I'm about to go out seeking my Red Dead Revengence!
Showing posts with label 2K. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2K. Show all posts
Wednesday, 16 August 2023
Tuesday, 5 October 2021
Sid Meier's Console Civilisation
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't
I'd imagine that a lot of you out there have heard of Civilisation, (not the concept, the game) and maybe even enjoyed the game yourself once or twice. Maybe you're a mega fan and it ranks as one of your favourite game series' of all time, or maybe you hate these overarching strategy games that threaten to swallow up entire weeks worth of your life. Personally, this game and others like it should have been the furthest from my radar, what with how genuinely strategically challenged I am, but somehow this series has been a gateway for me falling into an absolute rabbit hole of the later Civilisation games themselves, Star Wars Empire at War, Stellaris, Divinity Dragon Commander (although in fairness that game was more just laying in my way to total Divinity franchise ownership) and the XCom games. All of which I'm pretty terrible at, but I keep picking them up and submitting myself to their torture time and time again. And when I think about how I got to this self-flagellation, I think it all comes back to my discovery of a Civilisation game that not many know exist; the console version.
Civilisation is an absolutely huge title, no matter which entry of it you pick up. That comes from it's very core premise, which attempts to simulate all of civilised human history from initial tribal floundering to the prosperous industrial ages and further to our eventual ascent into space. Every game has to tell this simply epic tale which means even in the quickest of games you've got a lot of ground to cover, and in the more complicated games it's entirely feasible to be juggling a match for months. Typically Civilisation 'difficulty' comes in managing how cities are founded, the direction development takes, the acquisition of land and resource nodules, diplomacy with neighbouring states, and handling military might. The late game of Civilisation typical changes things up with a lesser weight on violence and much more in on the diplomacy (especially given how any war is within reach of going nuclear) but apart from that most games just 'evolve' by giving you more systems to juggle and manage as the ages go by and life becomes more complicated.
All of these is what makes this a '4X game', and is why it's the sort of game best suited for the PC audience. Afterall, decisions about how to build your ideal society are going to be informed by pausing and taking stock of everything you have at your disposal, what your best move might be and (crucially) what your opponent's response to that move will be. (it's that last one which I always have trouble with) All of which are traits typically more in line with PC gamers and the way that they plan their games, which is why strategy works best for them. Alongside RPGs. (Which is the reason why it's simply insane for Persona 5 Royal to not have been ported to the PC yet, ATLUS! At this point now I want 5 and Royal to show up as a package deal, just to make up for all this infernal 'will they, won't they' you've subjected us too!) So with those prejudices/rules to mind, why exactly is there a Civilisation on the Xbox 360?
Well the obvious answer is reach, given back at that time in 2008 PC gaming was big, but not as big as the very many popular consoles that were bubbling around then. The PlayStation 3, the Xbox, The Nintendo DS, even App stores. These were all fertile grounds for picking up players, many of which hadn't even heard of this venerated series before simple due to the tech gap. (like me) Then there's the fact that Civilisation had gone two years without an entry already and it felt like time. Civilisation V, the one which is considered the definitive by many, even today, would come out in two years from then, and the staying power of these games meant that the Firaxis didn't necessarily have to feed the PC audience just yet to keep them interested, and therefore the team could focus on cultivating a new and expanded fanbase instead.
I came upon this game back in a time before I had disposal income to really pursue the games that I'm interested in, but I was still invested in the gaming world and that led to me seeking out publications and magazines that touched upon it. That was how I learned about a lot of games that would file away in the back of mind only to be teased out years later when I saw them pop up and went, "Well I have the money now, why not give it a go?" One such magazine would come every other issue with a demo disc loaded with little snippets of upcoming games, which is where I got into the habit of seeking free demos. The Xbox 360 had an entire infrastructure built to support demos and dish them out to the public, which was how I ended up coming across Civilisation Revolution. Quite simply, I happened across a game I never would have attracted to normally and played it simply because it was free; let that be an example of how genuinely helpful it can be to have a game demo out there.
The demo put you in the shoes of either Caesar and Cleopatra and would let you play out a chunk of the early game for Civilisation, namely founding a few cities and researching and creating until the 1200's. Just before the game really kicks into the renaissance age and the more complicated mechanics rear their heads. And let me just say right now that I was hooked. Likely due to the way the game was set to quicker matches, I could slip into a civilisation and immersive myself in the daily running in no time flat. Thus I started to really pick up on some of the finer details. What were the best places to found a city, how defending the first city isn't necessarily worth situating a home army for because barbarians don't really have a chance against fortified gates. I learned that World Wonders are an early game must-have, and how there's a lot more to city composition than "just pick what the game recommends and hope for the best." This demo proved long enough to show me what this series was about, and then cut me off just when it was getting good. So of course I would go on to buy the game.
You can find the Civilisation Revolution game today on the original consoles (or the sequel on IOS) and even though both games are dated, I will say right now that if you've a passing interest in the franchise than this really is a fantastic way to get a foot in. It's incredible how much of the core experience was preserved in this smaller, quicker, and streamlined product. And in many ways, I actually prefer the late game of Revolution because it allows you to win by specialising in whatever area you want to, such as simply by being an economic powerhouse, instead of having to use that money to further your goals towards another victory. (Perhaps some might find that a little passive of a way to win at Civilisation, but to my little console gamer brain that's just fine by me.) Late game has a lot of it's systems stripped, making it so that you don't really have to start micromanaging relationships across the entire world like the main games would. Combat is simplified, research trees are shorter (and more legible) and we're all around looking at a game which managed to stick the unwieldy package that is Civ into a weekend party game box. Genuinely impressive.
Sid Meier's games could really use with more efforts to open themselves up to the casual crowd, because as evidenced by myself it really does open up the doors for the series to gain new, unlikely fans. Revolutions proved enough to get my beak wet, but it wasn't until Civilisation V proper that I truly felt part of the grand strategy experience, and that is the exact purpose a small spin-off title like this should serve. It's only a shame that they never managed to get the game working for the Nintendo Wii, because with the proliferation of games like 'Fire Emblem', I think that Firaxis would have gained to score a fair few fans from that crowd. I hope the future might see some more accessible spin-off titles lure the curious into the fold, with the provision that whatever is offered in no way resembles 'XCOM: Legends'. (Making a game that encapsulates the core mechanics of the main game is typically where you should start, Firaxis.)
Tuesday, 27 October 2020
Didn't I just cover this?
Deja Vu; i've just been in this place before
Here we are again. It's always such a pleasure. Remember when 2K tried to screw us over last? I do. In fact the whole affair is so fresh in my mind that I feel as though I could never forget the multiple heinous ways that 2K sought to definitively prove how poorly they could treat their consumer base. It's almost got to be a competition for them at this point, "How much can we abuse our position of power to milk folk before they stop coming back"? Of course that cannot be the case, because 2K make sports games and the answer to that query would be too obvious; sports fans will buy literally anything that you put in front of them. It's almost like watching a superhero turn bad before your very eyes and wondering idly if they were ever a good person to begin with. I mean, remember seeing the 2K logo pop up whenever I put in Bioshock, so there's some positive connection right there, but to be honest those games were probably more due to the work of Irrational Games than these doofuses. Is there anything positive left to say about 2K at this point?
A year back I was thinking the same thing when their NBA 20 game was struck with the latest in a long line of avaricious controversies; the forced ad drama. Basically, this was a situation in which 2K thought it entirely fair and in keeping with their rights as a publisher to forcibly load adverts in front of games that folk wanted to play. Basically, they were treating their full price sports game, which was already monetised to hell and back, like a free-to-play title chock-full of free ad space. People reacted as you would expect and the move was slowly faded out without any responsibility or public statement being made. To this day I don't know if they completely removed them or just limited the pool to those that didn't complain, but headlines stopped appearing so the problem vanished at least temporarily. For time there was even talk that 2K might have finally done the impossible and surpassed EA in terms of unlikability. (Until EA reclaimed that title just a week or so ago with Ads in their UFC game.)
But you can't keep a multimillion dollar conglomerate down, it would seem, because 2K have returned once again this year to throw back in their third party ads in this year's NBA 21; your welcome, Sports community! And though I hate to throw around comparisons in a practice as honestly vile as this, I'd go so far as to call this worse than EA's UFC implementation. Whereas in that game the ads were ancillary flashes representing 'The Boys' which would pop up just before replays or above the time bar (and the ring itself had some 'The Boys' branding) for NBA 2K21 the game will quite literally halt your loading time between menus in order to show off a full 20 second ad. And no, this isn't just filler to help you pass loading times, (not that it would be any better if it were) the loading itself will slow to a crawl in order to force you to watch the ad. (Very cool, guys. Except not.)
There have been actual outlets that have tried all kinds of tricks to make absolutely sure that these Ads are unskippable, but to be honest that doesn't even matter because the Ads are there at all. This is a full price game that is trying to monetise people's time even further than the core mechanics of the game are already designed to do. In fact, it's not even full price; it's over full! Because the next-gen versions of these sports games have all simultaneous upped their price by an extra 10 dollars for literally no reasons whatsoever. Perhaps they expect us to buy that crap about how development costs are outpacing their ability to produce, but with the lack of effort going into these yearly releases coupled with the incredible profits that these games make, it's hard not to wonder how these people haven't gotten careers in politics with their habitual lying.
And let me be even clearer than I feel I have been throughout this blog; there is absolutely no place in full priced gaming for third party ads. This is something I feel very strong about, on a personal level. Ads are a necessary part of our modern ecosystem that earns it place by worming into places where we consider our entertainment to be free, or at least inexpensive. But even then there are limits. Part of the reason that cord-cutting became so popular is because of the absolute deluge of Ads that folk were subject too on TV, even when paying through the nose for the service as it is. Some folk even download elaborate Ad blocking software on browsers in order to avoid them throughout the Internet. What I'm trying to say is that the balance between adverts and consumers is fragile at best, and with the premium prices that we pay in order to access the latest games, especially with sports games, 2K better know folk will have exactly no chill for their time being wasted in such a manner.
Sure, there is an argument to be made here, as folk always do, that this is a mild inconvenience and thus a non-issue. An extra 20 seconds to the loading time isn't going to make anyone's head fall off and it's only effecting sports games right now anyway. "I don't even play sports games". But as I must reinforce, over and over, this is only ever just the beginning. The reason that we see these stupidly greedy policies get instituted in sports games first is because these companies know how pliable the sports audience can be, and they know that if they can't pull a trick on them, there's no chance they could pull it over the rest of gaming. Therefore if there's ever something vile and unappealing that you see make it's way over to sports you have to call it out there, else it makes it's way to a franchise you love and care about. (And it will. Trust me it will.)
As of right now the issue isn't widespread. In the conniving way that these companies do, 2K have saw it fit to shadow launch this new feature a month after launch (so that it wouldn't effect review scores) and to a limited amount of people. (To limit potential backlash.) But the news has already made it to the outlets so it's likely only a matter of time before the plug is pulled and the team slink back into the darkness, but make no mistake they'll be back again next year! This is the same crap that they pulled last time and you can bet they learnt nothing from it; they're just going to keep testing the waters until we grow too used to it in order to call them out, at which point it'll become a mainstay feature of every one of their games from that point forth. I may sound alarmist, but look at Season Passes, Lootboxes and low-effort Yearly recycle releases, then tell me I'm making mountains out of molehills.
So once again we do this dance of whack-a-mole, 2K pushes the envelope and we shout them down, no ground is made and we all convene again next year to do it again, but meanwhile other liberties get taken. The jacking up of sports game prices has gone over practically unchallenged and many believe this new $70 pricetag might be here to stay, which could start to have an effect on other AAA games in it's orbit. That's how people like this win, they dangle the small bait to rile everyone up whilst sneaking their policies through the backdoor, and time after time we just let them. It's a little galling to think that enriching the gaming space cannot be done in a manner that enriches the player as well, but I suppose this us-vs-them environment is exactly the one that companies like 2K have been trying to build all these years, we'll just see how long it persists before it starts to bring the industry down around our ears. (and I'm only being mostly sarcastic there)
Wednesday, 22 July 2020
Ballbaskets with 2K: 2021 edition
Please make it stop.
Of all the games that Sony decided to show off as being their Playstation 5 line-up, there was but one which actively encouraged to spit in it's direction. A game so bafflingly popular that it positively disgusts me to see it perpetrated year after year, and to whom their community is one of the most embarrassing stains on all gaming culture. (Second only to those Star Citizen mega fans who spend their life savings funding a pipe dream.) Of course I'm talking about the yearly copy-and-repeat job out of the sports world; NBA 2K21, and what sort of world are we in where true game development maestros like Arkane, Oddworld Inhabitants and IOI have to share a digital stage with the gibbering hacks out of 2K who are so lacking in any rudimentary talent or know-how that they forgot to change their executable's Ico file last year. (You just can't make it up.)
"But how can you possibly talk about 2K for an entire blog" I hear you wonder, "They make the same game every year, pull the same crap, and never, ever, learn." And right you are, reader, but that's the very reason why I can't just let it go. This isn't a case of the second or third entry in the row that has made the same stupid mistakes, that's abhorrent and pathetic enough, no this is beyond the 10th entry of the same unrelenting nonsense. It's far beyond a joke; it is a menace upon the once-great sports games world. What was the last great sports game title which still had passion and creativity behind it, and wasn't just another serialised duplicate cash-in? Was it Rocket League? Because that game came out half a decade ago so if it was then this industry has got problems... But another popular argument which could be addressed right here is the claim that "You wouldn't buy this game anyway" (damn right, I wouldn't) "So why waste your breath?" Well I'll tell you, it's because these games invariably contain the portend for whatever dark hell is impending on the rest of industry.
That's right, I'm not some sort of bible-thumping magnanimous do-gooder who campaigns for the good of communities that he actively dislikes, no this is a purely personal squabble as I'm tired of dealing with the ripples that the sports industry splash down with. First came the microtransaction which may owe their popularity just as much to MW3 as anyone else, but still was pushed heavily by sports games and now they're freakin' everywhere. Then came the lootboxes which introduced an element of gambling to our purchases in such an avaricious and transparent manner that even governments are starting to mobilise legislature to get them regulated and/or banned. (Good riddance.) But what kind of control-freak bender could the folk over at 2K be on now? How else will they try to jump the shark and lead the rest of the industry along for the ride? Well it's quite simple actually, so simple I'm amazed they haven't tried it years ago; they've upped the price of games from $60 to $70 coming into the new generation. (Way to start the decade off right you sack of pustulous worms.)
Now, the pricing of triple A games has been something of a debate over the last couple of decades as we've sat rather firmly in the $60 price point for so long now. (With the regional conversions bridging from there.) This price point has stayed mostly stagnant throughout all the shifting tides of inflation and rising production costs to the point where some folk feel it's only right that games start upping the pricing again, to account for all the new variables. But there's some matters folk fail to take into account. Sure prices have remained at $60, but that has been enabled by the absolute explosion of the industry over the past couple of decades as the once-niche hobby has become one of the biggest pastimes across the world. (Thus significantly widening the potential client base) Because of the nature of the product, upscaling the sales of games is minimal and thus the amount of money that AAA games companies rake in has skyrocketed alongside the meteoric growth of the hobby. (Heck, gaming was labelled as the single post profitable entertainment medium last year, and that was without Covid shutting everything down. Imagine how ridiculous that figure is this year!)
Whatsmore, the idea that video games haven't become more expensive over these last 20 years is a complete misnomer as proven by the points and industry trends that I've already bought up. DLC allows for extra content to be sold alongside the game and Microtransactions allow for tiny bits of data to be mass sold on top of games. MMOs allow for subscription services that can secure reliable and regular funding to games and Live Service titles can secure a mix of all three of those extra payment methods.Through all of these little tricks, alongside the rising sales-base, games companies have been fully within their capacity to match the rising cost of development, provided they appropriatly manage funds. (Funny how all the companies who complain about lacking the funding for development coincide with the one's who pay off unearned millions to their executives...)
Yet even with all that to ruminate on, 2K have decided that those who want to buy the next gen version of their latest dumpster fire will have to cough up an extra $10 in order to do so. That's $10 for the exact same game save for some upscaled textures which, knowing 2K, were probably just scaled with the 'expand tool' in Photoshop. (Seems like a great deal to me, no?) And the worst part is that when this inevitably works out great for the company, because all the sheep who buy these games likely lack the awareness to notice the obvious price hike, you already know it's going to start getting forced on the rest of us. EA are already rubbing their hands waiting for an excuse to jack-up all of their first-party titles, I can promise you that. And once they do it, other's will be encouraged to follow suit in order to stay competitive, and then the community will push back, making these companies retreat to a compromise of $65 to appease us all, tricking everyone into putting down their pitchforks under the impression that they won. We've done this song and dance before and I've gotten bored of all the moves.
But that isn't all the stupid tricks that 2K is trying to pull because of course it isn't. This is 2K we're talking about, those guys can't publish a single trailer without simultaneously unveiling something brow and controversy-raising. It's their signature move, their raison d'être, their one armed man. So last year was the gambling, before that was the microtransactions, and this year it's the confusing payment plan again which they've bought up to disguise their scummy replacement for Xbox Smart Delivery. (Which, as a reminder, is a program that allows players to upgrade their current gen versions of upcoming games to next gen versions at no extra cost.) Under 2K's system, folk who buy the current gen version of NBA 2K21 will have to independently buy another copy in order to play on the next generation. This is unless those folk shell out for the $100 Mamba Forever version of the game which offers players a free copy of the standard edition of the next gen game. (They couldn't even give them the special edition for $100.) Oh, and extra points for exploiting the horrific tragedy of Kobe Bryant's death to sell this plan, 2K; that's really on-brand for you.
So yeah, I'm not going to go through my usual cycle of talking about the game, summing up the trailer and discussing if its worthy of representing the new generation, because this is the sort of trash that's not worth that level of consideration. These titles aren't games anymore, they're cynical schemes to wrangle as much blood-sweat-and-cash from their fan base as humanly possible, with a gross tendency of setting just the worst examples on the rest of the industry. These are the titles shunting creativity out of the gaming medium and it sickens me to think about how they get away with this year after year without even the most remote modicum of push-back. So to any sports games fans who read this I implore you, stand up for yourself, stand up for the hobby you claim to love and stand up for all of us, because your games are quite literally the front lines for every repugnant greedy tech executive out there. The next ten years of gaming culture could, quite literally, be in your hands. Don't buy 2K21.
Of all the games that Sony decided to show off as being their Playstation 5 line-up, there was but one which actively encouraged to spit in it's direction. A game so bafflingly popular that it positively disgusts me to see it perpetrated year after year, and to whom their community is one of the most embarrassing stains on all gaming culture. (Second only to those Star Citizen mega fans who spend their life savings funding a pipe dream.) Of course I'm talking about the yearly copy-and-repeat job out of the sports world; NBA 2K21, and what sort of world are we in where true game development maestros like Arkane, Oddworld Inhabitants and IOI have to share a digital stage with the gibbering hacks out of 2K who are so lacking in any rudimentary talent or know-how that they forgot to change their executable's Ico file last year. (You just can't make it up.)
"But how can you possibly talk about 2K for an entire blog" I hear you wonder, "They make the same game every year, pull the same crap, and never, ever, learn." And right you are, reader, but that's the very reason why I can't just let it go. This isn't a case of the second or third entry in the row that has made the same stupid mistakes, that's abhorrent and pathetic enough, no this is beyond the 10th entry of the same unrelenting nonsense. It's far beyond a joke; it is a menace upon the once-great sports games world. What was the last great sports game title which still had passion and creativity behind it, and wasn't just another serialised duplicate cash-in? Was it Rocket League? Because that game came out half a decade ago so if it was then this industry has got problems... But another popular argument which could be addressed right here is the claim that "You wouldn't buy this game anyway" (damn right, I wouldn't) "So why waste your breath?" Well I'll tell you, it's because these games invariably contain the portend for whatever dark hell is impending on the rest of industry.
That's right, I'm not some sort of bible-thumping magnanimous do-gooder who campaigns for the good of communities that he actively dislikes, no this is a purely personal squabble as I'm tired of dealing with the ripples that the sports industry splash down with. First came the microtransaction which may owe their popularity just as much to MW3 as anyone else, but still was pushed heavily by sports games and now they're freakin' everywhere. Then came the lootboxes which introduced an element of gambling to our purchases in such an avaricious and transparent manner that even governments are starting to mobilise legislature to get them regulated and/or banned. (Good riddance.) But what kind of control-freak bender could the folk over at 2K be on now? How else will they try to jump the shark and lead the rest of the industry along for the ride? Well it's quite simple actually, so simple I'm amazed they haven't tried it years ago; they've upped the price of games from $60 to $70 coming into the new generation. (Way to start the decade off right you sack of pustulous worms.)
Now, the pricing of triple A games has been something of a debate over the last couple of decades as we've sat rather firmly in the $60 price point for so long now. (With the regional conversions bridging from there.) This price point has stayed mostly stagnant throughout all the shifting tides of inflation and rising production costs to the point where some folk feel it's only right that games start upping the pricing again, to account for all the new variables. But there's some matters folk fail to take into account. Sure prices have remained at $60, but that has been enabled by the absolute explosion of the industry over the past couple of decades as the once-niche hobby has become one of the biggest pastimes across the world. (Thus significantly widening the potential client base) Because of the nature of the product, upscaling the sales of games is minimal and thus the amount of money that AAA games companies rake in has skyrocketed alongside the meteoric growth of the hobby. (Heck, gaming was labelled as the single post profitable entertainment medium last year, and that was without Covid shutting everything down. Imagine how ridiculous that figure is this year!)
Whatsmore, the idea that video games haven't become more expensive over these last 20 years is a complete misnomer as proven by the points and industry trends that I've already bought up. DLC allows for extra content to be sold alongside the game and Microtransactions allow for tiny bits of data to be mass sold on top of games. MMOs allow for subscription services that can secure reliable and regular funding to games and Live Service titles can secure a mix of all three of those extra payment methods.Through all of these little tricks, alongside the rising sales-base, games companies have been fully within their capacity to match the rising cost of development, provided they appropriatly manage funds. (Funny how all the companies who complain about lacking the funding for development coincide with the one's who pay off unearned millions to their executives...)
Yet even with all that to ruminate on, 2K have decided that those who want to buy the next gen version of their latest dumpster fire will have to cough up an extra $10 in order to do so. That's $10 for the exact same game save for some upscaled textures which, knowing 2K, were probably just scaled with the 'expand tool' in Photoshop. (Seems like a great deal to me, no?) And the worst part is that when this inevitably works out great for the company, because all the sheep who buy these games likely lack the awareness to notice the obvious price hike, you already know it's going to start getting forced on the rest of us. EA are already rubbing their hands waiting for an excuse to jack-up all of their first-party titles, I can promise you that. And once they do it, other's will be encouraged to follow suit in order to stay competitive, and then the community will push back, making these companies retreat to a compromise of $65 to appease us all, tricking everyone into putting down their pitchforks under the impression that they won. We've done this song and dance before and I've gotten bored of all the moves.
But that isn't all the stupid tricks that 2K is trying to pull because of course it isn't. This is 2K we're talking about, those guys can't publish a single trailer without simultaneously unveiling something brow and controversy-raising. It's their signature move, their raison d'être, their one armed man. So last year was the gambling, before that was the microtransactions, and this year it's the confusing payment plan again which they've bought up to disguise their scummy replacement for Xbox Smart Delivery. (Which, as a reminder, is a program that allows players to upgrade their current gen versions of upcoming games to next gen versions at no extra cost.) Under 2K's system, folk who buy the current gen version of NBA 2K21 will have to independently buy another copy in order to play on the next generation. This is unless those folk shell out for the $100 Mamba Forever version of the game which offers players a free copy of the standard edition of the next gen game. (They couldn't even give them the special edition for $100.) Oh, and extra points for exploiting the horrific tragedy of Kobe Bryant's death to sell this plan, 2K; that's really on-brand for you.
So yeah, I'm not going to go through my usual cycle of talking about the game, summing up the trailer and discussing if its worthy of representing the new generation, because this is the sort of trash that's not worth that level of consideration. These titles aren't games anymore, they're cynical schemes to wrangle as much blood-sweat-and-cash from their fan base as humanly possible, with a gross tendency of setting just the worst examples on the rest of the industry. These are the titles shunting creativity out of the gaming medium and it sickens me to think about how they get away with this year after year without even the most remote modicum of push-back. So to any sports games fans who read this I implore you, stand up for yourself, stand up for the hobby you claim to love and stand up for all of us, because your games are quite literally the front lines for every repugnant greedy tech executive out there. The next ten years of gaming culture could, quite literally, be in your hands. Don't buy 2K21.
Thursday, 19 March 2020
World on Lockdown
Canto Della Verbena
Oh, I tell you stuff that you already know too much on this blog? Well here's a doozy then; the world's on lockdown! (Wait, you knew that too? damn...)The Covid-19 outbreak, which I can now officially refer as an epidemic (Thanks: whoever is in charge of how spooked everyone is!) has resulted in a ludicrous amount of delays and concessions across the whole world. Folk all over are now practising the noble art of social distancing (Nice luck getting as good as me, guys. I've had years of practice) and people are finding themselves being ordered to stay inside in order to keep safe. Those who are forced to leave the sanctity of self isolation early, usually come to stock up on supplies like this is some end of world scenario, and come kitted out with face masks as though this is an airborne contagion which, by-the-by, I'm fairly certain it isn't. The only thing that mask will save you from is if someone infected literally coughs in your face and even then it's still going to get in your eyes. (I'm sorry, I'm just sick of seeing those damn masks everywhere... What is this, Japan?)
As people spend more and more time on the indoors they are forced to partake less in outdoor activities and more with the indoor ones. That means no more going to the movies in order to sit in a dark room with a bevy of potentially infected strangers, (Leading to the delay of several movies and the bombing of every movie who refused to budge) no more huge city-wide events and gatherings like parades and the like (Unless you live in Germany, because apparently they know something we don't) and a lot more video calls into your company whilst you receive some work-from-home time. (Unless they can't facilitate that, in which case you can bet they'll still drag you in, Covid or no.) And just to make matters worse, it seems that even our immortal celebrities aren't immune to the hand of the virus any longer. Tom Hanks was diagnosed with the virus not so long back and England's own Idris Elba received a similar diagnosis. (Good lord. I guess this is real serious now!) In such dark and desperate times I feel it behooves us to just forget about everything else and do what god intended, stay up late and play videogames.
I mean, why not? If you've got the games and the time, now is the perfect time to catch up on all those titles you missed out on back in the day. And because of the constant worldwide production shutdowns that are occurring, next year will be the perfect year to catch up on all those TV shows that you've missed out on over the years (because there's going to be literally nothing on to watch.) Today's collective quarantine may be bad news for the movie going world (and the movie news world, as all the news is just about cancellations) but this is nectar for the gaming world and I'm sure many company's are rubbing their hand together thinking of the record sales days to come. (Except for Obsidian, who have delayed their Switch launch of Outer Worlds for some reason.) 'DOOM Eternal' is likely going to do gang busters when it lands tomorrow and next month's Resident Evil 3 and Final Fantasy 7 practically have themselves a shoe in for healthy sales. (Good thing too. All those games deserve it.)
There have been some instances, however, where the opportunity to swoop in and take advantage of this surprise free-time abundance has been a little too overwhelming to fully exploit. At least, that's the only excuse I can think of to explain the mind-mindbogglingly dumb situation that has affected the NBA 2K20 world. For those who haven't heard, the real-life National Basketball Association has decided to halt it's season early amid cries from uppity players who 'refuse to play in empty stadiums.' (Not that I blame them, I just think it's funny that's where they draw the line. Risk of getting Corona? No that's fine. But empty stadiums? Imma throw a tantrum right here!) Such a situation would encourage basketball fans to take their Basketball time to the digital world instead, maybe even make use of that game's simulated mode to imitate the results that they might have seen if the matches had gone ahead. But that would have been a mistake.
You see, as soon as booting up the simulated match mode, which traditionally reads the stats and match-ups that are planned in the real world, the API apparently enters an infinite loop because whatever third party information source it relies on is currently reading blank. What results is a bunch of buffering, not much loading, and eventually a CTD for the user. (Outstanding programming guys!) Now, immediately this has drawn parallels to WWE 2K20 which famously broke down on January 1st because the developers apparently didn't think to code their game to account for the change in decade, prompting the game's new nickname; Y2K20. There are, to be fair, some key differences here. Namely, that WWE's bug was caused by plain unadulterated incompetence whilst this one is due to a unforeseeable world event, but this does betray how fragile these systems are, doesn't it? Sports games certainly aren't built to last these days.
Since then the bug has been fixed and everything is back to business as usual. 2K have patched the system to work purely off of planned matches going forward until those run out; then, who knows. The majority of the industry, however, are currently thriving in this activity vacuum and I do find that rather encouraging for my favourite pastime. Nioh 2, for example, seems to be tracking pretty well for it's first few days, even though it released as a Playstation timed exclusive again (Sony are really starting to become one-trick ponies these days, huh.) and Ori and the Will of the Wisps in enjoying some attention. Not to say that these titles wouldn't have done well under normal circumstances, but a little more success than usual is never something to scoff at.
I do fear for what this will mean in the near future, however, once all the big titles that have been announced drop and we're left with all the games that should have been announced this year but didn't get their stage. I've mentioned it before, but literally every gaming press event has been cancelled in the last couple of weeks and that's completely shot the marketing cycle for a lot of games. I mean, don't get me wrong, the big hitters will be fine. Sony have their own live show, Microsoft is following suit and Bethesda will probably piggyback off of that since the rumour is that this year will be the big info drop on the long awaited Starfield. (I don't care about Ubisoft.) But the smaller guys haven't really got a recourse, and that saddens me a little. (Don't tell me Soulstorm is going to be delayed! I've waited so long...)
So this is the state of a world in lockdown, general disarray everywhere but a temporary boost to the videogame market. The months to come are surely going to prove trying for everyone as we scrounge to the ends of the earth to find those precious last rolls of toilet paper, but at least we'll have a steady stream of exciting titles to keep us busy in the meanwhile. until then it's important to remember the basics like, don't panic, practise proper basic hygiene, and stop buying 2K products, seriously what the hell is wrong with you people? Here's hoping that everything clears up in the months to come and people stop callously hoarding for no reason. And I'm serious about that, there is literally no reason. What are you hoarding for? Do you really believe this is Armageddon? Because if it is, then don't you think you need a bit more to survive than toilet paper? If the world is literally about to end then here's an idea, just die! If you don't have what it takes to survive in a post apocalyptic hellscape then what's the point of hoarding supplies? To prolong your life just that little bit longer, whilst making yourself a target for folk to come and take it from you? Seriously, what is the endgame for you people? I just feel like no one ever thinks a potential apocalypse through whilst that's literally all that goes through my head everyday. Hmm... I'm rambling? Oh right, I should probably just stop writing now...
Oh, I tell you stuff that you already know too much on this blog? Well here's a doozy then; the world's on lockdown! (Wait, you knew that too? damn...)The Covid-19 outbreak, which I can now officially refer as an epidemic (Thanks: whoever is in charge of how spooked everyone is!) has resulted in a ludicrous amount of delays and concessions across the whole world. Folk all over are now practising the noble art of social distancing (Nice luck getting as good as me, guys. I've had years of practice) and people are finding themselves being ordered to stay inside in order to keep safe. Those who are forced to leave the sanctity of self isolation early, usually come to stock up on supplies like this is some end of world scenario, and come kitted out with face masks as though this is an airborne contagion which, by-the-by, I'm fairly certain it isn't. The only thing that mask will save you from is if someone infected literally coughs in your face and even then it's still going to get in your eyes. (I'm sorry, I'm just sick of seeing those damn masks everywhere... What is this, Japan?)
As people spend more and more time on the indoors they are forced to partake less in outdoor activities and more with the indoor ones. That means no more going to the movies in order to sit in a dark room with a bevy of potentially infected strangers, (Leading to the delay of several movies and the bombing of every movie who refused to budge) no more huge city-wide events and gatherings like parades and the like (Unless you live in Germany, because apparently they know something we don't) and a lot more video calls into your company whilst you receive some work-from-home time. (Unless they can't facilitate that, in which case you can bet they'll still drag you in, Covid or no.) And just to make matters worse, it seems that even our immortal celebrities aren't immune to the hand of the virus any longer. Tom Hanks was diagnosed with the virus not so long back and England's own Idris Elba received a similar diagnosis. (Good lord. I guess this is real serious now!) In such dark and desperate times I feel it behooves us to just forget about everything else and do what god intended, stay up late and play videogames.
I mean, why not? If you've got the games and the time, now is the perfect time to catch up on all those titles you missed out on back in the day. And because of the constant worldwide production shutdowns that are occurring, next year will be the perfect year to catch up on all those TV shows that you've missed out on over the years (because there's going to be literally nothing on to watch.) Today's collective quarantine may be bad news for the movie going world (and the movie news world, as all the news is just about cancellations) but this is nectar for the gaming world and I'm sure many company's are rubbing their hand together thinking of the record sales days to come. (Except for Obsidian, who have delayed their Switch launch of Outer Worlds for some reason.) 'DOOM Eternal' is likely going to do gang busters when it lands tomorrow and next month's Resident Evil 3 and Final Fantasy 7 practically have themselves a shoe in for healthy sales. (Good thing too. All those games deserve it.)
There have been some instances, however, where the opportunity to swoop in and take advantage of this surprise free-time abundance has been a little too overwhelming to fully exploit. At least, that's the only excuse I can think of to explain the mind-mindbogglingly dumb situation that has affected the NBA 2K20 world. For those who haven't heard, the real-life National Basketball Association has decided to halt it's season early amid cries from uppity players who 'refuse to play in empty stadiums.' (Not that I blame them, I just think it's funny that's where they draw the line. Risk of getting Corona? No that's fine. But empty stadiums? Imma throw a tantrum right here!) Such a situation would encourage basketball fans to take their Basketball time to the digital world instead, maybe even make use of that game's simulated mode to imitate the results that they might have seen if the matches had gone ahead. But that would have been a mistake.
You see, as soon as booting up the simulated match mode, which traditionally reads the stats and match-ups that are planned in the real world, the API apparently enters an infinite loop because whatever third party information source it relies on is currently reading blank. What results is a bunch of buffering, not much loading, and eventually a CTD for the user. (Outstanding programming guys!) Now, immediately this has drawn parallels to WWE 2K20 which famously broke down on January 1st because the developers apparently didn't think to code their game to account for the change in decade, prompting the game's new nickname; Y2K20. There are, to be fair, some key differences here. Namely, that WWE's bug was caused by plain unadulterated incompetence whilst this one is due to a unforeseeable world event, but this does betray how fragile these systems are, doesn't it? Sports games certainly aren't built to last these days.
Since then the bug has been fixed and everything is back to business as usual. 2K have patched the system to work purely off of planned matches going forward until those run out; then, who knows. The majority of the industry, however, are currently thriving in this activity vacuum and I do find that rather encouraging for my favourite pastime. Nioh 2, for example, seems to be tracking pretty well for it's first few days, even though it released as a Playstation timed exclusive again (Sony are really starting to become one-trick ponies these days, huh.) and Ori and the Will of the Wisps in enjoying some attention. Not to say that these titles wouldn't have done well under normal circumstances, but a little more success than usual is never something to scoff at.
I do fear for what this will mean in the near future, however, once all the big titles that have been announced drop and we're left with all the games that should have been announced this year but didn't get their stage. I've mentioned it before, but literally every gaming press event has been cancelled in the last couple of weeks and that's completely shot the marketing cycle for a lot of games. I mean, don't get me wrong, the big hitters will be fine. Sony have their own live show, Microsoft is following suit and Bethesda will probably piggyback off of that since the rumour is that this year will be the big info drop on the long awaited Starfield. (I don't care about Ubisoft.) But the smaller guys haven't really got a recourse, and that saddens me a little. (Don't tell me Soulstorm is going to be delayed! I've waited so long...)
So this is the state of a world in lockdown, general disarray everywhere but a temporary boost to the videogame market. The months to come are surely going to prove trying for everyone as we scrounge to the ends of the earth to find those precious last rolls of toilet paper, but at least we'll have a steady stream of exciting titles to keep us busy in the meanwhile. until then it's important to remember the basics like, don't panic, practise proper basic hygiene, and stop buying 2K products, seriously what the hell is wrong with you people? Here's hoping that everything clears up in the months to come and people stop callously hoarding for no reason. And I'm serious about that, there is literally no reason. What are you hoarding for? Do you really believe this is Armageddon? Because if it is, then don't you think you need a bit more to survive than toilet paper? If the world is literally about to end then here's an idea, just die! If you don't have what it takes to survive in a post apocalyptic hellscape then what's the point of hoarding supplies? To prolong your life just that little bit longer, whilst making yourself a target for folk to come and take it from you? Seriously, what is the endgame for you people? I just feel like no one ever thinks a potential apocalypse through whilst that's literally all that goes through my head everyday. Hmm... I'm rambling? Oh right, I should probably just stop writing now...
Tuesday, 10 December 2019
This is getting out of hand...
Now there are two of them!
As of late I have been in a state of perpetual hype due to the impending announcement of the Resident Evil 3 remake. I positively adored the RE2:Remake, ship it for Ultimate game of the year, and am fully ready to commit to this next game before I've even seen a trailer. I'm so enamoured with the concept, in fact, that I'm not even too annoyed to find out that we will likely not be seeing it debut at the Game Awards like we originally thought, but will instead have to wait until 'Jump Festa 2020', which is a couple of days before Christmas. (I can still make the 'early Christmas' joke.) And I'm only slightly aggrieved at how that change of plans will likely mean that the first reveal we get of that game will be purely in Japanese, meaning we won't get to hear Jill's new voice actor until the international re-release. Or the fact that I had an entire slate of blogs planned dependant on my RE:3 coverage which I expected to start next week. (I'm not bitter I swear.)
Although, from disappointment spawns opportunity as it would appear that one of my deepest desires has been answered in the from of a rumor that was officially confirmed by 2K yesterday via surprise tweet. "Today, 2K announced the founding of Cloud Chamber, its newest development studio. This team of storytellers has begun work on the next iteration of the acclaimed Bioshock franchise, which will be in development for the next several years." Oh yeah, that's right. After all these years, rumor upon rumor have finally crumbled away to reveal once and for all that the Bioshock franchise is not, in fact, as dead as we were all once led to believe. And now I have two unbelievably exciting series revivals to live for whereas last month I had none, ain't life grand?
For those who never had the pleasure, Bioshock is one of the franchises that absolutely took the gaming landscape by storm when it landed back in 2007. Irrational Games' FPS survival horror-esque hybrid seemed to defy everyone's initial expectation and prove to be a timeless video game classic. Acting as a spiritual successor to 1999's 'System Shock 2', Bioshock borrowed the one-to-one perspective, haunting atmosphere and twisting narrative of that title and polished it to a mirror shine masterpiece. Bioshock introduced everyone to the underwater world of Rapture, an art-deco objectivist paradise locked under the Atlantic ocean and doomed to become a watery tomb for it's inhabitants. The player is thrust into this world and expected to navigate it's depths, surviving the scavengers that feed off the city's bones and uncovering it's secrets until they discover the real truth behind it all.
Bioshock was a game that dragged people in with mystery, philosophy and style, just as Andrew Ryan himself would have, before punching players in the gut with one of the most poignant questions ever asked in a video game narrative, one that still rings to this day. Ever since then the series has stood for lofty ideas and incredible imagination as the scope of the vision has shifted throughout the years. Bioshock 2 bought players back to the City of Rapture but from a predominately different perspective, from the eyes of the working class that made the city run. Perhaps that game didn't have as much to say, but it was still as evocative and stunning as this series always, inexplicably, is. Bioshock Infinite bought that series screaming out of the Atlantic ocean and into the sky to the city of Columbia, through a project that was dripping in ambition. (Some would argue more ambition then the team could handle.) But whatever your opinions on the execution of that particular game, or the way it made concessions on some of it's core themes in order to remain feasible-to-make, it was still a brilliant entry that introduced one of the most iconic video game characters of all time.
After Infinite's 'Burial at Sea' DLC, however, things seemed to go south for the Bioshock brand. Irrational Games ended up shuttering their doors and Ken Levine, the visionary director credited with bringing much of Bioshock to life, moved on from gaming in order to try his hands at other entertainment pursuits. Since then the only real news we heard about this series was a few years back when a group of ex-Irrational developers banded together to form a studio and create a game which looked to be some sort of spiritual successor to Bioshock. That ended up fizzling out, however, and since then the franchise has appeared to be well and truly dead. But appearances, it seems, can be deceiving.
As soon as this announcement was made, Kotaku's Jason Schrier put together an 'I told you so' article wherein he laid out the fact that this title isn't exactly news, and in fact it was in development for a number of years. (I suppose now 2K are liking what they see enough to come out and formally announce the project.) Apparently, before this new studio 'Cloud Chamber' was officially unveiled today to be heading this project, 2K had been outsourcing the bulk of Bioshock 4 (codenamed: Parkside) to a studio called 'Certain Affinity', who are best known for providing additional support for Call of Duty and Halo development teams.
This was quite the break for Certain Affinity, as their jobs had entirely been on contracting up until now, but it seems that 2K either didn't like the rate of progress or wanted to put more effort behind the title, as they bought it in-house and rebooted the title in the process. This was in 2016, and since then the project has been quietly picking up folk from various 2K projects, including a few who worked in 'Hanger 13', the team that put out Mafia 3. (Let's hope that game isn't any indication as to their talent.) Parkside's team has been operating in heavy secrecy ever since and, despite getting outed in a report in April 2018, managed to avoid officially announcing the project until the press release yesterday.
If 2K are prepared to announce that the next Bioshock game is alive and under active development, even if it's not due for 'several years', it means that they are ready to go into full production, and that is exciting. Bioshock has never been a name that's stood for low-effort releases at any point in time, this has been a franchise that has been defined my ambition, innovation, and even a little bit of envelope-pushing when needed. And in a gaming age that is slowly beginning to welcome back many of it's storied FPS franchises for triumphant returns, (See: Deus Ex, Doom and Wolfenstien) I think there couldn't be a better time for the grandfather of the heartstopping plot-twist to make a return finally after all these years.
That being said, today's announcement was just that: an announcement and nothing more. So far we have no vestige of an idea of where this title will go in regards to story, themes, setting or even genre. (This could be a tactical resource management game for all we know.) We also have no idea who 2K has got manning this project from a creative angle, which is an important position to fill considering how influential Ken Levine was to the creation of both Rapture and Colombia, two of gaming's most iconic locations. Similarly, we cannot be sure whether or not this title will attempt to continue the 'A tower, a city, and a girl' formula of the first three games or go somewhere completely different with it all. (Personally I find myself desperately torn between the desire for something different and eagerness to see what can be done with the fertile land that has already been tilled.)
Whatever ends up happening I can speak to one truth, fans are absolutely ecstatic about the proposition of a new Bioshock and will likely happily digest anything that 2K decide to throw their way. (Unless it ends up being a live-service, guys, we may be desperate but we still have principles!) I cannot accurately convey how much the Bioshock franchise means to me, there are only two other games that have truly touched/effected me more and I'm so happy to hear that we might get a chance to see it again someday. Now we just have to see if the 2K of today can assemble a team with what it takes to do the title justice, and how the concept will evolve and morph to fit the mold of modern game development. "Constants and variables", as she says.
As of late I have been in a state of perpetual hype due to the impending announcement of the Resident Evil 3 remake. I positively adored the RE2:Remake, ship it for Ultimate game of the year, and am fully ready to commit to this next game before I've even seen a trailer. I'm so enamoured with the concept, in fact, that I'm not even too annoyed to find out that we will likely not be seeing it debut at the Game Awards like we originally thought, but will instead have to wait until 'Jump Festa 2020', which is a couple of days before Christmas. (I can still make the 'early Christmas' joke.) And I'm only slightly aggrieved at how that change of plans will likely mean that the first reveal we get of that game will be purely in Japanese, meaning we won't get to hear Jill's new voice actor until the international re-release. Or the fact that I had an entire slate of blogs planned dependant on my RE:3 coverage which I expected to start next week. (I'm not bitter I swear.)
Although, from disappointment spawns opportunity as it would appear that one of my deepest desires has been answered in the from of a rumor that was officially confirmed by 2K yesterday via surprise tweet. "Today, 2K announced the founding of Cloud Chamber, its newest development studio. This team of storytellers has begun work on the next iteration of the acclaimed Bioshock franchise, which will be in development for the next several years." Oh yeah, that's right. After all these years, rumor upon rumor have finally crumbled away to reveal once and for all that the Bioshock franchise is not, in fact, as dead as we were all once led to believe. And now I have two unbelievably exciting series revivals to live for whereas last month I had none, ain't life grand?
For those who never had the pleasure, Bioshock is one of the franchises that absolutely took the gaming landscape by storm when it landed back in 2007. Irrational Games' FPS survival horror-esque hybrid seemed to defy everyone's initial expectation and prove to be a timeless video game classic. Acting as a spiritual successor to 1999's 'System Shock 2', Bioshock borrowed the one-to-one perspective, haunting atmosphere and twisting narrative of that title and polished it to a mirror shine masterpiece. Bioshock introduced everyone to the underwater world of Rapture, an art-deco objectivist paradise locked under the Atlantic ocean and doomed to become a watery tomb for it's inhabitants. The player is thrust into this world and expected to navigate it's depths, surviving the scavengers that feed off the city's bones and uncovering it's secrets until they discover the real truth behind it all.
Bioshock was a game that dragged people in with mystery, philosophy and style, just as Andrew Ryan himself would have, before punching players in the gut with one of the most poignant questions ever asked in a video game narrative, one that still rings to this day. Ever since then the series has stood for lofty ideas and incredible imagination as the scope of the vision has shifted throughout the years. Bioshock 2 bought players back to the City of Rapture but from a predominately different perspective, from the eyes of the working class that made the city run. Perhaps that game didn't have as much to say, but it was still as evocative and stunning as this series always, inexplicably, is. Bioshock Infinite bought that series screaming out of the Atlantic ocean and into the sky to the city of Columbia, through a project that was dripping in ambition. (Some would argue more ambition then the team could handle.) But whatever your opinions on the execution of that particular game, or the way it made concessions on some of it's core themes in order to remain feasible-to-make, it was still a brilliant entry that introduced one of the most iconic video game characters of all time.
After Infinite's 'Burial at Sea' DLC, however, things seemed to go south for the Bioshock brand. Irrational Games ended up shuttering their doors and Ken Levine, the visionary director credited with bringing much of Bioshock to life, moved on from gaming in order to try his hands at other entertainment pursuits. Since then the only real news we heard about this series was a few years back when a group of ex-Irrational developers banded together to form a studio and create a game which looked to be some sort of spiritual successor to Bioshock. That ended up fizzling out, however, and since then the franchise has appeared to be well and truly dead. But appearances, it seems, can be deceiving.
As soon as this announcement was made, Kotaku's Jason Schrier put together an 'I told you so' article wherein he laid out the fact that this title isn't exactly news, and in fact it was in development for a number of years. (I suppose now 2K are liking what they see enough to come out and formally announce the project.) Apparently, before this new studio 'Cloud Chamber' was officially unveiled today to be heading this project, 2K had been outsourcing the bulk of Bioshock 4 (codenamed: Parkside) to a studio called 'Certain Affinity', who are best known for providing additional support for Call of Duty and Halo development teams.
This was quite the break for Certain Affinity, as their jobs had entirely been on contracting up until now, but it seems that 2K either didn't like the rate of progress or wanted to put more effort behind the title, as they bought it in-house and rebooted the title in the process. This was in 2016, and since then the project has been quietly picking up folk from various 2K projects, including a few who worked in 'Hanger 13', the team that put out Mafia 3. (Let's hope that game isn't any indication as to their talent.) Parkside's team has been operating in heavy secrecy ever since and, despite getting outed in a report in April 2018, managed to avoid officially announcing the project until the press release yesterday.
If 2K are prepared to announce that the next Bioshock game is alive and under active development, even if it's not due for 'several years', it means that they are ready to go into full production, and that is exciting. Bioshock has never been a name that's stood for low-effort releases at any point in time, this has been a franchise that has been defined my ambition, innovation, and even a little bit of envelope-pushing when needed. And in a gaming age that is slowly beginning to welcome back many of it's storied FPS franchises for triumphant returns, (See: Deus Ex, Doom and Wolfenstien) I think there couldn't be a better time for the grandfather of the heartstopping plot-twist to make a return finally after all these years.
That being said, today's announcement was just that: an announcement and nothing more. So far we have no vestige of an idea of where this title will go in regards to story, themes, setting or even genre. (This could be a tactical resource management game for all we know.) We also have no idea who 2K has got manning this project from a creative angle, which is an important position to fill considering how influential Ken Levine was to the creation of both Rapture and Colombia, two of gaming's most iconic locations. Similarly, we cannot be sure whether or not this title will attempt to continue the 'A tower, a city, and a girl' formula of the first three games or go somewhere completely different with it all. (Personally I find myself desperately torn between the desire for something different and eagerness to see what can be done with the fertile land that has already been tilled.)
Whatever ends up happening I can speak to one truth, fans are absolutely ecstatic about the proposition of a new Bioshock and will likely happily digest anything that 2K decide to throw their way. (Unless it ends up being a live-service, guys, we may be desperate but we still have principles!) I cannot accurately convey how much the Bioshock franchise means to me, there are only two other games that have truly touched/effected me more and I'm so happy to hear that we might get a chance to see it again someday. Now we just have to see if the 2K of today can assemble a team with what it takes to do the title justice, and how the concept will evolve and morph to fit the mold of modern game development. "Constants and variables", as she says.
Monday, 14 October 2019
Who is reponsible?
Can't business and pleasure co-exist?
Recently there have been a great deal of developments in the fields of microtransactions and Lootboxes. It seems like every other day we're hearing about some new game that pushes the boundaries once again or a retrospective from someone who has had their financial stability ruined from such mechanics. After a while, whenever I read these stories they would leave me with a thought running through my head; should companies be held responsible for situations like this. By that I mean, are game developers and publishers responsible for safe guarding their consumers against the possibility of losing everything. Just so we're clear, this blog will consist of less statements of fact and more my opinion on the topic at hand.
A while back I wrote a blog about a BBC story detailing a family who's savings had been eaten up after their four children were allowed to run wild with the microtransactions. The father had bought a couple of them for the children as a present, and the kids had observed how he had done it and repeated the process. (If I recall correctly, this is rather easy to do as neither PlayStation nor Xbox ask for you put in your credentials more than once.) The sub-10 year olds ended up spending £550 in search of their favourite player; Lionel Messi. (Whom they never received.) Once the parents discovered this, after receiving their bank statements, they went to both EA and Nintendo to solve this issue. This next part of the story is a bit sketchy and I'm not sure how much I believe it, but apparently, EA sent them back a link to their 'Controlling in-game purchases' site page, whilst Nintendo actually refunded the money. (I'm not sure if that's real, it just fits EA's MO a little too well.)
The wasn't the end of that story however, there were more instances of situations like this. In the article they mentioned one player who submitted for an information's request and discovered that he had spent around $10,000 in two years towards the game. When talking about it in a Eurogamer interview, he uttered that infamous quote "It's just not worth it." I actually do remember this story at the time too. When this data law was implemented there was so much grumbling from the likes of EA and Activision that they decided to make it a huge hassle for customers to receive their data. They're were even some gaffe's outside the gaming sphere, such as when one Alexa customers was accidentally sent copies of the recorded audio from another users device. (But that's a whole other kettle of fish.)
There was actually a follow-up article from the BBC where they collated different stories from consumers into a list of accidental infractions. One woman told of her 22 year old Autistic son and he ended up spending his life savings of £3,160 on a mobile game called 'Hidden Artefacts'. (Wait, he's 22 and he had 3 grands worth of savings? Well, I feel like a failure.) The woman worked tirelessly to get the money back but, as one would expect from the mobile market, everyone was extremely unhelpful and she ended up hitting a road block. There was another story about a 16 year old who spent nearly £2000 on NBA, which had to be paid out of his sister's college funds. A 12 year who dropped £700 on Clash of Clans and a 5 year old who put £500 into a golfing game.
Now, initially you may be thinking something along the lines of "So what, should these companies really be held accountable for buyer's remorse?" But I'd urge you to take a look at the ages of those people I mentioned again. You may note how everyone there is either underage or somewhat vulnerable. Now, this may be because high functioning adults who fall for these schemes are too embarrassed, or pig headed, to admit it, granted, but I feel there is a more insidious angle to all this. You see, a lot of mobile games or video games that allow for this kind of overspending are aimed towards appealing to kids. That 'Hidden artefacts' game featured a young girl in it's art, the golfing game looked bright and appealing, Sports games are always a safe bet for kids, and 'Clash of Clans' has always had a low effort cartoony look to it. (Although that may be more a comment to Supercell's lazy art direction.)
With the plethora of advertising laws that exist to limit the amount and type of content that be advertised to children, given their inherent weakness to suggestion, wouldn't one assume that similar laws exist towards targeting money-grubbing games towards them? Well, no actually. Advertising law is hyper focused on the advertising area of marketing (go figure) with the actual presentation of the game, and more importantly it's contents, falling under the supervision of the Entertainment Software Association. And we all know their stance towards featuring gambling in games .("What gambling? I don't see no gambling.") The point is moot anyway. Children are merely collateral damage in this conflict anyway, the real target for these companies are the adults.
Fifa don't make their tens of millions a year through miss-purchases, oh no. EA, 2K and just about every AAA gaming company nowadays, gear their games towards getting players hooked on the Lootbox cycle. I'll use Fifa as an example. Fifa totes their popular Ultimate Team mode every year as a 'fanatasy football online', experience. It is the key mode and the star attraction for fans, and the main source of revenue for the people running the show. Once players access this mode, they are encouraged to build their team and play them against other players online, but there is a problem. You'll go online, get your butt kicked and come away realizing that you need better players. (And if you think that the chances of coming across a better equipped opponent is random, I suggest you take a look at some of the matchmaking patents that game's companies were filing for towards the end of 2017.) The consumer then realizes that their only way to get better players is to fork out on Lootboxes. They get crap so they keep going until someone useful arrives. They go online, maybe win a few matches, and then get hit up against a roadblock again and return to the Lootboxes.
That is the cycle that rules Fifa and it is what makes them their bread and butter. It is coupled with the fact that every year your Ultimate Team is reset, requiring you to go through your grind all over again from scratch. When you purpose build your system for this, then it is an entirely consensual relationship in the eyes of the law. Moral obligation might have people point their fingers at the predatory game play loop that keeps people spending, the gambling-esque psychological cues to get people hooked, and the obfuscating 'FUT' Coins to devalue the money that is being spent. But none of that is the concern of EA, because everyone partaking is doing so willingly.
So if that's the case, why are there people who still walk away from it feeling like they've been taken advantage of? Remember that guy who spent $10 000 on FUT, he certainly feels upset with himself for going that far. Go onto Fifa's own Reddit and you can come across people who bemoan the money they've spent on Microtransactions. Just now I managed to bring up a thread from 9 months back that has people saying that they actually hate playing the game, due to it's pay-to-win tendencies, and find opening packs to be the most fun part. Take a look Here, this stuff is real!
The question that I want to purpose at the end of the day is (once again); are these companies responsible for the systems they implement? Should they be held responsible for the way they twist and torment people into spending more then they should in things that they regret? One could almost compare a situation like this as similar to living in an abusive relationship, with one party always pushing the other into situations they feel uncomfortable with. (Although, perhaps that is a tad too flippant.) Ultimately, there is no legal answer to this question as of yet. As much as these companies like to boast about how the law permits them to make their games like this, the truth is that the law is silent on the issue, we'll see which way the pendulum swings when the matter makes it to court. (Perhaps soon if Parliament has any bite to it's bark.) Until then it is an issue of ethics, and that I cannot answer definitively. I leave the matter open to you to decide. Take a measured look, remember to be empathetic, and see if you know were the blame should lay.
Recently there have been a great deal of developments in the fields of microtransactions and Lootboxes. It seems like every other day we're hearing about some new game that pushes the boundaries once again or a retrospective from someone who has had their financial stability ruined from such mechanics. After a while, whenever I read these stories they would leave me with a thought running through my head; should companies be held responsible for situations like this. By that I mean, are game developers and publishers responsible for safe guarding their consumers against the possibility of losing everything. Just so we're clear, this blog will consist of less statements of fact and more my opinion on the topic at hand.
A while back I wrote a blog about a BBC story detailing a family who's savings had been eaten up after their four children were allowed to run wild with the microtransactions. The father had bought a couple of them for the children as a present, and the kids had observed how he had done it and repeated the process. (If I recall correctly, this is rather easy to do as neither PlayStation nor Xbox ask for you put in your credentials more than once.) The sub-10 year olds ended up spending £550 in search of their favourite player; Lionel Messi. (Whom they never received.) Once the parents discovered this, after receiving their bank statements, they went to both EA and Nintendo to solve this issue. This next part of the story is a bit sketchy and I'm not sure how much I believe it, but apparently, EA sent them back a link to their 'Controlling in-game purchases' site page, whilst Nintendo actually refunded the money. (I'm not sure if that's real, it just fits EA's MO a little too well.)
The wasn't the end of that story however, there were more instances of situations like this. In the article they mentioned one player who submitted for an information's request and discovered that he had spent around $10,000 in two years towards the game. When talking about it in a Eurogamer interview, he uttered that infamous quote "It's just not worth it." I actually do remember this story at the time too. When this data law was implemented there was so much grumbling from the likes of EA and Activision that they decided to make it a huge hassle for customers to receive their data. They're were even some gaffe's outside the gaming sphere, such as when one Alexa customers was accidentally sent copies of the recorded audio from another users device. (But that's a whole other kettle of fish.)
There was actually a follow-up article from the BBC where they collated different stories from consumers into a list of accidental infractions. One woman told of her 22 year old Autistic son and he ended up spending his life savings of £3,160 on a mobile game called 'Hidden Artefacts'. (Wait, he's 22 and he had 3 grands worth of savings? Well, I feel like a failure.) The woman worked tirelessly to get the money back but, as one would expect from the mobile market, everyone was extremely unhelpful and she ended up hitting a road block. There was another story about a 16 year old who spent nearly £2000 on NBA, which had to be paid out of his sister's college funds. A 12 year who dropped £700 on Clash of Clans and a 5 year old who put £500 into a golfing game.
Now, initially you may be thinking something along the lines of "So what, should these companies really be held accountable for buyer's remorse?" But I'd urge you to take a look at the ages of those people I mentioned again. You may note how everyone there is either underage or somewhat vulnerable. Now, this may be because high functioning adults who fall for these schemes are too embarrassed, or pig headed, to admit it, granted, but I feel there is a more insidious angle to all this. You see, a lot of mobile games or video games that allow for this kind of overspending are aimed towards appealing to kids. That 'Hidden artefacts' game featured a young girl in it's art, the golfing game looked bright and appealing, Sports games are always a safe bet for kids, and 'Clash of Clans' has always had a low effort cartoony look to it. (Although that may be more a comment to Supercell's lazy art direction.)
With the plethora of advertising laws that exist to limit the amount and type of content that be advertised to children, given their inherent weakness to suggestion, wouldn't one assume that similar laws exist towards targeting money-grubbing games towards them? Well, no actually. Advertising law is hyper focused on the advertising area of marketing (go figure) with the actual presentation of the game, and more importantly it's contents, falling under the supervision of the Entertainment Software Association. And we all know their stance towards featuring gambling in games .("What gambling? I don't see no gambling.") The point is moot anyway. Children are merely collateral damage in this conflict anyway, the real target for these companies are the adults.
Fifa don't make their tens of millions a year through miss-purchases, oh no. EA, 2K and just about every AAA gaming company nowadays, gear their games towards getting players hooked on the Lootbox cycle. I'll use Fifa as an example. Fifa totes their popular Ultimate Team mode every year as a 'fanatasy football online', experience. It is the key mode and the star attraction for fans, and the main source of revenue for the people running the show. Once players access this mode, they are encouraged to build their team and play them against other players online, but there is a problem. You'll go online, get your butt kicked and come away realizing that you need better players. (And if you think that the chances of coming across a better equipped opponent is random, I suggest you take a look at some of the matchmaking patents that game's companies were filing for towards the end of 2017.) The consumer then realizes that their only way to get better players is to fork out on Lootboxes. They get crap so they keep going until someone useful arrives. They go online, maybe win a few matches, and then get hit up against a roadblock again and return to the Lootboxes.
That is the cycle that rules Fifa and it is what makes them their bread and butter. It is coupled with the fact that every year your Ultimate Team is reset, requiring you to go through your grind all over again from scratch. When you purpose build your system for this, then it is an entirely consensual relationship in the eyes of the law. Moral obligation might have people point their fingers at the predatory game play loop that keeps people spending, the gambling-esque psychological cues to get people hooked, and the obfuscating 'FUT' Coins to devalue the money that is being spent. But none of that is the concern of EA, because everyone partaking is doing so willingly.
So if that's the case, why are there people who still walk away from it feeling like they've been taken advantage of? Remember that guy who spent $10 000 on FUT, he certainly feels upset with himself for going that far. Go onto Fifa's own Reddit and you can come across people who bemoan the money they've spent on Microtransactions. Just now I managed to bring up a thread from 9 months back that has people saying that they actually hate playing the game, due to it's pay-to-win tendencies, and find opening packs to be the most fun part. Take a look Here, this stuff is real!
The question that I want to purpose at the end of the day is (once again); are these companies responsible for the systems they implement? Should they be held responsible for the way they twist and torment people into spending more then they should in things that they regret? One could almost compare a situation like this as similar to living in an abusive relationship, with one party always pushing the other into situations they feel uncomfortable with. (Although, perhaps that is a tad too flippant.) Ultimately, there is no legal answer to this question as of yet. As much as these companies like to boast about how the law permits them to make their games like this, the truth is that the law is silent on the issue, we'll see which way the pendulum swings when the matter makes it to court. (Perhaps soon if Parliament has any bite to it's bark.) Until then it is an issue of ethics, and that I cannot answer definitively. I leave the matter open to you to decide. Take a measured look, remember to be empathetic, and see if you know were the blame should lay.
Saturday, 14 September 2019
A new competitor enters the Microtransaction fight!
If there's any justice in the world.
Another day another treatise on the awfulness of modern day video game microtransactions, however, this time it's coming from an official report with legislative power behind it. (A whole report? Golly.) Once again, UK Parliament (That's my home team.) have expressed interest in managing the avarice of games companies through restrictions and regulations. I have exposited my opinion on this before, and if you read my last blog on the matter you will know that I have given up all hope of this situation being solved amicably. Government supervision is the last thing anyone needs in a creative field, but honestly, how are they going to taint the medium any worse than the greedy big corpo's already have?
If you go online to Parliament.UK, you can find an extensive report, apparently the work of 9 months, dedicated to "immersive and addictive technologies". This report defines 'immersive techonogies' as experiences that occupy the realm of digital or augmented reality; essentially meaning VR games and games like Pokemon GO and Ninantic's other cash grabs. They believe that the 'immersion' factor of these games makes them more likely to have an influence on behaviour. Interesting stuff, but I wanna focus on that second one, because that is where Parliament really starts to go for the game's industries' jugular.
'Addictive' technologies is rather self explanatory, referring to products or devices that people either have, or perceive to have, a dependency on. This goes into 'gaming disorder' and 'engagment metrics', all subjects for other blogs, but in Section 3 we get to the juicy stuff: "Financial harms of Immersive technologies." Whenever microtransactions are bought into the world of gaming, the usual arguments start up about; value, pricing and pay-to-win. (or P2W) Lately, as we've moved into the world of rampant monetisation, video games companies have attempted to pooh-pooh any potential backlash with carefully considered statements. "It's just cosmetics" is the, much parroted, phrase that adorns the press release of many an online storefront, whilst "They're time savers" or "It's about player choice." has begun to seep it's vile way into single player games too. Oftentimes gamers are torn between these artificial battle lines that developers have set up, waging between "It's not pay to win if it's just about looks!" and "It's not 'player choice' if the choice is between a fun game and a boring one". (Just look at the recent backlash regarding Fallout 76 and it's fridge to get an example of that.)
Parliament's report will hopefully put an end to much of that debate, as they delve into the murky world of customer manipulation in it's pure form. I will follow their example and establish for everyone that there are real life consequences to systems like these. A while ago I wrote a blog about a family who's children had emptied their parent's bank accounts on FIFA Ultimate team, all wasted on lootboxes for the promise of securing Lionel Messi (Which, due to FUT's lootbox setup, they never did.) Parliament offer a similar tale that pertains to a game that was an absolute blast-to-the-past for me, Runescape. The Report reads "We were contacted by a member of the public whose adult son built up considerable debts, reported to be in excess of £50,000, through spending on microtransactions in British company Jagex’s online game RuneScape."
From this, we can see that people have fallen for the trap of microtransactions before in incredibly serious ways. This is the reason why people gawk when companies like Respawn stand up for their ludicrous price points by saying; "the majority of people never buy them anyway!" That isn't the point. The point is that there as those that do and these people can be abused whilst playing the game. If you're comfortable with creating a product that has the potential/intent to harm or abuse your consumers, then maybe you shouldn't be working in creative fields. "But what can be done?" is the question that must be asked. "Surely if there were ways to cut down on abuse then games companies would have done so!" And they would have, if it wouldn't end up cutting into their bottom line.
The makers of Candy Crush Saga, King, spoke out against accusations that they were complicit in the fleecing and exploitation of it's customers. "we would send an e-mail out when a player’s spend was $250 in a week for the first time. It was an e-mail that said, “We notice you are enjoying the game a lot at the moment. Are you sure you are happy with this?” […] We got back, “I wouldn’t spend the money if I didn’t have it” and things like, “I’m fine, please leave me alone”. We felt it was too intrusive so we stopped doing that." That is all they have done for customer protection, by the by. So that's nice. King sent people emails for a bit until some people complained and then they resolved themselves of all protective responsibilities. (What heroes)
As it just so happens, there is a tool that would be very effective of limiting the exposure of this kind of content to those vulnerable to it. (I.e. Kids and those susceptible to problem spending.) You see, a while back, the Games Industry developed this thing called a 'ratings board', that would provide content guidelines for developers, shops and consumers. (All as a bid to prevent Government oversight.) With the stipulations that this board dictates (I'm specifically referring to PEGI, here) Video games that feature gambling must be labelled as such and be assigned an '18' badge. This would mean that children would not be exposed to the thrill of gamb- I mean loot bo- I mean 'Surprise mechanics' at a young age. (If you feel I was being condescending in that paragraph. Well spotted.)
However, the 'age rating' system was proven pointless after NBA 2K20 unveiled their gambling themed trailer and still got away with a '3' rating. ("Sports games have always been rated 3, why should this one be any different") The part that really gets me is, even if we buy the age old "It isn't technically gambling because you can't cash out!", excuse, the trailer still clearly shows that the game features gambling-esque imagery, which is grounds for a 'Teen' rating under Pegi's own stipulation. Heck, YouTuber YongYea pointed out that Pokemon Red and Blue was labelled 'Teen' for that very reason, and that game didn't even have any microtransactions! (Just an ingeniously clever marketing ploy to get you to buy the game twice.)
I would encourage interested readers to take a look at the article through this link Here and see just what it is that Parliament has to say about the greedy aspects of the gaming industry. (Again, the juicy parts are in section 3.) I'm not yet sure if anything will actually come of it (Especially with the politically tumultuous time that the UK is suffering through right now.) But it's always fun to see someone shine a flashlight under the friendly facade of AAA gaming and watch the cockroaches scurry. As you have likely noticed, this is topic I could talk about until the sky falls down (Falling Skies; great show! Kinda tapered off in the later series...) but I find that situations like this are best left for the observer to look through and come to their own conclusions. Besides, after reading through all of the industries' clandestine action and motivations, I need a bath.
Another day another treatise on the awfulness of modern day video game microtransactions, however, this time it's coming from an official report with legislative power behind it. (A whole report? Golly.) Once again, UK Parliament (That's my home team.) have expressed interest in managing the avarice of games companies through restrictions and regulations. I have exposited my opinion on this before, and if you read my last blog on the matter you will know that I have given up all hope of this situation being solved amicably. Government supervision is the last thing anyone needs in a creative field, but honestly, how are they going to taint the medium any worse than the greedy big corpo's already have?
If you go online to Parliament.UK, you can find an extensive report, apparently the work of 9 months, dedicated to "immersive and addictive technologies". This report defines 'immersive techonogies' as experiences that occupy the realm of digital or augmented reality; essentially meaning VR games and games like Pokemon GO and Ninantic's other cash grabs. They believe that the 'immersion' factor of these games makes them more likely to have an influence on behaviour. Interesting stuff, but I wanna focus on that second one, because that is where Parliament really starts to go for the game's industries' jugular.
'Addictive' technologies is rather self explanatory, referring to products or devices that people either have, or perceive to have, a dependency on. This goes into 'gaming disorder' and 'engagment metrics', all subjects for other blogs, but in Section 3 we get to the juicy stuff: "Financial harms of Immersive technologies." Whenever microtransactions are bought into the world of gaming, the usual arguments start up about; value, pricing and pay-to-win. (or P2W) Lately, as we've moved into the world of rampant monetisation, video games companies have attempted to pooh-pooh any potential backlash with carefully considered statements. "It's just cosmetics" is the, much parroted, phrase that adorns the press release of many an online storefront, whilst "They're time savers" or "It's about player choice." has begun to seep it's vile way into single player games too. Oftentimes gamers are torn between these artificial battle lines that developers have set up, waging between "It's not pay to win if it's just about looks!" and "It's not 'player choice' if the choice is between a fun game and a boring one". (Just look at the recent backlash regarding Fallout 76 and it's fridge to get an example of that.)
Parliament's report will hopefully put an end to much of that debate, as they delve into the murky world of customer manipulation in it's pure form. I will follow their example and establish for everyone that there are real life consequences to systems like these. A while ago I wrote a blog about a family who's children had emptied their parent's bank accounts on FIFA Ultimate team, all wasted on lootboxes for the promise of securing Lionel Messi (Which, due to FUT's lootbox setup, they never did.) Parliament offer a similar tale that pertains to a game that was an absolute blast-to-the-past for me, Runescape. The Report reads "We were contacted by a member of the public whose adult son built up considerable debts, reported to be in excess of £50,000, through spending on microtransactions in British company Jagex’s online game RuneScape."
From this, we can see that people have fallen for the trap of microtransactions before in incredibly serious ways. This is the reason why people gawk when companies like Respawn stand up for their ludicrous price points by saying; "the majority of people never buy them anyway!" That isn't the point. The point is that there as those that do and these people can be abused whilst playing the game. If you're comfortable with creating a product that has the potential/intent to harm or abuse your consumers, then maybe you shouldn't be working in creative fields. "But what can be done?" is the question that must be asked. "Surely if there were ways to cut down on abuse then games companies would have done so!" And they would have, if it wouldn't end up cutting into their bottom line.
The makers of Candy Crush Saga, King, spoke out against accusations that they were complicit in the fleecing and exploitation of it's customers. "we would send an e-mail out when a player’s spend was $250 in a week for the first time. It was an e-mail that said, “We notice you are enjoying the game a lot at the moment. Are you sure you are happy with this?” […] We got back, “I wouldn’t spend the money if I didn’t have it” and things like, “I’m fine, please leave me alone”. We felt it was too intrusive so we stopped doing that." That is all they have done for customer protection, by the by. So that's nice. King sent people emails for a bit until some people complained and then they resolved themselves of all protective responsibilities. (What heroes)
As it just so happens, there is a tool that would be very effective of limiting the exposure of this kind of content to those vulnerable to it. (I.e. Kids and those susceptible to problem spending.) You see, a while back, the Games Industry developed this thing called a 'ratings board', that would provide content guidelines for developers, shops and consumers. (All as a bid to prevent Government oversight.) With the stipulations that this board dictates (I'm specifically referring to PEGI, here) Video games that feature gambling must be labelled as such and be assigned an '18' badge. This would mean that children would not be exposed to the thrill of gamb- I mean loot bo- I mean 'Surprise mechanics' at a young age. (If you feel I was being condescending in that paragraph. Well spotted.)
However, the 'age rating' system was proven pointless after NBA 2K20 unveiled their gambling themed trailer and still got away with a '3' rating. ("Sports games have always been rated 3, why should this one be any different") The part that really gets me is, even if we buy the age old "It isn't technically gambling because you can't cash out!", excuse, the trailer still clearly shows that the game features gambling-esque imagery, which is grounds for a 'Teen' rating under Pegi's own stipulation. Heck, YouTuber YongYea pointed out that Pokemon Red and Blue was labelled 'Teen' for that very reason, and that game didn't even have any microtransactions! (Just an ingeniously clever marketing ploy to get you to buy the game twice.)
I would encourage interested readers to take a look at the article through this link Here and see just what it is that Parliament has to say about the greedy aspects of the gaming industry. (Again, the juicy parts are in section 3.) I'm not yet sure if anything will actually come of it (Especially with the politically tumultuous time that the UK is suffering through right now.) But it's always fun to see someone shine a flashlight under the friendly facade of AAA gaming and watch the cockroaches scurry. As you have likely noticed, this is topic I could talk about until the sky falls down (Falling Skies; great show! Kinda tapered off in the later series...) but I find that situations like this are best left for the observer to look through and come to their own conclusions. Besides, after reading through all of the industries' clandestine action and motivations, I need a bath.
Sunday, 1 September 2019
2K finally lost their minds.
You do it yourself, you do. Just you and no-one else.
Here we are again. It feels like not a day goes by without something incredibly stupid happening in the world of gaming regarding monetisation. At this point I don't know how to react anymore. How do you react when the industry you love is being wantonly sabotaged by the idiots in top brass? Previously I've shared how damning I feel it will be for the government to come in and start regulating video game content but now, honestly, I just don't have the energy to care anymore. Bring in the government regulations, go ahead. The industry is too moronic to hold itself to any standards so by all means, bring in the government.
I'm not even some anti-government fanatic, either, I just love the idea of freedom of expression and shudder to think what might become of it once we submit to fear mongering. But I guess it's no longer just 'fear mongering' in this regard, is it? Video games have crossed the Rubicon into the land of unregulated gambling and they are so unrepentant that they don't even have the common decency to lie about it anymore. Every industry buffer has failed us. The publishers who are meant to ensure that they maintain profitability without shooting themselves in the foot, the developers who promise time and time again that they've learnt to not make casinos disguised as games and the ratings board who are supposed to regulate games so that the government doesn't start paying undue attention. (That really worked out, didn't it?)
For those who have no idea why I'm so despondent today, it is because I'm still coming to terms with the NBA 2K20 MyTeam trailer. MyTeam, is essentially NBA's version of FIFA Ultimate Team; the 'fantasy football' experience digitized and monetized to hell. I you think that FIFA has been worse in recent years (or the past decade) due to their sole reliance on FUT, then let me assure you that you've seen nothing yet. FIFA is still a decent enough game (The same game that released in 2010, but still.) as long as you never touch the FUT portions of the game. 2K's Basketball series cannot even earn that little praise. 2K are so desperate to scrape together a few extra dollars that they have imbued monetisation into every element of the game.
2K's NBA titles have already been rife with it's own controversies throughout the years. Who can forget 2K18's haircut incident? In that game, the developers took the core concept of virtual currency and pushed it to it's gross extremes. For their MyCareer mode, (2K have something against the spacebar, don't blame me.) they decided to lock every interaction, beyond the ability to play the next match, behind a paywall of VC. (Fitting name.) VC was required to buy clothing, upgrade characters, buy dunking animations and, look at a haircut? That's right, if you wanted to change up your character's haircut you had to spend 2-3 games worth of VC. But that isn't even the worst part, you see, 2K didn't even bother to leave in a preview mechanic, meaning that the only way to see how that haircut looks on your character was to buy said-haircut. Oh, and haircuts require multiple purchases if you want to switch back. Of course, all that grind could be skipped if you sold your soul to 2K and bought up their VC packs!
Then there was 2K19 under which every aspect of character improvement was locked behind virtual currency paywalls that required you to either spend real money or grind to an inhuman degree in order to get anywhere. That wasn't even the worst part, although that was damning enough. You see, the 2K team apologized (With crocodile tears) about their abhorrent haircut fiasco from the previous year, and in order to make it up to fans they made the selfless and admirable decision to... do something ten times worse. "How could things possible be worse?" you ask. Well, How about literally holding your matches hostage in the loading screen so that they can bombard you with real life advertisements. I'm not joking. This $60 game treated you as though you were a 'freeloader' on a mobile game, bombarding you with third party ads when all you want to do is play the game.
Looking at all this, you might wonder why it is that fans put up with this game, and honestly I don't know, but I do think that their gritted compliance will be to blame when this nonsense inevitably becomes prevalent across the industry. People argue that "There's no other Basketball games on the market!" well to that I point you to the advice imparted by Joe Vargas of AngryJoeShow; just get last year's game, it's literally the same game. I won't get all melodramatic and recite the old adage about how evil wins when good people do nothing, but instead I will recite the similar, and more digestible, sentiment that was apparently uttered by Alexander Hamilton: "If you stand for nothing, than you'll fall for anything." Let these people know that enough is enough or enough never will be enough, and we will all have to pay the price.
Point in case, 2K20's MyTeam trailer. This was an advertisement that was built around showing off the newest features of 2K's microtransactions and it did so with gusto. Not a moment goes by when they aren't flaunting off lootboxes, trading cards, and premium currencies. Things get really abhorrent, however, when you take a look at their methods of 'rewarding' the player. Win a match? Good job, you get a pull of our one-arm bandit. Or a spin of our prize wheel or a ball in our Pachinko machine. Yep, just as all the gaming industry is busy treading on eggshells to avoid governments scrutiny, 2K jumps in and breakdances on the floor. They're proud of their greed!
I don't want to dedicate anymore to this topic than it deserves, and what 2K deserves is to be shot into orbit through a cannon. Gamers everywhere have been complaining to the ratings board about how 2K20 is rated PEGI 3 whilst Pokemon Red and Blue are rated 12 for it's fake late-game casino. Responses from the board have either been silence or dismissive. That means there is no where left for this to go than to the government, and as I shared at the beginning of this blog, at this time I welcome them. AAA gaming is dead and the industry itself are the ones that pulled the trigger.
Here we are again. It feels like not a day goes by without something incredibly stupid happening in the world of gaming regarding monetisation. At this point I don't know how to react anymore. How do you react when the industry you love is being wantonly sabotaged by the idiots in top brass? Previously I've shared how damning I feel it will be for the government to come in and start regulating video game content but now, honestly, I just don't have the energy to care anymore. Bring in the government regulations, go ahead. The industry is too moronic to hold itself to any standards so by all means, bring in the government.
I'm not even some anti-government fanatic, either, I just love the idea of freedom of expression and shudder to think what might become of it once we submit to fear mongering. But I guess it's no longer just 'fear mongering' in this regard, is it? Video games have crossed the Rubicon into the land of unregulated gambling and they are so unrepentant that they don't even have the common decency to lie about it anymore. Every industry buffer has failed us. The publishers who are meant to ensure that they maintain profitability without shooting themselves in the foot, the developers who promise time and time again that they've learnt to not make casinos disguised as games and the ratings board who are supposed to regulate games so that the government doesn't start paying undue attention. (That really worked out, didn't it?)
For those who have no idea why I'm so despondent today, it is because I'm still coming to terms with the NBA 2K20 MyTeam trailer. MyTeam, is essentially NBA's version of FIFA Ultimate Team; the 'fantasy football' experience digitized and monetized to hell. I you think that FIFA has been worse in recent years (or the past decade) due to their sole reliance on FUT, then let me assure you that you've seen nothing yet. FIFA is still a decent enough game (The same game that released in 2010, but still.) as long as you never touch the FUT portions of the game. 2K's Basketball series cannot even earn that little praise. 2K are so desperate to scrape together a few extra dollars that they have imbued monetisation into every element of the game.
2K's NBA titles have already been rife with it's own controversies throughout the years. Who can forget 2K18's haircut incident? In that game, the developers took the core concept of virtual currency and pushed it to it's gross extremes. For their MyCareer mode, (2K have something against the spacebar, don't blame me.) they decided to lock every interaction, beyond the ability to play the next match, behind a paywall of VC. (Fitting name.) VC was required to buy clothing, upgrade characters, buy dunking animations and, look at a haircut? That's right, if you wanted to change up your character's haircut you had to spend 2-3 games worth of VC. But that isn't even the worst part, you see, 2K didn't even bother to leave in a preview mechanic, meaning that the only way to see how that haircut looks on your character was to buy said-haircut. Oh, and haircuts require multiple purchases if you want to switch back. Of course, all that grind could be skipped if you sold your soul to 2K and bought up their VC packs!
Then there was 2K19 under which every aspect of character improvement was locked behind virtual currency paywalls that required you to either spend real money or grind to an inhuman degree in order to get anywhere. That wasn't even the worst part, although that was damning enough. You see, the 2K team apologized (With crocodile tears) about their abhorrent haircut fiasco from the previous year, and in order to make it up to fans they made the selfless and admirable decision to... do something ten times worse. "How could things possible be worse?" you ask. Well, How about literally holding your matches hostage in the loading screen so that they can bombard you with real life advertisements. I'm not joking. This $60 game treated you as though you were a 'freeloader' on a mobile game, bombarding you with third party ads when all you want to do is play the game.
Looking at all this, you might wonder why it is that fans put up with this game, and honestly I don't know, but I do think that their gritted compliance will be to blame when this nonsense inevitably becomes prevalent across the industry. People argue that "There's no other Basketball games on the market!" well to that I point you to the advice imparted by Joe Vargas of AngryJoeShow; just get last year's game, it's literally the same game. I won't get all melodramatic and recite the old adage about how evil wins when good people do nothing, but instead I will recite the similar, and more digestible, sentiment that was apparently uttered by Alexander Hamilton: "If you stand for nothing, than you'll fall for anything." Let these people know that enough is enough or enough never will be enough, and we will all have to pay the price.
Point in case, 2K20's MyTeam trailer. This was an advertisement that was built around showing off the newest features of 2K's microtransactions and it did so with gusto. Not a moment goes by when they aren't flaunting off lootboxes, trading cards, and premium currencies. Things get really abhorrent, however, when you take a look at their methods of 'rewarding' the player. Win a match? Good job, you get a pull of our one-arm bandit. Or a spin of our prize wheel or a ball in our Pachinko machine. Yep, just as all the gaming industry is busy treading on eggshells to avoid governments scrutiny, 2K jumps in and breakdances on the floor. They're proud of their greed!
I don't want to dedicate anymore to this topic than it deserves, and what 2K deserves is to be shot into orbit through a cannon. Gamers everywhere have been complaining to the ratings board about how 2K20 is rated PEGI 3 whilst Pokemon Red and Blue are rated 12 for it's fake late-game casino. Responses from the board have either been silence or dismissive. That means there is no where left for this to go than to the government, and as I shared at the beginning of this blog, at this time I welcome them. AAA gaming is dead and the industry itself are the ones that pulled the trigger.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)