Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
Half the posts in the Controversial Gaming Opinions thread aren't controversial gaming opinions at all.
If you want a controversial gaming opinion:Half the posts in the Controversial Gaming Opinions thread aren't controversial gaming opinions at all.
Sounds like the average snoy gaf opinion though.If you want a controversial gaming opinion:
Most PC gamers are broke gamers who need to chase cheap deals because they actually can't afford gaming and to feel better (and hide this fact) they brag about high-end systems 90% of the PC gamers don't even own.
Apparently I'm a shill, so....Sounds like the average snoy gaf opinion though.
btw, the opinion isn't completely incorrect, except for the fact you're conflating two very different publics...Apparently I'm a shill, so....
Sleeping Dogs was also a new japanese IP in a time people had decreased faith in JP games. It came out full of bugs and glitches, employing practices of chopping off the game and selling the rest as DLC day 1 before that was even a thing, releasing even more overpriced micro-dlcs later on.
Whenever people speak fondly of Sleeping Dogs, how it was a hidden gen, an underappreciated game and how evil the industry and players were for ignoring it, 90% chance they've played the definitive edition years later.
And also an example of how not to do releases, like i very clearly explained.Sleeping dogs was developed in the west and it was just one example of great ips which died by bad day one sales.
Normally I would agree but then you have studios like Atlus who seem to screw over launch day buyers by providing a better version later on that you have to pay full price for even if you bought the first game. (Japanese games need to stop doing this). There is little incentive on the consumer side to buy day one since most of the games go on a massive sale months later. With games getting longer and longer and backlogs growing, some people just wait.
I would want there to be incentive to buy games day one. There used to be really good preorder bonuses that included merch, artbooks, steel cases, and soundtrack for base price.
And also an example of how not to do releases, like i very clearly explained.
Maybe not shill but would sony defender be a more accurate term? You seem to get really defensive whenever Sony encounters the slightest amount of criticism, unusually more so than other users.Apparently I'm a shill, so....
More often than not they're from well-known IP or have been hyped for years before release. Sleeping Dogs was a game no one knew about who also happened to have a bad release, it was like SE was asking for it to flop. Heck, the game even did well on the first week before dropping off the charts.There are dozens of less interesting games which launch buggy with dozens of mtx with better sales but okay. I stand by the fact that gamers are at fault for the loss of some games.
VR and PC (Steam) is the future of gaming. We'll see more 3rd person VR games and lighter headsets until it completely overtakes traditional monitors and TVs.
Nintendo and Sony will suffer next generation if they don't innovate.
Now thats a controversial opinion.Valve basically copied nintendo wtf.
Idc what you call me, tbh. I'll just wear it as a badge of honor.Maybe not shill but would sony defender be a more accurate term? You seem to get really defensive whenever Sony encounters the slightest amount of criticism, unusually more so than other users.
More often than not they're from well-known IP or have been hyped for years before release. Sleeping Dogs was a game no one knew about who also happened to have a bad release, it was like SE was asking for it to flop. Heck, the game even did well on the first week before dropping off the charts.
Now thats a controversial opinion.
Also, GAAS should exclusively refer to f2p and subscription-based games
Why?Also, GAAS should exclusively refer to f2p and subscription-based games
I agree with almost everything you've said (especially milking TLOU multiple times in a row), except Uncharted. You lost me there.Naughty Dog is a hollow husk of its former self with nothing new to show. In the 17 years since the release of Uncharted, these guys have been suckling on the tit of Uncharted and TLOU with releases of ports, remasters, and reremasters.
It would also mean Overwatch was GAAS but Overwatch 2 wasn't.Why?
No Man's Sky doesn't classify as a GaaS?
What about Assassin's Creed Origins/Odyssey etc?
All these games belong in the SP category.
I honestly don't understand why GAF thinks GaaS == MP.
My definition of a GaaS goes like this:
It's a game that resembles a living organism that constantly evolves (new content updates).
Not a static "one and done" game, like we still live in the 80s/90s.
And an RPG is any game in which you play a role, right?Why?
No Man's Sky doesn't classify as a GaaS?
What about Assassin's Creed Origins/Odyssey etc?
All these games belong in the SP category.
I honestly don't understand why GAF thinks GaaS == MP.
My definition of a GaaS goes like this:
It's a game that resembles a living organism that constantly evolves (new content updates).
Not a static "one and done" game, like we still live in the 80s/90s.
No, unless it gets new content updates as I said.And an RPG is any game in which you play a role, right?
I think we live in different worlds because i've seen plenty of new IPs succeding. What these successful new games had different from the likes of Sleeping Dogs however, is that fact that they knew how to budget themselves better for the market they were appealing and generally had fair prices for what they offered.No its also new ips, games with potential, sometimes sequel or reboots.
People can do whatever with their money but I think its funny that alot od people buy hardware regularly which have insane margins and than cheap out on games and if publishers kill new ideas and ips those people bitch on the pubs for not trying or for not bringing xyz back.
I meant that calling every game that gets updates and expansions a GaaS is the same fallacy as calling every game in which you play a role an RPG. These things have been around for years before the rise of the GaaS.No, unless it gets new content updates as I said.
I would argue games like Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk 2077 could classify as GaaS, but not every RPG is a GaaS.
Let me put it differently: a critical element of what we consider a service, as opposed to a product, is a condition in which the service ends.Why?
No Man's Sky doesn't classify as a GaaS?
What about Assassin's Creed Origins/Odyssey etc?
All these games belong in the SP category.
I honestly don't understand why GAF thinks GaaS == MP.
My definition of a GaaS goes like this:
It's a game that resembles a living organism that constantly evolves (new content updates).
Not a static "one and done" game, like we still live in the 80s/90s.
No, I'm not going to call Quantic Dream games "RPGs" just because you play a role.I meant that calling every game that gets updates and expansions a GaaS is the same fallacy as calling every game in which you play a role an RPG. These things have been around for years before the rise of the GaaS. The difference is that GaaS are designed to enable this
You make some good points regarding the word "service", so I'm going to raise yet another controversial opinion:Let me put it differently: a critical element of what we consider a service, as opposed to a product, is a condition in which the service ends.
F2p is a 'free' service, and people can bounce in and out as they please for as long as it's available. A subscription has to last as long as the periodic fee the user paid says it does.
But what about a game like NMS? You bought it and you have it for life, there's no condition for its "end". Yes, it gets updates, but ultimately the end-product will still remain with you for life as long as you have the proper soft/hardware to run it.
Naturally, waters get muddied when we begin speaking of online-only games you must "buy". Is that really a service? How long did you buy that service for if so? It's honestly the part of gaming where things start sounding like a scam if scrutinized, since a contract which one party reserves the right to withdraw without consent or refunds whenever it feels like wouldn't survive in court in other industries.
No, I'm not going to call Quantic Dream games "RPGs" just because you play a role.
Cyberpunk in 2020 vs Cyberpunk in 2024 are 2 very different games.
Not only it got new content (some free, some paid), but also new mechanics, QoL updates (revised skill tree) etc. It didn't just get bug fixes (the bare minimum effort). CDPR went the extra mile.
Same for No Man's Sky and many other SP games.
Of course Fortnite is a GaaS too, since it's not exactly the same game it was back in 2017, but I don't think it's fair to narrow the definition of a GaaS down to MP/F2P. It's a bit dismissive.
I'd argue the first well-known GaaS was World of Warcraft back in 2004. Yes, the GaaS term didn't exist back then, but we're not here to argue semantics.
Regardless of personal preferences, all these games are living organisms that constantly evolve, they have occupied their fans for a long time and therefore it's not preposterous to say that they follow the GaaS model, more or less.
Imagine if no one bought NMS on day 1 (I agree it was a bit scammy to market an indie game as AAA, despite the fact it became AAA later on)... how would it look and play in 2024?
Every developer has to find its own niche in the industry and I believe all of them will follow the GaaS model at some point (that's another controversial opinion ), more or less successfully!
GaaS is not an "insult" as GAF likes to think, nor the embodiment of devil in the gaming industry.
I wholeheartedly believe that if done right, it's beneficial for both gamers and companies = win-win situation.
I mean, i get what you're saying but this is the kind of thing that need to catch on among the actual publishers and developers in order to go anywhere.You make some good points regarding the word "service", so I'm going to raise yet another controversial opinion:
Blockchain is also the future of gaming.
What do I mean by that?
How many times it saddened you when some online service got shut down?
It could be an online store (Wii U) or an online MP with no LAN mode support (I'm looking at you Splatoon 1)!
But what if these things actually ran on a decentralized blockchain?
Think of something like Bitcoin (been chugging along since 2009), but for gaming.
You wouldn't have any fear that the service might get shut down, right?
You would also be able to contribute to the network with a node/miner and even get paid with crypto tokens.
This isn't the proper thread to discuss blockchain technicalities, so let's keep it short:
Sooner or later everything will be blockchain-driven and if done properly (in a decentralized manner) the benefits will be huge for gamers.
You will even be able to sell "used" digital games without excessive fees and without having to trust a central party/custodian.
Sounds a lot better than Steam and GOG combined if you ask me.
I have no idea who that guy is, but I'll just tell you I've been here since 2011. What about you?So you are just Men In Boxes’ less blatant alt. Gotcha.
Just because I've been here for a long time, it doesn't mean I have to be aware of every internal GAF joke.
Valve basically copied nintendo wtf.
I think you overemphasize the "critical element" here as it's a topic almost nobody cares about. Gamers, developers, and publishers find the most vital part of a game to be the revenue generating years.Let me put it differently: a critical element of what we consider a service, as opposed to a product, is a condition in which the service ends.
F2p is a 'free' service, and people can bounce in and out as they please for as long as it's available. A subscription has to last as long as the periodic fee the user paid says it does.
But what about a game like NMS? You bought it and you have it for life, there's no condition for its "end". Yes, it gets updates, but ultimately the end-product will still remain with you for life as long as you have the proper soft/hardware to run it.
Naturally, waters get muddied when we begin speaking of online-only games you must "buy". Is that really a service? How long did you buy that service for if so? It's honestly the part of gaming where things start sounding like a scam if scrutinized, since a contract which one party reserves the right to withdraw without consent or refunds whenever it feels like wouldn't survive in court in other industries.
Let's see if I got this right. You think Switch 2 can't compete with Steam Deck? Is that what you're saying here?Yeah but Valve is a consumer friendly company. They have fairer terms of service, their prices are better, and they let you do whatever you'd like with your hardware. I have my entire childhood video game collection on my Steam Deck along with all of my Steam games. You simply cannot beat that. Nintendo didn't even gives us simple themes on Switch.
The longer the Deck is around the easier it becomes for the average person to take advantage of its benefits. The Deck has improved immensely since launch and its only getting better with each iteration.
If Nintendo simply makes the Switch 2 slightly upgraded hardware they'll fizzle out. Considering their CEO is not a creative person, but a financial guy, they might not innovate in the way we've known them to in the past. We'll see...
Steam is not even like GOG, let alone Nintendo that provides actual physical game ownership (that classifies as consumer friendly in my book, but I don't expect everyone to have the same definition).Yeah but Valve is a consumer friendly company. They have fairer terms of service, their prices are better, and they let you do whatever you'd like with your hardware. I have my entire childhood video game collection on my Steam Deck along with all of my Steam games. You simply cannot beat that. Nintendo didn't even gives us simple themes on Switch.
The longer the Deck is around the easier it becomes for the average person to take advantage of its benefits. The Deck has improved immensely since launch and its only getting better with each iteration.
If Nintendo simply makes the Switch 2 slightly upgraded hardware they'll fizzle out. Considering their CEO is not a creative person, but a financial guy, they might not innovate in the way we've known them to in the past. We'll see...
Don't worry, the law cares very much about this critical element. Its the difference between buying a car and taking an uber.I think you overemphasize the "critical element" here as it's a topic almost nobody cares about.
Don't worry, the law cares very much about this critical element. Its the difference between buying a car and taking an uber.
-NMS is like a car Hello games sold to the user, and they offer to come to your house and give it free upgrades indefinitely. The car will still be yours after they stop coming.
-WoW is like Blizzard renting you a car, where you pay a periodic fee and you can use the car during that period. They'll maintain the car, upgrade it, and perhaps even give you a personal driver in the meantime.
-Then, The Crew is like Ubisoft sold you a car, but there was a fine print in the contract saying they could enter your house and burn the car down whenever they felt like.
I've been saying NMS is a GaaS long before Hello Games did:I guess in order of who's opinion I'd care about most it would be...
1. Players.
2. Devs / Publishers
...
...
...
927. The Law
Hello Games considers No Mans Sky to be a Live Service title. I'm satisfied with their definition, as I think most are.
Yeah but Valve is a consumer friendly company. They have fairer terms of service, their prices are better, and they let you do whatever you'd like with your hardware. I have my entire childhood video game collection on my Steam Deck along with all of my Steam games. You simply cannot beat that. Nintendo didn't even gives us simple themes on Switch.
The longer the Deck is around the easier it becomes for the average person to take advantage of its benefits. The Deck has improved immensely since launch and its only getting better with each iteration.
If Nintendo simply makes the Switch 2 slightly upgraded hardware they'll fizzle out. Considering their CEO is not a creative person, but a financial guy, they might not innovate in the way we've known them to in the past. We'll see...
This is the only correct answer. They closed the studio down cause the game didn’t sell enough copies cause they released it on their sub service! Why is this so hard for people to understand?Hi-Fi Rush launched on Game Pass, you didn't have to buy the game to play it.