On April 28 2021 21:07 Manit0u wrote: HoMM is another great example of a franchise ground to dust. There are 7 games in the series, yet people still prefer to play HoMM3 over any subsequent title. Ubisoft really dropped the ball on this one.
I think the biggest thing are the technical difficulties actually. HoMM5 is super solid and HoMM6 was imo a large step forward mechanically, but hampered by the technical side and the fact that the studio went out of money and eventually bankrupt.
HoMM7 just gave me the impression that they didn't have any budget, it looks worse than HoMM6, has less features and maps that have large areas where they couldn't be bothered to even put some background in.
On April 28 2021 22:04 Simberto wrote: 5 was pretty nice, too, and i also spend a reasonable amount of time in 4.
I recently rediscovered 6, which i bought years ago, and it seems actually nice to play. However, sadly it has the utterly horrific Ubisoft account linked to it. Ubisofts paranoid always on DRM ruins that game.
I just want to play it. I don't want to log into your online service, and i especially don't want to be kicked without saving in the middle of whatever is going on, from a single player game i play on my personal computer, because it lost contact to a paranoid server that i don't actually need to play that game.
I am currently honestly thinking about getting some pirated version of the game i own, simply to get rid of that shit. And i obviously won't buy 7, since that almost certainly has the same shit going on.
As you said, i think this is a very clear case of company policy ruining a game franchise, even if the games are still actually fun to play.
I legitimately think that 6 would be the best one if it wasn't for Ucan'tPlay. The way they removed the randomization in the skill tree added a lot of depth to the game imo and the factions had more complex units that often enabled each other and created a playstyle. It's probably the only heroes where having some t1 units later on is actually worthwhile (except for heroes 5 peasants for entirely different reasons) and levels matter more beyond the stats. Also imo better campaign storytelling.
The game is such a step up in gameplay and would be so damn great if it had better balancing, more maps and didn't require the shitty online service. I still can't get over the fact that they chose to discard all the changes in heroes 7.
Also noteworthy that they campaign makes a lot more sense if you play it in the chronological order and it's pretty dumb that you can't see that anywhere in the game.
This documentary restored a bit of my faith in the gaming industry. It seems like not everyone has been swallowed by corporate bullshit, money chasing at all costs and that there's still passion in people and willingness to put customer satisfaction first and foremost.
This Epic v Apple court battle is already revealing things.
Walmart’s unannounced cloud gaming service, codenamed Project Storm, has been detailed in new confidential emails. An exhibit in the Epic Games v. Apple trial reveals Walmart’s efforts to pitch its cloud gaming service to Epic Games and get Fortnite on board.
“I played Walmart’s demo on an Android phone (with an Xbox controller) and the experience felt like playing on PS4 and superior to playing on Android or iOS,” said Epic Games co-founder Mark Rein in an email thread from April 2019. Rein also excitedly shares a photo of a game clip with the rest of the Epic Games executive team, showing how Walmart was planning to sell this in stores to let a phone attach to a controller. “They’re going to sell the clip for a crazy low amount, they were saying something like $2,” said Rein.
A presentation attached to the emails shows how Walmart had been pitching its cloud gaming service to publishers like Epic Games. The company was planning to run the service on Windows, with third-party game launchers like Steam, Uplay, Origin, Epic Games Store, Battle.net, and Bethesda Launcher supported.
It’s not clear from Walmart’s presentation when the company planned to launch the service, with a beta period originally set to launch in July 2019. An early mock-up of the user experience looks very similar to other cloud gaming services, with a list of games, genres, and a search function.
Walmart was planning what it describes as an “open ecosystem,” with the ability to stream from the cloud or download and play games locally. The technology behind Walmart’s cloud gaming service is LiquidSky, a service Walmart acquired. LiquidSky was previously powered by IBM Cloud’s bare metal servers and Nvidia GPUs, and it appears to offer a powerful Windows PC for cloud gaming.
Epic Games was one of many publishers to which Walmart pitched. Reports originally surfaced about Walmart’s plans in 2019, but the company has still not officially announced any cloud gaming service. Sources familiar with Walmart’s plans tell The Verge that some publishers and developers had signed up to produce or host games on Walmart’s service, but that the launch had been put on hold once the pandemic began last year.
It’s not clear if Walmart’s cloud gaming service will still launch. We reached out to Walmart to comment on Project Storm, but the company did not respond in time for publication.
Either way, Mark Rein seemed interested in Walmart’s pitch and exploring services like Google Stadia and Nvidia GeForce Now. “Walmart is open to exploring all kinds of business models, but I expect their service will be the least expensive of all of these because they’re Walmart and that’s their gig.”
Epic Games ultimately partnered with Nvidia to launch Fortnite on GeForce Now last year. It’s currently the only way to play Fortnite on iOS, after the Epic dispute with Apple led to the removal of Fortnite from the App Store.
Subway got into it with the CBC after a report their meat was lousy. the CBC's reporting looked even more credible after an extended public mud slinging contest with Subway.
I suspect EA will end up looking worse just like Subway did. EA's best move is to just shut up.
The CBC is a left-wing, liberal apologist machine. However, on many non-political topics they do some great investigative journalism. Ya gotta give 'em credit for that.
I guess if ATVI acquires a company the size of Blizzard or King then Bobby won't be able to turn that into a huge bonus.
eliminating awards based on creating "transformative transactions" in M&A.
Subway got into it with the CBC after a report their meat was lousy. the CBC's reporting looked even more credible after an extended public mud slinging contest with Subway.
I suspect EA will end up looking worse just like Subway did. EA's best move is to just shut up.
The CBC is a left-wing, liberal apologist machine. However, on many non-political topics they do some great investigative journalism. Ya gotta give 'em credit for that.
I guess if ATVI acquires a company the size of Blizzard or King then Bobby won't be able to turn that into a huge bonus.
I wonder if these changes will lead to ATVI being less willing to take risks on innovative stuff they did in the past like DJ Hero and Skylanders?
Rofl that EA article. "We didn't mean to "convert them" to our pay2win gambling mode, we just wanted to "convert them" through our pay2win gambling mode to our new iteration of Fifa where they can restart their pay2win gambling collection from zero. You see, our pay2win gambling mode is really about engagement and not about pay2win gambling, monetization doesn't play a role in this. We want them to engage in our pay2win gambling mode because that's the only one we continuously support".
If it wasn't about the money how come they don't support the other modes? Maybe continuous support from a company might be related to continuous player engagement? It's kinda insulting how dumb EA apparently thinks the readers are.
On a side note I'd assume that if the stock price and net benefit rise as the result of acquiring large companies then Kotic would get his bonus (indirectly too due to his stocks). The article you linked isn't really clear on these, at least not the part I could read.
On May 05 2021 10:01 Archeon wrote: If it wasn't about the money how come they don't support the other modes? Maybe continuous support from a company might be related to continuous player engagement? It's kinda insulting how dumb EA apparently thinks the readers are.
Maybe it's the Corporate America thinking?
"We're making a boatload of money with this so I want you to get all the way off my back about it."
I guess they think that if something is making them big bucks and if they dress it up in corpo-speak for the public it'll all be OK. Unfortunately for them big parts of Europe are not really corporate-minded.
Edit: It would perhaps make more sense if big bucks for corporations would also mean big taxes that help the country but they don't pay taxes and even get subsidized by the government. Seriously, fuck that shit.
Edit2: I guess I'm not the only one not being a fan of big companies:
Subway got into it with the CBC after a report their meat was lousy. the CBC's reporting looked even more credible after an extended public mud slinging contest with Subway.
I suspect EA will end up looking worse just like Subway did. EA's best move is to just shut up.
The CBC is a left-wing, liberal apologist machine. However, on many non-political topics they do some great investigative journalism. Ya gotta give 'em credit for that.
I guess if ATVI acquires a company the size of Blizzard or King then Bobby won't be able to turn that into a huge bonus.
eliminating awards based on creating "transformative transactions" in M&A.
I wonder if these changes will lead to ATVI being less willing to take risks on innovative stuff they did in the past like DJ Hero and Skylanders?
Rofl that EA article. "We didn't mean to "convert them" to our pay2win gambling mode, we just wanted to "convert them" through our pay2win gambling mode to our new iteration of Fifa where they can restart their pay2win gambling collection from zero. You see, our pay2win gambling mode is really about engagement and not about pay2win gambling, monetization doesn't play a role in this. We want them to engage in our pay2win gambling mode because that's the only one we continuously support".
If it wasn't about the money how come they don't support the other modes? Maybe continuous support from a company might be related to continuous player engagement? It's kinda insulting how dumb EA apparently thinks the readers are.
On a side note I'd assume that if the stock price and net benefit rise as the result of acquiring large companies then Kotic would get his bonus (indirectly too due to his stocks). The article you linked isn't really clear on these, at least not the part I could read.
I mean it’s laughable really. It’s engaging yes, in exactly the way gambling is engaging!
I wonder if the industry will shoot itself in the foot with such mechanisms, the regulatory hammer may not come or it may swing down overly hard. Remains to be seen I suppose!
I mean pay to win sucks as a mechanic to have, but pay to win where you’re rolling the dice on the chance to get the thing you want to help you win is worse again.
Subway got into it with the CBC after a report their meat was lousy. the CBC's reporting looked even more credible after an extended public mud slinging contest with Subway.
I suspect EA will end up looking worse just like Subway did. EA's best move is to just shut up.
The CBC is a left-wing, liberal apologist machine. However, on many non-political topics they do some great investigative journalism. Ya gotta give 'em credit for that.
I guess if ATVI acquires a company the size of Blizzard or King then Bobby won't be able to turn that into a huge bonus.
eliminating awards based on creating "transformative transactions" in M&A.
I wonder if these changes will lead to ATVI being less willing to take risks on innovative stuff they did in the past like DJ Hero and Skylanders?
Rofl that EA article. "We didn't mean to "convert them" to our pay2win gambling mode, we just wanted to "convert them" through our pay2win gambling mode to our new iteration of Fifa where they can restart their pay2win gambling collection from zero. You see, our pay2win gambling mode is really about engagement and not about pay2win gambling, monetization doesn't play a role in this. We want them to engage in our pay2win gambling mode because that's the only one we continuously support".
If it wasn't about the money how come they don't support the other modes? Maybe continuous support from a company might be related to continuous player engagement? It's kinda insulting how dumb EA apparently thinks the readers are.
On a side note I'd assume that if the stock price and net benefit rise as the result of acquiring large companies then Kotic would get his bonus (indirectly too due to his stocks). The article you linked isn't really clear on these, at least not the part I could read.
I mean it’s laughable really. It’s engaging yes, in exactly the way gambling is engaging!
I wonder if the industry will shoot itself in the foot with such mechanisms, the regulatory hammer may not come or it may swing down overly hard. Remains to be seen I suppose!
I mean pay to win sucks as a mechanic to have, but pay to win where you’re rolling the dice on the chance to get the thing you want to help you win is worse again.
This is the bit where he's absolutely very clearly lying through his teeth:
"Our job is to inspire the world to play. Play is the metric, and engagement is how we define that success," Jackson defends. "Monetisation regularly follows that, but not always, and it's certainly not here."
I wonder how is this even a thing? You don't have to look any further than Id Software with their Doom Eternal to see everything wrong with the industry currently. Nothing wrong with IS and DE, I'm using them as an example of a game done right and being successful.
The game has amazing graphics and runs smoothly at 250fps with barely any bugs upon launch (the fact it runs so well is what actually allows speedrun exploits, which would not work at lower fps). There are cosmetics, customization and cheat codes in the game, all obtainable within the game without mtx. Players were happy with it, company was happy with it (they even sold $200 collectors edition which people didn't regret buying). Why can't we have more stuff like that instead all those GaaS mtx infested and bug ridden releases?
On May 05 2021 23:29 Manit0u wrote: I wonder how is this even a thing? You don't have to look any further than Id Software with their Doom Eternal to see everything wrong with the industry currently. Nothing wrong with IS and DE, I'm using them as an example of a game done right and being successful.
The game has amazing graphics and runs smoothly at 250fps with barely any bugs upon launch (the fact it runs so well is what actually allows speedrun exploits, which would not work at lower fps). There are cosmetics, customization and cheat codes in the game, all obtainable within the game without mtx. Players were happy with it, company was happy with it (they even sold $200 collectors edition which people didn't regret buying). Why can't we have more stuff like that instead all those GaaS mtx infested and bug ridden releases?
Because customers do not seem to value that enough. Or, the customers don't hate the exploitative bullshit enough. And there are no laws against it.
You have to come to terms with the fact that we are not really the core demographic of video games anymore. Most companies do not make video games for people who care about video games. They make video games for people who just want to start up a game from time to time. And a lot of these people are not as disgusted by the mtx stuff as people who care about video games are. That is the core demographic of video games nowadays.
If everyone started to actually think about what games they buy, wait for two weeks after launch, inform themselves, and avoid the broken titles with exploitative bullshit, then the exploitative bullshit would stop being the best strategy for companies. I do all of that, but most people who buy video games do not. Which means marketing is more important than quality, and monetization is king for milking more money out of the guys you tricked into your ecosystem.
On May 05 2021 23:29 Manit0u wrote: I wonder how is this even a thing? You don't have to look any further than Id Software with their Doom Eternal to see everything wrong with the industry currently. Nothing wrong with IS and DE, I'm using them as an example of a game done right and being successful.
The game has amazing graphics and runs smoothly at 250fps with barely any bugs upon launch (the fact it runs so well is what actually allows speedrun exploits, which would not work at lower fps). There are cosmetics, customization and cheat codes in the game, all obtainable within the game without mtx. Players were happy with it, company was happy with it (they even sold $200 collectors edition which people didn't regret buying). Why can't we have more stuff like that instead all those GaaS mtx infested and bug ridden releases?
I think your premise is maybe a little out of date here. QA is an expensive department to maintain and the yields from it fall off the closer you get to final launch. In the past, when you shipped a game, especially on console, that was it: no patches, no hotfixes, no opportunity to resolve issues that your team missed the first time. There really was no alternative. Today, many software companies are leveraging Internet connectivity in their products to support QA. The engineers are thus encouraged to do their own testing and set up unit tests to protect known areas of risk. On top of this, they can now create A/B experiments in the forms of opt-in dev releases or betas, or phased rollouts for the general public. A closed QA environment, even with broad variety in system configurations, will never be able to 100% reflect a real-world user experience. That means if you can instead deploy an "early access" or "beta" version to 1% of users, you not only save on QA costs but you get valuable real-world data that you can use to fix unforeseen issues. This type of gradual release leading up to 1.0 means you have high-quality real-world test results, and even after 1.0 you can keep delivering updates with relatively fast turnaround. This can come off as a "buggy release" occasionally but that's entirely dependent upon the internal testing structure as well as the release strategy, and the Internet allows most issues to be fixed within hours or days rather than months or never.
EA employs slimey tactics to maximize profits of their annualized sports titles. However, one must also acknowledge that EA has brought more innovation and development resources towards Hockey video games than any other company in the history of the industry. And, its not close... has any other org brought even 2% as much to Hockey video games as EA has?
ATVI did everything it could to extract every $ from the SC2 playerbase. However, one must also acknowledge that the # of RTS games that had more development resources dedicated to it .... is right around zero.
On May 05 2021 23:29 Manit0u wrote: I wonder how is this even a thing? You don't have to look any further than Id Software with their Doom Eternal to see everything wrong with the industry currently. Nothing wrong with IS and DE, I'm using them as an example of a game done right and being successful.
The game has amazing graphics and runs smoothly at 250fps with barely any bugs upon launch (the fact it runs so well is what actually allows speedrun exploits, which would not work at lower fps). There are cosmetics, customization and cheat codes in the game, all obtainable within the game without mtx. Players were happy with it, company was happy with it (they even sold $200 collectors edition which people didn't regret buying). Why can't we have more stuff like that instead all those GaaS mtx infested and bug ridden releases?
Many call it predatory because it is. Which games are the ones with the most income?
But in reality it's the customers fault. If we spend the money without hesitation, they would be stupid to stop doing so when their responsibility towards the shareholders is to make as much money as possible within the law boundaries. And in almost all the countries lootboxes aren't gambling.
Blizz lost 30% of the user base in the last 3 years (they're down 5 million MAU this past year) but the revenue is up. I guess they're opting for more and more aggressive monetization systems while completely neglecting their long time fans, favoring quick cash grabs over long term engagement (WoW cash shop is geared more and more towards new players).
On May 06 2021 03:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote: EA employs slimey tactics to maximize profits of their annualized sports titles. However, one must also acknowledge that EA has brought more innovation and development resources towards Hockey video games than any other company in the history of the industry. And, its not close... has any other org brought even 2% as much to Hockey video games as EA has?
ATVI did everything it could to extract every $ from the SC2 playerbase. However, one must also acknowledge that the # of RTS games that had more development resources dedicated to it .... is right around zero.
Sometimes, you must give the devil its due.
I think this is a flawed argument. Perhaps the reason why EA/ATVI have 'brought innovation and development resources' is because they orginally made a boat load of cash, and then used that cash to crush competition and poach or acquire any competing talent. You propose that if they didn't exist we would have 0 games with such dedication behind them but perhaps if they didn't exist with their sleazy tactics, there would actually be multiple companies each making a fairer share of the profit up for grabs and we would have a slew of different great games available to play.
On May 06 2021 03:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote: EA employs slimey tactics to maximize profits of their annualized sports titles. However, one must also acknowledge that EA has brought more innovation and development resources towards Hockey video games than any other company in the history of the industry. And, its not close... has any other org brought even 2% as much to Hockey video games as EA has?
ATVI did everything it could to extract every $ from the SC2 playerbase. However, one must also acknowledge that the # of RTS games that had more development resources dedicated to it .... is right around zero.
Sometimes, you must give the devil its due.
I think this is a flawed argument. Perhaps the reason why EA/ATVI have 'brought innovation and development resources' is because they orginally made a boat load of cash, and then used that cash to crush competition and poach or acquire any competing talent. You propose that if they didn't exist we would have 0 games with such dedication behind them but perhaps if they didn't exist with their sleazy tactics, there would actually be multiple companies each making a fairer share of the profit up for grabs and we would have a slew of different great games available to play.
I personally see Jimmy's post exactly as he wrote, there's no other company beside EA and ATVI has the will and resource to invest in those titles/genre now, so they must do something right, and we gotta give them credit for that. Whether it's better if EA/ATVI doesn't exist, that is entirely different matter, and I'm not sure if it's something worth discussing.
EPT
