Pay for what you want. Inflation and the gradually falling value of the dollar are processes that will always play into reality.
Unless the game mechanics are directly tied to some essential online/live function, there is no reason that, upon sunsetting in 5 or 10 years (if game popularity significantly wanes) that it can't be modified to function offline.
This is what I expect to occur with Gran Turismo 7, as I think the "always-online" aspects are tied to the car markets, credit system, and anti-cheating measures. Once the game is no longer financially significant to Sony (like whe...
This game could really use twin-stick support. On PS Vita, you were able to map the face buttons to the right stick... can't seem to find a way to do this on PS5. Anyone have any luck?
Apples and oranges there. VR and 3D are only marginally related. VR is about complete immersion.
Ah, good catch.
Two different concepts. The issue here is the risk of monopolization within industries through consolidation and gatekeeping. Which leads to the stifling of competition. Twitter is merely changing hands, not being swallowed under a larger social media umbrella.
To fit your point better, MS buying Activision would be like if Facebook bought Twitter or Instagram.
Exactly this. Gamer expectations when the Vita launched were dramatically higher than in the PSP era, and the level of time, people, and financial investment to try and support two consoles with that caliber of gaming wasn’t feasible for Sony at that time. Or at least, not without a strong ROI, which the early Vita sales quickly extinguished hopes of. Sony would have had to split their development team resources to churn out exclusive IPs and not just “cut down ports”. Sony made a big gamble ...
I can honestly say that battery life is not a big concern for me as I tend to play it near a power source. If you're frequently away from any power (airplane/train/bus) that's probably a concern, but I think we often catastrophize the need for hours of battery... myself included.
And heck, many forms of public transportation are offering power at your seat.
Agreed. This is probably my favorite co-op game. Playing with a close friend made this a tense but rewarding experience, even though the RE universe/setting was a bit different. The marsh level is still up in there as one of my most memorable co-op experiences.
Would love to see a Resident Evil 0 reboot that scraps 90% of the original game and more closely follows the exploits of Bravo Team in/around the mansion. This would kill two birds with one stone by; A) downgrading the need to do a full-on RE1 Remake in the same vein as the other reboots (since you could cover most of the Spencer Mansion by following Bravo Team members), and B) fix the awful story arch of RE0 and course-correct it to be more grounded and interesting.
Truth to this. Also applies to many mail-in "rebate" offers. Only a small percentage of customers will ultimately go through with the process.
While I prefer physical in many instances, your statement is not without qualifications.
Reasons why digital might be superior:
- Space, inventory, and clutter
- Convenience and ease of use
- Prices - I've seen more outrageous digital sales offers (i.e. 80-90% off flash sales) than I have with physical
- Environmental and waste (i.e. materials, shipping, and landfill waste)
I'm sure there are others.
Spider-Man 2. Right around the corner.
Big fan of Playstation IPs, but haven't gotten myself to play any of these games. 2.5 Spiderman games in the last few years seems like a lot of the same thing.
Was thinking of giving Miles Morales a go to see if it would be of interest. It's the shortest one from what I gather, but I'm somewhat leery of epic open-world games that are just one meandering quest to another with snail's pace progression. Anything over 20 hours of gameplay to me is tough to fi...
Prices have to increase at some point in the timeline. Games are not a commodity. If not now, sometime in the future, but as the cost of living has increased everywhere else, games would/will eventually need to follow suit.
This. A higher price point equates to lower volume risk, all things being equal. A game can technically sell about 20% fewer copies at $70 and still break-even/be considered a moderate success over one selling at $60. It's not a perfect formula, but as long as demand doesn't drop by more than 20%, there's a net positive.
Publishers need incentive to invest in games. More niche/experimental titles carry more financial risk. If said financial risk exceeds the ...
Would you prefer forced conscription like in Russia?
Encumbrance, as annoying as it is, does add some tension and a strategic element to games that otherwise would be lacking balance in some way. It has its place.
MS is not in any way motivated to downplay its success, or lack thereof.
The new generation is a more logical jumping off point to adjust costs. Inflation is a constant process, but gaming consumers would find it odd to have game prices increase by $2 each year.
The common man will better rationalize/understand that a PS5 game costs more than a PS4 game, even if the costs are spread across all platforms. Can also make the argument that higher sales volume will constitute the ability to accept a lower price to generate the same revenue.