RurouniZel
Asks questions so Ezalc doesn't have to
I'm on board. Fuck this bullshit.
Were you people this upset about Steam not letting you rent, lend, sell "your" games?
If MS is smart, they will have "Steam-like" sales. That would be amazing.
I'm part of the problem because I'm not jumping up and down about it? Thats a pretty stupid way of looking at things.
Can you explain this thread you made back in 2012:
www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=462068
The title of which is:looks like i may be working on Xbox 720
Were you people this upset about Steam not letting you rent, lend, sell "your" games?
Question; Are developers defending these policies by creating games for said console?
Looks like you folks may need to boycott more than one company.
What about TurtleBeach and all of those other headset companies making headphones specifically for the new Xbox jack? They're supporting that system and the policies. Looks like they're in the shit too. Yeah?
Can you explain this thread you made back in 2012:
www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=462068
The title of which is:looks like i may be working on Xbox 720
Wow.
With the recent reveal of the Xbox One's privacy features, licencing model, and the looming information pending from Sony, it is important we ask ourselves how we got here. What happened with our beloved industry that caused us to end up at this point. Was it the surge in used game sales, cutting publishers and developers out of the picture? Was it the uptake in piracy as internet speeds and technology became readily available. If we are now at the point where basic consumer rights of ownership are being infringed on and bent, then there clearly must have been a catalyst. If we have pushed, then this must be the push back, and it is important to know where it came from.
Now, outside of used games, piracy, or any other factors, I want to look to development studios, publishers, and metacritic first. All three of these are largely responsible for their own successes or failures. When metacritic came to fruition and rose as an ever important piece of our industry, publishers took note. Consequently, they began to build their publishing deals with stipulations and conditions pertaining to metacritic scores. This puts unnecessary pressure on a development studio to do one of two things:
1) Take the big risk. Keep true to your vision, create your game, and do the best you can. Brave the uncharted waters with new angles on classic mechanics and see if it takes off.
2) Chase the industry fads. Find what's popular, focus test, build your game by the numbers, and check the boxes. Hopefully this will yield a decent metacritic score, which could translate into bonuses, continued investments into your IP, and hopefully sales.
Now, the problem with the first scenario is how risky it is. Publishers are investing tens, possibly hundreds of millions of dollars into your project. If you fail, you fail HARD, and it could really put a stain on your studio. Likewise, with a new IP, or new idea, you'll need great marketing. Word of mouth is fantastic, but as we've seen with Sony titles, that slow upstart in sales with just word of mouth can be extremely daunting. How do you balance your risks with your marketing budget, and your perception of your title? If things start out negatively for your game, how do you win that back? Can you abandon ship? It's a very risky game to play.
With the second scenario, in all instances you're more than likely going to end up with something that is a solid product, but may not be stand out from the crowd. Looking at titles like Army of Two, Medal of Honor, Dantes Inferno, and many others...this is often the case. Your product can be solid, but without marketing, pizzazz, and something unique, you're ultimately just going to "get by" or worse.
The big issue I have here is that a lot of titles are released, marketed, and abandoned like clock work. Publishers take small calculated risks, and then blame the consumer when the titles fail, yet hold these studios to near impossible standards due to an aggregate website. No studio truly wants the pressure of fearing a 75 as a score, or being shut down / sold because their game didn't meet targets. In addition to this, publishers are entirely too cozy with the enthusiast media. Showering them with gifts, review copies, press invites, etc. While I understand the importance of providing your product to outlets to spread the word, it is also worth noting that this skews the "scale" of their ratings. For the last 10 to 15 years, most games are judged on a scale from 7-10, while these outlets claim their scale is from 1-10. In all likelihood, this is because publisher relations are important to the survival of the enthusiast press, thus smaller passable games are viewed as "terrible" because they're at the bottom of the normally used scale...7.
What about budgets? How are publsihers approaching their approval process or projects? With so many games green-lit annually, and so few being "breakout hits", it is hard to imagine how a publisher comes to the conclusion that they should publish a title, but more importantly, that they should publish it and sell it for $60. I can name probably one or two dozen titles from last year that had absolutely no reason to be $60, as that effectively puts them in competition with the best of the best, and immediately makes them invisible to the knowledgeable consumer. Gamers aren't exploring box arts, more importantly, neither are casual gamers. They're reading Game Informer magazine, looking to see what has the most marketing in their local GameStop, and talking to the clerks behind the counter to be fed whatever opinionated nonsense they can. Your price tag is the barrier. If the clerk says "this game is good, but this game is also good" and they both share the same price tag, but one is plastered all over the walls of the store...what do you think they're gonna buy?
Frankly, the industry has backed itself into a corner with poor practices, lack of elasticity, and an absence of focus. Unfortunately, this has been pushed over to us, the consumer. We are now expected to bite the bullet, to pick up the slack for Publishers, so they can continue to do what they do: All of the wrong things. Used game sales aren't the problem. Piracy isn't the problem. If Dead Space 3 needed to sell 5 million copies to break even / justify it's existence as a franchise, then no amount of cutting used sales or removing piracy was going to make that game wildly successful, nor was it going to increase the profit margins for it. EA, you did it wrong. "AAA" games are the problem. Frankly, we need MORE b-tier titles at $19.99-$39.99. Those titles have small budgets, small expectations, and bigger profit margins (as those price ranges hit a wider audience). We need less investment into super bowl ads, prime time commercials, or UFC ring space. We're in an age of always connected devices. Hulu, Amazon, Google, even the consoles themselves...the advertising spaces are there, where gamers see them. We need to break our relationships with the enthusiast press. Stop coddling them, and stop letting them hold you by the balls. You want to remove the problems with metacritic? Start putting together better (and more) demos that show off your product in new and meaningful ways. Don't sell us on trailers with cheesy rock / dubstep tracks and quick cuts of what your game looks like, let us REALLY see the game.
Publishers would have you believe that these policies will result in "cheaper games" and "savings for us all" much like Steam. The key difference here, however, is that Steam is an all digital platform, for the most part, with few physical releases. They've worked out some incredible developer relationships, and removed publishers from the equation. Why are we, the consumer, expected to take these ideas at face value? Are they nothing more than empty promises? If publishers haven't felt the need to pass the savings on to us at this point in the generation, when development costs are falling, as middle ware and engine optimization is at its peak...why are we to believe that a new generation, with new R&D, new engines, bigger development teams...all of these things, and this is going to save us money? I'm sorry, but I just don't buy it. You're in it for money, not good will. Try investing your money better, managing your studios, teams, and projects better. Maybe then, you'll make more money, and it'll be easier to pass the savings down. Until then, this is all just hot air.
I fear, however, that these thoughts are all too late for us. The industry has moved, and we as consumers won't be able to shift it back. This is where things are going. Microsoft, nor Sony, felt the need to step up to publishers and tell them "No, you need to get your act together". Instead, they bowed to their pressure, as one or the other didn't want to be without those important multiplatform games, becoming another Nintendo (whom I love). This is unacceptable, as the publishers, in effect, have held them, and us by consequence, for ransom. Our rights are being held over us, and for what? So publishers can take more risks? As unfortunate as it sounds, this is a capitalist economy. If your products aren't performing to standard and your studio faces closure, you probably suffered some deal of mismanagement, be it on the end of the publisher or developer. Removing used game sales, trades, or rentals from the equation (or hampering ones ability to do so at will, easily and without restriction) will not save this industry. It will not make things easier. You will still suffer the same mismanagement, you will still be guessing, trying to nail the movement and evolution of gamers tastes and the industry. That is the nature of the beast.
So, publishers, don't hold us by the throats and tell us this is for our own good. We know that's a crock of shit. This is for YOUR own good, but ultimately, you're too short sighted to be any wiser. You will continue to eat at your own tail, until you've consumed yourself, and we won't be around anymore to bail you out, it'll be too late. You can fix the symptoms all you want with your demands for these policies and infrastructures, but until you fix the cause, you'll still end up in ultimately the same position. Declining stock value, studio closures, and shitty metacritic scores.
Didn't read. Still buying Xbox day one.
Deal with it. You are now the enemy.I'm part of the problem because I'm not jumping up and down about it? Thats a pretty stupid way of looking at things.
Hahaha, it is remarkable. Simply remarkable how daft the viral crew is. They're all but wearing their pins in flaming lettering on their vests lol
Can you explain this thread you made back in 2012:
www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=462068
The title of which is:looks like i may be working on Xbox 720
Haha oh my god. They're leaving BREAD TRAILS for us now? This is the true next generation of videogaming right now. All fourth wall breaking and shit lol
oh wowDidn't read. Still buying Xbox day one.
Dude, MS has to stop this soon, my ignore list is getting way too full of anticonsumer idiots
Amir0x for fucking president!I'm 100% on board for any boycott. We'll cross this bridge with Sony as well if they go down this road.
Microsoft has now come out in the open and stood behind what we all feared. There's no confusion left but in the tiniest nuances of this story: they are gunning for us as consumers, and it's either we stop it now or this industry radically changes into something not worth saving (if it even survives at all anyway).
If this not worth a boycott, absolutely no bit of game news would ever warrant such. If this is not worth a boycott, then we might as well all just go home and allow any business to take advantage of us simply because we don't want to put in the effort to push back. If this is not worth a boycott, then we never really loved games in the first place and this hobby of ours needs to go down in flames anyway.
I say, if this is not worth a boycott, then nothing in this industry ever would be.
OH SHIT!Can you explain this thread you made back in 2012:
www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=462068
The title of which is:looks like i may be working on Xbox 720
Could you imagine a world where MS does exactly what Steam is doing? A world where people PRAISE MS?!
God helps us all...
All this really boils down to two broad camps.
1. Collectors, people who don't have internet, people who replay games and keep their old consoles, people who sell their games themselves, people who rent, people etc. etc. who are severely affected by this and are understandably pissed off about it.
It's easy to think that camp 1 should be everyone--and it is a huge chunk of serious gamers for sure, but it's not everyone. Enter camp 2....
2. People who truly aren't really affected by any of it. People who are always online, people who only/mostly play games online (and wouldn't be gaming if their internet is down anyway), people who just trade games in (they don't sell on their own, or collect games to play again later), people who sell/trade their consoles when they move onto the next gen (thus no concerns over being able to play the games years down the road) etc. etc.
Some of camp 2 may be pissed out of the principle of the matter, but they can more easily shrug it off as it doesn't affect their gaming habits at all, and they can maybe some some benefits in not having to change discs etc.
Thus some in camp 1 need to realize that not everyone who isn't livid over this crap is a shill or fanboy etc. Some people just aren't affected by it.
Myself, I guess I fall in camp 1 as I do resell my games after beating them. But that's it--I'm always online, I don't collect or replay games, I get rid of my consoles when I move on to a newer generation and so forth. So other than having severely limited reselling options (which pisses me off), my gaming wouldn't be much affected by this. So while I don't like it at all, I'm not in full on rage/boycott gaming mode yet either.
All these supposed violations of "consumer rights" are a direct result of the move to an all digital future.
Physical media in this day and age is wasteful and pointless. Imagine how the Iphone would have done if people had to put in a new cartridge for each individual app?
Sony would be smart to get on board and embrace it now, the alternative is getting steamrolled like they did by xbox live and the whole online play thing.
All these supposed violations of "consumer rights" are a direct result of the move to an all digital future.
Physical media in this day and age is wasteful and pointless. Imagine how the Iphone would have done if people had to put in a new cartridge for each individual app?
Sony would be smart to get on board and embrace it now, the alternative is getting steamrolled like they did by xbox live and the whole online play thing.
Deal with it. You are now the enemy.
Stop saying "we." I am not a part of this drama queen circle jerk.
Actually it might - can you play SoM on your SNES today? Will you be able to play Halo 5 in 20 years?
Just so you can't weasel out and edit it
All these supposed violations of "consumer rights" are a direct result of the move to an all digital future.
We wouldn't be upset if Microsoft went digital-only like Steam. 'No used games' is inherent to digital titles.
It's the artificially crippling of physical media that is the evil here... and the fact that a 24hr check in is enforced to make it happen.
Apps cost a buck, I want a hard copy of something I paid 60 for.
Deal with it. You are now the enemy.
My ignore list is 90% banned people anyways.
If he works for MS, so what? He isn't covertly trying to get people to buy an X1, he is simply saying he doesn't care about the issues and that he himself will buy one.
On blastCan you explain this thread you made back in 2012:
www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=462068
The title of which is:looks like i may be working on Xbox 720