Katana314

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 10 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

To the people that worked on it, even when the result kinda sucks, there's some level of attachment. They spent literal years of their life investing into it. That might be where the tone is coming from.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 21 hours ago

Marketers actually place these into different categories of advertising goal. One kind might just exist to make people aware of a product and its role (eg, vacuum cleaner attachment) whereas others spend longer convincing customers it's something they want/need. There's yet another category that I think relates more to direct advertising and isn't as common for mass products like games.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 21 hours ago (6 children)

There have definitely been times that copying other people worked out well.

Fortnite and Apex copied the BR trend when PUBG wasn't satisfying everyone's needs. The former even lazily reskinned a zombie defense game for the battle royale approach. Lots of games reskin the theme of Dark Souls and do okay.

Even if it's lazy or uninventive, once in a while one of those reskins has a particular element of the concept it reinvents in a much better way. Seems Concord never came up with any such ideas, which could have been great since many people are currently tired of Overwatch specifically.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Or, The Bunkererer: Also called “Conscript”, another survival horror game about World War 1.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

Who said that?

Be specific, include the word “only” as you quoted, and very important: Don’t lie.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

I can't speak towards whatever you might be misinformed about. The only other close thing I can think of is when a support staff told a user that their account was going to be deleted, which prompted a huge backlash. But, one of the determinations seemed to be that they only do so for inactive accounts that have never purchased anything; and was in fact a GDPR requirement. So, it was another nothing article based on rumors.

Which makes sense if you think about it - actually put some kind of motivation behind the "evil schemes" you're reading. Greed is very much expected, but removing people's old games doesn't gain Ubisoft anything but poor press. If you told me they were selling cheat codes for old games for $30 each, I'd believe it. There's no profit in what people are actually suggesting though.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The other thing I worry about is for people to be genuinely too blinded by reputation to give games a chance, or to give meaningful feedback that helps those diamonds come to existence.

I feel like there are some timelines/realities where big publishers like EA / Ubisoft put out a genuinely good game. And it has happened - Titanfall 1/2 are darlings to a lot of people. I'd say Mario + Rabbids was genuinely fun and had great music. I've watched streamers play Star Wars Outlaws, and while no, it's not a fantastic game and I don't plan to buy it, I can see a few touches I can appreciate. The fact that players basically chuck it in the "Ubisoft = shit" bin to go on hate-tirades without having much of substance (or better yet, to put their energy into praising games they liked) to say seems to doom us by our own expectations.

Remember that Valve had to work with Sierra (a big evil publisher) as they were starting, before eventually going solo. I worry that the next decade's Valve is going to get trashed because at the time of their next release, they were "Ubisoft Southern Northland" and "ubisoft = shit".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I remember distinctly Danganronpa's problem with shock value.

I finished the first case of the third game, and thought "Wow! That was incredible! I hadn't anticipated that ending at all!"

And then, once the dust on the case had settled, because of the effects of that change in circumstance, I had no interest in playing the rest of the game.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Man, I really want to assume our lords and saviors will keep putting out perfect games, and yet we've been burned in our history.

CDPR put out a half-baked Cyberpunk after a year of hype. Valve put out "Artifact", the Dota card game. It feels like the really inventive studios sometimes get tired of the working formulas they're adored for and end up putting out things not many people like - possibly as a way of doing a personal passion project.

I'll be happy if that never happens for Larian, but it's a worrying possibility.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

At least we have that fanmade expansion for Heroes 3.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Is this at all accurate?

The closest thing I could find when I searched for this topic is that the multiplayer and online services related to those games were being taken offline. Given you can still play Counter-Strike 1.6, I can see some frustration on that, but I also didn't think many people knew AC1 had any multiplayer features.

Anyone reading can go and take a look at current reviews on Steam for Assassin's Creed 1 and 2. The newest reviews come from the last few weeks, and no one is highlighting "Ubisoft STOLE this game from me, CANNOT BE PLAYED" etc.

Which makes it hard for me to respect memes like this one when the reactions, at least in part, seem to be driven by constant misinformation. Ubisoft games are absolutely mediocre, I can agree with that, but there is absolutely no need to lie about them.

I am aware of the game preservation movement, focused on The Crew, and I'm in favor of that. I still don't think it had anything to do with the quote. No one in game publishing makes a business around taking away games people were already playing.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago

It’s more like some sudden waking up.

Xbox was flat out not responding to them. They’re basically living in the retirement home and need an occasional tap on the shoulder to be reminded they still release a few games.

 

This might be a slightly unusual attempt at a prompt, but might draw some appealing unusual options.

The way it goes: Suggest games, ideally the kind that you believe would have relatively broad appeal. Don't feel bad about downvotes, but do downvote any game that's suggested if you have heard of it before (Perhaps, give some special treatment if it was literally your game of the year). This rule is meant to encourage people to post the indie darlings that took some unusual attention and discovery to be aware of and appreciate.

If possible, link to the Steam pages for the games in question, so that anyone interested can quickly take a look at screenshots and reviews. And, as a general tip, anything with over 1000 steam reviews probably doesn't belong here. While I'd recommend that you only suggest one game per post, at the very most limit it to three.

If I am incorrect about downvotes being inconsequential account-wide, say so and it might be possible to work out a different system.

 

Sales follow the tradition of supply and demand. Products come out at their highest price because of expectations and hype. Then, as interest wanes, the publisher continues to make some sales by reducing price to tempt the less interested parties.

But this isn't the formula for all games. While we might agree that games from 2000 or even 2010 are "showing their age", at this point 5 to 8-year-old games are less and less likely to be seen as 'too old' by comparison to hot releases. Some publishers have picked up on that theme, and doubled down on the commitment to the idea that their games have high longevity and appeal; making the most of their capitalistic venture for better or worse.

I recently was reminded of an indie game I had put on my wishlist several years back, but never ended up buying because it simply had never gone on sale - but looking at it now, not only did it maintain extremely positive user reviews, I also saw that its lowest all-time price was barely a few dollars off of its original price.

In the AAA space, the easiest place to see this happening is with Nintendo. Anyone hoping to buy an old Legend of Zelda game for cheap will often be disappointed - the company is so insistent on its quality, they pretty much never give price reductions. And, with some occasional exceptions, their claims tend to be proven right.

In the indie space, the most prominent example of this practice is Factorio, a popular factory-building game that has continued receiving updates, and has even had its base price increased from its original (complete with a warning announcement, encouraging people to purchase at its lower price while it's still available).

Developers deserve to make a buck, and personally I can't say I've ever seen this practice negatively. Continuing to charge $25 for a good game, years after it came out, speaks to confidence in a product (even if most of us are annoyed at AAA games now costing $70). I sort of came to this realization from doing some accounting to find that I'd likely spent over $100 a year on game "bundles" that usually contain trashy games I'm liable to spend less than a few hours in.

For those without any discussion comments, what games on Steam or elsewhere have you enjoyed that you've never seen get the free advertising of a "40% off sale"?

view more: next ›