RANDOM VIDEO GAME NEWS

[Mamoulian War]

Well, they are at least trying to do something. Everybody else is just talks and tears.

[Hurlshort]

Yes, thank goodness we have this important research being done by this benevolent group.  It will really shed some light on the industry.  

[Fighter]

Well I'm not so sure they are less trustworthy than say EA. Thieves maybe but it wouldn't surprise me if they are more honest.

[Lexx]

What if someone else releases a crack in the meantime. That would skew the data again. I mean, it's not like they are the only ones doing cracks, no?

[pmp10]

What if someone else releases a crack in the meantime. That would skew the data again. I mean, it's not like they are the only ones doing cracks, no?

That group was the first one to crack 2nd generation of denuvo DRM so it may be crucial for the future of piracy.

Especially since Just Cause 3 and Rise of Tomb Rider use even newer version and remain uncracked so far.

[rjshae]

Here's a study on the topic: The Economic Benefits of Reducing Software Piracy.

 

Their conclusion is that a reduction is good for the economy (as are other reductions in theft, per your basic Economics 200 course). 

[Malcador]

Hopefully Razor steps up to the throne again

 

Is an amusing announcement regardless.

[Hurlshort]

Well I'm not so sure they are less trustworthy than say EA. Thieves maybe but it wouldn't surprise me if they are more honest.

 

EA is a business.  You can trust their priority will be to turn a profit, and the market will dictate their business model.  Not sure why you would expect anything else out of a business.

[Zoraptor]

Here's a study on the topic: The Economic Benefits of Reducing Software Piracy.

 

Their conclusion is that a reduction is good for the economy (as are other reductions in theft, per your basic Economics 200 course). 

 

It's also the BSA doing the study. There's literally no chance of them saying that piracy is in any way OK, even if it were. The only difference between them and pirates doing a study is that the pirates will do it for free while the MBAs will hire a seven figure consultant to tell them what they want to hear.

[Orogun01]

How can they possibly know the effects of piracy from that? It's not like you can roll back time and see how a pirated game would perform without piracy.

Lords of the Fallen remained uncracked for at least 6 months, most of the sales within this period would be piracy free. So yes, you can measure how well a game does without piracy and whether there is a surge in the sales vs the projected sales.

 

Personally I just think they are other factors and that this is just an excuse, also this may be the moment when publishers realize who the real enemy is: Steam Sales.

[Rosbjerg]

 

 

Well I'm not so sure they are less trustworthy than say EA. Thieves maybe but it wouldn't surprise me if they are more honest.

EA is a business. You can trust their priority will be to turn a profit, and the market will dictate their business model. Not sure why you would expect anything else out of a business.

A buisness is made of people for people and I expect more from my fellow man than (borderline sociopathic) greed.

[HoonDing]

Tell that to all the Chinese children making Nike footwear.

[Hurlshort]

You can expect a bit more humanity from local and small businesses, but huge corporations rarely have time for that. They have shareholders to keep happy. But setting aside the hyperbole, what has EA ever done that is borderline sociopathic greed? They release playable games, for the most part. They may try and nickle and dime you with dlc, but they only do that if the market supports it. Which it apparently does. The consumers are as much to blame there.

[Rosbjerg]

The consumers are as much to blame there.

My point as well, they respond to consumer behaviour, if you don't expect anything but greed, don't expect change.

 

 

But setting aside the hyperbole, what has EA ever done that is borderline sociopathic greed?

Treatment of employees for one, but this is a longer discussion of course.. I'll simply concede that I was indeed exaggerating for the point.

[Chilloutman]

 

The consumers are as much to blame there.

My point as well, they respond to consumer behaviour, if you don't expect anything but greed, don't expect change.

 

 

But setting aside the hyperbole, what has EA ever done that is borderline sociopathic greed?

Treatment of employees for one, but this is a longer discussion of course.. I'll simply concede that I was indeed exaggerating for the point.

 

Well, its not that simple, there are a lot of companies who want to keep good PR image if you like. They could get more money but they would ruin their own reputation. With EA on other hand, there is not much more to ruin...

[Keyrock]

The consumers are as much to blame there.

The worst of the lot are the fanboys.  They're so wrapped up in their favorite franchise that they will staunchly defend any and all decisions made by the developer or publisher and will often go so far as attacking anyone with a contrary opinion.  I can only try to guess at their mindset, but my theory is that they tend to think that by sticking up for the people making their favorite game series they will be rewarded somehow.  In the cruelest of ironies, they are helping the publisher gouge them just that much harder next time.  A business' primary goal is to make money, as much of it as possible.  That is true across the board.  Some will pursue said primary goal more aggressively and be more willing to use...  unsavory practices than others.  A company like EA that has put many a small to mid-sized studio out of business, shut down online game servers, sometimes after rather short periods of time, and been at the forefront of pushing season passes and microtransactions into full priced titles, all in the pursuit of the bottom line, will constantly actively be pushing the boundaries of how far they can take these things.  Sadly, the fanboys are doing the PR work for the publisher by singing their praises, flooding metacritic 10/10 best game evar!!1!11! reviews to "offset negative ones" which is just as ridiculous as 0/10 reviews to offset good ones and "punish" the publishers, and actively working to silence any and all criticism of the franchise and publisher.  Look at the whole fiasco with the shady as **** Deus Ex: Mankind Divided pre-order scheme (not EA, I know).  There was a contingent of fanboys loudly and proudly defending that garbage.  How friggin' brainwashed do you have to be to defend something like that?  Holy ****!  Luckily, that scheme was so ridiculous and enough people in the media took them to task for it that enough people opened their eyes and the outcry over it got strong enough that it was taken down, but just the mere fact that there were ANY people out there defending that crap boggles my mind.

[Hurlshort]

The only thing wrong with the Deus Ex pre-order campaign was it was too complicated.  It was just some advertising group trying to figure out a way to increase pre-orders, and it fell flat.  

 

I feel like people take the business of games way too seriously.  Most of the complaints are pretty petty, and consumers have the power to change the practices of these companies with their dollars (and often do.  EA has done a ton to try and change their image.  They aren't handing out all those free games on Origin for nothing.)  

 

 

I'd say the only criticism I really tend to sympathize with is the plight of the employees.  If a company is mistreating their employees, then I get my hackles up.  But Rockstar is notorious for their bad treatment, and no one ever really gets on their case because they make good games without DLC.  

[Oner]

 

How can they possibly know the effects of piracy from that? It's not like you can roll back time and see how a pirated game would perform without piracy.

Lords of the Fallen remained uncracked for at least 6 months, most of the sales within this period would be piracy free. So yes, you can measure how well a game does without piracy and whether there is a surge in the sales vs the projected sales.

 

Personally I just think they are other factors and that this is just an excuse, also this may be the moment when publishers realize who the real enemy is: Steam Sales.

TBH this would work better with a yearly game like CoD, and even then only when the series doesn't just decide to make a dip in quality.

[Keyrock]

The only thing wrong with the Deus Ex pre-order campaign was it was too complicated.  It was just some advertising group trying to figure out a way to increase pre-orders, and it fell flat.  

 

Are you ****ing kidding me?  Nothing wrong with a scheme that not only goaded people into preordering but also actively encouraged them to put pressure on others to do the same?  Nothing wrong with a scheme that would make the game release later than it had to if a certain amount of pre-orders weren't met?  Nothing wrong with a scheme that cut off parts of the game that would clearly be ready at launch and then had the gall to "reward" those that pre-ordered by only giving them a small slice off the stuff they cut out of the release as a "bonus".  Even if you were the most loyal fanboy of the series, pre-ordered the game, and pressured a hundred people into also pre-ordering the game, you'd still not get the complete package available at launch.  You'd literally have to pre-order like 4 copies of the game to get everything available at launch.  From a strictly legal standpoint, they weren't breaking any laws, but from an ethical standpoint, that's some really dirty ****.  Literally everything about that scheme was anti-consumer.  They straight up held parts of the game and the release date hostage unless a certain level of pre-orders was met.  To me, that's pretty ****ed up.  Thank goodness enough people got up in arms over that.  If sympathizers like you had let that crap go, we'd be getting an even more devious scheme next time.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Keyrock

[Chilloutman]

I feel like people take the business of games way too seriously.  Most of the complaints are pretty petty, and consumers have the power to change the practices of these companies with their dollars (and often do.  EA has done a ton to try and change their image.  They aren't handing out all those free games on Origin for nothing.)

Are you really that naive or I am that cynical? It might look like they want to look 'good' by these 'free giveaways' when reality is that they dont give you anything you cant have for free using google for 5 minutes. They just force you to get into their 'origin' machine

[Keyrock]

Anonymous The Division Dev Admits The PC Version Is Being Downgraded To Keep Parity With Consoles.

 

As with anything coming from an anonymous source, grain of salt is advised.

 

 

We do have to kind of keep it in check with the consoles, because it would kind of be unfair just to push it so far away from them. But it’s been good having a dedicated PC build for this game. I’m really happy that we’re pushing the PC build as much as we are. There’s a lot more customized options and stuff than the console.

 

It's no secret that console versions of games have been holding PC versions back.  While this is a dirty "secret" pretty much everyone has known about for a long time, it is a bit stunning to have someone flat out admit it it, assuming this anonymous dev is legit.  To me, the most fair thing to do would be to push each platform as far as you are capable.  It's pretty sad because the XBOne and PS4 were supposed to "solve" or lessen this problem by closing the gap to high-end PC, but they would up being even further off high-end PC horsepower than the previous console generation upon release.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Keyrock

[rjshae]

 

Here's a study on the topic: The Economic Benefits of Reducing Software Piracy.

 

Their conclusion is that a reduction is good for the economy (as are other reductions in theft, per your basic Economics 200 course). 

 

It's also the BSA doing the study. There's literally no chance of them saying that piracy is in any way OK, even if it were. The only difference between them and pirates doing a study is that the pirates will do it for free while the MBAs will hire a seven figure consultant to tell them what they want to hear.

 

To lend credence to your argument, can you produce a valid study demonstrating the opposite is true?

[Lexx]

On one hand I hate how consoles are hindering pc games, on the other hand I like to play my games with 60 fps and not upgrade my hardware every half a year.

[HoonDing]

Due to consoles I didn't upgrade my peecee for 20 years.

[Hurlshort]

 

The only thing wrong with the Deus Ex pre-order campaign was it was too complicated.  It was just some advertising group trying to figure out a way to increase pre-orders, and it fell flat.  

 

Are you ****ing kidding me?  Nothing wrong with a scheme that not only goaded people into preordering but also actively encouraged them to put pressure on others to do the same?  Nothing wrong with a scheme that would make the game release later than it had to if a certain amount of pre-orders weren't met?  Nothing wrong with a scheme that cut off parts of the game that would clearly be ready at launch and then had the gall to "reward" those that pre-ordered by only giving them a small slice off the stuff they cut out of the release as a "bonus".  Even if you were the most loyal fanboy of the series, pre-ordered the game, and pressured a hundred people into also pre-ordering the game, you'd still not get the complete package available at launch.  You'd literally have to pre-order like 4 copies of the game to get everything available at launch.  From a strictly legal standpoint, they weren't breaking any laws, but from an ethical standpoint, that's some really dirty ****.  Literally everything about that scheme was anti-consumer.  They straight up held parts of the game and the release date hostage unless a certain level of pre-orders was met.  To me, that's pretty ****ed up.  Thank goodness enough people got up in arms over that.  If sympathizers like you had let that crap go, we'd be getting an even more devious scheme next time.

 

 

Yeah, that pretty much illustrates my point in taking things too seriously.  I like how I'm a sympathizer now.  

 

Everything you said can be applied to every kickstarter campaign, which quite clearly was the template they were trying to copy.  You also don't seem to really understand their scheme, which makes sense, since I said it was overly complicated.  You pre-order once, you get to choose a reward at every level as it unlocks, which is predicated on the amount of pre-orders.  There is no reason to pre-order multiple times, unless you are crazy enough to try and unlock tiers by yourself.  You could buy the collector's edition for an ungodly amount, but it did come with physical rewards as well.  But really, all the 'unlocks' were garbage except for the one extra mission.  They were skins and novellas, they had little to do with the game itself.  And most likely that mission will be available as a DLC after release.  

 

It's a stupid scheme, but it's not evil incarnate.  It fell flat, and that's for the best.