Capitalism is still the reason why we got video games to begin with but I do agree that those are getting overboard.
I have no problem with that, but free market principles does not mean faith bad acting, as part of the free market is producing products and cultivation of the customer, which was the point of my post. What is accepted use of the principles, and what is unacceptable? What feeds in to the market, so to keep it growing forward, and what it toxic and damaging to the market. (Short term gains or long term sustainable ones?)
To be honest gaming as we know it didn't exist before the Krash and the fall of arcades for consoles and easier accessibility for PC gaming changed it as well.
Agreed, might be time for another till they stop bad acting, and we might get a more refined market, that does not have the parasitic methodology it put in place now, that only feeds them and not the market.
Creating a video game is expensive though. Even indie devs need to take time and have funds.
No one is disputing that,
everything costs money, and making any product is expensive, but what is important to brake down is,
HOW they have become
expensive and
WHY they continuing to be more expensive related to WHAT your buying, hence why some of the factors i mention and should
not be ignored.
I pointed out the bloat related to tools and noted open source tools which are entering the market to compeat with them, as software as a service is becoming an unessesery cost, and competition is also part of capitolism. So if some one can do that same job for cheaper, why not?
Also, what is going in the game?
We do not need a superstar camio, or an only fans cameo or what ever, just make the game and let the game play and narrative carry it... If you need other brand regognisiton, then your content is S*IT, or you just want to meet celebraties, do it in your own time!
I pointed out the design and implementation for potential financial paths which are also unessesery bloat! Namely:
micro-transaction ( which is essentially games as a service), with continued marketing in game so it does not allow you to properly enjoy said games.
predatory mechanics where your data is mined and harvested for sale to other data brokers
, not to mention continued spying on the user, with kernel mode malware installed on some if not all systems that play these games, which allow door ways for cyber criminals to take advantage of the consumer.
Non-disclosure agreement and indemnification clauses in contracts the users do not read or wish to read due to the format of them, demanding the consumer to defend the bad actions of companies, especially in terms of class action law suites, under extrusion of their digital gaming libraries and other means of cohesion..
All these
financial mechanism paths cost money to develop for and are a potential sunken cost that they expect the user to eat in two ways:
1) high price at the door of $80+ on initial sale to cover potential losses towards this design (games cost money to develop argument with this as a factor.). If no one buys then the game is a failure and the consumer is to blame, not their bad design choices, and bloat of cost.
2) take part in these additional bloated cost of financial mechanism paths, so to make them more money.
These things need to be broken down, to see how and why games cost money, what works for the consumer (the buy of the game) and cutting the fat.
I ask again, did expedition 33 and other indi games have such bloat i have specifically noted?
I don't get what you mean with the intent. I mean it's the final product that matters not the intent.
I would argue that the
final product is a result of the
intent of the
product design, which i still feel is not the game itself, but rather the opportunities related to making more money with the game only as a financial vehicle towards that. Again, look at expedition 33, they sold a game and only a game. Where are the other nasty elements people do not like?
They are not thre, and the game design, story and other elements plus none of the unessesery bloated cost, are what make that game so successful. It is a game to enjoy and play and there is no other nasty things to accept as part of that.
You should not need to wear a CD as protection when playing a game. You just want to chill and play the game, not be markets to, not be harrassed, life is already hard, so why should we put up with what "Modern" games expect your to accept?
I'd still argue that E33 is still heavily inspired by pre existing games such as the FromSoftware one for the general aesthetic and Persona for the gameplay.
See, you mention FromSoftware being inspration and i agree,and that also proves my point, as very little if not no From Software games have the bloat i have mentiioned, and instead they focus on in thier game creation. What do they focus on again?
The story
The game design
Replayability.
And thats why From Software games are so loved by me and so many others, the game!. Hidetaka Miyazaki gest it, and other western studios moan becouse they are successful.
Just look at this article from 2022 as an example.
Western Devs having a moan at From and other japanese devs
My point stands. Expedition 33 is an amazing game, and was cheaper to design, as it did not have the unessesery bloat i mentioned.
The western market of game design caused the computer game crash of the 70s / 80s, and Japan devs innovated it / saved it.
With Sony buying From Software (not sure if they settled that or not), and going against Sony USA, lets hope they do it again.
Otherwise i will keep replaying my old collection, of which there continues to be a back log.
Cardboardtubeknight
Cardboardtubeknight
χKai
