MudMan

Best I can tell 2 billion people use Facebook every day.

Either Facebook marketplace has the trade volume of a medium-sized continent or there are way more boomers than you think.

As is often the case with Meta stuff, anglo people and westerners in general tend to think usage works in ways it just doesn't. There are entire parts of the planet where Facebook never died and is THE social network, if not the Internet.

I guess it depends on where your line for "gross" happens to land. In my old age I tend to look at old arcades as being pretty gross. Certainly worse than I thought they were at the time.

I'm also not sure if I have a problem with Diablo IV. I think their incentive is for you not to run out of content and bounce all the way off before they can give you more, which is why they retuned it much more generously later. In this case the version of the game that people like more is also the one that did better for them financially. Is that more or less gross?

So I'm not sure I agree on whether the incentives matter. I think the experience I get matters. There is definitely a bad place there in the middle where you feel frustrated playing but won't stop playing, and that's a place where a bunch of the sloppier, grindier games make their money. And I'm not gonna stand here and say that all the upsells in games with a big live service don't make the experience worse. They do, in my book.

But those impacts to the experience are what matters to me, not that they are made as part of a business proposition. Full games in boxes were also sold for money. Live games I enjoy are made for money, too.

I'm more concerned at how live games get to vacuum up all players and keep them on lockdown forever than I am about their moneymaking practices, to be honest. People are worried about the wrong set of incentives here, if you ask me.

That being said... man, do I wish people would put their money where their mouth is. It's all well and good to complain about more expensive pay-up-front games or about overly intrusive microtransactions, but this conversation would be a lot smoother if people actively spending hundreds of hours on those weren't currently spending like 70% of the time and 50% of all the money in gaming. Voting with one's wallet rarely does much, in isolation, but there are absolutely tons of games out there. It'd be nice to see people flock towards the good ones, as per their own standards, and ideally spend some money on those.

Some are full games some are an empty cartridge with a key to download the game (which you can resell but not download if the servers go down). Some are a box with a code inside printed on a piece of paper (which gets associated to your account and you can't resell or download without servers).

There is a warning on the box for the two that don't include the playable game, but the fact that you need to know that or read the warning is a bit of a problem. And I don't particularly like the idea that Nintendo is deliberately confusing the issue to make people believe that buying the game in a box has no advantages.

I like the Switch 2 overall, but some of the weirdness they've done to make game licenses and physical games more complicated kinda sucks for reasons both intended and unintended.

Skins are fine. They are entirely optional. Something existing doesn't mean you must own it.

That's the part where we're not going to agree. Well, the maximalist holier-than-thou stance in general. But otherwise, you see things existing as an affront to you personally. This skin was made by someone and put in the game, and so I'm entitled to it, so it either shouldn't exist or it should be mine.

That just doesn't track. I don't feel any more entitled to some random bikini costume than I do to some random statue bundled with a collector's edition. It's faff some people may want, but I'm not being attacked because somebody is buying and selling collector's edition of Cyberpunk for 200 bucks, just like way I'm not attacked by someone buying some in-game costume.

Also, you do know pro football players get bonuses per goal, right? That comparison means different things depending on whether you know that and both are confusing.

Nah, they did it with Youtube videos.

But on the underlying point of "everybody is freaking out about AI things that good old big data had been doing for years with zero pushback" I very strongly agree.

Nah, some thoughts.

But not everything is black and white. And in the spectrum of grey there are plenty of in-game sales that are better than the alternative.

Again, I would much rather buy the characters one by one and have the all-in-one box come out later than have to wait for the big box and pay full price for it.

I am genuinely baffled about why you think that's worse than "pay me for the game every month or I take it away". I am even more baffled by how you think that distinction is somehow logical beyond personal preference. Your being adamant about this doesn't make it make sense.

That's great. Then we only need to make one of those every day for five thousand years, give or take, and we'll catch up with them.

Hosting maybe, but there is no way you're serving any content from a phone on a mobile network from a mobile device. That's just a nonstarter.

Also, why is Apple any better than Facebook in this scenario?

What's "plenty"? 50%? 40%? 10%?

I know 100% of GOG games are DRM-free, on Steam not so much.

I think people believe that if a specific third party DRM vendor is not listed on the Steam store page then the game has no DRM, but that's not the case.

I wouldn't consider pretty much any Steam game DRM-free or yours-to-own at all by default in that they do not provide an offline installer. You can remove the need to have Steam running after the first download in some games through relatively trivial ways of bypassing Steam checks, but if you want to keep them independently of Steam you still have to store a loose files install of the game, which may or may not like to be portable. Utimately having easy to remove DRM and having no DRM aren't the same thing.

Also, no, definitely not a longer ETA than Switch 2 physical games. A longer ETA than Switch 2 physical cart keys, but you can also resell those, so I guess different pros and cons. I really don't like people jumping onto the idea that all Switch 2 physical releases aren't full physical releases. It plays Nintendo's game of blurring the lines between physical and digital releases. Full cart releases, including Nintendo first party releases, are full physical games and will work indefinitely with what you get in the box.

So can somebody walk me through the assumption that it is somehow less private for Gemini to access your apps to send messages than it was for Google Assistant to access your apps to send messages?

Look, hey, it's a neat side effect for AI panic to make people aware of some of the privacy issues with voice assistants, but beyond the emotional, is there a reason that'd be the case?

Hey, if latching on to the jokes helps you ignore the point be my guest, but the point stands with or without your acknowledgement.

I don't "delight in their exploitation", I am one of the people who buy this stuff.

I am not a victim just because you decide I am. I have some say in this.

So hell yeah, bait me, daddy. To this day, Dragon Ball FighterZ is probably the best gaming experience I've ever had. I was there at ground floor, bought every character, watched every tournament, got competitive. I ended up with three copies of the game, all 100%-ed and with hundreds of hours of play.

And the only thing that bums me out is that they had to bail out of it early, presumably to go make Marvel Tokon.

I will be on ground floor for Tokon, and I will be funding that mouse engine with a bunch of piecemeal cash, I'm sure.

And I need you to listen to me when I tell you that it's going to be on purpose, that I'm not a victim, that I hope that treadmill lasts for a good long while and that the game is good enough to support it.

So please spare me the benevolent outrage. I don't need your protection from my own taste. I would very much appreciate an offline-playable version of the game I can buy with all the DLC down the line, like I did for Marvel vs Capcom 3 or Street Fighter IV, and thanks to the weirdly wholesome interaction between developers and the FGC I may actually get that at some point to support tournament play. But otherwise? Nobody is complaining. You can go save somebody else.

And hey, I say this being a big fan of single player games, and a big supporter of physical media and game preservation. But you come here to tell me that some of my favourite games —and I'm talking game-changing experiences I cherish deeply— should have been illegal and I just don't know better? Yeah, not gonna fly, Hillary.