kane_magus: (Default)

This is some next level asininity as far as DRM goes. The gist, at least of the first few minutes of the video: two different shitty games have two different shitty kernel level DRM/anti-cheat schemes, and they apparently detect each other as malware and apparently neither will let you have the other game installed on your system.

No, Pat, the player solution is not "play on console and turn off crossplay with PC." The player solution is to simply not buy or play games that do/have this shit at all to being with.

Or, at the very least, that's my solution, anyway. I know my solution is also "unfortunately not viable for a large percentage of players," as Woolie said of Pat's solution, but I also know that that "large percentage of players" is part of the problem of why this shit exists in the first place. If that "large percentage of players" didn't buy games that did this shit, then the large percentage of game devs and publishers who currently do this shit would stop doing this shit.

Pat: "From the industry perspective, it's our good friend Capital who have fucked us on this one." Full stop, video could have ended right there. That said, his reasons for why "Capital" has "fucked us on this one" are absolutely legit. And what Woolie describes after that is one of the biggest reasons I do not play multiplayer games that involve the general public: randos on the Internet almost invariably suck the stinky shit straight from Satan's sulfurous sphincter through a silly swirly straw.

Also, that bit where Pat is talking about some Destiny bullshit where your reward for winning some online tournament thing or whatever the fuck is merely the right to spend real world money to buy the actual reward (i.e. some dumbfuck cosmetic thing), while Woolie is just going "ugh... uuuurrrrgggghhh..." and making puke faces on his side of the video is just the toxic plastic cherry on top of the shit sundae that is all of this abject idiocy.

Woolie: "It is my single most hated thing. Just the fact that you can have a full conversation about a game that has nothing to do with how it actually plays or getting to its content, because it's just the entire fucking economy around it. Yeah. Yeah yeah yeah, that's ridiculous man."

And the tangent that Pat goes into at the end about that academic anti-ChatGPT stuff sounds draconian, and it kind of is, but at the same time, what better solutions are there now? Hell if I know. *shrug*

Pat: "By the way, this is totally off-topic, barely tangential... if you're part of the audience that's using ChatGPT to do your exams or cheat in schoolwork, I want you to stop doing that, not because it's wrong. It is wrong. But you are actively damaging your brain and giving yourself the equivalent of a large-grade concussion. You are hurting your brain. For real. I'm not joking. You are working on giving yourself early onset dementia. I'm so serious about that."
kane_magus: (Default)
"Ubisoft's annual financial report includes claim that monetizing games with microtransactions 'makes the player experience more fun'"

I'll give them this much credit, I certainly have way more fun playing other games that aren't Ubisoft games, so I'm glad that they make the choice so easy for me by monetizing their "premium" games with microtransactions.

More seriously speaking, I guess they're not entirely wrong. Well, I mean they are wrong, because the whole damn thing is nothing but wrong. However, they wouldn't be putting all that horseshit in their games in the first place if people weren't spending oodles and oodles of money to buy it. So I guess somebody must think it's "worthwhile." The people who buy the shit are roughly on par with the people who sell the shit, as far as being the cause of the problem. But then, the fact that people still buy Ubisoft games at all is like... whatever. *spins finger around at side of head*

Saying "Our monetization offer within premium games makes the player experience more fun by allowing them to personalize their avatars or progress more quickly, however this is always optional," is completely asinine, though. But then, this was meant for sHaReHoLdErS.

"...or progress more quickly..." Selling worthless cosmetic crap is already bad enough, but they're admitting to literally selling the equivalent to cheat codes. Of course, it's not as if they're the first company to ever straight up sell as DLC what used to be cheat codes freely built into the game already, not by a long shot. Hell, it's not even the first time that Ubisoft themselves have done this bullshit.

"...however this is always optional." As [personal profile] owsf2000 first said probably a decade ago by this point, it's "optional" in the sense that, sure, you certainly don't have to buy the microtransactions... if you're willing to tediously grind for weeks or months on end. But assuming that you're a normal-ass person who doesn't want to waste your time doing that, then hey, guess what? Ubisoft has some "optional" microtransactions available to help you "progress more quickly" and speed up the process! In other words, the games are explicitly designed to be tiresome chores unless you cough up some (more) real world money to make the game you already paid for be less of a dreary slog to play. Isn't that "more fun"? *eye roll*

Come ooooonnnnn, modern video game industry crash. Come oooooooooonnnnnnnnnn, modern video game industry crash.
kane_magus: (Default)

"Video Games Europe, an industry lobby group, is now lobbying against the Stop Killing Games movement. I think we're stirring up the hive."



I (usually) watch these things, but I don't usually post them here, but this time, I just wanted to make a comment in response to something he showed in the video. He's talking, here, about all the "complexities" of making an online-only game that simply are not needed anymore once the game has reached the end of its life and has been (in an ideal world) simply released into the wild, rather than removed and destroyed forever, and there's a big list of "Examples of microservices NOT NEEDED for an end-of-life copy of a game." I'm just going to transcribe that list here. (pre-post EDIT) And boy did that take far longer than I was anticipating going into it, whew. (/pre-post EDIT)



Massive bullet point list behind cut (seriously, you don't really need to look at this shit if you don't want to) )



That's probably not even close to everything on the full list. That's just what was scrolled on the screen in this video. (Also, my only real concern was making sure I didn't fuck up the formatting/nesting/look of the list [which I did a couple times and had to fix during the creation of this post], so if there were any typos made during the process of transcribing the actual list items that weren't in the list as shown in the Youtube video, then that is my fault, and I'll fix it if I notice it, but I don't really give much of a fuck anymore, either way.)

My comment is simply this: I don't need any of that shit at all, ever in any video game I play (or if that shit is in games I play or have played in the past [e.g. No Man's Sky, Minecraft, Star Trek Online, The Secret World, etc.], it doesn't directly affect me, because I ignore/don't use any of it as best as I am able, and if I must use/interact with such shit, I do so only extremely grudgingly). I don't care if the game is at "end-of-life" or if it's a newly bought game that only just released today (not that I buy games on release day anymore, of course). That is a big, huge, colossal part of why I don't play online-only games at all, to begin with. I simply don't play games that have that shit in them and avoid like the plague games that do have that shit in them (and I know about it). That is all. Simple as that.

So if, as Video Games Europe claims, "[the proposals put forward by Stop Killing Games] would curtail developer choice by making these video games prohibitively expensive to create" by, presumably, not having all that stupid, worthless horseshit in them (or by having to turn off/remove all that stupid, worthless horseshit when such a game reaches "end-of-life"), even if that was true, which it almost assuredly is not (as Ross himself states), then my only response is this:

FUCKING GOOD. KILL THAT SHIT FOREVER, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.

kane_magus: (Default)

Everything Pat talks about in this video, particularly from around roughly the halfway point and onward, is why I will never knowingly and willingly play a "live service" game, ever. To fucking hell forever with "live service"/"Gaa$" games. Not even if it's free, but especially not if it's fucking "pReMiUm."

And Woolie, no, Tarkov is absolutely not goddamned free to play. Jesus Christ is it so not free to play. Thanks for blighting my mind with the (hopefully blessedly brief) memory of Tarkov again, Woolie. *weary sigh*
kane_magus: (Default)
I just got done playing through what I thought was all the new shit recently released for Vampire Survivors, which was a couple of new adventures (finally, one for Tides of the Foscari, which didn't have an associated adventure until now) and some other assorted secrets and unlocks and new weapons and whatnot. A fair bit of content. But when I got done, I was like, "Wait, hold on, where's the crossover stuff with Square Enix and that SaGa game I haven't played and have no interest in buying or whatever?"

Turns out the SaGa: Emerald Beyond crossover is a a whole separate DLC that required being manually added and downloaded, rather than just being an automatic update, even though it's free. Makes sense, in retrospect, I guess? Kind of? *scratches head* So, yeah, I wasn't as done as I thought I was. Won't be doing all that new new shit tonight, though.

Anyway, I guess this is probably a lead up to some massive Vampire Survivors DLC crossover with Final Fantasy or Kingdom Hearts or Dragon Quest or whatever. Kind of like how they teamed up with Konami for a Contra DLC first, before getting to the one that actually made sense. That'd probably be cool, too. Personally, I'd prefer Chrono Trigger/Cross, though. Of course, that just means that what they'll actually crossover with is something like the Mana series or Front Mission or Parasite Eve or ActRaiser or some shit. ¬_¬ I mean, don't get me wrong, I'd still play those, too. (I still bought and played that fucking Among Us crossover DLC, after all, even though I otherwise have less than zero interest in Among Us itself. Vampire Survivors is still Vampire Survivors, even if it's crossing over with some weird thing that I don't care about.)
kane_magus: (Default)
Full, superfluous title, which won't fit up there: "All 55 of these games are under $5 in Steam Spring Sale 2025, which is just silly for Metroidvanias, RPGs, roguelikes, and more gems this good"

Caveat: The above article does not take DLC into account on some of these. These are just the "base games" that are that cheap. As such, some of the full versions of these games can still cost $30 or more, in some cases.

Ones on that list that I would personally recommend (that I've played myself), with some additions of my own:
kane_magus: (Default)
Full headline, because just look at that gargantuan monster: "Steam has changed its policy on DLC content and season passes, so now players are entitled to proper compensation if future plans fall through: 'Customers will be offered a refund for the value of unreleased DLC'"

As just one example, the article mentions Stellaris. The main reason I have never bought anything to do with Stellaris is because every time I see it go on sale for 75%/$9.99 USD or whatever, I'm inevitably reminded that that's just for the "base game," and the DLC will still be way too expensive, even at half off or more. Like, right now, with just the very basic 10% "bundle discount," the "Stellaris Ultimate Bundle" is fucking $290.49 USD. All the DLC separately (some of which isn't, amazingly, in the "ultimate bundle") is $359.74 USD. And that $359.74 doesn't even include the "normal" $39.99 price tag for the "base game." The DLC/season pass situation of Stellaris is completely asinine.

Anyway, good on Steam for doing this, I guess.
kane_magus: (Default)

Look, I don't give a shit what the game in question may be, if a game has a fucking "season pass"[1] (or multiple "season passes," as some of the shittier games out there often do), there should never be any DLC for that game that is not part of any "season pass" (even if said DLC is additionally sold separately outside of the "season pass" structure, which is okay since there may be people who only want some of the DLC and don't want to have to pay through the nose to get all the rest of the worthless shit in the "season pass" or whatever). If you're determined to have a fucking "season pass" at all, but you're also selling some DLC that's not part of any "season pass," though? You done fucked it up.

Never mind that this has been fucking happening ever since the very advent of the goddamned "season pass" concept.

Anyway... I kind of tuned out when they started talking about fighting game tournament stuff in the second half of the video. Something about a Chinese player being banned for dubious and stupid reasons from a tournament in Thailand after making it to top 8 or whatever. I do agree that sounds pretty asinine, though.

[1] - "Not to be confused with battle pass," says Wikipedia. Heavens forbid. *eye roll + weary sigh + smdh*
kane_magus: (Default)
Full headline: "Don't like $70 games? Monster Hunter Wilds and Dragon's Dogma 2 publisher Capcom says wait 5 years and they'll all be $5"

"Price reductions are always on horizon... unless it's a Nintendo game"

That gets a hearty "No shit, Sherlock" from me. I've been doing that for twelve years now, and I've had very little problem with it at all. If a game that used to be in the $50-$100 range falls to the $5-$10[1] range, that's way more palatable to me than if it was, you know, still in the $50-$100 range, even if it takes five-plus years to get there. And some games hit that threshold within a fraction of that "five years" figure. But even then, that's not a guarantee that I'll definitely buy it.

With that said, though, I'm not sure what Capcom is actually on about, because as of right now, six year old Monster Hunter World is still $29.99 USD on Steam, and that's just for the basic "base-game" level shit, with the actual full game (i.e. including all DLC, presumably) still at fucking $69.97 USD. (It is, admittedly, currently on a Steam sale, for the moment, with the "base-game" at $9.89 USD and the most expensive "full game" version at $24.77 USD, but still.) Also, there are literally 200 separately listed DLC items on the Monster Hunter World Steam store page, almost none of which are on sale, that total a whopping fucking $508.27 USD, though most of that dumbfuckery is probably rolled up into the "Master Edition Digital Deluxe" shit with the $70 USD price tag. In any case, I have not bought any version of Monster Hunter World as of yet. Maybe if that "Master Edition Digital Deluxe Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" version ever hits sub-$10, I might bite on it.

Also, though it is no longer the case now, Monster Hunter World originally shipped with fucking Denuvo, same as just about every other Crapcum game these days (the newer of which are still infected by that shit), so I don't care if the game costs $700 or $70 or $7 or $0.07 or $0.0007, I will not knowingly/willingly buy anything with that shit infesting it.

[1] - For only a very rare few games would I be willing to buy even at the initial "$20-$30" range that I noted in that 12 year old post there. For me, now, today, with 99% of games, it's "either get down to $5-$10 or less or else continue to fuck off."
kane_magus: (Default)
Just in case anyone needed yet another example of why I consider the phrase "modern video game industry" to be one of the most grievous insults: here you go.

(EDIT) Just to note: I'd never heard of this game or dev before, but now that I have, they've instantaneously gone onto my "never buy" shitlist forever. Not that I would have ever considered paying $250 (or even just $50) for a fucking beta to start with, especially when the game sounds like utter dogshit to me, even before taking the devs' current greedy idiocy into consideration.

(Or, at least, if I had heard of them and potentially posted about them before, which I haven't bothered to look back at old posts to check, because I really don't care to waste the time, then I was apparently successful in completely blotting them out of my memory until now. And so, thus begins anew the process of blotting them out of my memory entirely.) (/EDIT)

(EDIT 2)

Via Mord's comment below:


Yeah, pretty much this.

That said, all those other games that Joe recommends instead of this Tarkov shit... nah. I'll pass. I have no interest in gritty war shooter games. Last one I played was one of those Calluhdoody games at some point between 10 to 15 years ago, and that was only because I was drafted to replace, for a single day, one of the testers who was out sick at the no longer existing QA company I used to work for back when I lived in Redmond, WA.

I should start watching Angry Joe again, more often.

(/EDIT 2)
kane_magus: (Default)
Full headline, because Dreamwidth's subject field length is still inadequate: "PSA: If you are unhappy with a game due to predatory microtransactions and DLCs, stop complaining and stop playing them"

I agree with this in part, but not fully. I already don't buy/play games like that[1]. However, I'm sure as shit not going to stop complaining about such things. The guy is absolutely right, though, in that complaining about this stuff does not accomplish a single goddamn thing at all (beyond providing a [dwindling] sense of catharsis).

It's like I have said many times in the past, myself. As much as I hate the modern video game industry for all the dumbshit it spews on a constant basis these days, I hate modern video game buyers/players at least as much, because if they weren't down there, with their gaping maws perfectly lined up with the sewer outflow pipe, the modern video game industry would not be up there, diarrhetically spewing all that dumbshit into the toilet for all these morons to blithely suck down. "Vote with your wallet" never works, and the people who say it know it never works, because far too many fucking idiots far too often "vote with their wallet" explicitly against their own best interests.[2]

To restate: Shit producers thrive on shit consumers. Shit consumers (often militantly) support shit producers. Circle of life.

On the one hand, telling people to "stop complaining and stop playing them" is laudable common sense. Because people should stop playing them. On the other hand, it would be best to keep in mind that quote that is misattributed to Albert Einstein: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting to get different results." Telling people to (yes, indeed) boycott games like that is worthless, because people are simply not going to boycott games like that, or at least not enough to matter at all. It never works. It's probably never going to work. That's just all there is to it.

And telling people to stop complaining about this shit is not going to work either, because fuck you, John Papadopoulos of website "Dark Side of Gaming," I'll complain about whatever I want, whenever I want. ¬_¬

For me, the order of annoyance probably goes like this, in ascending order from least to most annoying:
  1. People who complain about modern video game industry dumbfuckery, such as me and [personal profile] owsf2000.
  2. People who complain about people who complain about modern video game industry dumbfuckery, such as Mr. Papadopoulos here.
  3. People who complain about modern video game industry dumbfuckery while still actively giving money to the modern video game industry, such as roughly 99.9% of all people who buy/play video games.
Anyway, I'll just say it again:

C'moooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooon modern video game industry crash.

[1] - Well, in the specific cases of Tekken or Calluhdoody or most of the other games mentioned by name in this article, I didn't care about any of that shit even before they were drowned in a deluge of modern video game industry dumbshit. Well, maybe aside from the earlier Mortal Kombat games, I guess. And The Elder Scrolls, of course, because even though he never mentions that by name, the header image on the article is of that asinine Oblivion Horse Armor bullshit (which, despite my post there, actually wasn't the first video game to ever have paid DLC, since MechAssault predated that by a few years[3]).

[2] - See also: giving campaign contributions to Donald Trump (or the GQP in general).

[3] - Not only that, but that MechAssault game was apparently one of the first known instances of on-disc DLC, too. Shit.
kane_magus: (Default)
Here is yet another """""feel good""""" article (with a way too long headline that I didn't even try to put up there in the subject field) about fans rallying together and doing a thing that they wouldn't have had to do at all had Nintendo not been shitheads about the whole thing and had just made all that stuff available offline by default.
kane_magus: (Default)
For clarity's sake, the headline for this article on the Google News app on my phone (as well as on the browser tab in Firefox/Chrome/etc.) shows as "Dragon's Dogma 2 gleefully rejects modern game design rules," which conjures a vastly different initial impression than "All the ways Dragon's Dogma 2 will fight against you" does.

So... let's see, then.

Draconian DRM in the form of a Denuvo malware infestation? Check.

Worthless, predatory DLC? Check.

Game-breaking, progression loss bugs? Check.

Bad optimization/performance, even on high-end computers (which is very likely at least partly the fault of Denuvo)? Check.

Dubious design choices? Check.

So... no. Looks to me like Dragon's Dogma 2 gleefully embraces modern game design rules, not rejects them. In fact, Dragon's Dogma 2 looks like a perfect storm of the absolute worst of modern game design. A textbook example of what not to do. (At least if you don't want to be perceived as incompetent, greedy asshats, anyway, which Crapcum seems to not really care about anymore, I guess, like so much of the rest of the modern video game industry. *shrug*)

...

...

<sarcasm> Oh, wait, they were talking about the actual game that's hidden under all that huge pile of garbage listed above? Well, then. Never mind, I guess. </sarcasm> *eye roll + smdh + weary sigh*
kane_magus: (Default)
In addition to the ignominious Denuvo infestation, here is another huge reason not to buy Dragon's Dogma 2 right now. I'll be waiting for a "complete" version, with all the DLC included, Denuvo removed, and for that to hit a $12 sale ($12 being what I paid for the original game+all DLC). If that takes five to ten years, then so be it. (And, maybe, by then I will have a computer beefy enough to actually play it, too.)

Also, I normally hate "joke" reviews for games on Steam, but in this case, I will make an exception. I love that that is the current "most helpful" review.

Of course, none of that is going to matter, the game's going to sell like gangbusters, and video game consumers are going to once again prove that they're blithely willing to attach their lips to the sewer pipe and consume whatever the modern video game industry shits into their willing mouths.
kane_magus: (Default)

Out of all the really asinine dumbshit rotten things that have been excreted out of the malign asshole of the modern video game industry over the past three decades or so, this is certainly one of them. Take that previous sentence there and plug it into your GameScent machine, GameScent machine creators.

Also... "DLC scents." ಠ_ಠ
kane_magus: (Default)
Full subject line: "Every time a new shooter launches, I start a countdown until it becomes a clown show of brands and hideous skins"

It's not just shooters, of course. Between crossover skins like TMNT and butt-fugly shit like this in Street Fighter and then Mortal Kombat with all the non-MK DLC characters and the farting and other such inane crap, it's infecting fighting games, too (and those are just the two games that I even remotely know/care about).

Meanwhile, over in open world exploration game land, they have shit like this. I mean, in that last case, at least he still kind of looks like Spider-Man, and not like SpongeBob or something, but still.

Most (not all, but most) of this shit is just a subclass of fatuous DLC/microtransactions, of course.
kane_magus: (Default)

(Disclaimer: only a very small part of the above video is about the disgusting DLC prices. I couldn't have cared less about the "lack of lobbies is weird" thing or the "new game should have just committed to 2v2" thing.)

Yeah, and this is why I haven't cared about Mortal Kombat since MK9 (aka Mortal Kombat) which came out in 2011, 12 years ago. Well, that and the fact that most of the games since then have been contaminated with the Denuvo malware on release, with MK12 (aka Mortal Kombat 1) being no exception to that. Modern day Mortal Kombat is a textbook example of everything wrong with the modern video game industry. (Not that Capcom/Street Fighter or any other fighting game devs/series is any less guilty of this horseshit these days.)

The only interaction I've had with the Mortal Kombat series since 2011 has been to occasionally watch Youtube compilations of the various games' story mode cutscenes, which typically (thankfully) leave out the fighting game bits in between, and I figure the same will be true of MK12's story mode, as well, whenever such compilations become available.
kane_magus: (Default)
"And doesn't think a recession will stop people spending money on games."

Come on, modern video game industry crash.

C'moooooooooooooooon modern video game industry crash.

Seriously, I am so fucking sick and tired of that banal, worse-than-worthless "oh back in the old days we used to pay hundreds of dollars for video games (if you account for disgusting, ridiculous inflation) so really it's an absolute steal that new video games today 'only' cost $60-$100-plus[1] if you think about it actually" argument that keeps getting trotted out like some diseased, malformed show pony at least once every year or more.

Especially when "back in the old days" they had to pay for physical cartridges/discs, packaging, manuals, and other supplementary physical material, whereas today, they're just slapping some code up on Steam or GOG or their own proprietary online shops or whatever (and I don't give a flying fuck if it's code that "thousands of people spent billions of hours working on," it's still just fucking code).

Well, Capcom can charge whatever the fuck they want if they really feel the "need" to do so, I suppose, but I sure as flying fuck ain't paying it and haven't been paying it for over a decade now.

[1] - Which, of course, does not include any additional nickeling-and-diming-and-dollaring-and-"price-of-an-entire-full-ass-game-all-on-its-own"-ing microtransactions/DLC that is probably also involved after the initial too expensive purchase of the game itself, given that it's the goddamn modern video game industry after all. (And yet, morons stupidly buy that shit for that price, so why wouldn't they sell that shit for that price?)
kane_magus: (Default)
"Disney owns the LucasArts catalog, and Disney only calls you if it needs to."

I despise that fucked up, broken aspect of capitalism in which an entity that had fuck all to do with creating a thing can end up owning a thing, because money. And I don't mean like buying a car you didn't build or a loaf of bread you didn't bake or whatever, obviously. I'm talking about giant corporations buying up smaller companies just to get their piggy hands on said company's intellectual property, which then gives them the right to do whatever the fuck they want with said IP. It's bullshit, but it's capitalism, and... that's a pretty redundant statement right there.

Ron Gilbert did not work for Disney when he created Monkey Island. I'm not sure that Ron Gilbert has ever directly worked for Disney at all. (Though, I suppose Ron Gilbert making Return to Monkey Island involved "working for" Disney to some extent, at least.) However, he did work for LucasArts when he made Monkey Island, and because of that, LucasArts, not Ron Gilbert, owned Monkey Island. And because of money, Disney now owns what's left of LucasArts, and because of that, they can do whatever the fuck they want with Monkey Island and anything to do with Monkey Island, and there's not a damn thing Ron Gilbert can do about it, yay or nay. And that sucks ass.

Ron Gilbert has even offered more than once to buy the rights for Monkey Island back, but of course, why the fuck would Disney do that, when they can make more money licensing out Guybrush Threepwood for shitty DLC for shitty MMOs?

Profile

kane_magus: (Default)
kane_magus

January 2026

S M T W T F S
    1 2 3
4 5678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Page generated Jan. 6th, 2026 02:12 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios