Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I hate what video games have become

ivanca.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 690 posts

Re: I hate what video games have become

#431

Post by Terretta »

usrusr wrote: post #352
nopcode wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A better phrasing is whether they offer a competitive advantage.

While I get the impression that many of those visual bling payables available today seem to give more of a disadvantage than an advantage, back in the days of 1.6 CS I caught myself in real life considering the contrast between what I wore and the environment I was passing through. Not because I was expecting to get shot at (I certainly wasn't), but because at the time it was so much of a routine consideration for me…

Underlining this comment — Ubisoft games, such as Division or Breakpoint, allow purchase of national camo designs.

If these had no “gameplay” effect or “competitive advantage” based on environment, why do nation states spend money developing them and equip troops differently based on biome?

And why have some games had to patch their PvP to “outline” opposing players with a visibility border in the patches that follow certain “cosmetics”?

A more subtle advantage can arise from hitboxes in both hitscan and projectile games with customizers or cosmetics that change the mesh. There’s a reason some games are predominantly female characters in close fit gear.

Finally, even games that insist no gameplay or competitive advantage, are fully aware of “the meta”.

In Fallout 76, for example, PvP players learned to hotkey the “Nuka-Cola” drinks with special benefits. In a for money store, Bethesda allows you to purchase a robot junk collector that gathers Nuka-Colas for free. Rationale is it is just a QoL (quality of life) benefit, but in reality, it allows stockpiling a combat advantage to last longer in combat than the opponent. Same store also allows you to purchase “repair kits” for weapons and “bubble gum” that suppresses the survival mechanism around eating/drinking for an hour of game play.

Again, Bethesda’s claim is QoL not pay-to-win, but weapons repairable mid-battle away from one’s base certainly affects winning, and level of hunger/thirst affects damage multipliers and action point refresh (aka ‘mana’).

Lines keep moving.

Re: I hate what video games have become

#432

Post by PaulHoule »

Strom wrote: post #421
comrh wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What aspect is pay to win?

You need to pay for champions, they are not unlocked for free.

You can get some for free. You certainly might be attached to a particular one and want to buy it, but the game is balanced enough that you can easily win with a champion that is easy to get.

I had a lot of luck with Sona, for instance, who I got for free right away.

(Sometimes I think it would be fun to play League again but I can't stand the thought of being tied up for 45 minutes)

Re: I hate what video games have become

#433

Post by paulmd »

tjader wrote: post #343
badsectoracula wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Rocket League doesn't need to be a "viable live service game", it could just be a regular multiplayer game that gives you a client and server executable to run your own. It isn't like not being a live service game killed Quake 3, for example.

I don't believe RL or other modern online games could survive with even a tenth of the player base if they didn't have decent matchmaking, and you can't have decent matchmaking if you depend on players finding each other outside the game and one of them running a server and sharing the IP address. It's way too much friction to expect most players to do that.

Console games survive perfectly fine without any sort of anticheat/etc, maybe that would be bad for PC gaming but games could sustain their player base without anticheat, and matchmaking is neither necessary (lots of multiplayer games just don't use it at all) nor is it particularly expensive to run if that's all you're doing.

Obviously that would be a problem on the PC but games would remain popular and publishers would get paid without either of those things. Games as a whole wouldn't go anywhere. They just make more money this way.

Re: I hate what video games have become

#435

Post by allo37 »

I wonder how much of this is driven simply by the fact that games are often bought by young people.

I remember when I was a kid/teenager I just didn't have much money, so if I wanted a game I either had to save for it or ask my parents. But if a game was free, then no problem, right? Just download and enjoy! And the microtransaction-based content addition is much more allowance-friendly than a monthly subscription or a large (for a kid) upfront cost.

Re: I hate what video games have become

#436

Post by swills »

iforgotpassword wrote: post #259
SentientNo4 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cosmetic items are not just visual though. They are real elements in the game. Yes, I really hate this argument that cosmetics are not gameplay. Visuals are a huge part of what makes a game, no one would be happy if games shipped without textures and shaders and people would have to pay to unlock them.

> no one would be happy if games shipped without textures and shaders and people would have to pay to unlock them. Not a meaningful comparison. A game without textures would be hardly playable at all. The same can't be said for skins or accessories to your character/vehicle. You don't get eye-cancer with the default skin. If you feel you need that virtual Louis Vuitton bag to fully enjoy the game then well be a sucke…

That's fine for you. A lot of these games are social experiences. Kids do get called names and bullied for having a default skin. Peer pressure drives a lot of the purchasing of cosmetics. That's why you'll rarely find paid cosmetics in games that don't also feature social aspects.

Re: I hate what video games have become

#437

Post by Ygg2 »

japhyr wrote: post #422

My son is eleven, and he has been so frustrated so many times when he's found what he thought was a good game, only to discover that it's a pay-to-win game. I've learned in this thread that there are games where most or all of the IAPs are cosmetic, and don't give players significant advantages. My son already plays Rocket League. Can anyone recommend other good games where you don't have to buy your way to competiti…

Single player games. Stuff made by Larian for Coop DnD.

Deep Rock Galactic for Coop mining fun.

Re: I hate what video games have become

#439

Post by scrapcode »

japhyr wrote: post #422

My son is eleven, and he has been so frustrated so many times when he's found what he thought was a good game, only to discover that it's a pay-to-win game. I've learned in this thread that there are games where most or all of the IAPs are cosmetic, and don't give players significant advantages. My son already plays Rocket League. Can anyone recommend other good games where you don't have to buy your way to competiti…

MOBAs League of Legends and DOTA2 are FTP but the acquisition of a wider variety of characters in LoL is excruciatingly slow without paying. The communities also seem extremely toxic in my limited experience.

Re: I hate what video games have become

#440

Post by gigaflop »

telchior wrote: post #86
holler wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One complaint I've had with RL recently is that it seems like they've put all their energy into new visuals and cosmetics while leaving the game mostly unchanged. The standard multi ranked map sometimes feels boring and I've wondered why they don't add different types of maps to the mix; spheres, tubes, different physics, goals in the center, figure 8 map(?), embankments (like map in season 1), etc. I guess it's simp…

Fair criticism, but one that is only relevant in the first place because of freemium. Prior to that business model, there was no such thing as a company continuing to provide regular, ongoing support to a 7 year old game of the non-subscription variety. I mean, how or why would they? You release something; it makes 90% of its lifetime revenue in year 1; if you continue working on it for 6 more years, you're out of bu…

I don't trust AAA studios, or any game studio for that matter, to implement NFTs in a responsible and ethical manner.

Ubisoft has announced NFT integration via their own platform. However, unlike an actual "I can do what I want with this" token, it may as well be a database entry in the company network: https://quartz.ubisoft.com/welcome/

I don't think there's any way to 'solve' NFTs in games right now: A true NFT can be moved anywhere on an open network (monkey jpeg receipts, etc), but a game-related NFT needs to be constrained to those users who play the game, otherwise it's even more useless.

It doesn't help that most things NFT-related are scams, hype bait, etc.

Post reply on HN