upvote

points

by hbn2 days ago |
comments
upvoteby Dylan168072 days ago|
next
[-]
Traditionally if you're going to play through a game in a couple weeks and then not own it anymore, that means you sell it and someone else buys it for their own couple weeks, and the company should be happy if they make $15 per person in the chain.

Also this is part of why I'm really worried about how weak the concept of game ownership is getting.

See also how anyone buying GTA6 near launch will be unable to resell it.

reply
upvoteby bombcar1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The vast majority of people buy a game, play it a few weeks, and then it sits forever - even if they could trade it in for a few bucks.

Lamepass should have been much closer to "buy a new release, get a month of gamepass games for free" or something.

reply
upvoteby Dylan168071 days ago|
parent|
[-]
The kind of person that actually cancels gamepass within a month is the kind of person to actually trade in the game. And with an efficient trading market they'd get more than a few bucks so early on.
reply
upvoteby reassess_blind1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Not necessarily. I was never the type to trade in physical games, but recently for Forza 6 I could either pay $99AUD to "own" the game, or buy one month of the PC game pass for $15AUD. An obvious choice.

The friend I played the game with did the same. Honestly, if they didn't include Forza 6 in Game Pass we both would've purchased it full price.

reply
upvoteby bombcar1 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
True, they set themselves up for "the only people who subscribe are those who use/abuse the subscription" - which is a recipe for failure.
reply
upvoteby tonyhart71 days ago|
parent|
[-]
by that logic then every subscription is a dud since they could just use heavily in few months and cancel for the rest of the year

but that's not happen in reality, people forgot to cancel

reply
upvoteby robertlagrant1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I see what you mean, but I think gamers on a budget will cancel. Other gamers would've paid full price for 12 games and instead paid $15 each for 12 games.
reply
upvoteby ErneX1 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Not budget constrained gamers, which there are a lot of.
reply
upvoteby hbn2 days ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
The writing's been on the wall about physical games going away for quite some time now.

You can tell the PS5 was designed to be a digital-first system by the disc drive slapped on the side like a tumour hanging off the otherwise symmetrical body.

reply
upvoteby Dylan168072 days ago|
parent|
[-]
I don't mind physical copies dropping in importance, and all else equal I even like the move to digital, but we desperately need to fix ownership of digital copies and stop having loopholes around "it's just a license".
reply
upvoteby philistine1 days ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
> near launch

How can you say that? No credible reporting has proven that there ever will be a version of GTA 6 on a disc. The physical versions that are announced will all consist of a one-time code.

reply
upvoteby nothercastle1 days ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
This model is going away expect piracy to increase accordingly
reply
upvoteby mvdtnz1 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I very much doubt a typical AAA game is bought new then resold 3 times on average. Very much doubt. And even if the used game market does cannibalise new games, they also generate a demand. Some gamers will pay full price knowing they can recoup some of it on the used market. Some of those gamers may not have made the purchase otherwise. Game Pass does not perform the same function.
reply
upvoteby 2 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby tracker12 days ago|
prev|
[-]
[flagged]
reply
upvoteby wholinator22 days ago|
parent|
[-]
What's woke about xbox?
reply
upvoteby ryandrake2 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Yea, I'd love to hear specifics. OP is all over this thread vaguely insinuating about "political content" but notably hasn't yet pointed out any specific examples that are objectionable.
reply
upvoteby tracker12 days ago|
parent|
[-]
[flagged]
reply
upvoteby ryandrake2 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
None of those examples are political. They might be things you don't like, which is fine, but that doesn't make them politics. What makes the attractiveness of a 3D game character "politics"? What makes a useless gay side quest politics, but a similar useless straight side quest not-politics?
reply
upvoteby tracker12 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Injecting LGBTQ+, then excluding it for certain markets is absolutely political.
reply
upvoteby Dylan168072 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Having a realistic amount of LGBTQ people/interactions in a big story shouldn't qualify as "political". Removing it for certain markets is much more political, and they should not do that, but I get the impression that isn't the outcome you want.

Edit: Also the average level in the real world is a lot more than 1%. 1% is like just the trans portion.

reply
upvoteby account421 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
They are political and being outraged at gp pointing it out doesn't change that they negatively affect the commercial success of the games.
reply
upvoteby pyth02 days ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Just so I understand your objection, they are woke because in the game one of their studios made, the woman in the game wasn't attractive enough for you?
reply
upvoteby tracker12 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
And you totally skip the "self-insert"... But I'm sure you'd cast Lizzo as Helen of Troy.
reply
upvoteby Dylan168072 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Who was the "self" being inserted here? That's a confusing term for a game made by so many people.
reply
upvoteby tracker12 days ago|
parent|
[-]
https://www.reddit.com/r/marvelmemes/comments/17h76ej/so_a_i...

Of course, it's not like you couldn't have done a google search yourself, if you really cared.

reply
upvoteby ryandrake2 days ago|
parent|
[-]
The top Reddit comment there pretty much sums this whole discussion up. I can't believe I dragged myself into this. It's just Gamergate again and again. I should have known.
reply
upvoteby tracker12 days ago|
parent|
[-]
So you think the character looks like a fashion model? Really?
reply
upvoteby 2 days ago|
parent|
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby debugnik2 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Not even their studio, his example is from Sony.
reply
upvoteby newaccountman22 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
What do editorial decisions in some specific game have to do with the news item?
reply
upvoteby debugnik2 days ago|
parent|
[-]
It's not even a game by a Microsoft studio, but a Sony one.
reply
upvoteby jamiek882 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Anyone else deeply deeply weary in their bones about people doing this?

I hate this timeline. We can’t even talk about fucking corporate margins without some chud shoehorning some of this shit in.

reply
upvoteby account421 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The corporate margins are the result of this shit being shoehorned into games.
reply
upvoteby ToucanLoucan2 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
It's by design. The outrage merchants post day in and out to signal allegiance to this bizarre cult.

People also don't respect how WILDLY influential GamerGate as been. There's good arguments to be made that Trump and his shitty White House would never have come to pass if not for moot re-enabling political discussions on 4chan at the behest of some combo of Epstein and Bannon, explicitly to stoke reactionary rage at anything "gay" in games.

Like don't get me wrong it's deeply stupid and perhaps respect is the wrong word, but it's crazy how much those old events are shaping current culture war nonsense.

reply
upvoteby vel0city2 days ago|
parent|
[-]
I agree. A lot of people assume rational actors and don't understand "meme magic".
reply
upvoteby ToucanLoucan2 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Even calling it memes is overly charitable. It's deliberate stoking of rage at scale to accomplish political ends.
reply