Bigred's Video Game Thread

[Jack Sawyer]

Dude....we didn't have the internet. Video games were not mainstream enough to be advertised in prime time. If you wanted to know what was up, you needed to read the magazines. The only reason I knew Final Fantasy existed is because of Nintendo Power. It made me want to buy the game. I did end up buying the game. So....yeah, game makers benefited ALOT from that shit.

You do understand, I assume, that Nintendo is just one publisher which also happened to be the dominant console maker back in the day right? What about all of the other devs? Did they have magazines too?

What does it cost to open the black box? If it's equal to the average of 50 memory cards, 600 broc & cheese, 250 tic tacs, and 100 polished stones. Then it seems pretty fair to me.

Whatever it's cost, you'd be GAMBLING for your memory card. The Nile is also a river in Egypt.

Whaaaaaaaaaaat???? You mean you made a purchase decision based on your own needs, preferences, and budget all under your own free will??? How the fuck did you do that with all these greedy corporations controlling your mind!!!???

LOL. I'll bite.

It wasn't thrown into my face. My progression was not hampered because I lacked it. It was not cut out from the game prior top release just to be readded as paid content later. They were upfront about it back then. It did not cost more than the game itself.

This statement provides some insight into your flawed thinking. Playing video games is not an "accomplishment". You're playing with a toy.

Exactly, but one which wants to manipulate you into dumping all your money into it, for no reason other than to keep playing with the toy. Don't throw in money, the toy becomes tough; throw in money, the toy becomes easy. The amounts of money are not children's candy prices either.

Why? Who is getting hurt? You and Oskar keep saying how much money the game will make.....so obviously they have an audience that isn't too offended by what they're doing.

An audience that doesn't KNOW what they are doing, banana. There is massive a difference.

Ever heard of the frog in the boiling pot metaphor?

Your use of the term "progress" suggests that you take your video games a little too seriously. They're not real Jack. Ok?

The money you lose at them is very real. Thank you for slowly arriving at some sense.

It's not gambling cuz baseball cards.

Another false equivalency. Great.

Honestly, this feels more and more about you not wanting to pay, and less and less about keeping kids away from slot machines.

Say it upfront and if I want I'll pay. Why the dishonesty? Why the bullshit? Why the insistence that gambling isn't gambling? Why the SAAS while insisting I pay for entry as well?

Well beanie babies don't actually 'do' anything. They exist to be collected. So in order to accomplish the goal of a complete collection, you did in fact need at least one of every specific beanie baby.

You can collect them? Which means they have actual, intrinsic value right?

[quote="Banana"]Well maybe you pirated it by word-of-mouth, but if you follow the chain backward, Konami got paid somehow./quote]



I learned of it organically, so no, Nintendo didn't get paid on that one thing, as, you know, they owned Nintendo Power and not Konami.

Also the word "hampered" implies that there is some verifiable minimum standard of progression speed in video games. There isn't. I've been playing Clash of Clans for 5 fuckin years and I'm still on town-hall level 9. I've spent more than a year just upgrading walls. It's a grind. But if someone spends money to buy gems and get to level 10 before me...so be it. I wouldn't say that my progress has been "hampred" by not spending money. I progressed through the game at a pace and investment total that best suited my needs. If the game didn't offer me that choice, then I would have simply played a different game.

You play mobile games. I don't, because I despise the "free" mobile game accepted monetization practices. I would not want for full price console games to become like "free" mobile games, because, again, I PAID TO FUCKING PLAY IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. Throw in there the fact that I do not wants kids gambling (for memory cards, keeping in line with the analogy earlier which you found so fair), and then you get the entire argument for the millionth time.

[quote="Banana"]Ok....so 'it's all up to you'. Great, we agree. Play fast, play slow, it's all up to you. Some people might choose to play 'the long way', but are also willing to pay extra for a boost. How does that diminish YOUR experience?
/quote]

Ever heard of multiplayer? PVP? That damned activision patent I just showed you? Why, oh enlightened banana, do you think the focus is so much on multiplayer battles nowadays? Combat prioritization, fuck story. Why do you think this is?

Also the word "hampered" implies that there is some verifiable minimum standard of progression speed in video games. There isn't. I've been playing Clash of Clans for 5 fuckin years and I'm still on town-hall level 9. I've spent more than a year just upgrading walls. It's a grind. But if someone spends money to buy gems and get to level 10 before me...so be it. I wouldn't say that my progress has been "hampred" by not spending money. I progressed through the game at a pace and investment total that best suited my needs. If the game didn't offer me that choice, then I would have simply played a different game.

There isn't. They just make any progress impossible. Here, a spreadsheet for you as an example.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...dhQ/edit#gid=0

[quote="Banana"]Why? Who is getting hurt? You and Oskar keep saying how much money the game will make.....so obviously they have an audience that isn't too offended by what they're doing./quote]

Kids, gambling. People with gambling tendencies being exposed to gambling while others swearing up and down it isn't gambling. People who want to just play single player games with certain monopolized ips. People who buy the games expecting to play the game hitting grindwalls and paywalls. General game design is getting hurt too. I can keep going.

[quote="Banana"]Stop with this....13 year olds don't have credit cards!!! An adult has to intervene in order for the 13 year old to spend any money. Yes, he can buy gift cards and use them online but he's limited by A) how much cash he has, and B) How often he can get to a store that sells gift cards. He can't go into debt. He can't blow off the mortgage payment to buy more lootboxes. And if he really is in a situation where he's spending "too much" on this stuff, then the overwhelming contributing factor is a lack of parental oversight. While that's sad, it's certainly not the job of the video game industry to sacrifice potential profits just to pick up the slack for a few bad parents./quote]

I will stop when they stop targeting these games at kids. Need for Speed: Payback has lootboxes and progression hampering in it, for christ sakes. 2017 will go down in history as The Year of the Lootbox.


I'm done bro. Keep trolling.

[BananaStand]

Did they have magazines too?

Electronic Gaming Monthly was a thing back then. So, yes.

Whatever it's cost, you'd be GAMBLING for your memory card. The Nile is also a river in Egypt.

No you wouldn't. You'd be spending an average amount per transaction, and receiving an item from a population of items that have an average value equal to what you spent. Again...baseball cardzzzz!!!

The google definition of gambling is to "take risky action in the hope of a desired result". There is nothing "risky" about buying something. Just because it might not be what you want, doesn't mean it's gambling. There's no risk. You can't LOSE.

It wasn't thrown into my face.

Aggressive advertising offends you? Crybaby

My progression was not hampered because I lacked it.

Was your progress enhanced because you had it? That's probably the way to describe it. "hampered" just isn't apt in this situation. That's just a word you're using cause you're a crybaby.

It was not cut out from the game prior top release just to be readded as paid content later

If it's cut out before release, then it's cut out before you buy it. Nothing was *taken* from you. Only a crybaby would feel that he's owed something he was never entitled to in the first place.

They were upfront about it back then

Do they need to be now? Clearly you're already quite well informed, so I'm not really sure what all this crybaby stuff is about.

It did not cost more than the game itself.

But they still sold it to kids right? Funny....that one doesn't make your list of gripe-comparisons to the 'good old days'.

Exactly, but one which wants to manipulate you into dumping all your money into it, for no reason other than to keep playing with the toy. Don't throw in money, the toy becomes tough; throw in money, the toy becomes easy. The amounts of money are not children's candy prices either

Tough or easy are questions of personal preference. Cheap or expensive are relative terms as well. So it sounds like a person should be able to determine a level of investment and level of difficulty that best suits them. You seem to be saying that everyone should want it cheap and easy, and that the game-makers should be required to provide it the way you personally enjoy. Crybaby stuff dude.

An audience that doesn't KNOW what they are doing, banana. There is massive a difference.

Do you know anyone in this audience? Is this REALLY a widespread problem? Anecdotes don't count. If this was really something that was happening, then the gaming industry would be losing customers left and right. An industry scaring off its own clientele is stupid, but still not illegal, or even immoral. It's just hopelessly stupid, which is why I simply don't believe that a double-digit billion dollar industry is actually doing this.

Ever heard of the frog in the boiling pot metaphor?

Well no one is being cooked to death, so it's a little bit of an extreme comparison. If someone gets into gaming and accepts that the culture includes loot boxes, so what? Why does someone need to be enlightened on "the good old days" in order to decide whether not they can enjoy the current gaming culture. And as I've pointed out extensively, "the good old days" weren't as good as you think they were.

The money you lose at them is very real. Thank you for slowly arriving at some sense

.
I'm sorry....I need some help here. How do you "lose money" at these things. You get something every time you pay for something right? Do you ever pay money just to have the screen flash "you lose, here's nothing, better luck next time"

Another false equivalency. Great.

you're only claiming that it's a false equivalency because the cards are tangible and have some value in perpetuity. I completely deny that logic because it is OBVIOUS that something can have value, and be consumed. Food is an excellent example. I ate lunch today. It's fucking worthless to you. I can't touch it anymore. I can't sell it to anyone. But I got everything I needed and expected from it. So it was worth the money I paid for it.

Baseball cards don't "do" anything. Video games actively provide entertainment. Just because the value of the card stays with the card, and the value of a video game is specific to the player, doesn't mean that one is gambling and one isn't. It's just a different way to consume value.

Say it upfront and if I want I'll pay. Why the dishonesty? Why the bullshit?

It's my understanding that the game isn't even out yet. And yet, you already know this. So I'm not sure why you're complaining about people not saying things "upfront". Exactly how were you deceived into a purchase decision if you're so well informed prior to release?

Why the insistence that gambling isn't gambling?

Cuz it aint. There's no 'risk'.

Why the SAAS while insisting I pay for entry as well?

This is just you bitching about high prices. Crybaby.

You can collect them? Which means they have actual, intrinsic value right?

Dude, stop this. Value can exist many different ways. Collectibles and Consumables are different. Sorry if that offends you, but you really need to get over it.

You play mobile games. I don't, because I despise the "free" mobile game accepted monetization practices

.
LOL, ok then. How about you just make that a policy for ALL games, not just mobile. From now on, your rule will be "I don't play games I don't like". Then just go with that. Why try to force YOUR preferences onto the entire industry? Obviously, not everyone "despises" it the way you do.

I would not want for full price console games to become like "free" mobile games, because, again, I PAID TO FUCKING PLAY IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Obviously you didn't pay enough!! The people who make the game decide what you need to pay to have a certain experience. If you want that experience, you pay. You don't get to set your own price. You don't get to pay less and then demand maximum value! If people are willing to pay for the maximum experience, then there is a market there and there is no compelling reason to interfere with commerce. If some poor people get left out....so what. Video games are not a right!

Throw in there the fact that I do not wants kids gambling

Right....throw that in, cuz without it your argument is just a bunch of selfish belly-aching.

Ever heard of multiplayer? PVP? That damned activision patent I just showed you? Why, oh enlightened banana, do you think the focus is so much on multiplayer battles nowadays? Combat prioritization, fuck story. Why do you think this is?

So this really is just about jealousy. You can't compete against the folks willing to spend more, so you whine about it. C'mon dude.

There isn't. They just make any progress impossible. Here, a spreadsheet for you as an example
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...dhQ/edit#gid=0

What is this? More belly-aching about how long and hard it is to get what you want??

Kids, gambling.

OMG give this up dude. Kids dont' have credit cards. And this really isn't any different than them buying pokemon cards.

People with gambling tendencies being exposed to gambling while others swearing up and down it isn't gambling.

Stop it. It's not the video game industry's problem to protect people from themselves. Haven't we had this conversation before? Violent video games didn't cause Columbine, and lootboxes aren't going to exacerbate gambling problems.

People who want to just play single player games with certain monopolized ips.

The box says right on it if it's a single player game or not.

People who buy the games expecting to play the game hitting grindwalls and paywalls.

Not a new thing dude.

I will stop when they stop targeting these games at kids.

Star Wars is a 40 year old franchise, you know that right?