The unspoken reason for the decline in video game quality.

[fumzuck1]

I am not saying that "early access" is to blame ...
I am saying that steam and other places that host these need to stop allowing them to monetize them. If its "early access" EVERYTHING ABOUT IT till release of the "live"game should be free.
It would cut back on the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ games that rip off companies have been throwing out just to make fast money then shut down or ... in cases like Just survive take a game you paid for and not compensate or refund because it was "early access" years old but somehow early access ...
Take away the cost of the game and money made from dlc till its not "early access" and you will see a big improvement in gaming .

[DiceDsx]

William Shakesman님이 먼저 게시:

Tito Shivan님이 먼저 게시:

In this day and age, those words are way, way, waaay more fluid and aquivalent than you imagine.

When it benefits the companies, they are free and generous with the redefinitions. When it makes them money on sales, they are perfectly happy to allow the publics understanding of those terms to color their buying decisions

And there's very little companies hate more than being told they cannot, in fact, have it both ways.

Are you sure you're not describing gamers? Because what you wrote fits them prefectly, especially the "redefining terms when convenient for them" part.

[William Shakesman]

DiceDsx님이 먼저 게시:

William Shakesman님이 먼저 게시:

When it benefits the companies, they are free and generous with the redefinitions. When it makes them money on sales, they are perfectly happy to allow the publics understanding of those terms to color their buying decisions

And there's very little companies hate more than being told they cannot, in fact, have it both ways.

Are you sure you're not describing gamers? Because what you wrote fits them prefectly, especially the "redefining terms when convenient for them" part.

This is fairly obviously something you are sore about from some previous dispute, but you are brushing up against points a few steps ahead that people here aren't quite ready for yet about human nature. Both parties in these discussions are certainly human and prone to such things. The economic and contractual views do not consider these aspects at all.

[Nx Machina]

William Shakesman님이 먼저 게시:

When it benefits the companies, they are free and generous with the redefinitions.

Applicable to gamers when they believe they are owed a product which may never complete product.

William Shakesman님이 먼저 게시:

When it makes them money on sales, they are perfectly happy to allow the publics understanding of those terms to color their buying decisions

Gamers are perfectly happy to rewrite what is clearly written to fit a narrative when it comes to wanting their money back.

William Shakesman님이 먼저 게시:

And there's very little companies hate more than being told they cannot, in fact, have it both ways.

And gamers hate being told they bought the cake, took several bites and it is no longer refundable.

[DiceDsx]

William Shakesman님이 먼저 게시:

DiceDsx님이 먼저 게시:

Are you sure you're not describing gamers? Because what you wrote fits them prefectly, especially the "redefining terms when convenient for them" part.

This is fairly obviously something you are sore about from some previous dispute, but you are brushing up against points a few steps ahead that people here aren't quite ready for yet about human nature. Both parties in these discussions are certainly human and prone to such things. The economic and contractual views do not consider these aspects at all.

The nature of gamers is why these discussions happen: they are unable to accept the consequences of their choices and push the entire blame on others instead.

It's not surprising that the word "responsibility" never seems to apply to them when they bring it up.

[Tito Shivan]

DiceDsx님이 먼저 게시:

Are you sure you're not describing gamers? Because what you wrote fits them prefectly, especially the "redefining terms when convenient for them" part.

"Imma buy this 'released' game despite I know it'll be buggy because devs will later fix it and I can't stand losing a day of playtime"
Or
"Imma buy this 'Early Access' game despite I know it'll be buggy because devs will later fix it and I can't stand losing a day of playtime"
And
"Whatever I do I'm going to complain either way".

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Tito Shivan님이 먼저 게시:

"Imma buy this 'released' game despite I know it'll be buggy because devs will later fix it and I can't stand losing a day of playtime"
Or
"Imma buy this 'Early Access' game despite I know it'll be buggy because devs will later fix it and I can't stand losing a day of playtime"
"Whatever I do I'm going to complain either way".

CoD gamers never cease to amuse me. The sad part is, the game(s) are in a worse state now than at launch.

People must love packet burst, lagging and server crashes because they keep playing through it, nearly at season 5 of 6.

[xBCxRangers]

cSg|mc-Hotsauce님이 먼저 게시:

Tito Shivan님이 먼저 게시:

"Imma buy this 'released' game despite I know it'll be buggy because devs will later fix it and I can't stand losing a day of playtime"
Or
"Imma buy this 'Early Access' game despite I know it'll be buggy because devs will later fix it and I can't stand losing a day of playtime"
"Whatever I do I'm going to complain either way".

CoD gamers never cease to amuse me. The sad part is, the game(s) are in a worse state now than at launch.

People must love packet burst, lagging and server crashes because they keep playing through it, nearly at season 5 of 6.

:cool_seagull:

Sports games as well. I can play Madden, FIFA, NCAA 10, and it's much better than they are now. If the OP was referring to the Triple A's, he'd be absolutely correct.

[DiceDsx]

Tito Shivan님이 먼저 게시:

DiceDsx님이 먼저 게시:

Are you sure you're not describing gamers? Because what you wrote fits them prefectly, especially the "redefining terms when convenient for them" part.

"Imma buy this 'released' game despite I know it'll be buggy because devs will later fix it and I can't stand losing a day of playtime"
Or
"Imma buy this 'Early Access' game despite I know it'll be buggy because devs will later fix it and I can't stand losing a day of playtime"
And
"Whatever I do I'm going to complain either way".

Fool me once, shame on you.

Fool me twice, shame on you.

Fool me thrice, shame on you.

...

Fool me a hundred times, shame on you.

-Gamers™️

[davidb11]

The good Early Access games trump the bad one.
Yeah, it's not perfect, but it's a lot better than Greenlight ever was.

[Start_Running]

DiceDsx님이 먼저 게시:

William Shakesman님이 먼저 게시:

This is fairly obviously something you are sore about from some previous dispute, but you are brushing up against points a few steps ahead that people here aren't quite ready for yet about human nature. Both parties in these discussions are certainly human and prone to such things. The economic and contractual views do not consider these aspects at all.

The nature of gamers is why these discussions happen: they are unable to accept the consequences of their choices and push the entire blame on others instead.

I'me wondering how much of tghis spills out into their wider lives.. or maybe it's a case of their broader outlook manifesting in the gaming space.

DiceDsx님이 먼저 게시:

It's not surprising that the word "responsibility" never seems to apply to them when they bring it up.

They are but mindless sheeple, who buy whatever the flashy pictures and upbeat voice tells them to buy. Then can do naught else for it is beyond their capability and even comprehension to think.


This is what they say about themselves when they deny responsibility for their actions.

If you have no responsibility then by definition you had no agency.

[Tito Shivan]

DiceDsx님이 먼저 게시:

Fool me once, shame on you.

Fool me twice, shame on you.

Fool me thrice, shame on you.

...

Fool me a hundred times, shame on you.

-Gamers™️

"Next [Insert game] is going to be the best thing ever since sliced bread!"

davidb11님이 먼저 게시:

The good Early Access games trump the bad one.
Yeah, it's not perfect, but it's a lot better than Greenlight ever was.

Greenlight was bound to fail. The correct route is to let everything sink or swim at the place that matters:

The checkout line.

Biggest proof is in the pudding of Epic adopting Steam Direct way of self-Publishing.

[Crazy Tiger]

William Shakesman님이 먼저 게시:

When it benefits the companies, they are free and generous with the redefinitions.

You mean like people do in their complaint threads by calling things they don't like "scams", "fraud", "anti-consumer", "woke", etc, etc? People sure as hell like to redefine things when they want to get their way.

It's almost like it's part of humanity in general.

[William Shakesman]

DiceDsx님이 먼저 게시:

William Shakesman님이 먼저 게시:

This is fairly obviously something you are sore about from some previous dispute, but you are brushing up against points a few steps ahead that people here aren't quite ready for yet about human nature. Both parties in these discussions are certainly human and prone to such things. The economic and contractual views do not consider these aspects at all.

The nature of gamers is why these discussions happen: they are unable to accept the consequences of their choices and push the entire blame on others instead.

It's not surprising that the word "responsibility" never seems to apply to them when they bring it up.

As I have said, this rhetoric can safely be disregarded as it is merely a parlor trick to excuse companies from any sort of personal responsibility whatsoever. Most things are a two way street but too many people subscribe to these silly black and white us vs them world views.

[DiceDsx]

William Shakesman님이 먼저 게시:

DiceDsx님이 먼저 게시:

The nature of gamers is why these discussions happen: they are unable to accept the consequences of their choices and push the entire blame on others instead.

It's not surprising that the word "responsibility" never seems to apply to them when they bring it up.

As I have said, this rhetoric can safely be disregarded as it is merely a parlor trick to excuse companies from any sort of personal responsibility whatsoever. Most things are a two way street but too many people subscribe to these silly black and white us vs them world views.

I must be a great magician then, because you're acting exactly as I said gamers do: shifting all the blame towards others.

It'a funny that you bring up responsibility again, because gamers never seem to take theirs. They tell others to take responsibility, but what about their own? Do they not have any? They have pointed fingers at everyone but themselves at this point.

This two-way street seems pretty one-way, if you ask me.

Gamers seeing things as "us vs them" is actually a thing, though: it's always the fault of the scummy devs, the greedy publishers, the lazy Steam.

But somehow it's never the fault of the people opening their wallets and supporting the current industry.

Have gamers take responsibility and they'll see actual changes happen, but that seems like a pipe dream sadly.

[William Shakesman]

Crazy Tiger님이 먼저 게시:

William Shakesman님이 먼저 게시:

When it benefits the companies, they are free and generous with the redefinitions.

You mean like people do in their complaint threads by calling things they don't like "scams", "fraud", "anti-consumer", "woke", etc, etc? People sure as hell like to redefine things when they want to get their way.

It's almost like it's part of humanity in general.

What'll REALLY surprise you is when you eventually learn it isn't just all the people you don't like who only do it but some people you DO like do it too but most folks aren't ready for that one.