Toadofsky
-
Posts
1,054 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Toadofsky
-
-
This thread sure has taken quite a turn from just being about EA's Online Pass system.
Oh c'mon now, you didn't think it wouldn't grow into a bigger discussion?
I honestly think there could be more to all of this, if used game sales hurt these companies, and they don't ask why they buy them, other than the fact that they're a bit cheaper, here's what I think it could be, and it's what I think I've been basically saying when it all comes down to it...
Consumers don't feel these HD games are worth the $60 price tag. And I'm not talking hardcore gamers, I'm talking average joes and josies that play games, not really delving much into them, but rather, are occasional players.
And that could bring a bigger question into play, content. If the consumer doesn't think the product is worth the price, than what is that to say of the content itself?
Just a question I thought about with thinking about this thread...
-
Actually, it IS your problem. When games get really expensive to make, any failure means developers closing up shop, layoffs, less risks taken, more sequels, ports and knockoffs, less innovation, longer development cycles, etc. And guess what? We're seeing tons of that stuff now. FF13 took what, 5 or 6 years to develop? Next generation it might take 7 or 8, if not more. Does anyone really want that?
Don't take any of this personally....
Again, maybe it's time to think more on how to save money than keep risking financial ruin because of spending so dang much on making the game. I know that there are gamers who "demand" this stuff, and I wholeheartedly admit that it's nice, but it's just bells and whistles, fluff, if you make a crappy game that's rich in physics, "great" voice acting, and forgettable orchestral score, nothing is going to save that game, of course that's entirely a matter of opinion.
Do I like seeing sequel after sequel after sequel? Of course not. But the fact for me remains the same, evaluate cost, and find better ways to make a game. To me, companies have put themselves into this position, to keep putting themselves into financial risk every time they release a "blockbuster".
And Zircon, I do understand that there's TONS of work that goes into making games, more than I would ever even want to get into. But I have to ask, who else besides hardcore gamers ever asked for this? Of course it's going to be a natural progression with games, but I'm still under the belief that this shouldn't have to be a necessity for a game to be good. Mario Bros. Wii didn't have a bunch of frills, and while I highly believe that game could have been even better from them, it was a well made game (again that's opinion). Was it costly? I have no doubts of that, but as costly as Mario Galaxy? I highly doubt it. And look at which one sold more overall...
-
I'll just say it again, the fact that games are sooo expensive to make, is not my problem. It's the game companies fault for not trying to find better ways to make a game without it being such a financial risk, if companies can't figure that out, or find a way to compete with the used game market, that's their own fault.
I really don't care for the whole "we need to support developers" arguement. That could come down to one thing, developers are crappy businessman, and can't make deals with their publishers to get a bigger cut of the profits, ego could factor in as well. But the excuse game makers have for their game not selling for long? "Used games are killing it!"
This generation has seriously taken a dark turn.
This is not pro consumer, it's anti-consumer. And when companies continue this mentality, it can hurt them in the long run. And I will gladly say good riddance to them.
-
Let's say you don't have Live. You buy a game used, have no interest in the online aspect of it, and just want a fun time waster to play. You get home, pop the game in, and the game starts trying to check on Live to see if its code has been used by someone. Guess what? It can't check, tells you to log into Live to verify the game, and you can go no further. And even if you had Live, it would see its code in the database and you'd have to pay a fee to play it in single player offline mode.
Don't tell me it couldn't happen.
I wonder how long it'll be before we're charged for the patch fixes.
I already called it. And I have no doubts it'll spread into the Single Player gameplay.
And Zircon, I do consistently forget that games were expensive back in the day ($70 dollar Yoshi's Story in Babbages! Ugh!
). Don't take this personally, but the fact that games are sooo expensive to make, is not my problem. It's the game companies fault for not trying to find better ways to make a game without it being such a financial risk, if companies can't figure that out, or find a way to compete with the used game market, that's their own fault.
-
I'm sorry, but I don't support this, at all.
What I find astounding is all the industry "apologists" of this. Look, there may be a number of people that have a large disposable income, but the truth is, games are too expensive, and there are financially stripped gamers. And when you release major titles within 3 weeks time frame, how do you expect to make a profit off your game?
The uninformed consumer is going to see a copy of a game 15 dollars less than the retail disc, what do you think they're going to do? They're going to get the cheaper deal!
All of this is anti-consumer. You see this all you self professed hardcore gamers? That's those companies that "care" about you soooo much. They care sooo much, they're eventually going to make you pay more and more, and sucker you in by calling it a work of "art". And the game journalists will be suckered into it, and make sure they spin all this into something good.
I refuse to embrace this practice that EA and now Ubisoft is implementing, even if it means no longer buying their games (yeah, I'll skip Beyond Good and Evil 2 if it ever comes out, I already lost interest over playing Mass Effect 3). Day one DLC is bad enough when many already believe that it should be on the disc from the start (me being one of them). What do you think they'll start trying to do next? They'll start trying to restrict how far you get in the SINGLE player games, just you wait and see, maybe not in the next year, but in the next set of consoles I wouldn't be surprised.
Do companies honestly believe they'll boost sales up higher? What if this plan backfires in the long run? It'll run the cost of games higher or sink companies. I've always questioned why I should pay $60 for a 5-10 hour game. It's not worth it, that so called "experience" will be forgotten after you play the next game, because far too many games today are not worth playing a second, third, or fourth time. That's not what I call a good purchase.
I will stand by my statement that companies should revolve around the consumer, not the other way around. Game companies are no different to me. By trying to turn used games, and used game buyers into some sort of evil person, you'll lose customers, possibly for good. This "Oh woe is me! I don't get a dime from used game sales!" is getting old.
What astounds me is that journalists nor game companies want to bother finding out why people are buying games used MORE. It's obvious, we're in a time when we have to tighten our belts, and look for deals, again, not everyone has a large disposable income. Heck, if they were to cut the price down on games, including the content, and offer it at a later point as DLC, at a REASONABLE price, I'd be fine with it. But greed is a powerful thing, and I don't expect any companies to do that.
Keep hiking the price of games and screwing customers over, and we'll see how much "growth" results from it. Pachter and all the other game "analysts" won't be able to spin that.
I'm officially fed up with the gaming industry, and that's pathetic when I have little to no involvement other than being the customer.
Sorry for this basically being a rant.
-
There weren't many times in Mario 64 that you would have absolutely had to play any level 5 times to move on to a different one though. But even if you weren't slightly exaggerating, those levels had so much to explore and so many secrets to find that I always felt it was worth replaying them over and over. I still love popping Mario 64 in the old N64 and playing through it again every few months now. Mario Galaxy wouldn't even let you decide that you didn't want to do a certain star and go off to this other corner of the level instead. It felt very constrained to me, and not at all like what made Mario 64 fun to begin with.
You prefer 2D Mario don't you? Galaxy is okay but there's no feeling fir me to run back and play it after I got all 120 stars. Even if you replay it as Luigi.
-
As for my feelings on current gen games that wont have aged well.... I would say it applies to any game that relies on a "cinematic" approach to storytelling but doesnt really pull it off particularly well (MGS4), and of course any game that relies on graphics to be impressive but lacks substance (FFXIII). Video games are at a pretty pivotal point in time though. Standard gameplay formulas are cleary becoming outdated, and we're only just beginning to have a grasp on making 3D graphics look relatively realistic at a practical level of effort put in. We'll see where this goes. Ultimately I think that games which succeed in creating an atmosphere and an immersive gaming experience are the ones that will still be playable in years to come.
I'd like to believe that last sentence could happen. But until a bunch of the game designers quit thinking they're "artists" or directors of an "experience", I don't see much hope in a lot of the games today. I'm to the point where I'm only interested in a game if it has a lot of REPLAY value, a game that can be picked up months after I have played it.
If it doesn't have an "arcade structure", chances are, it's only gonna be a rental for me. But hey, since game companies are getting so greedy in trying to kill of rentals AND used games, I probably won't be doing much future generations of gaming at all.
-
Then you've never had to confront the Milkman Conspiracy.
Remember those old Windows games? Skifree? Chips Challenge? Yeah. Used to play those for hours. Now...
That's the part I wanted to get too, but I was forced to get a cobweb duster and a bunch of arrowheads, which I didn't have, I promptly gave up after that...
-
What?
You sir, are crazy.
This game is still awesome. I popped it in the other day and it was a blast. Humor and story is fun and great too.
<3
I know I'm in the minority on that game, sorry it just didn't connect with me. I was constantly getting bored with the dialogue in some parts. Psychonauts is just not my game, sorry..
-
I played it last year and the art direction was so impressive I actually took note of it.
I'd rather play a game with ass-poor graphics and good cinematography than one that can convey every nuance of a facial expression and is so limited in its scope.
I enjoy good visual art, but it's never a deal-breaker for me except in survival-horrors. However, I admit that I dislike it when games try for realistic facial expressions yet fall just short so it looks alien (cue valley theory). I'm thinking last-(sixth-)gen there, such as FFX. Those games also seem to spend a lot of time focusing on faces, which makes it all the worse.
Gameplay is obviously another killer, but the worst offender is and shall always be GOD-AWFUL VOICE ACTING.
Heavy Rain ought to fit that bill sooner or later. I know I'm in the minority when it comes to games today, but I'm at the point where I care less about the details/physics graphics nonsense so many magazines and journalists swoon over, and more about if it's even entertaining to play, and if it will even be worth playing again at all.
In regards to FFX, I swear Wakka and Tidus would have been lovers, as "blasphemous" as that may be to the Final Fantasy fans.
I remember EVERYONE just loving Psychonauts, I gave it a shot, and hated it. And I love platformers, even ones as collect-a-thon as Banjo Kazooie, it just wasn't a good game, and I still believe that after trying to play it again when it was on sale on Steam for $2.00.
-
Ads in Youtube don't bother me. They gotta pay for keeping all that bandwith somehow I guess.
I slowed my internet down a few megs not long ago because I don't play online games, I only stream Netflix from the Wii (and it doesn't bother it), and I use it for paying the bills/web surfing. Not exactly much in terms of important things at all.
That's probably just me though...
-
Metal Gear Solid, both versions. Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess, they're just a big chore to finish.
And I'll just go ahead and say that A LOT of games this generation won't age well. Which ones, I cant really say, but I can just feel it.
Then we will get game designer BS saying "oh those games are meant to be played once!"
You expect me to pay $60 bucks for a 5 hour "movie"? And NOT feel I got ripped off? Riiiight...
-
Sometimes even $5 or $10 is a stretch. I'd kill to get Rocket Knight, but $15 is out of the question financially
.
Don't you just love this age of over priced DLC? Not too mention getting punished for buying games used?
-
Does this not concern anyone?
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/no-video-allowed-at-natal-e3-showcase
Granted, secrecy can be one thing, but to not be allowed any cameras? Something is fishy here....
-
Just looked through this....
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article7118570.ece
I honestly call bull on this. I don't see Satoru Iwata even saying something like that, "Apple IS THE ENEMY OF THE FUTURE". Sounds like analysts and journalists trying to brew up a war between two companies that don't even have the same principles going for them.
I like this little wrap up over that article...
Are game journalists/analysts so bored they have to start crap now? They've done enough with retarded rants and getting fanboys riled up...
-
I wish I didn't trade in WiiPlay, I loved laser hockey and tanks.
You'll probably like this one then, I'm interested in it myself, it's something I think me and my fiancée could play together...
-
That's how I feel, but idiots like Pachter keep saying that it's needed. I personally don't want a wii HD for a few more years. I have too much time invested with my Nintendo Wii.0
-
Come on, admit it. You cried along with the rest of us when Charlie died, Juliet died, and when Desmond made that phone call to Penny.
Actually, I had a falling out with the show, I got frustrated with it, and skipped the last half of Season 3, and completely ignored the Season 4, I got back into it around Season 5's beginning or middle I believe.
As stupid as it sounds, I don't feel I missed TOO terribly much, I read through about what I missed (LOTS, I KNOW), other than that, I'm glad I got back into it, just so I could finish it.
SPOILERS
I once again got all misty eyed when Jin and Sun died. I couldn't believe it. They went through soooo much, only to die. And now their kid's an orphan.
Don't you just hate and love it when shows do that? Throw you for a loop, and take away what you were expecting?
-
http://www.destructoid.com/mario-galaxy-2-getting-tutorial-dvd-that-won-t-run-on-wii-172805.phtml
If that doesn't show you how much they want this game to sell well, I don't know what will. It's not like the Hardcore are going to keep this game on the top 20 for as long as a large amount of people have with New Super Mario Bros. on the DS and Wii have.
Other than that, I'd like to play it, I'm just not feeling like it's going to be a game that I'll keep after I've completed it. Heck, I traded Mario Galaxy, AND Brawl, I was done with them.
Maybe I'm growing out of games, or I'm getting old...
-
Well, it looks like the developers got to put their "story" into the game, and it looks like they're trying hard to get ones who only like 2-D Mario, to play this new Mario Galaxy game.
Honestly, this is pissing me off, I think they should have put this much effort into making a 4 player co-op 2-D game. Not that I didn't like NSMB Wii, I loved it (I even made an alternate box art for it on my Deviantart page).
I honestly wonder if this game is going to sell very well, couple the fact that from how well NSMB Wii did (people like 2-D Mario better), and the fact they're putting a DVD in to show HOW TO PLAY THE GAME, it looks like they're trying to recoup any potential loss from the game.
Yeah, I'm looking WAAY too far into this, and I pre-ordered it too...
-
YES!!! I can't wait!! Is the Koopa beach song the same as the one from the different oneups album?
-
I wish Aerosmith would do songs like they did in the 80's. That was probably their peak in the 90's... After that, I think everything went downhill...
-
And he is well-suited for a fighting game, considering his games were side-scrolling beat-em-ups. I wish I had my gamecube stuff... still haven't beat the first one... stupid friggin' helicopters...
Adults mode eh? I beat it on that mode, I only tried V-Rated a few times, practically IMPOSSIBLE!!
In regards to M vs. C 3, give me Howard the Duck, that's all I ask, I don't care if he's a DLC character even...
-
Van Halen, and I don't care what anybody says, Sammy Hagar was just fine with Van Halen. So I guess look into the best of both worlds...
Business owners thread
in General Discussion
Posted
While I am not a business owner at all, I will say this when it comes to it all,
Do what you love and make sure you have employees that love what they do. Always keep your customer in mind, never forget it. If you have that, you'll have little turn around, and will have a pleasant environment, with employees giving a 100% of effort.
That's something seriously missing from the games industry these days....