Help me comprehend this

[Parmenides]

You cant have your cake and eat it too. Offline singleplayer with no achevmenta, or online with them. Pick one.

Pooh on the achievements! Never cared for them

Well this thread backfired. Good stuff

I will point out that people keep saying 'voting with your wallet' doesn't work. That's not true. People do vote with their wallet with every purchase. The fact that 20 million people buy Call of Duty means that they believe it is worth spending their money on even with whatever perceived or actual flaws the game might have. If people are buying DLC or Ubisoft games or casual games or whatever, it means they are okay with paying for extra content or don't care enough about DRM requirements or whatever. If for some reason they do not like that product enough, they might not buy it next time around. If you find something wrong with a product, then just don't buy it.

People do vote with their wallets. It's just that some people here don't like how they vote. And they think they know better, and that they have some sort of God given right to tell others how to spend their hard earned money.

That's not the case. Look at people in general. People in life usually settle for less all the time. People get scammed all the time. People get tricked by the salesmen for a bad deal all the time. Just look at all the people who have really bad cell phone plans. People pay more for less and aren't even aware of it. That's life. If there is no God, then people are wasting their time on religion. If there is a God, then people are missing out on God. A lot of people don't know what they are missing. And they missing out on a lot of things that would appeal to their preferences.

When a game is popular it doesn't necessarily mean everyone is enjoying it and enjoying it more than most people. They don't know what they are missing. Most people aren't voting with their wallet. The only vote they make is that they are easily susceptible to marketing schemes.

"Voting with your wallet" is a stand against marketing schemes. It's a statement of awareness.

 

[erf]

For a simple answer to your original question in this thread:

There are social and economical trends that affect all money driven industries. Gaming is no different. If you can't live with it then just do as your doing and "vote with your wallet".

Or you could just accept the fact that capitalism has extreme backlashes and understand that there is nothing that is going to stop the trends that affect gaming.

While these trends will continue you will also have the counter intuitive who stand up and stay true to what the product is about.

You will always have your Madden, Diablo, and CoD franchises that are overwhelmed by popularity and in turn "watered down" to cater to the masses.

On the other hand you will also have your Demon's Souls, Guild Wars, and Battlefields that stand up to these trends.

As a gamer I'll enjoy both based on the fact that I understand these trends and there is nothing I can do about them...short of starting my own fucking publishing/development firm.

Cry moar dude.

 

[Q-BZ]

Why do people buy games like Diablo 3, or Modern Warfare 2/Black Ops which have essential features STRIPPED from them compared to previous installments in their respective series?

Because they have different tastes and preferences than you do and by that count some of those are still good games in their own right as far as they are concerned.

Why are people all too willing to not only pay for a stripped down experience, but also buy the map packs, DLC, and all that, THAT WAS NOT part of the previous gaming experience? Worse yet, why do people try to rationalize their actions in doing so on these boards?

Good questions. Usually the so called rationalization comes down to "I do this or I don't play at all" and not playing at all more often than not is not the preferred choice. I'm speaking for myself right off the bat.


There is another choice but I won't go there. Too many people do and I consider them part of the problem but they don't and they argue and justify it to the moon so it's not worth going there again.

Do you not realize that you're making gaming WORSE instead of better by voting with your wallets to support these actions?

As you've seen around here, a lot of people either don't think about it and/or simply don't care.

Let's see, in the last 2-3 years, very quickly we've seen the following:

1. Always on DRM
2. Unneccessary addons like GFWL (looking at you Bioshock 2) when you already have Steam as your DRM
3. Limited installs/activations of a game YOU BOUGHT AND PAID FOR
4. Removal of key features like offline single player modes, dedicated servers, removal of content in order to peddle it as Day 1 DLC

Agreed.

5. The constant dumbing down and consolization of games to the extent to where the game is only challenging to the lowest common denominator and the average player has absolutely no problem beating the game. Are games even challenging anymore?

And yet you've made 2-3 threads dedicated to worshipping a console game and bashing anyone that doesn't think the thing is videogame Jesus Christ.

I'm kind of teasing you here a little bit: Actually it should be about a good game or a bad game regardless of platform so I salute you on that front for not being a platform fanboy because if you were you wouldn't even own a PS3 or give a rats ass about these Demon Souls games.

I have a number of PS3 games I like myself and I'll see if I build up the courage and buy enough blood pressure medicine to try out that Demon Souls series or not.

Hell, I've played more Red Dead Redemption on the PS3 vs. just about any other game since that game came out.

6. DLC. If i'm being absolutely honest, I can see how a few DLC's are good, because instead of the expansion packs of the past, you can buy a selected add on here and there that can lengthen your gaming experience, but for the most part, they haven't done a good job of selling us DLC that offers any kind of value except for a few select games (Fallout, Borderlands, etc). Most of them are games that deliberately cut out content in order to sell you new skins, races, a level here, or there, or something!

Agreed. I can only speak for myself when I say I'm pretty picky about when I throw down for DLC or not.

7. Removal of dedicated servers, I know i've mentioned this already, but the reason for it goes hand in hand with why they aren't putting mod tools in games these days, because they want to sell you DLC, and with you being able to control your own dedicated server, YOU can control what content gets put out there. By locking the platform to a proprietary network, they can ensure that if you don't pay for maps, you can't play them. No modding tools, then you can't make map packs or modify the game for the enjoyment of the community as a whole.

I totally agree. You're also alluding to Mod Tools which I personally feel should be mandatory releases.


This was a topic that I couldn't believe the stupid shit some people were saying when MW2 rolled out without dedicated servers. One person even stated point blank they thought the gaming experience would be BETTER for not having dedicated servers at all.

I will not buy any multiplayer game that lacks dedicated servers. Period.

8. Removal of single player. I've never understood why people support removing single player as an option for games that are clearly meant to be played single player if the player wishes, like Diablo 3 or Starcraft 2. Instead those games have to connect to Battle.net so you can't even play them if you don't have an internet connection.

Again, couldn't agree more. I'm more of a single player person anyways and always will be.

Chances are unless it's an obvious MP game like a BF3 that if a game doesn't have a worthwhile SP mode I won't bother with it.

I think that gamers of this new generation simply don't have any standards, and it's allowing the rest of us to get fucked by the actions of others.

For any number of reasons it seems that way but frankly that's a phenomenon I've charted outside of just gaming as well.

It's seriously gotten to the point to where gaming has stagnated and the only thing that really matters, i mean, REALLY matters isn't how much fun you're having or how much fun you aren't having, but how many dollars a game generates.

Again, a phenomenon that isn't confined to gaming but there are still plenty of good games in the mix. It's not all bad.

Companies don't give a shit if you have fun or not, or what YOU want. They simply want to be able to bank on the average gamer being unwilling to resist the new shiny and shell out the bucks for not just the game, but all the other DLC and microtransactions associated with it.

Sadly, it's been a safe bet. It's the chicken and the egg argument but they've made that bet and it's paid off in spades. I don't need to cite Madden or COD sales to you to prove that point.

I'm not even a COD hater but how many times you can pay $60 for the same damned thing, folks? Really?

To a great extent, it's about control, and it used to be in YOUR hands.

LOL, like a lot of other things. Yet again, this is something goes outside of just videogames.

YOU used to decide how you wanted your game to be played, who could join, who couldn't join, whether you were offline or online, what map you wanted to play on, what games you wanted to join from a server browser list, you used to have a dedicated server you could depend on being available for you to join and play with a community you were familiar with. P2P gaming on a platform like IWnet has destroyed that. Always on DRM ensures that you will not be able to play Diablo 3 offline. Always on DRM ensures that you cannot play Starcraft 2 offline AND save your campaign and achievements. Always on DRM ensures that if you buy Assassin's Creed Brotherhood, that you cannot play it unless you are online. Being able to pull the plug on the servers that have Madden 2011 on them ensures that you must buy Madden 2012 if you want to play online.

Want to play Battlefield 3? Then you have to be willing to install Origin.

There's a huge reason a lot of people play games like Counterstrike Source and Call of Duty 4, Starcraft, and yes, even Diablo, YEARS after they came out.

Look at the above and you'll see why.

No argument from me.

Here's the catch though: The only other choice is to not play at all...or go the illegitimate route and that opens the can of worms on that whole subject which I know how I feel about it... so if you're someone that wants to stay legit then you're facing those two choices. All of that above or don't play at all.

Not easy, is it?

I find it a sad commentary on the state of PC gaming when on October 4th, Dark Souls launches and I will be receiving my pre-order from Amazon.com and it will offer a stiffer challenge than any PC game released this year, or probably the last few years.

I'm not sure how true a statement that is but maybe so. I look at those games and I've watched a lot of videos and I personally feel like a person has to have a little bit of masochist streak in them to find that "fun." I just don't really see it working for me. I may yet still take the first game for a test spin anyways.

Obviously YMMV. You've got this stuff elevated past the heavens and anyone that disagrees with you on this isn't hardcore, doesn't like good games, and all the rest.


No, they simply have a different of opinion from you and that's something you just don't seem to be able to handle very well if at all from what I've observed.

I'm not sure how you get along in real life if you really have the kind of difficulty dealing with different POV like what I SEEM to be see here on this forum from you on a regular basis. I hope I'm mistaken in that perception.

It should not be this way, PC gaming should offer not just the best experience, but the most flexible, modifiable, challenging, and be the DEFINITE experience. Lately, in spite of excellent games like Deus Ex: Human Revolution, I think the gap between consoles and PC's is narrowing.

Don't believe me? Just look at the selection of PC titles we have now, there's very few DEFINITE PC experiences out there, instead, it's all multiplatform and the consoles have their share of our best stuff.

I agree.

So it comes down to what it should be about anyways: It's either a good game that deserves to be bought or not. That's priority one.

In my case if I have the choice I'm always going PC first. If it's never coming there then that's what a console is for.


Again, people's mileage may vary.

 

[Frog2]

The main reason people tolerate this is because they're stupid, what else could it be?
I bought Crysis+WH, but will never buy Crysis2
I bought COD4, but have never bought another COD, nor will I ever buy such dumbed down games.

I bought F1 2011 hoping it would be better than 10, but it's worse, for example, the MP is almost always laggy and I keep getting booted, all due to P2P vs the firstclass MP's in games like GTR evo and Iracing which have dedicated servers.

Buying F1 2011 was a stupid mistake, but I'm going to learn from it unlike the casual/tarded gamers who help trash like COD break records and earn billions despite being an embarrassment to discerning gamers.

 

[DeathPrincess]

You cant have your cake and eat it too. Offline singleplayer with no achevmenta, or online with them. Pick one.

I hate acheivements. Its always 95% doing repetitve crap (thus boring), things youd get anyway through normal gameplay (thus pointless), or stupid stuff so the publisher pushes you to use features you wouldn't do normally, like the ill conceived multiplayer they added on in the last week of development (thus annoying). If there is anything difficult/worthwhile you can usually glitch your way to them.

Having 100% whatever does no make you a good player, like having a 60% accuracy in a game where you only take easy shots doesn't, or spend time camping so you have a high k/d ratio (I dislike stats too ). It justs means you are distracted from the main experience with a load of crap noone really cares about, but does anyway. Making the expereince much much less enjoyable. I'd rather go on to the next section rather than stand around killing 1000 satyrs with a spoon to get the stupid "acheivement".

 

[erf]

I hate acheivements. Its always 95% doing repetitve crap (thus boring), things youd get anyway through normal gameplay (thus pointless), or stupid stuff so the publisher pushes you to use features you wouldn't do normally, like the ill conceived multiplayer they added on in the last week of development (thus annoying). If there is anything difficult/worthwhile you can usually glitch your way to them.

Having 100% whatever does no make you a good player, like having a 60% accuracy in a game where you only take easy shots doesn't, or spend time camping so you have a high k/d ratio (I dislike stats too ). It justs means you are distracted from the main experience with a load of crap noone really cares about, but does anyway. Making the expereince much much less enjoyable. I'd rather go on to the next section rather than stand around killing 1000 satyrs with a spoon to get the stupid "acheivement".

I've never understood why people "hate" achievements so much. Do they in any way take away from the game? If you don't like them just don't pay attention to them.

I've never played a game with achievements in mind, but I have always thought it's a neat little addition.

 

[Katalysis]

Giant wall of proto "pc gaming is dead" text crits you for maximum damage.

 

[DeathPrincess]

I've never understood why people "hate" achievements so much. Do they in any way take away from the game? If you don't like them just don't pay attention to them.

I've never played a game with achievements in mind, but I have always thought it's a neat little addition.

I don't know, but it just does. I've "completed" many games before, and felt like I had some kind of "closure" or whatever. But now theres a stupid thing waived in your face that you haven't finished the game until youve done it using a co op buddy with you both clicking 1000 times between every fight. Or played the dead multiplayer 123043560 times.

Games used to be more about making your own challenge. Things like speedruns/etc. But this forced boorishness doesn't really make a game more enjoyable. Infact quite the opposite, as it's used as a way of making the game feel artificially longer because theres a "play for 1000 hours" acheivement. Or "complete the game while wearing sock", "complete the game wearing sock in medium/hard/nightmare" things to do. While the actual game lasts for 3 hours, they feel justified because it takes 2304305 hours to get all the "acheivements".

There have been a few that have been fun to get, but they are the exception rather than the rule. Plus they effect my OCD

 

[erf]

I don't know, but it just does. I've "completed" many games before, and felt like I had some kind of "closure" or whatever. But now theres a stupid thing waived in your face that you haven't finished the game until youve done it using a co op buddy with you both clicking 1000 times between every fight. Or played the dead multiplayer 123043560 times.

Games used to be more about making your own challenge. Things like speedruns/etc. But this forced boorishness doesn't really make a game more enjoyable. Infact quite the opposite, as it's used as a way of making the game feel artificially longer because theres a "play for 1000 hours" acheivement. Or "complete the game while wearing sock", "complete the game wearing sock in medium/hard/nightmare" things to do. While the actual game lasts for 3 hours, they feel justified because it takes 2304305 hours to get all the "acheivements".

There have been a few that have been fun to get, but they are the exception rather than the rule. Plus they effect my OCD

I can understand the OCD part entirely, but I just got to the point where as I'm actually just enjoying the game I was able to appreciate the times when I did get an "achievement".

I've gotten caught up in the "zomg I have to get it" a couple of times but as soon as the enjoyment factor was lost I'd just say fuck it.

 

[Q-BZ]

I've never understood why people "hate" achievements so much. Do they in any way take away from the game? If you don't like them just don't pay attention to them.

I've never played a game with achievements in mind, but I have always thought it's a neat little addition.

Same here. It's cool when I'm doing something and I see that pop up.

 

[butterfliesrpretty]

to the op: stop crying, you've made your point clear in multiple threads, all the while derailing them well after you made your point. Don't play the game, express your opinion and move on. Just because others don't agree with you doesn't mean it's the end of the world.

 

[Porter_]

Why do people buy games like Diablo 3, or Modern Warfare 2/Black Ops which have essential features STRIPPED from them compared to previous installments in their respective series?

all the white-knighting and adamant "vote with your wallet" propaganda towards PC gaming is obnoxious. if you find a game fun then buy it. if not then don't. it's as simple as that. i don't see the need to incessantly harp on this.

 

[Shalafi]

I hate acheivements. Its always 95% doing repetitve crap (thus boring), things youd get anyway through normal gameplay (thus pointless), or stupid stuff so the publisher pushes you to use features you wouldn't do normally, like the ill conceived multiplayer they added on in the last week of development (thus annoying). If there is anything difficult/worthwhile you can usually glitch your way to them.

Having 100% whatever does no make you a good player, like having a 60% accuracy in a game where you only take easy shots doesn't, or spend time camping so you have a high k/d ratio (I dislike stats too ). It justs means you are distracted from the main experience with a load of crap noone really cares about, but does anyway. Making the expereince much much less enjoyable. I'd rather go on to the next section rather than stand around killing 1000 satyrs with a spoon to get the stupid "acheivement".

I agree, I never liked achievements personally, especially when most achievements consist of something like, making it past the first save point, or making it through the first cutscene, or getting your first kill or whatever.

Pooh on the achievements! Never cared for them



That's not the case. Look at people in general. People in life usually settle for less all the time. People get scammed all the time. People get tricked by the salesmen for a bad deal all the time. Just look at all the people who have really bad cell phone plans. People pay more for less and aren't even aware of it. That's life. If there is no God, then people are wasting their time on religion. If there is a God, then people are missing out on God. A lot of people don't know what they are missing. And they missing out on a lot of things that would appeal to their preferences.

When a game is popular it doesn't necessarily mean everyone is enjoying it and enjoying it more than most people. They don't know what they are missing. Most people aren't voting with their wallet. The only vote they make is that they are easily susceptible to marketing schemes.

"Voting with your wallet" is a stand against marketing schemes. It's a statement of awareness.

I agree, that's the best way to phrase "Vote with your wallet" that I've seen yet. I find it somewhat puzzling that people STILL do not grasp the concept behind voting with your wallet. Voting with your wallet is a part of the cause and effect that shapes the direction of gaming.

When you vote with your wallet by buying dumbed down, stripped down, consolized PC games, then you get exactly what you paid for. This is BAD.

When you vote with your wallet by NOT buying those games, that's one less sale that goes towards those kind of games. That's GOOD.

I don't know, but it just does. I've "completed" many games before, and felt like I had some kind of "closure" or whatever. But now theres a stupid thing waived in your face that you haven't finished the game until youve done it using a co op buddy with you both clicking 1000 times between every fight. Or played the dead multiplayer 123043560 times.

Games used to be more about making your own challenge. Things like speedruns/etc. But this forced boorishness doesn't really make a game more enjoyable. Infact quite the opposite, as it's used as a way of making the game feel artificially longer because theres a "play for 1000 hours" acheivement. Or "complete the game while wearing sock", "complete the game wearing sock in medium/hard/nightmare" things to do. While the actual game lasts for 3 hours, they feel justified because it takes 2304305 hours to get all the "acheivements".

There have been a few that have been fun to get, but they are the exception rather than the rule. Plus they effect my OCD

I agree, I never did put much stock in achievements.

 

[Shalafi]

Because they have different tastes and preferences than you do and by that count some of those are still good games in their own right as far as they are concerned.




Good questions. Usually the so called rationalization comes down to "I do this or I don't play at all" and not playing at all more often than not is not the preferred choice. I'm speaking for myself right off the bat.


There is another choice but I won't go there. Too many people do and I consider them part of the problem but they don't and they argue and justify it to the moon so it's not worth going there again.






As you've seen around here, a lot of people either don't think about it and/or simply don't care.

And there's a consequence for those kind of beliefs and actions, and you can see the results in the selection of PC games we have lately.

And yet you've made 2-3 threads dedicated to worshipping a console game and bashing anyone that doesn't think the thing is videogame Jesus Christ.

I'm kind of teasing you here a little bit: Actually it should be about a good game or a bad game regardless of platform so I salute you on that front for not being a platform fanboy because if you were you wouldn't even own a PS3 or give a rats ass about these Demon Souls games.

I have a number of PS3 games I like myself and I'll see if I build up the courage and buy enough blood pressure medicine to try out that Demon Souls series or not.

Hell, I've played more Red Dead Redemption on the PS3 vs. just about any other game since that game came out.

I have never been against console games, only consolization of PC games, there's a huge difference there, and it's frequently misunderstood what is meant by that. I'll speak in plainer terms, I want my console games to remain console games, and my PC games to be the epitome of what PC gaming is all about. I want my console games to be a console experience, and for the most part, the only console games I buy are single player ones. I also have Red Dead Redemption.

When games like Diablo 3 and Call of Duty are made with consoles first in mind, it means that anybody purchasing the PC versions will not be getting the DEFINITE PC experience. Now why is this? Before in Diablo 2, you could have 8 people playing with you in the same game, in Diablo 3, this has been dumbed down to 4. In Diablo 3, you had stat points so you could customize a character, in Diablo 3, that's been removed. CoD has given us map packs that used to be free that are now $15 pieces of DLC, why? Cause console players were willing to pay that. Umm, no thanks . . . . and this has carried over to PC gaming, so no, consolization of PC games is not a good thing.

As far as Dark Souls goes and I'm praising it, it's because it deserves it. I've never given out unwarranted praise or scorn, there's always a reason for my harsh judgement or high praises. Dark Souls is a challenging hard game, just watch any of the live streams to see proof positive of it, just go to justin.tv and search for Dark Souls, you'll see.

In a day and age where most games have an easy mode and cater to the casual crowd, this is a breath of fresh air. I've owned Demon's Souls since it came out, and I know what it's all about.

Dark Souls has zero DLC, as the developers felt like that when you buy the game, it should be the finished version. Plus the Collectors Edition cost me $59.99, same as a normal priced game. Again, a step in the right direction. Skyrim has a $150 collectors edition where you get little more than a statue and an art book, LOL. What a rip off.

Agreed. I can only speak for myself when I say I'm pretty picky about when I throw down for DLC or not.

I totally agree. You're also alluding to Mod Tools which I personally feel should be mandatory releases.


This was a topic that I couldn't believe the stupid shit some people were saying when MW2 rolled out without dedicated servers. One person even stated point blank they thought the gaming experience would be BETTER for not having dedicated servers at all.

I will not buy any multiplayer game that lacks dedicated servers. Period.

Preaching to the choir here. This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that people are not only PAYING for this experience, but actually defending it . . . .

seriously, WTF. Why would you want to pay for a game that relies on P2P and gives you high pings, no gaming community, and no regular server to call home?

This, I do not understand.

Again, couldn't agree more. I'm more of a single player person anyways and always will be.

Chances are unless it's an obvious MP game like a BF3 that if a game doesn't have a worthwhile SP mode I won't bother with it.


For any number of reasons it seems that way but frankly that's a phenomenon I've charted outside of just gaming as well.

Again, a phenomenon that isn't confined to gaming but there are still plenty of good games in the mix. It's not all bad.


Sadly, it's been a safe bet. It's the chicken and the egg argument but they've made that bet and it's paid off in spades. I don't need to cite Madden or COD sales to you to prove that point.

I'm not even a COD hater but how many times you can pay $60 for the same damned thing, folks? Really?

LOL, like a lot of other things. Yet again, this is something goes outside of just videogames.

It's sad, just sad.

Here's the catch though: The only other choice is to not play at all...or go the illegitimate route and that opens the can of worms on that whole subject which I know how I feel about it... so if you're someone that wants to stay legit then you're facing those two choices. All of that above or don't play at all.

Not easy, is it?

Pretty simple for me actually, I choose to be part of the solution rather than contributing to the problem.

I'm not sure how true a statement that is but maybe so. I look at those games and I've watched a lot of videos and I personally feel like a person has to have a little bit of masochist streak in them to find that "fun." I just don't really see it working for me. I may yet still take the first game for a test spin anyways.

Obviously YMMV. You've got this stuff elevated past the heavens and anyone that disagrees with you on this isn't hardcore, doesn't like good games, and all the rest.


No, they simply have a different of opinion from you and that's something you just don't seem to be able to handle very well if at all from what I've observed.

I'm not sure how you get along in real life if you really have the kind of difficulty dealing with different POV like what I SEEM to be see here on this forum from you on a regular basis. I hope I'm mistaken in that perception.

I simply state the obvious fact that there are plenty of other casual gaming experiences that might better suit them if they feel like they aren't cut out to play a game as challenging as Dark Souls.

I'm not really hyping Dark Souls, I'm simply bringing awareness to this forum of the game and Demon's Souls, it's precedessor. It's definitely a game that people who like a stiff challenge can appreciate.

In fact, where many people died hundreds of times on the first level, I started a new character last night and beat the first level without dying, and made it to the boss of the 2nd level without dying untill I fought the boss himself, thats' when I died.

I get along fine with people in real life.

So it comes down to what it should be about anyways: It's either a good game that deserves to be bought or not. That's priority one.

In my case if I have the choice I'm always going PC first. If it's never coming there then that's what a console is for.


Again, people's mileage may vary.

Well, if Dark Souls were a PC game, it'd be charting pretty high around here, but Japanese companies do not make any, if at all PC games, because Japanese gamers are not interested in PC gaming, they prefer consoles.

 

[ThunderBuns]

I just don't understand the removal of singleplayer. Sure you can force people to be online and spam DLC advertisements at them, but aren't you losing more sales by removal of a pretty easy to implement feature than gaining sales in your DLC?

 

[Tudz]

The main reason people tolerate this is because they're stupid, what else could it be?

You know what's hilarious, I know you're serious, however this READS like a sarcastic comment simply because of how incredibly naive, insulting and down right stupid the comment is

Buying F1 2011 was a stupid mistake, but I'm going to learn from it unlike the casual/tarded gamers who help trash like COD break records and earn billions despite being an embarrassment to discerning gamers.

Wait, what? You didn't learn from F1 2010? You didn't learn from the dozen codemasters games leading up to this one? That's a bit silly of you isn't it? NEWS FLASH: Codemasters have been making arcade and semi-sim games for 14 years! Phwoar, amazing isn't it? You're such a fast learner unlike all those dirty console peasants

Atleast COD players keep buying games they like instead of continuing to buy games they dont like

 

[Yoshiyuki Blade]

I keep it simple.

Was the money worth the entertainment received?

If yes, then:
Good.

If no, then:
Not good.

Edit: To add more to this, there are many things I don't like about the industry. I leave negative opinions around once in a while, but more often than not, these types of discussions aren't even on my radar. I don't talk to people who are interested in games I don't like and I do my best not to talk about these people either. I'm simply beyond caring about these types of games. However, I do know that they're extremely popular and gather lots of people (they're games most of you in this thread are into). I just let the law of supply and demand dictate the flow of design in the industry. If I find that there are no more games for me, then I'll disappear from gaming, that's about it. There are no white knights that will give us what we want because everyone wants very different things.

 

[Tudz]

I keep it simple.

Was the money worth the entertainment received?

If yes, then:
Good.

If no, then:
Not good.

100% agree. I dont see why anyone, enthusiast or not, should purchase games on anything other than this basis.

 

[quantum112]

Why do people buy games like Diablo 3, or Modern Warfare 2/Black Ops which have essential features STRIPPED from them compared to previous installments in their respective series?

Why are people all too willing to not only pay for a stripped down experience, but also buy the map packs, DLC, and all that, THAT WAS NOT part of the previous gaming experience? Worse yet, why do people try to rationalize their actions in doing so on these boards?

Do you not realize that you're making gaming WORSE instead of better by voting with your wallets to support these actions?

1. People are stupid.

That's it. You can make a waterfall of reasons, but they would all eventually flow into the same pond.

That is in fact the answer to a lot of questions starting with the words "why do people...".

"I don't care about feature x or y, I'm going to buy the game because it's still fun to me." Fair enough, but pretty soon you're going to have less and less fun for the same amount of money. The question is, how far does it need to go until the majority stops having fun? Ah, but they won't take it that far, no. Because you see, what is happening here is that the companies are asking themselves: "How many features can we strip from the game, while still selling it for the same price and not lose a substantial amount of sales?" Once they find that limit, games will simply settle on it and that will be the standard for everything.

Let's see, in the last 2-3 years, very quickly we've seen the following:

1. Always on DRM
2. Unneccessary addons like GFWL (looking at you Bioshock 2) when you already have Steam as your DRM
3. Limited installs/activations of a game YOU BOUGHT AND PAID FOR
4. Removal of key features like offline single player modes, dedicated servers, removal of content in order to peddle it as Day 1 DLC
5. The constant dumbing down and consolization of games to the extent to where the game is only challenging to the lowest common denominator and the average player has absolutely no problem beating the game. Are games even challenging anymore?
6. DLC. If i'm being absolutely honest, I can see how a few DLC's are good, because instead of the expansion packs of the past, you can buy a selected add on here and there that can lengthen your gaming experience, but for the most part, they haven't done a good job of selling us DLC that offers any kind of value except for a few select games (Fallout, Borderlands, etc). Most of them are games that deliberately cut out content in order to sell you new skins, races, a level here, or there, or something!
7. Removal of dedicated servers, I know i've mentioned this already, but the reason for it goes hand in hand with why they aren't putting mod tools in games these days, because they want to sell you DLC, and with you being able to control your own dedicated server, YOU can control what content gets put out there. By locking the platform to a proprietary network, they can ensure that if you don't pay for maps, you can't play them. No modding tools, then you can't make map packs or modify the game for the enjoyment of the community as a whole.
8. Removal of single player. I've never understood why people support removing single player as an option for games that are clearly meant to be played single player if the player wishes, like Diablo 3 or Starcraft 2. Instead those games have to connect to Battle.net so you can't even play them if you don't have an internet connection.

The only DRM I'm using is Steam, and that is only because of the sales, good prices and Valve having a proven track record.
Would not buy any game that doesn't have SP, unless we're talking MMO or something similar designed exclusively for MP. Which reminds me, I'd also like to throw in how MP these days is for the most part shooting at 12 year olds across the pond and getting "**** your mother" insults back. No fun there.
The only fun multiplayer I've had lately was in Arma2&OA, doing co-op missions with 4-5 mature people is great enough to put hours down with no regret.
Of course, IMO the most fun part of gaming is absent in 9/10 games of today, which is split-screen. I remember back in 1999 when I'd play Mortal Kombat 4 or Virtua Fighter 2 with friends for hours on end, on a 15" screen. Just 2-3 days ago, I had a friend come over and we were staring blankly hoping to find something to play together on the PC. Save for Worms 4 Mayhem, we had nothing. Then I had the idea, to fire up the Amiga WinUAE emulator, connected up a gamepad and played some Alien Breed, Double Dragon, Alcatraz, etc... Unfortunately we sucked, as we couldn't get past the second level in Alien Breed, which reminded us how games were far more challenging back then and we've become soft, playing this modern junk . Not to mention, it was insane fun. When you set aside uber-serious graphics, and go back to the time when the core focus of games was still in fact, gameplay, it's surprising to find out how much you're missing out on these days. I'm throwing down money for Serious Sam 3, not only because the devs are my countrymen, but because they're bringing back PC split-screen. Anyone who gives me a chance to play a good modern game together with real people in the same room deserves my cash instantly.

I think that gamers of this new generation simply don't have any standards, and it's allowing the rest of us to get fucked by the actions of others.

It's seriously gotten to the point to where gaming has stagnated and the only thing that really matters, i mean, REALLY matters isn't how much fun you're having or how much fun you aren't having, but how many dollars a game generates.

Companies don't give a shit if you have fun or not, or what YOU want. They simply want to be able to bank on the average gamer being unwilling to resist the new shiny and shell out the bucks for not just the game, but all the other DLC and microtransactions associated with it.

To a great extent, it's about control, and it used to be in YOUR hands. YOU used to decide how you wanted your game to be played, who could join, who couldn't join, whether you were offline or online, what map you wanted to play on, what games you wanted to join from a server browser list, you used to have a dedicated server you could depend on being available for you to join and play with a community you were familiar with. P2P gaming on a platform like IWnet has destroyed that. Always on DRM ensures that you will not be able to play Diablo 3 offline. Always on DRM ensures that you cannot play Starcraft 2 offline AND save your campaign and achievements. Always on DRM ensures that if you buy Assassin's Creed Brotherhood, that you cannot play it unless you are online. Being able to pull the plug on the servers that have Madden 2011 on them ensures that you must buy Madden 2012 if you want to play online.

Well, you know that saying... if you don't know any better...
Obviously someone who started gaming in 1993 will not have the same standards as someone who started in 2009.

Your second point (and really this whole phenomenon for the most part) is related to capitalism (which I'm not a proponent of - it's simply "less bad", doesn't mean it's good, being in the minorities most of the time - can't even buy a proper left-handed mouse because it isn't profitable to make one).

As long as the majority is happy and willing to buy something, your extent of being able to do something goes as far as not buying the game and making threads about it. Unless you can get the majority to see that something is an issue (good luck with that), nobody is going to bend over backwards about a couple of hundreds (or thousands) of lost sales.

Being in control is no longer the cool thing to do. For example, I used to be able to decide how I want the font on my screen rendered, but Win 7 took care of that one, what with hardcoding SmearType all over the Aero theme.

Want to play Battlefield 3? Then you have to be willing to install Origin.

There's a huge reason a lot of people play games like Counterstrike Source and Call of Duty 4, Starcraft, and yes, even Diablo, YEARS after they came out.

Look at the above and you'll see why.

I find it a sad commentary on the state of PC gaming when on October 4th, Dark Souls launches and I will be receiving my pre-order from Amazon.com and it will offer a stiffer challenge than any PC game released this year, or probably the last few years. It should not be this way, PC gaming should offer not just the best experience, but the most flexible, modifiable, challenging, and be the DEFINITE experience. Lately, in spite of excellent games like Deus Ex: Human Revolution, I think the gap between consoles and PC's is narrowing.

Don't believe me? Just look at the selection of PC titles we have now, there's very few DEFINITE PC experiences out there, instead, it's all multiplatform and the consoles have their share of our best stuff.

All in all, I see where your post is coming from and share a great deal of your sentiments. Unfortunately, as you probably realise even from the replies in this thread, most people do not, and as long as it stays that way, there isn't much we can do.

I spend my money these days very carefully, the latest few games that I have bought were Frozen Synapse, Minecraft, Arma2&OA, all of which I have not regretted and play and have fun with to this day.

Aside from that, most of the games installed on my PC are older games, mostly pre-2005, and I have regular fun playing offline multiplayer on the PS2. As long as no one can take any of that from me, I'm good. As for new games, I'll continue to cherry-pick the few gems that come out that are actually worth spending money on, perhaps 1-2 games a year. There's nothing wrong with upholding your principles and buying according to your beliefs, which is what most folks buying the rehashed FPS games every year are doing, just on the other end of the spectrum.

The purpose of threads like this is to raise awareness and find like-minded people, and don't worry, we are out there. I've had the desire to make similar threads many times but realised in the end that most of the times is not worth the flaming that usually ensues.

 

[WorldExclusive]

Remember when you were 13yrs old? Gaming was awesome right?
10-15 years later it seems like you're being ripped off now?

Do you see the essence of the issue there?

They make games for all ages but they are really targeting teenagers. Once you hit 25, things that made sense before no longer makes sense now.
You're interests has matured but your still participating in a kids hobby. Our generation(70s and 80s) has grown up, and the desire for the old days of gaming has passed.

Ask a teenager if they're having a kick ass time.

 

[Riddleofsteel]

Love these threads. Especially the posts I can actually see. I got to the end of a few posts on page one and thought I heard the Unreal Tournament announcer say "HOLY SH*T!". Lotta words.

You can't fight everybody, or even most things in the gaming industry. If I enjoy a game, the money is well spent. Getting riled up at all beyond that is pure numbsdom, what difference does it make? OP: Wipe your glasses off, calm down and start having fun for a change.

 

[Yoshiyuki Blade]

Remember when you were 13yrs old? Gaming was awesome right?
10-15 years later it seems like you're being ripped off now?

Do you see the essence of the issue there?

They make games for all ages but they are really targeting teenagers. Once you hit 25, things that made sense before no longer makes sense now.
You're interests has matured but your still participating in a kids hobby. Our generation(70s and 80s) has grown up, and the desire for the old days of gaming has passed.

Ask a teenager if they're having a kick ass time.

Yeah, my all-time favorite classic games would be shit on by today's standards. For example Mega Man X's sequels 2/3 would be considered expansions or even DLC of the original and not as whole games sold at full retail price.

 

[Sovern]

Remember when you were 13yrs old? Gaming was awesome right?
10-15 years later it seems like you're being ripped off now?

Do you see the essence of the issue there?

They make games for all ages but they are really targeting teenagers. Once you hit 25, things that made sense before no longer makes sense now.
You're interests has matured but your still participating in a kids hobby. Our generation(70s and 80s) has grown up, and the desire for the old days of gaming has passed.

Ask a teenager if they're having a kick ass time.

The average gamer is 25-35 if I recall correctly. I wouldn't call gaming a kids hobby though. With the advent of Esports and multiplayer/MMO's gaming has really grown from something that you do by yourself or with a few friends to a full blown social experience if you're into playing/talking with other people that you otherwise would never know.

As for DLC/no single player/and the different types of DRM existing. The problem is that the majority truly don't care if their games requires an internet connection, or doesn't have true offline single player. They also don't care about DRM or DLC, they care more about the name of the game and the core features vs the additional stuff such as lack of single player or future plans for DLC.

We're in the minority when it comes to us gamers that don't like the aforementioned concepts.

 

[Buklao]

If you don't like the current state of gaming, then it's probably in your best interest to quit or find a new hobby. The gaming industry is moving towards casual gaming and trying to accommodate the larger target audience which includes non gamers and this will mean games will be easier, and more accessible.

I honestly hate how gaming is going in this direction and now i'm slowly quitting gaming all together. It was either that or play cs 1.6 until i die LOL

 

[Inate8]

I just find it funny that companies are doing this.
They are shooting themselves in the foot for the future, since maintaining servers for these games will be expensive and sooner or later(5 years down the road) people might still want to play it if the game turns out well, but unless you start charging for the servers, you will lose money.

I was thinking of playing Diablo 3, but since it is THE EXACT SAME AS THE OTHER GAMES(seriously there is no difference aside from gfx, and a bit of the cookie cutter story line), I've chosen to save my money and play Diablo 1 instead.

This DRM is more of a hindrance to paying customers AND to the companies themselves that have to maintain them for "free" into the future.

Any company that creates a block buster game with horrible always-on DRM will be paying to maintain those servers and subsequently maintain their player base so that the next games they make won't be black-listed due to their company being "that company".

 

[WorldExclusive]

The average gamer is 25-35 if I recall correctly. I wouldn't call gaming a kids hobby though. concepts.

Like I said, we've became adults and they are still catering to the kids.
The games hasn't grown with us.

 

[Sovern]

Like I said, we've became adults and they are still catering to the kids.
The games hasn't grown with us.

That depends on what kind of games that you play. The games that I'm into (CS, SC2, Diablo, Torchlight, etc) appeal more to adults than kids.

 

[Yoshiyuki Blade]

SC2 and Torchlight are teen rated so they aren't the most mature games out there. Hell, WoW fits into that category as well, despite how "kiddy" people think it is.

 

[Derangel]

SC2 and Torchlight are teen rated so they aren't the most mature games out there. Hell, WoW fits into that category as well, despite how "kiddy" people think it is.

A game doesn't have to be M rated to be mature. Maturity has nothing to do with blood, violence, and swearing.

 

[Yoshiyuki Blade]

I'm sure if we ask everyone what makes a game mature, we will find a wide range of arbitrary standards. That goes without saying. I personally think a lot of games (including CS, SC/SC2, Diablo/II/III) very much appeal to kids. To each their own I guess.

 

[Derangel]

I'm sure if we ask everyone what makes a game mature, we will find a wide range of arbitrary standards. That goes without saying. I personally think a lot of games (including CS, SC/SC2, Diablo/II/III) very much appeal to kids. To each their own I guess.

Kids will think things like Mortal Kombat are mature because of the graphic violence, but it is actually very immature. Let's look at movies for an example of what I mean. Both Schindler's List and Crank are rated R and both are good movies, but Schindler's Last is a vastly more mature movie.

 

[Superfly3176]

Don't buy it.

I'm going to buy it because it's going to be fun. If you don't like it don't buy it you've seriously been in every thread about this issue, multiple times.

 

[WorldExclusive]

That depends on what kind of games that you play. The games that I'm into (CS, SC2, Diablo, Torchlight, etc) appeal more to adults than kids.

It's really not about the games. Look at the posts, people are asking for these companies to do "better" business. That's the mature side I'm talking about.
EA this, Valve that, DLC this, Day 1 patches that. Is it about having fun? No. People are analyzing business practices and at times it dictates their buying choices, forget about the game being fun.
Most, not all, teenagers can careless about better business practices. As we get older, people start to look beyond what the game offers, and the purpose of having "fun" is lost.

No matter what, it's hard to ignorantly have fun once you know what goes on behind closed doors. That goes for any part of our society.

 

[Yoshiyuki Blade]

Another part of the problem of "grown up" gamers is that they've become eager to (naively) use vocabulary to show an "understanding" of the business side of things. I lost track of how many times I heard "shareholders" "bottom line" "poorly coded" "unoptimized" etc. with nothing but circumstantial evidence or even sheer speculation to support their arguments.

 

[Derangel]

Another part of the problem of "grown up" gamers is that they've become eager to (naively) use vocabulary to show an "understanding" of the business side of things. I lost track of how many times I heard "shareholders" "bottom line" "poorly coded" "unoptimized" etc. with nothing but circumstantial evidence or even sheer speculation to support their arguments.

This is very true. I roll my eyes are most calls of poorly coded or unoptimized. It usually shows a horrible lack of understanding. There are obvious examples of both out there, but if you believed what you hear around here every game ever made is badly coded.

 

[Krenum]

Because we live in an instant gratification society and because our society IS dumbed down now. Have you ever seen that movie Idiocracy? Yeah that is where we are headed.

 

[Buxaroo]

You cant have your cake and eat it too. Offline singleplayer with no achevmenta, or online with them. Pick one.

I remember a day when achievements weren't part of a PC gamers cares at all. I think achievements started with consoles, I don't really know, but for the last few years PC gaming has been infected by this mindset which I think is just plain stupid and is on the same wall as "trophies" and "status symbols". Both of which are irrelevant and arbitrary in every single way to playing a game.

And I agree with the most part with Fail's OP. And people bitching because he's bitching, come on, what else are these forums for? Not mutual masturbation. That's fanboism. And yes, voting with our wallets is a good thing, but discussions like these are always needed to show people that there is problems and to wake people up. Yes yes, videogame blah blah. Sorry, just because it doesn't effect RL in any real way doesn't mean it should not be taken seriously. Same thing could be said about books, music, TV, movies, etc. And look how in a lot of ways those areas are infected by substandards. Especially music and movies. Voting with your wallet has worked wonders for these fields hasn't it?

Point is really, actual quality of gaming has gone down a lot. We are getting less while paying a lot more. And the only way to point people to what's happening is by threads like this. Saying "stop talking about it" is just plain dumb. That same attitude is akin to grumpy assholes telling gays they need to stay in the closet because they are just making things worse by talking about their problems and making people "uncomfortable" because regular people aren't having the same problems . In order for changes to go into effect, people need to be made aware of the issues and whats changed for the worse. Coming with the attitude "stop your bitching and be glad your not being burned at the stake anymore" is piss poor bullshit.

 

[LstBrunnenG]

And yes, voting with our wallets is a good thing, but discussions like these are always needed to show people that there is problems and to wake people up. Yes yes, videogame blah blah. Sorry, just because it doesn't effect RL in any real way doesn't mean it should not be taken seriously. Same thing could be said about books, music, TV, movies, etc. And look how in a lot of ways those areas are infected by substandards. Especially music and movies. Voting with your wallet has worked wonders for these fields hasn't it?

I'm guessing you don't like Justin Bieber. In fact, I think that it's entirely likely that you're of the crowd that can't stand his music and thinks he's stupid.

Since you don't like his music (please follow my logic here even if my premise happens to be false in your case), I'm guessing you haven't bought any of his music. You have voted with your wallet. So have I, and tons of people the world over who either hate him or simply have no use for him.

And yet he's insanely popular. His music is selling quite well. It doesn't look like he's going anywhere anytime soon. That's because there is a very large demographic that likes what he's doing. You can put all the effort you want into not buying his music. You can even go to a music forum on the internet and bash him to your heart's content. It's not going to make the slightest dent in his popularity or sales.

Voting with your wallet doesn't work for you if you lose the vote.

Point is really, actual quality of gaming has gone down a lot.

Opinion. Again, to put that into your music metaphor, one man's Justin Bieber is another man's Mozart. Damn kids and their rock music!

We are getting less while paying a lot more.

Speak for yourself. I put a LOT of hours into MW2, maybe more than I've put into any other game besides CS:Source. But don't quote me on that, since Steam time tracking is a relatively new development when you take the long view on my gaming career.

And the only way to point people to what's happening is by threads like this. Saying "stop talking about it" is just plain dumb.

It's a free country, you can say what you want. You can "campaign" for your "vote" and try to persuade people to vote as you do. However, you have no guarantee that people will like what you say, or refrain from criticism.

That same attitude is akin to grumpy assholes telling gays they need to stay in the closet because they are just making things worse by talking about their problems and making people "uncomfortable" because regular people aren't having the same problems . In order for changes to go into effect, people need to be made aware of the issues and whats changed for the worse. Coming with the attitude "stop your bitching and be glad your not being burned at the stake anymore" is piss poor bullshit.

Nobody is forcing you to buy what you think are subpar games. Nobody is preventing you from playing what you think are quality games. In fact, nobody is stopping you from making a better game than all these inferior, subpar games you've been talking about. If you think it can be done better, let's see your game.

Otherwise, good luck on the campaign trail. You can't even get everyone on a PC-centric forum to agree with you - let alone the hordes of unwashed console peasants that every game publisher so desperately tries to court.

 

[Yoshiyuki Blade]

Indeed. I'd still be waiting for that white knight to revolutionize the state of gaming to my liking, but I gotta be realistic about... reality.

 

[Shalafi]

I remember a day when achievements weren't part of a PC gamers cares at all. I think achievements started with consoles, I don't really know, but for the last few years PC gaming has been infected by this mindset which I think is just plain stupid and is on the same wall as "trophies" and "status symbols". Both of which are irrelevant and arbitrary in every single way to playing a game.

And I agree with the most part with Fail's OP. And people bitching because he's bitching, come on, what else are these forums for? Not mutual masturbation. That's fanboism. And yes, voting with our wallets is a good thing, but discussions like these are always needed to show people that there is problems and to wake people up. Yes yes, videogame blah blah. Sorry, just because it doesn't effect RL in any real way doesn't mean it should not be taken seriously. Same thing could be said about books, music, TV, movies, etc. And look how in a lot of ways those areas are infected by substandards. Especially music and movies. Voting with your wallet has worked wonders for these fields hasn't it?

Point is really, actual quality of gaming has gone down a lot. We are getting less while paying a lot more. And the only way to point people to what's happening is by threads like this. Saying "stop talking about it" is just plain dumb. That same attitude is akin to grumpy assholes telling gays they need to stay in the closet because they are just making things worse by talking about their problems and making people "uncomfortable" because regular people aren't having the same problems . In order for changes to go into effect, people need to be made aware of the issues and whats changed for the worse. Coming with the attitude "stop your bitching and be glad your not being burned at the stake anymore" is piss poor bullshit.

You hit home on all the points I've been standing up here and expounding from my pulpit. I'd give my left nut for a game like Dark Souls to be on the PC AND taking full advantage of all of the capabilities that the PC platform has to offer, and that includes the Eyefinity technology.

If you have been looking at the live streams, can you honestly say you WOULDN'T want a game like that on the PC complete with all the eye candy on a big screen monitor at a high resolution with a top of the line video card?

But you're right, most people are saying we should shut up simply because shutting up is the path of least resistance, and people generally don't like having their flaws exposed for all to see.

I'm sure the people who want to perpetuate the stagnation of PC gaming do not think of themselves as having low/no standards, but it's true.

As I've said before, the gap between PC's and consoles is narrowing thanks to the consolization of most PC games that are being released these days. Soon, the day will come when we might as well be playing on consoles since the investment in a top of the line gaming PC isn't worth it anymore because there's no noticeable difference other than graphics when it comes to your gaming experience.

It would be a shame if that day ever comes.

I don't think PC gaming is dead, nor will it ever truly die, but yes, it is entering a steep decline and has been for the past 2-ish years.