this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2023
143 points (100.0% liked)

Gaming

30564 readers
271 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

lol. lmao.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Skyline969@lemmy.ca 102 points 1 year ago (6 children)

It’s because these companies keep driving up production costs on their own. Their next game has to top their last. At what point do we say that graphics are good enough? Who needs these insane amount of details? Why does a game absolutely need to be 100+GB in size? Is Bloodborne not visually appealing enough? What about God of War (2018)?

Can we not find a “good enough” acceptable baseline and just work with that? This infinite growth is annoying as both a developer and a player. Like okay, ooooh, you can render each individual hair on someone’s head and they each have their own physics. Congratulations. How’s the story for the game? Ah, broken to the point of unplayable, but you pinky swear a patch is coming.

[–] mint@beehaw.org 99 points 1 year ago (5 children)

i want shorter games with worse graphics made by people who are paid more to work less and i'm not kidding

[–] Icalasari@kbin.social 46 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Welcome to the world of indie games, where the passion leads to experiences that stick in minds more than plenty of AAA games these days

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This. I genuinely believe that in the near future indie games will be the sole torch-bearer for what I would call "traditional gaming". Tighter, more focused experiences with no microtransactions or sanitized, inoffensive bloat. Games that are offline and don't require any server handshake to function. And as the technology available to them advances, it will enable indie devs to be more and more ambitious with their vision.

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I feel like this is already the case, and has been for years. Few AAA games interest me these days, especially the ones coming out of the biggest studios like EA, Ubisoft, Activision-Blizzard, etc. The only recent one was Baldur's Gate 3, but that by itself is an exception to the norm.

Most AAA games are just complete soulless profit generators. It often feels as if any fun and experimental things get taken out because it would involve too much "risk", and stand in the way of earning money, instead of trying to make a good or fun or unique game. Instead they are just being made for as wide of a mass appeal as possible, allergic to anything that could make the game a little more interesting and niche.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WarmSoda@lemm.ee 27 points 1 year ago

Fuck yeah. Give me passion projects made by people having a great time any day of the week.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] empireOfLove@lemmy.one 36 points 1 year ago

This infinite growth is annoying as both a developer and a player.

wait until you find out what the world economy is built on...

[–] Alabaster_Mango@lemmy.ca 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I still play Dishonored every year. Those are not realistic graphics in the slightest, but it still holds up pretty well. Why? Style. I would 100% take a "lower" graphics game with style than a 100GB game with exquisitely modeled sandwiches.

Stylistic games also age better than realistic games in my opinion. Look at other 2012 games like Mass Effect, Far Cry 3, and Borderlands. Mass Effect and Far Cry went more realistic, and I think they suffered a bit for it in the long run.

Not saying Dishonored didn't age tho. It does have that 2012 feel, lol.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] whodatdair@lemm.ee 51 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I hereby announce that I don’t have enough money, and I want more.

[–] boCash@lemmy.blugatch.tube 13 points 1 year ago

I'm sorry, we don't acknowledge that query. It sounded like you said: "what's wrong with the world". Would you like lifelong, wistful depression or the psychopathy required for C-suite?

[–] Treczoks@kbin.social 42 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Well, if you think your game prices are too low, just raise them. The market will regulate this all on it's own.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

He knows that. Which is why he's talking about it and not actually doing it.

He's basically just whining about it to us.

[–] explodicle@local106.com 7 points 1 year ago

I'm worried that he's actually speaking to other CEOs. "If you raise prices, so will we."

[–] Skray@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

They largely are. $70 is becoming the new price point for a new game.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] GrindingGears@lemmy.ca 34 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm already 50% of the time on my ship to the seven seas. Do they want me permanently at sea? Same goes with the media companies like Disney+, Netflix and Amazon. They push it any further, I'm pushing off to seas for good.

They *literally, figured out how to beat piracy. The unbeatable problem. And then they had to go and blow it with their greed.

Meh. Capcom games just became $0 for me, because I'll swear an oath before you to pirate every one of their games, from here on out.

[–] ampersandrew@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Inflation is a fact of life. Is a price that raises ever all it takes for you to decide to pirate? Did you do so when games increased from $50 to $60?

[–] TwilightVulpine@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Poverty is also a fact of life. Not everyone can afford every price increase.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] GrindingGears@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Nope. I only pirate when media companies can't stop gorging themselves on billions of dollars in profit and shovelling shares and dollar bills down their greedy little throats.

It's not that I don't have the money, I've just had enough. When you had one of two streaming services and a Spotify and good prices on steam and whatnot, that worked.

Today we have preorders that eclipse 100 dollars, my streaming service bills are more than the cable bills they were supposed to be replacing, and now it's just more more more. We want more more more

🖕

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Skyline969@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I didn't decide to pirate when games went from $70 to $80 (CAD). I didn't decide to when they went from $80 to $90. I decided to when, on top of that price, I also am encouraged via predatory tactics (such as matchmaking intentionally matching you up with players who have all of this nonsense so you can "see what you're missing") to buy a deluxe edition, season pass, monthly battlepass, "cosmetic only" microtransactions, second season pass, additional DLC not part of any season pass, and whatever other crap they want to nickel and dime their playerbase into buying. All just to actually get the full content of the game. Remember when games had the full game when you bought it? Maybe an expansion pack that had a substantial amount of content that was developed and released after the game was released?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] bermuda@beehaw.org 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Interestingly enough, if the games industry had kept the $60 price point that they fixed back ~2005 up with inflation, games would be costing around $95 today.

[–] TwilightVulpine@kbin.social 40 points 1 year ago

Unfortunately people's wages haven't kept up with inflation either, so that would just be a double whammy of making people who already struggling to pay for essentials pay more for entertainment as well, and at that point I'd think some people would just decide they can keep playing their old games.

[–] Kichae@kbin.social 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Now do 1985.

Never mind, I'll do it myself: NES games were $50, which today is about $185.

[–] NuPNuA@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

That's only because people in the US and Asia overpaid for their games. We weren't paying that for microcomputer games in Europe.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I say big budget games are too large in scope. Too much going on, too ambitious, too much emphasis on certain aspects that I feel developers value more than consumers. Not every game needs to be the biggest baddest game of the year blah blah blah.

[–] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah. Every time someone comes up with "games are too cheap" I always point to the fact that the vast majority of AAA games have insane amount of bloat. If AAA devs were struggling to make a profit then a clear way to cut costs would be to streamline the product. If leveling is not vital, cut it. If randomized loot is not necessary, cut it. If horse balls shrinking/expanding with the weather is not necessary, cut it.

There are always ways to cut corners in a AAA games and if the cost was an issue they'd do it. But the fact that they don't shows how little the actually struggle. So far Bethesda is the only company that is clearly cutting the corners of their AAA products.

[–] Sina@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

So far Bethesda is the only company that is clearly cutting the corners of their AAA products.

Starfield is the sloppiest Bethasda game ever, cutting corners to save cost is not how I would describe its development at all.

I agree with what you are saying though. Spending 40% of the budget on voice acting and cinematographic dialog is extremely wasteful. As long as the gameplay is good and graphics are pretty gamers will like the product.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] saigot@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For real, I think it's rather telling that there are people who exclusively play some triple a games for the mini games.

It's also interesting seeing indie take larger and larger chunks from the triple a market. Remember when harvest moon and simcity were big corporate endeavors, now it's indie titles like city skylines and stardew Valley.

I would like to see some smaller projects from triple a studios targeting genres other than open world action-rpg.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Capcom's CEO salary is too high

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kepabar@startrek.website 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

It's true, game prices today are the same as they have been for the past 40 years for AAA titles.

I can't think of an industry which hasn't had a price raise in decades.

Gaming had managed to get by on this thanks to increasing market volume as gaming became more mainstream in addition to extra revenue streams like micro transactions. But it's hitting saturation now and won't keep counteracting inflation forever

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 28 points 1 year ago

I'd gladly agree to pay more in exchange for a legally binding agreement that higher prices mean video games free of predatory monetization and reasonable pay and job security for the people making the games. But we both know that they have no intention of doing the right thing, no matter how high the box price. They're already raking in record profits while laying off huge chunks of their workforce and giving the c-suite ever-increasing annual bonuses.

They've perpetuated the lie that microtransactions were a necessity and the $60 price was unsustainable for such a long time that people actually believe it. Now they want to increase the box price while keeping the predatory monetization, having their cake and eating it too.

[–] Nefyedardu@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Games have actually gotten cheaper over time adjusted for inflation even as production costs have risen, it's crazy. A NES game in today's money would be around $160.

[–] NightOwl@lemmy.one 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Game industry is bigger than movies and music combined which was not the case back in the NES era. Game industry has become a juggernaut with a huge consumer target base, and lower barrier to entry that allows for even random people being able to publish games instead of a few larger companies. Rise in production costs has been one that has been self imposed the way some studios go for big special effects blockbusters because they are targeting billions. Meanwhile like with movies you get these indie 2D and last gen 3D looking games being hits right alongside these billion dollar company attempts.

I guess one area you can look at is how niche products get priced lower like mechanical keyboards, and then once productions starts ramping up and things go mainstream suddenly these niche expensive ventures with a few fans becomes more affordable as larger quantities are now being distributed.

You same thing with tech like SSDs and hard drives actually falling price over time while capacities offered grows. Lot of PC parts actually with the exception of GPUs.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 15 points 1 year ago

Yes, but the market has grown significantly and the cost of production and distribution is very low, lower than the age of cartridges. The development is the only cost.

Lots of industries have had relative price drops over that time. Mainly electronics. An mp3 player used to be $200 minimum.

[–] Hirom@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Prices definitely increased, over the last 20 years new AAA games price increased from 45-50 EUR to 70 EUR.

With inflation taken into account that would probably mean flat prices.

With the increase in the numbers of players, the spread of DLCs and micro transactions, I suspect revenue increased even with inflation taken into account.

Could it be the cost of creating game is rising faster than inflation? Or game studio just got more greedy?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] sandriver@beehaw.org 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] there1snospoon@ttrpg.network 9 points 1 year ago

Honestly this is it.

AAA gaming does not equal good gaming, just bolted, expensive gaming.

[–] lukas@lemmy.haigner.me 19 points 1 year ago

Breaking news: Company wants more money.

[–] TychoQuad@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I see what he’s saying, but the market says no.

Honestly, more product categories should do the same, imagine if Apple released a new phone for an extra $100, but everyone just said no.

They would focus on keeping the costs down and whinge about it like game manufacturers do right now, and it would be glorious

[–] NightOwl@lemmy.one 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, it is interesting that with the exception of GPUs, PC parts like SSDs, hard drives, CPUs, and so on actually have felt like they haven't increased in price in comparison to phones. If anything prices have dropped and capacities increased and speeds gotten faster for SSDs for example. Same with televisions and monitors where stuff like resolution and hz has seen improvements while being cheaper than in the past.

[–] Shurimal@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

exception of GPUs

To an extent, motherboards, too, and even before the GPU prices went ballistic. I bought a Z87 mobo back in the day for 80 or 90€ and the most expensive mobos were around 300€ or so. The X570 mobos in 2019 started at 250€ and 550 mobos didn't even get released until at the end of 3000 series Ryzen. Who in their right mind would pair a 200€ R5 3600 CPU with a 250€ mobo?

I bet most of the budget-minded people who bought a R5 3600 CPU never got to use PCIe 4.0. And to add insult to injury, budget GPU-s started using PCIe 4.0 x8 (or even x4) instead of x16, effectively gimping them on budget mobos.

[–] BlackCoffee@beehaw.org 18 points 1 year ago

I literally sold the consoles I had and all my games with it because games became shittier each year.

Imagine having to pay 80+ dollars/euros for a game that isnt even the "finished" product.

I'd rather just save my money and spend it on things where I don't get absolutely railed as a consumer.

[–] RickRussell_CA@beehaw.org 15 points 1 year ago

Capcom has absolute authority to price its games however they see fit.

If they make choices that put them out of business, that's on them.

[–] reverendsteveii@beehaw.org 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] pythonoob@programming.dev 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At this point every game company would have to produce super solid, super polished games for like 4 years before they'd get my trust back.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SternburgExport@feddit.de 14 points 1 year ago

He's right. Free is a pretty low price for a game.

[–] lukas@lemmy.haigner.me 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Fuck around and find out chart

They can always charge 999999999999999999999999,- € for games. Keep the following rules in mind:

  • Demand always exceeds supply to an absurd degree.
  • Price elasticity doesn't exist.
  • The average willingness to pay for games is way above the 8,40 €, approaching infinity, contrary to the European displacement study on page 170 paragraph 4.
  • 100 % of game pirates will buy games if they can't pirate games, therefore DRM good.

Fuck around find out basic economic rules.

load more comments
view more: next ›