Unpopular gaming opinions Page 82

  • Page

    of 130 First / Last

  • JinTypeNoir 5 May 2013 02:01:20 4,365 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    This is surreal. As you guys are talking about the 360 pad, I find myself struggling to remember what it even looks like. Isn't it kind of like the Saturn pad?
  • DrStrangelove 5 May 2013 02:19:54 3,365 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Yes, they suck. I think the best shoulder buttons were those of the SNES, actually.

    Speaking of which, the SNES controller was an excellent design. Sure, it was a controller of the digital era without all the fancy sticks/trigger/rumble/sixaxis stuff we have now, but it absolutely nailed what it did. To that extent that 15 years later, Dualshock and X360 still have the same YXBA button layout, even after Nintendo ditched it.

    And its shoulder buttons laid the template for today's shoulder buttons and triggers.

    Mega Drive controller design? That simply disappeared, except if you want to count the X360's d-pad.


    edit: thinking about it, it's not entirely true the Mega Drive design disappeared. It was designed for a firmer palm-grip like most controllers afterwards, including the X360's, while the DS3 is still closer to the lying-lightly-in-your-hands design of the SNES.

    Edited by DrStrangelove at 02:40:22 05-05-2013
  • DrStrangelove 5 May 2013 02:21:58 3,365 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    @JinTypeNoir

    Nah, but I think it's pretty similar to the Dreamcast pad (which is another SNES-"inspired" pad, incidentally).

    Edited by DrStrangelove at 02:23:04 05-05-2013
  • RobTheBuilder 5 May 2013 02:23:21 6,521 posts
    Seen 8 months ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    The Gamecube ones were very nearly the best. The pressure with click worked great on some games, and terribly on others.

    Gamecube analogue stick though, still the best there has ever been. Shame the dpad was miniscule and the buttons thrown about.
  • JinTypeNoir 5 May 2013 02:28:15 4,365 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    The Gamecube controller was soooooo comfortable to hold! That thing massaged itself around your hands like it was soft clay.
  • PenguinJim 5 May 2013 03:50:29 5,754 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    JinTypeNoir wrote:
    bobdebob wrote:
    JinTypeNoir wrote:
    Day one on-disc downloads are the very height of, "You must not think your customers are very intelligent." And they're probably right.
    Oh, just fuck off. I hate that condescending attitude that posters that have when they think buying certain videogames makes you stupid.
    I said nothing of the sort. What that part actually implies is that companies seem to think they can get away with releasing only part of the game on the first day, and charge for the rest, even though its completed and that the amount of people who will notice or have any objection to this will do nothing to their reputation. That's like showing people a full cake and then when they buy it, only giving them half, saying that the other half became invisible and charging for each piece to become visible. Who would be taken in by a stupid trick like that? There are many, many, many stupid people in the world who can't work out the fundamental dishonesty of such a practice. Those who makes these decisions are trying to take advantage of their stupidity.
    See? That's what I can't understand. There are so many assumptions on your part - like the idea that ALL on-disc DLC was completed as part of the original development, budgeted as part of the original development, and was going to be released as part of the full game.

    It doesn't take a triple-figure IQ to understand that games are budgeted. You have so many people on specific salaries working (hopefully) contracted hours to develop specific content for a game that will be released at a specific price with a specific initial publishing run. For example, a $60 game. You can then budget further for a piece of add-on content if it's going to be sold separately - for example, a $2 DLC - which will allow you to allocate more hours for the development of said DLC. In other words, if it wasn't going to be charged for separately, it's entirely possible that it wouldn't be created at all.

    It shouldn't take a triple-figure IQ to realise that game development timetables are variable. Games are often delayed. After game content development has finished and the game is being bug-fixed, compatibility-tested and whatnot, you can then have the content developers work on new content - or perhaps go back to working on content that was cut from the full game for time/quality reasons (Ubisoft completing AC2's DNA gaps would seem to be an appropriate example - they were shit and legitimately cut, and then financed by predicted DLC revenue and completed). But what if your new content is developed and finished before the full game has gone gold? Well, obviously, they should make it download-only, because there was absolutely no backlash over Diablo 3 or Sim City being online-only, and everyone has their fingers crossed that the new Xbox will be online-only. Or - hey - it's finished already! The discs haven't been pressed yet! Quick, let's help out the consumer and whack it on there to save them a download.

    I'm not saying that all on-disc DLC is good, or good value, or even that it isn't content that was cynically sliced out of the main game in order to earn an extra buck. There may well be "bad" on-disc DLC (not that I've seen any proof).

    I can even see why people who haven't spent a single second considering it might jump to the knee-jerk assumption that on-disc DLC is bad.

    But I do think that it's entirely idiotic to assume that all on-disc DLC is evil.

    As for your cake metaphor... well, if they advertised the locked on-disc DLC as being part of the full game and included in the initial price, then your reasoning isn't completely retarded. Do you happen to have a link to when that has ever actually happened..?
  • Syrette 5 May 2013 04:10:53 43,057 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Brilliant post.

  • JinTypeNoir 5 May 2013 04:45:26 4,365 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    PenguinJim wrote:
    There are so many assumptions on your part - like the idea that ALL on-disc DLC was completed as part of the original development, budgeted as part of the original development, and was going to be released as part of the full game.
    In order to have been there on the disc on the first day, it was part of the budget. Whether you believe developers when they tell you that budgeting for downloadable bibble bobs is separate comes down to each developer's reputation and transparency. If they're being honest, they'll be transparent. It's really as simple as that.

    We went for 5 generations of consoles before this one, where somehow, someway, successful developers managed to develop games with reasonable budgets and profit enough to stay alive. If they are whining incessantly about the cost of game production, perhaps they should scale back their games? Don't give me that tripe about "in order to compete with the best" blah blah blah. The best developers don't try to compete, they make their own market. Being upfront and honest with the consumer is ALWAYS the best policy. I don't believe their flimsy excuses and neither should you.

    But what if your new content is developed and finished before the full game has gone gold? Well, obviously, they should make it download-only, because there was absolutely no backlash over Diablo 3 or Sim City being online-only, and everyone has their fingers crossed that the new Xbox will be online-only. Or - hey - it's finished already! The discs haven't been pressed yet! Quick, let's help out the consumer and whack it on there to save them a download.
    Oh dear. Oh my. This is bonkers. How do you compare these two things like this? The very notion of downloadable shitmerbrick is that you must connect to some network to download it. How on Earth else would they give you access to it? Ether fairies? And if its finished beforehand and does not seriously compromise the balance or atmosphere the game was going for, make it free or release it a good while later.

    I don't care if you've got starving children to feed. Most people do have those financial commitments and manage to meet them without being dishonest or fleecing customers. If publishers weren't so greedy and fiscally irresponsible, we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

    There may well be "bad" on-disc DLC (not that I've seen any proof).
    Are you aware of the insane controversy Capcom created with this practice, especially in Street Fighter vs. Tekken?

    But I do think that it's entirely idiotic to assume that all on-disc DLC is evil.
    Are you saying this to me or people in general? If it's me, I know. Dishonesty and shady business practices can only really approach evil when they do seriously harmful things. You're preaching to the choir if you're talking to me. I think its despicable, but I'm not one of those people who overreact and pretend like the developers are mustache-twirling train robbers. In fact, I think its infinitely healthier to criticize it, not buy it and move on.

    As for your cake metaphor... well, if they advertised the locked on-disc DLC as being part of the full game and included in the initial price, then your reasoning isn't completely retarded. Do you happen to have a link to when that has ever actually happened..?
    You see, its because I'm not stupid, that I'm not taken in by your rhetorical trick here. You are taking my cake analogy and creating a really dumb interpretation of it. It's like taking a well known saying like "absence makes the heart grow fonder" and concluding that its encouraging people to divorce and is therefore, retarded. I can see right through you.

    Of course there aren't as many instances of that because any bright mind knows what a recipe for public relations disaster it is. There is often no way to tell if the developer is being honest about what their plans were, except by what people are invested in selling the game to you might say.

    What publishers often do is develop games that seem like they are complete and try to present the best image for any other downloadable stuff as extra, OBVIOUSLY. Very few are stupid enough to admit it. However, anyone bright enough to put two and two together can come to the conclusion that this is suspect to abuse, especially nowadays where so many games have awful gameplay design, coupled with huge amounts of designer fluff that amount to so much nothing and give the illusion that the game is more complete with well-thought-out than it is.

    We are not privy to the ins and outs of development of all these games with on-disc stuff you have to unlock by paying to download things. We weren't ever privy to development, just like usually when we buy a cake we can't see somebody baking the cake for us. We don't know what its inside it, but we trust there is a cake in there from previous experience. If suddenly, people start saying to you that you can't get full cakes, we're going to look around at others who are not doing that, or reach back into our memories and say, "Hmmm. Your half-invisible cakes are bullshit."

    Edited by JinTypeNoir at 04:48:06 05-05-2013

    Edited by JinTypeNoir at 04:50:54 05-05-2013
  • PenguinJim 5 May 2013 05:52:47 5,754 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    JinTypeNoir wrote:
    As for your cake metaphor... well, if they advertised the locked on-disc DLC as being part of the full game and included in the initial price, then your reasoning isn't completely retarded. Do you happen to have a link to when that has ever actually happened..?
    You see, its because I'm not stupid, that I'm not taken in by your rhetorical trick here. You are taking my cake analogy and creating a really dumb interpretation of it. It's like taking a well known saying like "absence makes the heart grow fonder" and concluding that its encouraging people to divorce and is therefore, retarded. I can see right through you...

    We are not privy to the ins and outs of development of all these games with on-disc stuff you have to unlock by paying to download things. We weren't ever privy to development, just like usually when we buy a cake we can't see somebody baking the cake for us. We don't know what its inside it, but we trust there is a cake in there from previous experience. If suddenly, people start saying to you that you can't get full cakes, we're going to look around at others who are not doing that, or reach back into our memories and say, "Hmmm. Your half-invisible cakes are bullshit."
    Let me quote your Cake analogy, as you've clearly forgotten what you said:

    JinTypeNoir wrote:
    That's like showing people a full cake and then when they buy it, only giving them half, saying that the other half became invisible and charging for each piece to become visible. Who would be taken in by a stupid trick like that?
    You were clearly saying that publishers advertise a game that includes the DLC, when it actually requires additional payment - a bait-and-switch, if you will.

    THAT'S NOT WHAT'S HAPPENING.

    Let's adjust your analogy to RL. On-disc DLC is like showing people a full cake and then when they buy it, offering them some extra icing or filling for an additional cost. A lot of people won't be bothered - the extra icing or filling may make the cake too sickly or too big, or the people might simply be satisfied with the cost/cake ratio of the original purchase - but some people may like the cake and buy some extra icing if it is to their taste.

    Oh, they don't need to wait for delivery of the extra icing or filling because it can be unlocked inside their cake box? How convenient.

    It doesn't mean that the cake company could suddenly, magically make the icing or filling for free (although the cost/benefit ratio would certainly be good, considering that they have all the cake-baking and icing-making equipment ready).

    It doesn't mean that the cake company has started scooping filling out of the cake, making it a worse cake, expecting their customers to spend more money with them, who are now The Makers of Insufficient Cakes.

    Indeed, I think that's one of the strongest arguments that on-disc DLC isn't actually bad or damaging. If you're hurting your original game by removing chunks of content... surely that's going to hurt its Metacritic score? Not a good idea today. :p
  • JinTypeNoir 5 May 2013 06:49:26 4,365 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    PenguinJim wrote:
    JinTypeNoir wrote:
    As for your cake metaphor... well, if they advertised the locked on-disc DLC as being part of the full game and included in the initial price, then your reasoning isn't completely retarded. Do you happen to have a link to when that has ever actually happened..?
    You see, its because I'm not stupid, that I'm not taken in by your rhetorical trick here. You are taking my cake analogy and creating a really dumb interpretation of it. It's like taking a well known saying like "absence makes the heart grow fonder" and concluding that its encouraging people to divorce and is therefore, retarded. I can see right through you...

    We are not privy to the ins and outs of development of all these games with on-disc stuff you have to unlock by paying to download things. We weren't ever privy to development, just like usually when we buy a cake we can't see somebody baking the cake for us. We don't know what its inside it, but we trust there is a cake in there from previous experience. If suddenly, people start saying to you that you can't get full cakes, we're going to look around at others who are not doing that, or reach back into our memories and say, "Hmmm. Your half-invisible cakes are bullshit."
    Let me quote your Cake analogy, as you've clearly forgotten what you said:

    JinTypeNoir wrote:
    That's like showing people a full cake and then when they buy it, only giving them half, saying that the other half became invisible and charging for each piece to become visible. Who would be taken in by a stupid trick like that?
    You were clearly saying that publishers advertise a game that includes the DLC, when it actually requires additional payment - a bait-and-switch, if you will.

    THAT'S NOT WHAT'S HAPPENING.
    I did not forget what I said, I looked at it while I replied to you make sure I didn't use misleading language.

    Showing people a full cake, in this case, is analogy for what used to be a full game. It's the expectation of what you get when you buy a cake. Only giving them half is analogy for what is happening now.

    I think such interpretations only happen when being ungenerous and deliberately provoking argument. You made an interpretation of my analogy that only a blithering idiot would claim is happening; I interpreted your intention to be rabble-rousing for the sake of making someone look ridiculous with specious reasoning.

    All those cake metaphors afterwards were delicious and appetizing demonstrations of your point of view, but an analogy or metaphor can be interpreted multiple ways. I could easily take all your stuff and extrapolate them into the most ridiculous interpretations. This is not really arguing, but rhetorical wankery. Let's not do that; it doesn't lead anywhere. I say, "That's not what I meant," you say, "Well that's how I interpreted it." Whatever.

    Rather than continue Cake Wars in The Icing Strikes Back, I'd like to hear what on Earth you were trying to get at with that on-disc downloads vs. Sim City always online comparison.

    BTW, I could not disagree more about your last comment about Metacritic and cutting out content leading to a weaker game. In any creative endeavor, cutting out stuff that doesn't work is a fundamental piece of good design. I am further skeptical of the design sense of a team who might say that a piece of downloadable shmuckarack is so because it didn't work in the original game. Bloated game design became quite a problem in the PS2 days and it's only gotten worse.

    Some of Wind Waker's cut dungeons turned into Twilight Princess dungeons. Some of Final Fantasy VII's cut characters and scenarios were used in VIII. In the case of Final Fantasy, this is a far healthier development approach that could have helped Square Enix develop more games this generation. In the case of Wind Waker, do you think we would not be perfectly reasonable if we were upset about a hypothetical situation where Nintendo charged for dungeons they couldn't finish on time?
  • Madder-Max 5 May 2013 07:51:12 11,618 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Um ahem if I may. For what is worth, on disc dlc is like having a basic sky or virgin tv package and then paying to unlock extra services which are already there such as sports, movies etc to have the full package.

    99 problems and being ginger is one

  • PazJohnMitch 5 May 2013 08:04:08 7,779 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Madder-Max wrote:
    Um ahem if I may. For what is worth, on disc dlc is like having a basic sky or virgin tv package and then paying to unlock extra services which are already there such as sports, movies etc to have the full package.
    That is pretty much my take on it as well.
  • MrTomFTW Moderator 5 May 2013 08:15:47 37,300 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    People were using hacks to find cut out pieces of game long before this generation.

    A good example would be that extra dungeon in Wind Waker. These days they could finish it off during the latter stage of development/after launch and have it as DLC.

    Follow me on Twitter: @MrTom
    Voted by the community "Best mod" 2011, 2012 and 2013.

  • PazJohnMitch 5 May 2013 08:16:07 7,779 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Penguin and JTN I think you are both not realising the differences between Western and Japanese (Capcom) games.

    Like Penguin's example of AC2 there have been quite a few cases where western games have had poor levels cut out which have then been sold later as DLC. (I personally quite like this as I would rather play the shorter game without the shit bit in it).

    JTN's complaint seems to be with Capcom who have released a number of fighting games where half the characters are greyed out and have to be paid for as DLC. They were fully integrated into the game and clearly just sectioned out to earn extra cash.

    JTN's example is a worse situation and is like EA releasing FIFA 14 without Messi been a playable character unless you pay an extra 5. (Shit I have just given them an idea). Thankfully this is actually less common.
  • Arrr9 5 May 2013 08:25:21 401 posts
    Seen 4 weeks ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    TheMilkman wrote:
    Anyone that says the gameplay in Bioshock Infinite is poor should never be allowed to play an fps again as they don't understand them properly.

    And the 360 controller and the dualshock are both good pads. That seems to be an unpopular opinion here as it seems everyone thinks one is shit and one is ace.
    I understand first person shooty games fine. Much as Infinite has some lovely touches and has a lot to say for itself, in gaming terms I still have more fun shotgunning imps and cacodemons in Doom - the shooting part is just more fun with more weight and feedback to it.

    The 360 controller and dualshock are both good though, I'll agree on that.
  • JinTypeNoir 5 May 2013 08:40:09 4,365 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    The discussion began because the unpopular opinion was about first day on-disc downloadable booby prizes, and then expanded to other forms in the course. My initial posts were limited to on-disc games.

    Also, Japanese publishers are not the only ones who do this, and there are quite a few Japanese publishers who don't practice this at all. It is not a Japanese vs. Western thing. It's about different approaches. Though I think Capcom is probably the most infamous, as they usually are when it comes to moneygrubbing shamelessness.

    Obviously, downloadable goombarahrahs are easier to accept when it hasn't been on the disc at release and is clearly developed afterward. I'm still suspicious though and 90% of the time I choose to support stuff like Dark Arisen, Tales of Graces F or GOTY editions so I can send a message that, of the two, I like expansion discs and complete editions better.

    A much healthier evolution of downloadable kvetches would have been if Microsoft had encouraged modding instead of micro-ass-drilling. Yes, I'm aware of the irony of one of the world's most infamously greedy companies encouraging such pro-consumer move, but it would have done a world of good for helping the sales longevity of the type of games that became this generation and is a much better deterrent against used game sales then some of the horrifying scenarios that have developed recently.

    I continue to hope in this coming generation modding descends from PCs and becomes a huge and widespread phenomenon on consoles that goes far beyond a Little Big Planet here and a Trackmania there. It's one of the main reasons you buy the PC versions of Bethesda games over their console counterparts, for instance.
  • PenguinJim 5 May 2013 08:52:00 5,754 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    JinTypeNoir wrote:
    Showing people a full cake, in this case, is analogy for what used to be a full game. It's the expectation of what you get when you buy a cake. Only giving them half is analogy for what is happening now.

    I think such interpretations only happen when being ungenerous and deliberately provoking argument. You made an interpretation of my analogy that only a blithering idiot would claim is happening; I interpreted your intention to be rabble-rousing for the sake of making someone look ridiculous with specious reasoning.

    All those cake metaphors afterwards were delicious and appetizing demonstrations of your point of view, but an analogy or metaphor can be interpreted multiple ways. I could easily take all your stuff and extrapolate them into the most ridiculous interpretations. This is not really arguing, but rhetorical wankery. Let's not do that; it doesn't lead anywhere. I say, "That's not what I meant," you say, "Well that's how I interpreted it." Whatever.
    Your analogy really was shit because you were saying that the developer/publisher was lying to the consumer - "showing people a full cake and then when they buy it, only giving them half, saying that the other half became invisible and charging for each piece to become visible" (although I've never heard of HALF a game being on-disc DLC, and think 1% might even be generous, although I'd be happy to be corrected).

    There's no wriggle room here, JTN - you clearly contended that the developer/publisher was falsely advertising their product. "saying that the other half became invisible" - wtf? How can this be interpreted any other way than deliberate misdirection (i.e. lying)?

    But what are you really saying? That customers buy a full game expecting a full cake, which is... what, exactly? 17 levels? 64 costumes? 12 different guns? Why would they expect more than is advertised in the trailer or on the back of the box? If they buy a game that advertises 16 levels, and has a 17th as on-disc DLC, what's the problem? What game are you talking about where on-disc DLC is being advertised as part of the main game?

    JinTypeNoir wrote:Rather than continue Cake Wars in The Icing Strikes Back, I'd like to hear what on Earth you were trying to get at with that on-disc downloads vs. Sim City always online comparison.
    Consumers: Internet goes down! Internet isn't always reliable! Some people are still on dial-up!
    Developer: Ah, we have the means to put this DLC on disc! That should help out some of our customers with limited Internet access or slow Internet! :)
    Stupid consumers: You're lying, backstabbing, cheating thieves! This is only half a cake! RWAR!
    Mayor Quimby: Are these morons getting dumber or just louder?


    I didn't really feel that this needed more explanation - nor did I feel it necessary to respond to your suggestion that game development costs and business models have not changed for five console generations and don't need to change now, or your madcap theory that games development isn't planned or budgeted at all.

    For Streetfighter X Tekken, Capcom said: "We can cite our reasons why they were on the disc all day - compatability for all players, save HD space, download bandwidth etc..." - it sounds fine to me. Do you have evidence to the contrary? Or just conjecture and specious reasoning?

    JinTypeNoir wrote:
    BTW, I could not disagree more about your last comment about Metacritic and cutting out content leading to a weaker game. In any creative endeavor, cutting out stuff that doesn't work is a fundamental piece of good design. I am further skeptical of the design sense of a team who might say that a piece of downloadable shmuckarack is so because it didn't work in the original game. Bloated game design became quite a problem in the PS2 days and it's only gotten worse.
    I agree. And it's also very nice to have the choice to buy the "deleted scenes" as an extra if we're foaming at the mouth for more, too (and have some of those rabid DLC-purchasers fund the developer further when the DLC is very poor). I invented something called "reading reviews" (patent pending) so I can choose where to spend my money, so it's not a problem for me. ;)

    JinTypeNoir wrote:
    Some of Wind Waker's cut dungeons turned into Twilight Princess dungeons. Some of Final Fantasy VII's cut characters and scenarios were used in VIII. In the case of Final Fantasy, this is a far healthier development approach that could have helped Square Enix develop more games this generation. In the case of Wind Waker, do you think we would not be perfectly reasonable if we were upset about a hypothetical situation where Nintendo charged for dungeons they couldn't finish on time?
    There's no possible response, and I'm surprised you have even brought up an argument like that. Who's to say Wind Waker might not have been better if it had included the original dungeons, and Twilight Princess might have been a decent game if it had been entirely original? Unless you have a machine that lets us look into alternate timelines, I think I'm going to stick to facts and evidence from our universe.

    Speaking of which... got any links to disgruntled former bakers spilling the dirt on developers and their dodgy on-disc DLC practices? :p
  • Mola_Ram 5 May 2013 09:02:00 6,936 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    why are we talking about cakes again
  • PenguinJim 5 May 2013 09:05:09 5,754 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I don't often make ban requests of the mods, but if anyone makes a Portal reference here, I think that would be reasonable grounds.
  • ibenam 5 May 2013 09:06:41 1,344 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    The cake is a lie.
  • ibenam 5 May 2013 09:08:44 1,344 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Dammit you posted that as i was typing it out.
  • PenguinJim 5 May 2013 09:10:29 5,754 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    :D
  • MrTomFTW Moderator 5 May 2013 09:25:43 37,300 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago

    Follow me on Twitter: @MrTom
    Voted by the community "Best mod" 2011, 2012 and 2013.

  • Mola_Ram 5 May 2013 09:42:07 6,936 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
  • JinTypeNoir 5 May 2013 10:01:40 4,365 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    PenguingJim are you one of those people who thinks used games are killing the industry?

    PenguinJim wrote:
    Your analogy really was shit because you were saying that the developer/publisher was lying to the consumer - "showing people a full cake and then when they buy it, only giving them half, saying that the other half became invisible and charging for each piece to become visible" (although I've never heard of HALF a game being on-disc DLC, and think 1% might even be generous, although I'd be happy to be corrected).

    There's no wriggle room here, JTN - you clearly contended that the developer/publisher was falsely advertising their product. "saying that the other half became invisible" - wtf? How can this be interpreted any other way than deliberate misdirection (i.e. lying)?
    Dude, Penguin, give it up. You're taking my analogy literally, as if I'm saying that each case of on-disc downloadable creamiepoos is actually half the game every time. Reasonable interpretations of an analogy don't go the very last percentile like that. I've repeatedly explained to you that the analogy was about misrepresenting what your cake is and consumers being able to see through it because publishers are full of shit, not identifiable, class-action lawsuit, easily caught lying.

    Deliberate misdirection is closer (but not actually claiming the downloadable crickeybombs were part of the full game), yes. They are telling you that this stuff wouldn't be there if they couldn't charge for it due to budget and so on, but I think they are lying through their teeth a lot of the time and making excuses for trying to follow the leader with huge budgets. Nobody actually thinks they'd be insane enough to open themselves up for obvious lawsuits like you are suggesting my analogy says.

    The invisible pieces of cake represent the absurdity of the claim in the metaphor, not the actual means through which publishers are doing this.

    But what are you really saying?
    The whole point of using the cake analogy was to compare game development to baking a cake in that the consumer is typically not present during both processes and not being able to see the cake or game until the box is presented to you. The full cake was a metaphor for what we usually considered a full game before this generation.

    For instance, an RPG last generation which had alternate costumes and extra modes or dungeons as incentives to buy it against other RPGs now having that as downloadable cripecruleboos and that stuff is now missing unless you pay for it. Thus, the consumer ends up feeling like pieces of the cake they ordered are missing based on what they expect a game to have in terms of the amount volume included for free. When this stuff is on the disc on the very first day and you must pay it, that's like saying, "Pay to make these pieces of cake visible, even though other cake makers make them visible for free." It's there to demonstrate the absurdity.

    If you don't agree, understand where I'm coming from or still think my analogy is poo, let's drop it here, because we are obviously coming from different universes here and I don't think either you or I meant as disrespect to each other.

    What game are you talking about where on-disc DLC is being advertised as part of the main game?
    This is a situation you made up from my analogy. I keep telling you that it's not what I implied or meant by it.

    Consumers: Internet goes down! Internet isn't always reliable! Some people are still on dial-up!
    Developer: Ah, we have the means to put this DLC on disc! That should help out some of our customers with limited Internet access or slow Internet! :)
    Stupid consumers: You're lying, backstabbing, cheating thieves! This is only half a cake! RWAR!
    Mayor Quimby: Are these morons getting dumber or just louder?
    >_>

    <_<

    Are you saying that you believe the primary motivation of day one, on-disc, paid for shikishikiboys is to cater to people with slow internet connections? Are you implying that complaining about big downloads for downloadable groobies is somehow comparable to the nefarious practice of not letting you play a single-player-oriented game you bought unless you were contacted to the internet? Are you secretly Arthur Gies?

    And you are accusing me of specious reasoning?

    It's pure common sense that if you want to download something new for a game that you had best have a solid internet connection and enough hard drive space. The current market who buys downloadable cricketbums is not likely a market that consists of many people for whom this is a relevant concern.

    The current market for people who want to play a single-player oriented game and be able to play it any time they please encompasses a much wider swath of people for whom a solid internet connection could be a problem, although I bet one reason EA went with the idea is they thought it would play well to people who liked Farmville and Bejeweled online. They of course, miscalculated because any idiot could have told them people who play games that are only accessible online will not necessarily welcome a game you can buy on a disc, but cannot be played unless its online. The new Sim City unquestionably would have been better as a single player game with multi-player options.

    First day on-disc downloadable goomptywhos are generally aimed toward more enthusiastic players who put a lot of money into gaming and have the large hard drive versions of an Xbox, Wii U or PS3 and connect to the internet often, or have large capacity media inserted in their 3DS, Vita or PSP for that very purpose, or are used to doing so from iOS environments. All three audiences have a much higher chance of some sort of infrastructure they can take advantage of easily.

    I didn't really feel that this needed more explanation - nor did I feel it necessary to respond to your suggestion that game development costs and business models have not changed for five console generations and don't need to change now, or your madcap theory that games development isn't planned or budgeted at all.
    This is going to be my last reply to you if you do this again. I said many developers were able to plan and budget accordingly without going bankrupt, without the benefit of these micro payment models and if they could do it for more than 20 years, they can continue to do so. Clearly, that does not imply that business models or costs have not changed and only implies that if they could do it before, they can do it now. This generation, From Software and Atlus make two good examples, they survived. It does not follow that just because a new business model has been developed that it must be followed to the letter in order for publishers to survive.

    I do not buy the wholesale excuse that since game budgets have skyrocketed that this downloadable hoobygoob market has become necessary. The publishers brought those game budget problems on themselves and I will not pay to dig them out of the grave they dug.

    For Streetfighter X Tekken, Capcom said: "We can cite our reasons why they were on the disc all day - compatability for all players, save HD space, download bandwidth etc..." - it sounds fine to me. Do you have evidence to the contrary? Or just conjecture and specious reasoning?
    If those flimsy excuses sound reasonable to you, I've got a flying unicorn I can sell you for real cheap.

    JinTypeNoir wrote:
    Some of Wind Waker's cut dungeons turned into Twilight Princess dungeons. Some of Final Fantasy VII's cut characters and scenarios were used in VIII. In the case of Final Fantasy, this is a far healthier development approach that could have helped Square Enix develop more games this generation. In the case of Wind Waker, do you think we would not be perfectly reasonable if we were upset about a hypothetical situation where Nintendo charged for dungeons they couldn't finish on time?
    There's no possible response, and I'm surprised you have even brought up an argument like that. Who's to say Wind Waker might not have been better if it had included the original dungeons, and Twilight Princess might have been a decent game if it had been entirely original? Unless you have a machine that lets us look into alternate timelines, I think I'm going to stick to facts and evidence from our universe.
    What?

    No, seriously, what? The Wind Waker example is there to show an example of a game where gamers would reasonably be irate if they had to pay for additional dungeons, not to show that the game might have been better with the missing dungeons included as part of the original, non-downloadable package, which is so obvious it does not even merit mentioning. What planet of interpretation did you pull this out of?

    Edited by JinTypeNoir at 10:02:16 05-05-2013

    Edited by JinTypeNoir at 10:06:08 05-05-2013
  • Deleted user 5 May 2013 10:36:08
    http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/284/529/e65.gif
  • PenguinJim 5 May 2013 10:42:59 5,754 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    There's no way I'm reading all of that, but having read a couple of points, I can say I'm satisfied. :) I'm not suggesting that my opinion about on-disc DLC is popular, but I think I've done a good job of backing my points up (rather than crying "publishers are full of shit! They must be lying! There's no actual evidence for it, but it's scientific fact!" ). :p

    Edited by PenguinJim at 10:43:20 05-05-2013
  • bobdebob 5 May 2013 11:42:11 542 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    I was going to weigh in (again) on Day 1 DlC and the such but I'm seem to have missed it.

    Don't you people sleep?
  • PenguinJim 5 May 2013 11:52:36 5,754 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Can't.
  • thedaveeyres 5 May 2013 11:56:05 10,684 posts
    Seen 7 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    The last couple of pages in summary:

    Woof Bark Cakey Pig. Don't Send me back. Don't send me back t'dark place.

    D****** ******r

    XBLA: Hamster Trippin
    Steam: thedaveeyres
    PSN: HamsterTrippin

  • Page

    of 130 First / Last

Log in or register to reply