ObiGynKenobi

joined 1 year ago
[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 1 points 11 months ago

And 54 cents a month is more than the ad revenue generated by a non-premium user running adblock, hence Google would prefer it.

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

It's certainly the option Google would prefer, which essentially always means it's unethical.

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 5 points 11 months ago

No, this isn't something you can expect.

There used to be a distro called Gallium OS, but it's been dead for a couple years now.

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

There are actually Chromebooks with very solid specs, but no, it isn't that simple. They have custom firmware and components that often don't play well with Linux, or Windows for that matter.

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 1 points 11 months ago

My understanding is that Immortals of Aveum was the first output from a pivot of the genuinely terrific EA originals brand that gave us the likes of It Takes Two, A Way out, Unraveled, and lots more. It used to be a program that helped indie devs publish their games with EA only recouping their costs. Immortals of Aveum, ironically, had none of that magic. It was basically a Marvel story baked into a CoD campaign with magic instead of bullets.

Ideally, this will tell the suits that this pivot was a mistake and they'll go back to "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". But they're much more likely to overmonetize everything into oblivion while laying off massive chunks of their workforce.

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Things got very dire in the '10s, but there's been a bit of a course correction in recent years, at least with EA. It Takes Two and the Star Wars Jedi games were microtransaction free and wonderful experiences. Only It Takes Two could really be considered weird and quirky, but it was phenomenal. First party games are also typically exceptions to the modern AAA paradigm.

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 28 points 11 months ago

I'd gladly agree to pay more in exchange for a legally binding agreement that higher prices mean video games free of predatory monetization and reasonable pay and job security for the people making the games. But we both know that they have no intention of doing the right thing, no matter how high the box price. They're already raking in record profits while laying off huge chunks of their workforce and giving the c-suite ever-increasing annual bonuses.

They've perpetuated the lie that microtransactions were a necessity and the $60 price was unsustainable for such a long time that people actually believe it. Now they want to increase the box price while keeping the predatory monetization, having their cake and eating it too.

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 24 points 11 months ago (5 children)

This. I genuinely believe that in the near future indie games will be the sole torch-bearer for what I would call "traditional gaming". Tighter, more focused experiences with no microtransactions or sanitized, inoffensive bloat. Games that are offline and don't require any server handshake to function. And as the technology available to them advances, it will enable indie devs to be more and more ambitious with their vision.

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's a compelling proposition, and not one Microsoft can compete with. At least not in the mobile/tablet space. Cloud gaming is all well and good, but native hardware will always be superior. Microsoft is crazy not to be considering a 1st party handheld like the steam deck. Or at least a gaming-centric UI for small screen devices. Even just integrating something like the Xbox UI would be an improvement.

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Your point isn't without merit, but your framing of it certainly is. The comparison made in the initial post is apples to oranges, but your experience is nothing more than anecdote and implying digital is universally cheaper is absurd. Allow me to counter your anecdote with one of my own:

Only a few months after release, I picked up an Xbox copy of Cyberpunk 2077, brand new from a big box retail chain and with a complimentary steelbook case, for $5.

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 3 points 11 months ago

Ah yes, let's patch a harmless exploit in our purely single player game. Surely that's far more important than any of the gameplay-degrading/breaking bugs the game carries, many of which have been carried forward from Skyrim. Can't be giving the player the freedom to choose whether or not they want to accumulate credits faster than intended.

[–] ObiGynKenobi@beehaw.org 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Even if your PC isn't up to the task of running the game, it's worth a shot to install it and see if you can do just enough to open the console, even if it's at 2 fps. Unless you're running a Celeron processor or something, in which case don't bother.

view more: next ›