Black Ops

[moosh]

Originally Posted by GenghisTron

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRftU9URsS8

"Don't you see, we're living in a age where it's ok to charge gamers full price for a broken product on release day?!"

[Iggy]

Originally Posted by moosh

Companies only care about the money nowadays.

Fixed that first line for ya.

[Everything]

Originally Posted by squeek.

• Make a list of three things

• Tables
• Chairs
• Lamp

[GenghisTron]

Originally Posted by Iggy

You mean they are acting like Hollywood?

Yea, and it's a terrible model.

Originally Posted by KubeDawg

You mean they're acting like a business? *GASP*

Businesses are supposed to act in the interest of their consumers. My whole point is that the legions of 13 year olds who will buy any low-grade, repackaged FPS that has been made 20 times over with a different name and slightly different mechanics, is what drives this vicious cycle of game development. This is what has led to the consolization of blockbuster games, which leaves PC users in the dust because blockbuster titles are almost always shitty console ports.

Originally Posted by moosh

Video game developers only care about the money nowadays. Some developers even refuse to fix bugs in their games because it's 'not their problem'...

There's nothing wrong with seeking profit. The profit motive and the price system are ingenious methods of managing resources. The real problem is consoles. Console gaming is screwing over PC gaming and is forcing game developers to act irrationally. Most people don't want to be bothered with PC gaming, it's easier just to buy a console that doesn't need hardware upgrades, and is more portable than a PC and it's peripherals. For this reason, the console market is much larger than the PC gaming market. This is especially true when you get popular games like Halo, COD, etc.

If we want to change this zeitgeist, us PC gamers have to band together and actively try and change the zeitgeist. Look at how open source programming has changed the software market, compared to 10 years ago, practically all the good general-use software is free, or nearly free. It's possible to do the same to the PC video game market, but people have to work towards it. If you told people a decade ago that popular general-use software would be widely available for absolutely free, they'd call you insane.

When the system screws over the little guy, is the exact same moment the little guy (PC gamers) have to turn the tables and start screwing over the big guys.

[KubeDawg]

Originally Posted by GenghisTron

Businesses are supposed to act in the interest of their consumers.

And this is where you are wrong. Businesses are supposed to act in the interest of their own personal gains. If they can sell 7 million copies of this game on day one using similar technology/graphics/tactics etc, versus making a brand new game, using brand new ideas costing brand new money, it's going to take a lot longer and cost a lot more money to make thus decreasing their profits. They just want to ride the gravy train as long as they can, and eventually some other company will come along and release something better that also takes their market. But until that time comes, they're going to continue making similar games. It's the same with movie sequels or other games that have spinoffs or sequels.

[GenghisTron]

Originally Posted by KubeDawg

And this is where you are wrong. Businesses are supposed to act in the interest of their own personal gains. If they can sell 7 million copies of this game on day one using similar technology/graphics/tactics etc, versus making a brand new game, using brand new ideas costing brand new money, it's going to take a lot longer and cost a lot more money to make thus decreasing their profits. They just want to ride the gravy train as long as they can, and eventually some other company will come along and release something better that also takes their market. But until that time comes, they're going to continue making similar games. It's the same with movie sequels or other games that have spinoffs or sequels.

You're completely missing my point because you're ignorant of how economics work. Businesses act in the interest of their consumers because of the profit motive. Companies like EA and Treyarch don't put a gun to your head forcing you to buy their games, instead, they have to make a game that consumers want to buy.

Right now, in the current video game industry, big companies like EA and Treyarch are acting perfectly rationally. They are pursuing the most profit (That's the point of a business). The problem isn't seeking profit, the problem is that there is perverse incentives created by the irrational consumers that lead EA and Treyarch to develop games in the current manner. Imagine if the majority of gamers were like the proto-typical PC gamer. Say they were all PC gamers, who demanded a working, polished product on launch. A game not built on vanity, but on quality. In order to appease niche gamers, it would need to have mod tools, and gamers would need the ability to run their own dedicated servers. If this is how it was, do you really think that Treyarch would be pushing out games like Black Ops? No, they wouldn't, because that would be irrational.

Economic ignorami constantly seek to blame the companies who try and appease economic trends as being 'greedy' or 'money hungry', but they never blame the cause of this 'greedy' behavior. You see, I like to solve problems, and when you go about solving problems, you have to take into account many things, and when you look at an issue as complex as an entire billion-dollar industry, and sum it up to 'lolololol all dey want is da moneyz!!!!', you're going to be simplifying a complex problem, and will inevitably ignore confounding variables--which just makes you sound foolish. Profit is not a bad thing, it's the mechanic that makes sure you have 20 different flavors of yogurt to choose from, it's the mechanic that gives you inumerable choices and options in purchasing an automobile. Profit is perfectly rational. The problem comes in when you have an industry where most consumers are irrational. This forces companies to act rationally irrational. In other words, companies, in their rational pursuit of profit, are lead astray when they are forced to seek profit by appeasing a market of irrational consumers.

[Bridget]

Originally Posted by KubeDawg

And this is where you are wrong. Businesses are supposed to act in the interest of their own personal gains.

Annnnnnd how do they achieve this?

[Lost]

Originally Posted by moosh

Video game developers only care about the money nowadays. Some developers even refuse to fix bugs in their games because it's 'not their problem'...

And I love 'borrowing' those games from my good friend Peerat Bhay.

I've bought my share of shitty games (Scratches, Settlers, FFVIII) so now I don't mind doing some research or even torrenting them first. But if I like it, I buy it.

[JackBauer]

it's the first CoD I have ever bought. why? because the multiplayer part is supposed to be outstanding and I don't have any decent fps multiplayer games.

besides, 55 dollars in america is nothing compared to the 80 dollars it costs in Switzerland.

I'd rather pay for a game 60-80 dollars once than paying monthly fees too (WoW).

[moosh]

Originally Posted by Lost

And I love 'borrowing' those games from my good friend Peerat Bhay.

arr brotha

[Dexter]

YouTube

YouTube

game is for bads. bads where da money at

[Bridget]

Originally Posted by JackBauer

... for a game 60-80 dollars once than paying monthly fees too (WoW).

Ah, the lesser of two evils argument. I choose no evil.

[JackBauer]

Originally Posted by Bridget

Ah, the lesser of two evils argument. I choose no evil.

I bought the game in america for about 55 dollars. in Switzerland most games are between 70-80 dollars. I think it's a great deal for me.

[Dexter]

Originally Posted by Bridget

Ah, the lesser of two evils argument. I choose no evil.

Sure, but $15 isnt a lot. Also, don't forget the DLCs ..
hopefully not as FORCED as it was in MW2, but that game was so bad with no dedicated servers and all lol

[Iggy]

Originally Posted by GenghisTron

You're completely missing my point because you're ignorant of how economics work. Businesses act in the interest of their consumers because of the profit motive. Companies like EA and Treyarch don't put a gun to your head forcing you to buy their games, instead, they have to make a game that consumers want to buy.

Right now, in the current video game industry, big companies like EA and Treyarch are acting perfectly rationally. They are pursuing the most profit (That's the point of a business). The problem isn't seeking profit, the problem is that there is perverse incentives created by the irrational consumers that lead EA and Treyarch to develop games in the current manner. Imagine if the majority of gamers were like the proto-typical PC gamer. Say they were all PC gamers, who demanded a working, polished product on launch. A game not built on vanity, but on quality. In order to appease niche gamers, it would need to have mod tools, and gamers would need the ability to run their own dedicated servers. If this is how it was, do you really think that Treyarch would be pushing out games like Black Ops? No, they wouldn't, because that would be irrational.

Economic ignorami constantly seek to blame the companies who try and appease economic trends as being 'greedy' or 'money hungry', but they never blame the cause of this 'greedy' behavior. You see, I like to solve problems, and when you go about solving problems, you have to take into account many things, and when you look at an issue as complex as an entire billion-dollar industry, and sum it up to 'lolololol all dey want is da moneyz!!!!', you're going to be simplifying a complex problem, and will inevitably ignore confounding variables--which just makes you sound foolish. Profit is not a bad thing, it's the mechanic that makes sure you have 20 different flavors of yogurt to choose from, it's the mechanic that gives you inumerable choices and options in purchasing an automobile. Profit is perfectly rational. The problem comes in when you have an industry where most consumers are irrational. This forces companies to act rationally irrational. In other words, companies, in their rational pursuit of profit, are lead astray when they are forced to seek profit by appeasing a market of irrational consumers.

I think the point you are missing, is that these companies are selling games like hotcakes, and have the mindset of "these dumbasses will buy whatever we put out, because A> we tell them it's the hottest thing and B> there isn't anything else out there."

Sad part is, they are generally right.

Micro$oft used to pay stores to shelve software compatible with their OS, which is how Windows won the OS war. Amiga's OS was better(smaller, functionally stable, used less resources in your machine, and produced better graphix and sounds), followed by Apples OS at the time, and in last place, was Windows. M$ used mass marketing, blowing TONS of money on blitze advertising and buying shelf space.... and pushed their shitty product down everyone's throat. Neither Commodore(which owned the Amiga), nor Apple had the financial power to stand up to this assault. Apple did better, because they did some marketing, and came up with some innovative other products, but eventually gave way to M$ compatability. Commodore fucked up in the regard that their owners sucked up valuable capital, and used the rest for R&D.

This is part of the reason I believe Americans are stupid; "Oh, look... they have lots of software for this machine, it MUST be better!" without doing a lick of research.

Now, these companies are after one thing, and one thing only... money. And Americans are turning it over to them by the ton, to buy a game that they will play for maybe a month, then buy the newest "hot title".

[Bridget]

I love how Iggy, an American, spends so much time criticizing and generalizing other Americans.

[Lost]

Its our gol-damd rite.

Save the thread from being cast into the abyssal debate-ness!

[Iggy]

Originally Posted by Bridget

I love how Iggy, an American, spends so much time criticizing and generalizing other Americans.

I'm only an American by birth, not idealism or behavior. I've been elsewhere, and would prefer to BE elsewhere. Once the time comes, I will be. Count on it.

[Etzell]

Originally Posted by Iggy

I'm only an American by [the exact definition of the term.]

Fixed that for you.

[Crazycarl]

Right, so people in other countries are insusceptible to marketing and always make informed decisions? I think you're setting yourself for some major disappointment once you leave the country.