New Games Suck... Or Is It Just Me?

There is barely anything worth pirating, piracy was a thing when there were so many good games, movies, music and tv shows coming out you could not keep up with it.

Did you even read, yourself? You seem to have a major hard time understanding direct posts. That might be reason why you write a book every time you reply.

What I was trying to convey is that you coming up with a economic reasoning supposed to cause fear in the hearts of people willing to pirate games is not gonna stop them from doing so.

The only thing preventing people from pirating games is whether they care or not, which is principle based.

You always go on and on and on and on about a point that just leads nowhere. And when it does, you are wrong.

It was a discussion started by Nynja who said "zero reason for Xbox", I explained why I prefer Xbox because several reasons, HE was the one who played economic card here by saying pirating on PC is free.

I didn't try to tell him don't pirate in this case, I didn't even start piracy discussion. My goal was to defend for Xbox's value because Nynja dismissed it, not stop Nynja's choice on piracy. Not sure why you blamed me for starting an economic discussion on piracy.


You have the freedom to not read instead of complaining.

It's internet, anyone can post. If you don't like to read long posts, log off and save your time and energy.

I dont pirate, thats illegal.

But you said your decisions are made due to a lack of finances available. All I said was going to the avenue that lets you get your content for free will be cheaper in the end.


"I want an xbox over a pc because I get gamepass for free for 3 months, then I'll let microsoft nickel and dime me by subscription fees"
-you

Except you, on RT

What do you mean exactly? Game pass standard is cheaper than PSN Extra and cheaper than buying the whole game if you cycle through games really fast. I also like game pass catalog more than PSN one.

So it's actually THE cheaper option even after free game pass expires.

like I said, I play many short games and cycle through them really fast, or I play a game for a few hours and drop them after I've experienced the core loop. Which is cheaper? Pay $9 for Xbox game pass and cycle through 3-5 games per month, or pay $15-$150 to play 3-5 games every month because one game can cost $5-$50 each?

Or was your argument that PC game pass is $2 cheaper than Xbox game pass so I am wasting money in the long run by playing on xbox? If gaming PC cost $1000 and Xbox cost $130 during sales, that's $870 difference and you need 435 months of sub to make up the device cost difference, or 36.35 years. Pretty sure I would need PC upgrade more often than that.

And I haven't even discuss time cost on trouble shoot PC capability issues.

No matter how I see it, I don't see PC winning on the cost if you take piracy(which I don't do) out of discussion. PC only wins for people who play less games or multiplayer.

Edit: just noticed PC game pass is $3 cheaper than xbox in USD regions. But $3 still isn't big enough to offset the device cost difference.

I can see game pass not working well for people who play 1 long game every 1-2 months, but this isn't the case for me.

It's not so much about sales revenue as about publisher investment. Earlier I mentioned how big brand video games are treated the same way Hollywood treats big brand movies. In the case of "platform exclusive" titles, what happened is the publisher got investment money from that platform in exchange for those exclusivity. Sony is giving SE investment money that is then assigned to that project. If the project makes money the publisher pays an agreed upon amount to the investors, if the project doesn't make money then the investors do not get paid.

Basically it's a way for the publisher to share financial risk with other parties. That is why you keep seeing this DEI crap show up, those investment parties are insisting on it as a condition for their investment money. Or did everyone think ESG only applied to wall street?

Agreed. And this is the reason why PCs haven't run consoles out of market.

I dont remember whens the last time I played a PC game that had compatibility issues.

Could be because i keep my hardware relatively up to date vs trying to run ff16 on an i3 with 4gb of ram with a GTX 760?


Inb4 “you dont need upkeep on a console”
Well yes you do, youre not playing elden ring on your ps3, are you?

You're not pirating the game, your payments are just DLC for the companies. They release a non complete game, you're giving them a non complete (or non existent) payment.

Ok thats not entirely true, I may have lied by accident

Ive played games that had graphics issues or low frame rate.
Those issues were fixed when I updated my video card drivers.

The difference between PC and console is PC games will warn you but let you run the game with unsupported drivers, the console will prevent the game from loading unless you do the firmware update.

Maybe because you play less games so smaller sample size. Or maybe because you only play popular games so more people are playing with wider variety of PC setup and helping dev fixing those issues.

It happened to me twice in the past 2-3 years, that's like 2 games out of 100+ games. It doesn't happen often, but it could.

My capability issues are either visual novel BG image won't render but everything else render fine, or game flat out won't launch with error message code. Not even a chance to run it then test the framerates.

None of these are "running FF16 with i3 with 4gb of ram" issues. Those are 5-8 years old 2D games that are supposed to work on low end PC. Not sure if up to date hardware works if their code base is that old and developers no longer update them.

At least I know my Xbox 360 games will always work on my 360. (Yup, my PS2, Xbox 360, psp are still functional now). If the dev only need to develop for a closed platform, it's generally going to be easier to test and trouble shoot.

Ftfy

But yes, i have a smaller sample size of games played. Quality over quantity*. You play 10 dollar games that are finished in 1 hour ($10/hr of time played). I play 90 dollar games that take 50++++++ hours to finish ($1.80/hr of time played). Im financially responsible.

I also have a fulltime job which granted me the affordability to own a Switch, PS5 and a high end PC.

What do you mean lol. The game that I ran into capability issues was made by a company with 40 employees.

Balatro was made by 1 person, so it's not like solo dev game are all bad.

* this was Nintendos problem with the NES, they let anyone make games for their system and it got flooded with absolute garbage games.

Huh? How does 50 hours $90 games automatically better than 10 dollar games?

I thought you are on the side that Balatro(it's less than $10 in my region even without sale, made by one person) is a better game than Assassin's creed shadows, made by hundreds of people and cost $70?

You are just being silly and make no sense atm.

Balatro is a *** *** game with NES graphics. There is nothing complex about the games code even by 2000 standards.

It got by because it was a creative spin blending poker and roguelike. Thats it.

Playing BoTW and ToTK in good resolution and frame rate is very much worth pirating.

AC Shadows is a money laundering scheme because theres no game out there that needs do many devs that the credits that TWO HOURS to play through.

That or it is the gaming equivalent of too many cooks in the kitchen.

Yeah, you said cheap games = bad. This is obviously not the true.

Short game doesn't mean bad either. What Remains of Edith Finch is a 2 hour narrative game, it has 95% overwhelming positive on steam, won multiple narrative awards too.

To me length doesn't matter, team size doesn't matter. What matters if the core game experience is interesting. Plenty of short games or cheap games have no problem delivering such experience.

I have no interest to play a 50 hours AAA game that's just running in a big world doing endless side quests over and over.

It's not quality v.s quantity issues. Those aren't correlated at all.

“Narrative game”

Lol get the *** out



Average narrative game:
>>read dialog
>>press a
>>read dialog
>>press a
>>read dialog
>>press a
>>read dialog
>>press a
>>read dialog
>>press a
*background changes*
Voiceover of canned “konichiwa saaaan” audio that youll hear over and over
>>read dialog
>>press a
>>read dialog
>>press a
>>read dialog
>>press a
>>read dialog
>>press a
>>read dialog
>>press a
Repeat for two hours
Maybe sprinkle a dialog choice in there that has no impact

Immersive gameplay

Oops
Almost forgot the QTE prompts

I didn't ask you to play story games. But god forbid I prefer reading books in a game.

You sound salty to troll other people's gaming preference by calling their preferred game ***lol. Why does it bother you that people like reading dialogue in games?

Yup, I like reading dialogues (or low dialogue story telling) in games, deal with it.

Are you not playing Monster Hunter Wilds? It gave every PC player problems. Also, your missing out.

1-on ps5
2-“it gave” implying past tense? So its been patched?

That and everyone got the right drivers. As far as I know, the optimization problems are over. No one I play with has had any issues since TU1 last week.

Sooo the game needed a patch.

Are you gonna suggest console games never get patches??

Im sure SE wished SNES games could get patches so they could fix those embarrassing bugs in FF6

Me when I see any Sydney Sweeney pic

When did I suggest they didn't? You said you couldn't remember the last game you played on PC that had compatibility issues, I asked if you played MH. That's it.