Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

[The Ugly One]

PS2 games were $50 25 years ago. That's $90 in today's money. People bought a lot of games for the PS2. $100 really isn't as insane as you think, and it would take off the pressure to shit up every game with MTX.

 

[X Prime]

PS2 games were $50 25 years ago. That's $90 in today's money. People bought a lot of games for the PS2. $100 really isn't as insane as you think, and it would take off the pressure to shit up every game with MTX.

Why wouldn't they just do both, though?

 

[Gondolindrim]

PS2 games were $50 25 years ago. That's $90 in today's money. People bought a lot of games for the PS2. $100 really isn't as insane as you think, and it would take off the pressure to shit up every game with MTX.

I was doing inventory of my games once when I was still a kid and I found that I had 40+ PS2 games. Shit just adds up naturally and you don't even know it.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

super mario land 3 was NAWT better than super mario land 2 you son of a bitch

It was close, but I agree, I'm referring to WL1-WL4. WL2 & WL3 are especially shitty, they're puzzle platformers, which are probably good if you're into that but I'm not.

PS2 games were $50 25 years ago. That's $90 in today's money. People bought a lot of games for the PS2. $100 really isn't as insane as you think, and it would take off the pressure to shit up every game with MTX.

I've seen it explained better by others, but basically it's more complicated than merely accounting for inflation, it's not 1:1 as it seems. I forgot the argument that was made but it was kinda complicated. I realize this post isn't very useful.

 

[Poop A Loop]

I'd be willing to pay $100 for game if it didn't come with microtransactions, my health insurance premiums hadn't gone by $1-2k/year every year since Obamacare, home prices dropped by at least 30%, and my grocery bills went back to pre-COVID levels.

Games companies forget that they don't exist in a vacuum, much like streaming services and other discretionary items seem to forget.

So yeah, games should still cost $60 because games haven't gotten any better and 3/4 of the country isn't making any more money while inflation has made everything twice as expensive.

Still won't prevent NPCs from paying that much for GTA6 or Madden, but fuck that shit they can eat that slop while I emulate older, better games.

 

[Judge Dredd]

PS2 games were $50 25 years ago. That's $90 in today's money. People bought a lot of games for the PS2. $100 really isn't as insane as you think, and it would take off the pressure to shit up every game with MTX.

I've seen it explained better by others, but basically it's more complicated than merely accounting for inflation, it's not 1:1 as it seems. I forgot the argument that was made but it was kinda complicated. I realize this post isn't very useful.

I don't know if it was me (likely not) but I'll have a stab at it.

Note, I'm from the UK where the RRP of a game was £40. The basic math likely works out the same.

There was a middle market, budget market, and no micro transactions. Games like Judge Dredd, World War Zero, and EDF were £20 at release. Other games were on sale for that much a month or two after release. And if it didn't, popular games would likely be re-released under "Platinum" a year or two later. The PS2 was also the glory days of the "3 for £15" type offers from GAME. I know because I amassed a huge PS2 collection back then due to said deals. PC had the "Sold Out" range where games were £15, £10, sometimes £3. These weren't indie games either, but games like Theme Hospital, Hidden and Dangerous, and Civilization.

Then there's the fact games had legs. It's not like now where a game is "old" and "dead" after six months. Some games were still going strong years after release. Things like pre-orders and midnight releases were the exception for games like Halo.

If AAA want $100 release prices for new games, they have to offer an experience that's worth that, but they keep refusing.

 

[The Ugly One]

Why wouldn't they just do both, though?

Because MTX only sustain the top 5% of games that people play over and over and over. Nobody buys a pile of skins and cosmetics for a second-tier game that the average person will play and quit after one go through the campaign. In the PS2 era and before, spending 40 hours or more total in a game was a lot. Today, everybody's chasing PVP and PVE so they can get people to rack up 300+ hours and spend on MTX. I think my most-played game back then was one of the Timesplitters, and I had maybe 60 hours in it. By contrast, I have nearly 200 hours in Darktide, and that's not even a lot for that game.

Then there's the fact games had legs. It's not like now where a game is "old" and "dead" after six months. Some games were still going strong years after release. Things like pre-orders and midnight releases were the exception for games like Halo.

Back then, maybe 90% of a game's sales were made in 60 days, and you exhausted the content after 10-30 hours. Today, everyone's trying to go after whales who will play the same game over and over for years.

 

[Nut-Roaster the 2nd]

I couldn't bring myself to finish TotK because I just couldn't find it fun, even with the new atmosphere layers and the new tools.

 

[Snake of Diamond]

Back then, maybe 90% of a game's sales were made in 60 days, and you exhausted the content after 10-30 hours. Today, everyone's trying to go after whales who will play the same game over and over for years.

Pretty much says why most games tend to be live service here. Because the incentive is the treat it like a daily thing and reap "rewards" while also swaying you to try and buy something from the store that is constantly nagging at you.

 

[Calandrino]

I won't even start a game that's supposed to be more than 10 hours long. I just don't have that level of commitment.

 

[GeorgeFloydFentanylStash]

I won't even start a game that's supposed to be more than 10 hours long. I just don't have that level of commitment.

It has to be a 9 or 10 for me to commit more than 20-30 hours.

 

[PanLake007]

Games have too much dialogue, especially crpg's/jrpg's, it's like reading a book, I want to play not read or spend minutes listening to pointless dialogues.

Crpg's/jrpg's are also way too long, there is no need for them to be longer than 50 hours, most of it is pointless fillers anyway.

Even shooters are way too long these days, like STALKER 2 (~35 hours), I played VLADiK BRUTAL (7 hours) afterwards and had so much more fun with it, the better shooter. Max Payne was 8 hours and is still one of the greatest games ever made, it wouldn't have worked as a 35 hour game.

 

[The Ugly One]

I won't even start a game that's supposed to be more than 10 hours long. I just don't have that level of commitment.

Yeah, the funny thing is these modern battle pass-driven games have only 4-5 hours of content for you to recycle 100 times with different RNG permutations.

 

[LifeAlert]

It has to be a 9 or 10 for me to commit more than 20-30 hours.

In my book, if a game takes 20-30 hours then it automatically becomes ineligble for a 9 or 10, so that means all RPGs get a hard pass from me. Time sink slop such as those are clearly designed for cyber-homeless jap otaku salarymen who are hiding from their families in internet cafes, not the civilized world

 

[mrs thickness]

Games have too much dialogue

Terminal Yapping Syndrome has afflicted action games just as badly. Playing things like Hades or RE4make or literally anything by Squenix is grueling and feels like playing Ghostbusters 2016 because nobody ever stops yapping and quipping. Then if you play faster than their Kojima ass script can keep up, the characters cut themselves off and jump ahead just to keep up with you and maintain the constant flow of yapping. That is, assuming the game doesn't just stop you wholesale so it can catch up. It shatters my immersion, leaves nothing to the imagination, and creates an absolutely miserable aural cacophony when combined with today's dogshit audio mixing and design sensibilities. Oh, you like soundtracks with prominent melodies? Well too bad, because that would be too distracting and get in the way of the constant fucking yapping. Lowest common denominator design for the overly socialized with goldfish imagination and comprehension.

This is a generalization of course, but my impression of people who play video games for the words first and foremost is that they want a book club and a community more than they want a video game, and video games have more of a community than other word-based entertainment because the barrier of entry is considerably lower and it's where the porn is.

 

[Bully OST by Shawn Lee]

Racially and culturally diverse casts are a good thing to have, but millenial writers have zero experience with anyone outside of southern california so they think the best way to convey the idea that "These other people are just like you, bigot." is to make everyone have basically the same personality, and to have their culture hold zero weight towards their values and opinions. Everyone simply gets along because that is how it (never) works. This has lead to hilarious backfires where in the effort to make a game that anyone in the world can relate to results in a game that no one can relate to.

 

[GeorgeFloydFentanylStash]

In my book, if a game takes 20-30 hours then it automatically becomes ineligble for a 9 or 10, so that means all RPGs get a hard pass from me. Time sink slop such as those are clearly designed for cyber-homeless jap otaku salarymen who are hiding from their families in internet cafes, not the civilized world

Yeah. I typically shoot for 10-30 hours per game. Some are only worth doing the main story/campaign with little to no extra content played. But some games do make me want to explore every in a game, like Mass Effect 2.

I’ll put 50-100 hours into a game if it’s absolutely a 9 or 10. But I won’t do it for anything that is meh.

 

[Captain Syrup]

In my book, if a game takes 20-30 hours then it automatically becomes ineligble for a 9 or 10, so that means all RPGs get a hard pass from me.

The joy of realizing mid-game that the build you spent all that time perfecting is useless. You get your face kicked in and it hits you "Oh this game doesn’t care if I have a life."

 

[The Ugly One]

Racially and culturally diverse casts are a good thing to have

No, they aren't. GTA:Vice City was a better game because the mob was all Italian guys. SA was better because the hood was pretty much all niggers. Making the mob or the hood "racially and culturally diverse" would have been a bad thing.

the best way to convey the idea that "These other people are just like you, bigot." is

The problem is not how they convey this idea. The problem is it's a stupid fucking idea, and its stupidity becomes obvious when somebody pulls some retarded shit like making a Steam Age game set in a London that is mysteriously full of black women wearing top hats and monocles.

The hood scenes in GTAV were especially effective because they had real live hood niggers do their hood nigger jive speak, I believe even to the point the white liberal producers were uncomfortable, conveying a meaty realism that you simply can't if you buy into the fiction that all people are the same. There are only two kinds of people who would write a character like Lamar Davis, racists and hood niggers.

White people aren't like this (this is the guy who voiced Lamar):

 

[Captain Syrup]

Making the mob or the hood "racially and culturally diverse"

It’s the global market!