They do that because people pay for it.

"Vote with your wallet." isn't just a saying, it's the solution.

Stop giving money to "AAAa" publishers and they'll either go away or stop being ♥♥♥♥♥♥. Either way, it's a win.

Oprindeligt skrevet af Chaosolous:

They do that because people pay for it.

"Vote with your wallet." isn't just a saying, it's the solution.

Stop giving money to "AAAa" publishers and they'll either go away or stop being ♥♥♥♥♥♥. Either way, it's a win.

Well mostly I do not buy AAA games

I don't care who makes it as long as it's fun. I also learned not to trust steam reviews as I found some "overwhelmingly positive" reviews did not enjoy playing. Oddly enough, the opposite isn't true. If a game is given a poor rating it's usually because it has major flaws.

Same here have not got any AAA games at full price for a while, tired of paying top dollar to beta test unfinished products...

This is best time to be a gamer. Old great games that run like butter are $1 constantly.

Anti-cheat in single player games makes me feel microsoft in my brain.

In the last 10-15 years Ive found that most new games I'm really drawn to have been Indie type games. All at reasonable prices too

it's say its been a good 12-15 years since i've been attracted to anything most major publishers have tried to push out, to the point where the only gamers i see criticising the industry are the ones who still engage with those products

Oprindeligt skrevet af $2 Hero:

This is best time to be a gamer. Old great games that run like butter are $1 constantly.

Yes even one my favourite games do, Command & Conquer Red Alert 2/Yuri's Revenge it runs on any wtihout any updates but cost more then $1

Oprindeligt skrevet af Despiser:

I don't care who makes it as long as it's fun. I also learned not to trust steam reviews as I found some "overwhelmingly positive" reviews did not enjoy playing. Oddly enough, the opposite isn't true. If a game is given a poor rating it's usually because it has major flaws.

Well I do like games with mixed reviews and most do not care about reviews if just want it but other thing if I'm not sure if I want it then do look at viewers

Oprindeligt skrevet af NadaNewt:

Anti-cheat in single player games makes me feel microsoft in my brain. :MoonlighterAngry:

Or in coop games, if people want to cheat then let's them cheat, only people can't cheat is PVP

Without AAA games, we would be flooded with lazy asset-flipper games, souls-like, roguelite, pixel-art junk, and poorly made porn visual novels, which we already are anyway.

The sentiment of the OP and the people who agree with him is propaganda aimed at forcing asian games on us and trying to ruin the western game industry, supposedly for the sake of promoting nazism in media.

Of course AAA games need a few updates to get into gear; nowadays games are so large and complex that some issues will always be overlooked, and the vast variety of hardware combinations people use makes it almost impossible to optimize games for everyone on day one.

And btw, it's mostly japanese publishers that list a bunch of DLC's before the game is even released.

Speaking of whom, can someone explain to me what koei tecome is doing here?

https://psteamcommunity.yuanyoumao.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3613615226

If one of big western developers or publishers would have done this, the outrage would have been sky high.

Gaijin

Oprindeligt skrevet af Clone303:

Oprindeligt skrevet af NadaNewt:

Anti-cheat in single player games makes me feel microsoft in my brain. :MoonlighterAngry:

Or in coop games, if people want to cheat then let's them cheat, only people can't cheat is PVP

i can make arguments as a rhythm gamer. most rhythm gamers love the freedom of being able to play offline but the only true way to validate scores is by being connected to a server. so in certain scenarios i do believe there is merit to having an online conditions to single player play. but many companies/studios and developers don't always understand what is actually necessary. so games that should be unaffected, are affected. and that sucks major balls.

Here's what I dislike: the whole early access model; it gives a loophole to these slick companies who pop out a game that isn't even half-baked, and they can essentially not complete it, and you legally can't do a darn thing about it. Take The Long Dark, a good game, but last I checked the dev still hasn't finished the main storyline, and he already started selling DLC and is now making the second game. Then there is a favorite of mine, Project Zomboid, that has been in early access since 2013, and it still doesn't have human NPCs; they keep focusing on making this intricate crafting system that nobody cares about.

I miss the days when, if you bought a game, you knew it was yours and it was fully finished.