- 0 Posts
- 63 Comments
Surprisingly narrow minded and incorrect viewpoint.
Layoffs are inevitable, including at Larian studios. Otherwise they’re saying all video game studios just have linear growth forever which is stupid.
People downvoting have no idea what they’re talking about lol. One flop and Larian Studios will do mass lay-offs like every other studio. And no studio will make continual success after success.
Not sure that’s right - before the internet I had no clue what was supposedly good or not. I’d rent games from blockbuster and just try them one by one. Lots of shitty games and I had no idea that Mario or sonic or anything was meant to be good.
Now it’s a lot easier just based on metacritic or steam reviews to figure out if something is good or not.
I think it’s because people only remember the good games and not the stinkers.
I played a lot of shit games I can’t recall because I played for 30 minutes max. There was one game I never passed the first level as I couldn’t figure out what to do, I think something to do with jelly beans and a blob. How is that good gameplay lol?
But of course myself and others can tell you about the games we played for hours like Super Mario Bros which didn’t really have bugs and were good.
Games were definitely buggy and I honestly think people forget how much better the quality is nowadays.
I also think there is something to it just being the 90s or so and not having much choice. If you only have one game to play then of course you’re going to replay it to death. If I have a steam library of 1000 games then I’m much less likely to.
A lot of this is just nostalgia for the past and the environment as opposed to games being any better.
You can’t just ignore the arguments that don’t fit your world view/argument. In that scenario I could just look at the negatives of Steam and the positives of Epic and say that the Epic Store is better than Steam because I ignore all the stuff that doesn’t fit my argument.
It’s not just Cs go but multiple games like Dota Etc. They have specifically built a whole market and ecosystem to convince you to buy stuff and gamble effectively.
You are doing exactly what I said.
Valve is good, but they have shit features and I’m not sure why you’re defending them (but maybe you’re just a troll/ignoring my points?).
I don’t care about the competition - it’s like saying a person is molesting a child but hey, those two over there are molesting multiple children and murdering them! So they’re worse!
Marketshare is also a poor predictor as it’s often the first person to market as opposed to what’s best.
Think of it another way - Google has the most marketshare of search. Is it the best and is it doing only good things? If you say yes to both then I can’t help you further.
I don’t care about the things you mentioned, but yes, those are also issues.
I was talking more about the issues around gambling and making loops specifically to take advantage of gamers with problems.
As well as the real problem that a single leader leading a company/nation will mean that company/nation always fails. The successors will inevitably mess it up sometime.
To each their own, but I think this is a bit extremist. Life isn’t black and white. Free games with mtx can be good or bad, paid games without can be good or bad.
Just not buying solely because it has a shop/battle pass means you miss out on a lot of games where it has zero meaning and you’re not allowing any nuanced discussion to happen on the issue.
I actually don’t disagree with you and think we’re on the same page. Basically, you can summarise our whole discussion as all companies are doomed to fail at end of day.
If you don’t change and innovate you will fail.
If you change and innovate too much you will fail.
Finding the middle ground is rough and most companies will fail.
Anecdotally sure, but for the majority of people I’d be right. And that’s what matters - at a small level you’ll have outliers but if you’re winning the majority of the market then you will crush your competitors. Again it’s irrelevant whether your code is good or efficient or replaced by llms so long as you are winning long enough to kill your competition.
They may be failing but they have replaced the industry so it’s irrelevant.
-
Do you use Yahoo or AltaVista to search?
-
Do you still use taxis?
-
Do you use Blockbuster or subscribe to a standard cable package?
I’d wager you say no to all of them. So while the old may be right, it’s irrelevant because they were still outperformed and no longer exist or are just not as competitive.
Again, people get hung up on the best or right way to do things when the reality is that’s not how business works.
Who cares if it is on Steam or not though?
If everything was on everything then sure, that would be great. But that’s not realistic, and having this alternative where everything is on Steam but not elsewhere is not a good solution for that because Steam will be shit one day, and already has quite a few shitty issues.
Honestly, people have this ridiculous view of PC gaming and Steam sometimes. Look around the world and show me where having one company having a massive hold over that sector has ever worked out well long term for consumers.
I’ve never found it more convenient to use Steam or another store over piracy so it doesn’t make much difference to many.
Some of the games I do own on Steam now don’t work either, so it’s not like it’s an amazing store.
But if it’s inconvenient to download a different client just to buy a game then you’re just lazy. It’s not like you have to subscribe to it, it’s just a click and 5 minute wait.
Lol as someone else put it, it’s silly to complain that you won’t buy a game because it doesn’t use the marketplace you want to use.
Steam is just one marketplace and it needs competition. One day it’s going to go through enshittification and when that happens you’ll be thankful other marketplaces exist.
Sometimes I honestly wonder why PC gamers get so riled up over inconsequential things.
Steam and GoG are not just free services for gamers either. At their core they are businesses, and they invest significantly to try and make people spend more/get addicted to their services.
I hate this whole idea that some companies are your friend. That just shows their marketing and branding is working on people and blinding people.
Yep.
People fanboy over Steam endlessly without realizing that with time, it will turn to shit as well.
More competition is good, and maybe Epic is shit today but if their leadership changes then maybe it could actually significantly improve and surpass Steam.
But if it doesn’t exist, then if Steam turns to shit then you’re much more likely to just be stuck with shit.
I just subscribed for 4 or so years ahead at original prices. Will decide in 4 years if it’s still worth it, but for me the free games are easily worth the price of entry.
I’m not sure it really needs to be debated - prices have gone up, they raised prices. Either pay or don’t pay. It’s no big deal at end of day.
Phew! So they just have to make good enough games to avoid two complete flops in a row. Which is impossible but feel free to try and argue that it’s possible.
It’s also an extremely privileged view. “Just have lots of money and you’ll be fine lol! Dumb studios who don’t make enough money to weather flops are bad!”
It’s the equivalent of the rich billionaires saying if you want a house just work hard and buy one. It’s not hard! Why are the poor people complaining?
It would be nice to not have Layoffs but it’s just reality it will happen. If you think it’s impossible you are a child or are completely blinded by corporate interests.