cachinscythe's comments

Avatar image for cachinscythe
cachinscythe

548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Pardon, but I believe the Season 2 DLC Pass includes six characters. Abigail is only the fourth of these. So there's actually TWO more characters coming that have yet to be announced.

Just a slight mistake in the story, I'm sure.

Avatar image for cachinscythe
cachinscythe

548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I'm a bit puzzled by this. It looks like a Final Fantasy ripoff. It looks fun, but I'm honestly wondering if there's something I'm missing here...

Avatar image for cachinscythe
cachinscythe

548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Grenadeh @cachinscythe @playniko69 Oh really? Any evidence to back that claim up? Or are you just regurgitating what every other gamer on this forum continues to perpetuate for his/her own benefit? That benefit of course being to paint the gamer as the unquestionable victim of an economic transaction? What is the average salary of a developer? How much was Visceral Games given for Dead Space 3? Do you want to denigrate me with words and just STATE your case, or actually PROVE your case with facts?

Nobody makes gamers play games, and nobody makes them buy "crappy" products no matter how many times they behave as if they have no choice. I'm not saying it would surprise me if what people are saying on here is actually the case. All I'm asking for is PROOF. But as usual, the "past transgressions"--themselves not proven with evidence either--are supposed to be all the proof we need that the industry screws us every way it can. It's like a judge dishing out a cruel and unusual punishment to a criminal, then defending it by saying this punishment has actually been employed before...by cases the SAME JUDGE was involved in. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and not anything that objective evidence would back up.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: GIVE ME PROOF.

Avatar image for cachinscythe
cachinscythe

548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@playniko69 If "real people" are as psychotic as you're pretending to be, I'm glad they have little or nothing to do with the industry. Enjoy your time in prison.

The developers ARE "real people" with "real careers," "real experience," and "real bills to pay." Most of your "real people" are whiny gamers that wouldn't know how to develop a game even if all the instructions were laid out in front of them.

Most of these developers are the exact sort of real people that swore they'd never "stoop to that level." Then reality happened and they saw the inherent contradictions in the demands of gamers, and realized what unhappy, inconsolable jerks they were. They grew up. So should the rest of our subculture.

How about WE "wake the **** up"?

Avatar image for cachinscythe
cachinscythe

548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@TheEconomista Forgive me, as you likely know more about marketing than I do, but I can't help noticing a few presumptions here:

1) "...it really boggles my mind as to how EA doesn't listen to customer feedback."

Yes, it boggles my mind too, more than likely because it's not the case. Any company with as much capital as EA is GOING to listen to feedback from customers. Will they do it to a degree you find acceptable? Not necessarily. Will they USE the feedback all the time? No. But acting like that's an idiotic choice is to pretend you have any idea how the company has to function.

I remember how the creators of LEGO Star Wars received a lot of customer feedback complaining about the lack of fast paced action scenes and other stuff that could easily be provided by any other Star Wars game on the market. They ignored this feedback, as they should have. There are MORE than enough games to make those customers happy, and changing the LEGO franchise to suit that just makes it like all other Star Wars games. And for that matter, what makes you think they DIDN'T listen to customer feedback just because you don't like the results?

2) "Do they not realize that the horror and survival elements of dead space are what made the franchise popular in the first place?"

Do you have any hard evidence to back that up? The shooting mechanics in Dead Space are exceptionally well done, as is the upgrade system and other aspects that AREN'T related to the horror/survival elements. How about the story? That doesn't count?

And almost anytime I hear people saying, "They turned X into an (insert genre here) game," I find myself wanting to say, "How exactly do you expect them to grow their audience?" History has shown that over time, no matter how "faithful" a franchise remains to itself, the fans get tired of it and leave. So naturally it makes sense to mix things up and try to draw in new consumers. If you want evidence of how "sticking to your roots" ruins something in the long run, just look at the comics industry.

2) "By ONLY wanting to make money you'll make a shit game. By wanting to make a great game, you'll also make money."


Buddy, go out and make a game for the masses and forgo any monetary benefits to yourself. See how far you get. Yes, there are some people out there with enough passion to create something great just for the sake of creating it, but the vast majority of people--INCLUDING GAMERS--are not going to put any sort of effort into something without just compensation. Money is what CAUSES most people to get things done. It does NOT automatically lead to some awful product that consumers are guaranteed to hate.


If I'm missing something, by all means let me know.

Avatar image for cachinscythe
cachinscythe

548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Andrew1073 @cachinscythe @pldlevysama You're welcome.

Avatar image for cachinscythe
cachinscythe

548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@pldlevysama @Andrew1073 What world are you living in where people AREN'T complaining about advertisements on YouTube? His comment is certainly loaded with hyperbole, but the base idea remains the same. Even if you're saying they're just doing their jobs, GAMESTOP is the one TELLING them to do their jobs that way.

And there's a big difference between TV and video games. TV can't make money except from advertising and neither can YouTube. Profits at a game store come from the games, not the pushiness of the employees. If it were actually the DEVELOPERS engaging in this behavior, this forum would be condemning them for it, even though they'd be doing the same thing as those employees at Gamestop.

You have a right to be bothered by something, and if Andrew1073 is bothered by the customer service at Gamestop, he has every right to voice it. Whether it allows them to keep their jobs or not, if enough people are bothered by a practice, they will go elsewhere to purchase their goods.

Avatar image for cachinscythe
cachinscythe

548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@imagremlin @cachinscythe But how can you say with certainty that it makes the model "broken"? 80% of all games today don't make a profit. The other 20% have to make up the difference, and in many cases they do. If you're still in the black, then you're making money and that means you can't argue it's "broken." You COULD argue that it means the model is broken simply because it's not working for 80% of all games, but circumstances are very similar in other entertainment industries. Do you know of any places they can cut costs to make themselves more profitable? Because with the limited data we have, the only obvious thing I can see is not funding those 80% anymore, and that would result in the loss of so many jobs that companies would be accused of being severely greedy anyway. Or I guess they could just shut down and not make games, which wouldn't necessarily be bad as we've got a pretty healthy indie market going right now.

But without some clear explanations of where they can cut, you're not really telling us anything we don't already know. If the model is broken, how should they fix it? If you don't have any answer for that, maybe they don't have one either. At least, not one that doesn't constitute "screwing us."

Avatar image for cachinscythe
cachinscythe

548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@stziggy Congratulations. You've effectively re-stated the same tired old chestnut arguments made by everyone else on this page without showing any data to back up your points. Make a good game at a reasonable price? WHAT A NOVEL CONCEPT! Someone give this guy a job! It's only something any game developer EVER knows to do.

Something tells me EA doesn't give a crap about your stupid garage sale for two reasons: 1) a garage sale is not used to make money; it's used to get rid of junk you don't want, and 2) you're not likely to own more than one copy of it, which means taking you to court over it is not the least bit profitable for EA. So seriously people, knock it off with that flawed analogy.

As for your other examples, I DO agree with the base idea, but the distinction is that the courts--whether legitimately or not--have held that we are not actually purchasing a physical product, but a license to USE their product, which means they still retain the rights to it even after we buy it. As far as I know, there has been no such ruling in the housing industry or car industry, let alone in ridiculous places like prostitution or thrift stores.

And here's something else to think about: how much does it cost to produce a game? Because the truth is that if you can't turn a profit, you can't put it on the market. If putting the game out for $60 is the only way to do that, you HAVE to do that. Unless you're a non-profit organization of course. Can you show me evidence that the high cost of games is actually making these people rich, rather than just allowing them to stay afloat?

As for the "make a good game" argument, developers have been doing that for years, and gamers have gradually become ungrateful for what the industry provides. Not necessarily a bad thing, but since it all comes down to subjective opinion--rather than unbiased proof of what's "good" and "bad"--saying they should make a "good game" is essentially just asking them to make a game period, as there is no clear definition for "good game" that can be followed.

Avatar image for cachinscythe
cachinscythe

548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@imagremlin Um...do you have a graph to show me this "broken" business model? Or even data to show that publishers turn profits so ginormous that they can afford to buy Hawaii, rather than just bare profit margins to cover the cost of all failed projects--as 80% of all games don't make a profit--and other expenses?

Do you really think a game costs millions of dollars just because people working in the industry are idiots? Cause I don't. I think it's pretty obvious that it costs more money to make things more cutting edge, and if you don't, a lot of consumers just walk by saying it can't possibly be any good, INCLUDING many who say the business model and desire for profits has "broken" the industry.

But if I'm wrong, by all means show me data to back yourself up...