestop is screwed if this happens:

 

http://www.vg247.com/2013/02/12/gamestop-60-of-customers-wont-buy-a-new-console-that-blocks-used-games/

[carmel_andrews]

Doesn't this also stop some forms of piracy, since you will only be able to play the game you purchased on the machine you first played the game on (i.e. you won't be able to play that game on any other xbox system)

 

I think this is some sort of software protection system preventing illegal copies flooding the marketplace

 

The thing about not being able to use second hand games (or used games to you people) is a side benefit (to MS's games publishers/developers)

 

I think this was a move by software devs/pubs against MS, the idea being that if MS didn't agree to this (i.e the online verification system) then their platform wouldn't be supported

 

I think a similar system is already in place on tablet pc's and mobile phone apps (i.e. you can only download the content on the device your'e going to use the content on, again to prevent a used app market and also to stop piracy to some effect)

[onlysublime]

yes, most of the world has accepted online DRM from the PC to the mobile devices. the consoles are last to the game.

[Vic George 2K3]

It still just comes down to treating video games as a disposable form of entertainment all in the name of present-day profit with no concern for the future except the publishers and their profit margins. If we're lucky to have future generations, they won't be able to look back on the building blocks of the hobby because (1) there wouldn't be any building blocks left for the average Joe to consume because everything will be used (and if publishers have their way with banning used games playing on game systems, it will also be useless), and (2) the publishers will keep those generations too busy consuming more video games on a constant basis where they won't even bother to look back on last year's great games because they're so "out of date".

Edited February 16, 2013 by Vic George 2K3