The Jimquisition Thread

[drahkon]

29 minutes ago, Hero-of-Time said:

this bubble is going to burst if every publisher tries to design their games in a way that has players needing to sign in and play every single day.

It's hilarious how publishers try to copy Fortnite's success by applying this model, however, Fortnite doesn't even require you to sign in/play every day to max out everything  Respawn/EA tried to do it this way with Apex Legends and got an insane amount of backlash which apparently will influence the next season positively.

Here's my take on GaaS again: I don't mind it, if the game is good and the additional content is reasonably priced. GaaS for full priced games is horrible. Sadly I pretty much buy one game every year (CoD) which uses this kind of model...blame my best friend and the good times we have playing these titles  

Edit: Ah shit, my post created a new page...peeps: go back one page. S.C.G. posted a video.  

Edited June 27, 2019 by drahkon

[Hero-of-Time]

1 minute ago, drahkon said:

It's hilarious how publishers try to copy Fortnite's success by applying this model, however, Fortnite doesn't even require you to sign in/play every day to max out everything  Respawn/EA tried to do it this way with Apex Legends and got an insane amount of backlash which apparently will influence the next season positively.

There's also the working conditions to consider. One of the reasons Apex Legends player base has dropped off is because of the lack of new content. Gamers were kicking off left and right and complaining about the lack of updates. Fornite has made it so that players have become accustomed to getting new things on a regular basis. Apex Legends couldn't keep up with that kind of schedule and that's mainly because of the insane hours/crunch that is constantly going on over at Epic. 

 

[drahkon]

Just now, Hero-of-Time said:

Gamers were kicking off left and right and complaining about the lack of updates. 

That's true. And it's stupid. Especially when the gameplay is so good.

But gameplay is not what it's about, is it...  

[S.C.G]

59 minutes ago, S.C.G said:

 

 

58 minutes ago, drahkon said:

Edit: Ah shit, my post created a new page...peeps: go back one page. S.C.G. posted a video.  

No big deal, I just wanted to make sure we didn't miss any as the above video was posted around the same time as the previous one.

It's bad when we end up getting complacement about posting these videos, as if the exploits of AAA publishers and storefronts isn't even surprising any more.

But these videos definitely need to be shared if we're to hope for anything to change... oh and stopping buying certain games will help, by a small margin.

This is the thing... if everyone stopped buying certain games, things would soon change but then... that's unlikely, we can say the same for lots of things though.

Ultimately it comes down to that same quote... (often used in Jimquisition videos)

"Insanity is doing the exact same, fucking thing and expecting things to change" - Far Cry series (2015)?

By the same token, I suppose just posting videos here won't necessarilly change anything on its own, but it's something.

I don't know about anyone else, but I've really been trying to change the way I buy games recently, or rather don't and I've even gotten rid of games from publishers I no longer like due to their practices... games which, let's face it... I wasn't ever going to prioritise anyway, so what's the point in even owning them? Some of these titles I should have known that I wasn't going to enjoy in the first place but the continuing practices of these companies just solidifies my decision to get rid of these titles and they won't be getting any more of my money in the future if I can help it.

[Hero-of-Time]

23 minutes ago, S.C.G said:

But these videos definitely need to be shared if we're to hope for anything to change... oh and stopping buying certain games will help, by a small margin.

This is the thing... if everyone stopped buying certain games, things would soon change but then... that's unlikely, we can say the same for lots of things though.

It's an interesting point. I didn't buy Red Dead Redemption 2 partly because of the reports of the working conditions over at Rockstar. However, because I haven't been keen on their games for a long time it was easy for me to make this decision. What if these types of stories started coming out about Nintendo and that the next Mario and Zelda games that were to be released were created in horrendous working conditions, with staff being treated poorly and higher ups pocketing all of the bonuses. Would I be able to make the same decision as I had done with Red Dead? 

Last year, I had a conversation with a co-worker about how I cancelled my Amazon Prime account after lots of stories started cropping up about the working conditions that Amazon workers were having to put themselves through just to earn a wage. The lad at work said it was admirable what I had done but what about the food that I eat or the clothes that I wear? Most of these were probably made in a factory with similar, if not worse, working conditions. He had a point. Am I to stop buying clothes or food or basically anything just in order to take a stand? 

It's a weird situation because you want to help people where you can but unfortunately, in this horrible world we live in, most companies are run like this and I honestly don't know what the answer is.  

[Ronnie]

The other thing is, I don't think not buying a game sends the right message sadly. I'm sure the hard working developers behind Red Dead would have prefered you to buy the game and enjoy what they spent so long working on. Same with Nintendo, if crunch ever happened there, I'm sure the devs there would be sad that all their hard work meant reduced sales.

Sadly crunch happens everywhere, not just in games. The way to combat it isn't to make the people enforcing it poorer. At least IMO.

Edited June 27, 2019 by Ronnie

[Hero-of-Time]

4 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

The other thing is, I don't think not buying a game sends the right message sadly. I'm sure the hard working developers behind Red Dead would have prefered you to buy the game and enjoy what they spent so long working on. Same with Nintendo, if crunch ever happened there, I'm sure the devs there would be sad that all their hard work meant reduced sales.

Sadly crunch happens everywhere, not just in games. The way to combat it isn't to make the people enforcing it poorer. At least IMO.

True but, as seen in a lot of these reports, once games are finished some of these staff are actually let go and won't be receiving a penny for the sales of the game they have worked on anyway. 

The whole situation stinks and I think the only thing that will help change working conditions and dodgy business practices are if mainstream media  start reporting on them. Saying that, a lot of these companies have so much clout now that even then it may not help. Just look at the hoops EA are able to jump though in regards to their loot box controversy.  

[Ronnie]

2 minutes ago, Hero-of-Time said:

True but, as seen in a lot of these reports, once games are finished some of these staff are actually let go and won't be receiving a penny for the sales of the game they have worked on anyway. 

Absolutely, I just think they'd rather have their names attached to a game that sold a ton and have their work appreciated by as many people as possible.

[Hero-of-Time]

1 minute ago, Ronnie said:

Absolutely, I just think they'd rather have their names attached to a game that sold a ton and have their work appreciated by as many people as possible.

Yeah, I think there were a couple of examples like this during the Rockstar report.

I honestly wouldn't know how I would feel if I was in that situation. If I was treat in such a way that destroyed my body and mind then I think a big part of me would want the game to fail so that the company who treated me like garbage wouldn't get the success at the cost of myself. However, if you have been working on a game that reviews very well there may be some comfort knowing that your game is bringing joy to potentially thousands of people. 

 

[Dcubed]

We've never really had the issue of crunch getting this kind of media attention before.  While it feels like we're not making any progress, you have to keep piling on the pressure and working to expose these practices before these companies are forced to change.

 

Just look at how some companies are now using their lack of crunch as a point of promotion for themselves (like what Doug Bowser did for Nintendo).  That is what is going to really help to bring about change and that's not going to happen overnight.  You have to keep piling on that pressure and to not just let them sweep the issue under the rug and hope people forget about it.

[S.C.G]

 

[Sheikah]

Absolutely, I just think they'd rather have their names attached to a game that sold a ton and have their work appreciated by as many people as possible.

Actually the workers on some of these games do want it to fail. Here's an excerpt (and quote) from the Kotaku article about Anthem's downfall:

 

Among those who work or have worked at BioWare, there’s a belief that something drastic needs to change. Many at the company now grumble that the success of 2014’s Dragon Age: Inquisition was one of the worst things that could have happened to them. The third Dragon Age, which won Game of the Year at the 2014 Game Awards, was the result of a brutal production process plagued by indecision and technical challenges. It was mostly built over the course of its final year, which led to lengthy crunch hours and lots of exhaustion. “Some of the people in Edmonton were so burnt out,” said one former BioWare developer. “They were like, ‘We needed [Dragon Age: Inquisition] to fail in order for people to realize that this isn’t the right way to make games.’”.

 

I agree with that view - while it would hit the developers' bonuses for people to not buy their games it would send a message and potentially bring about change. With 2 flops in a row and media coverage there is a chance now that Bioware might do something about it.

[Hero-of-Time]

Fantastic, moving and pretty powerful episode from Jim.

This video right here shows just why loot boxes and microtransactions are a disgrace to the industry and need removing or at the very least regulating. There is ZERO defense for these kinds of practices in gaming. ZERO.

I honesty can't believe that Torulf Jernstrom is on a stage telling people how to wring the cash out of those who have addictive tendencies. It's absolutely disgusting. I honestly wanted to punch the smug git.

[drahkon]

This video needs to be shared...everywhere.

I'm not one to share pictures/videos on Facebook, but be sure that I will share this. It's about the video game industry; I am passionate about it and everything what Jim talks about makes me furious. But here's the thing: a lot of aspects can be extrapolated (probably the wrong word....maybe projected? I can't even think of the right German word) to other areas in life - I mean, there's the IKEA example in the video.

Companies prey on addiction. And I sure as hell got close to falling victim to it. Heck, I was on the verge of alcoholism a couple of years ago...I know what addiction to a physical substance feels like. And it's absolutely disgusting that addiction to non-physical substances are laughed upon and ridiculed. 

This is a rant. A non-reasonable rant. And I am angry right now. People need to be aware that addiction IN GENERAL is dangerous. And if someone profits off of addiction...they can go to hell. Be it in video games, be it in supermarkets, be it in casinos...fuck you and everything you do. 

Edit: I'm not only angry...I'm sad. 

Video games have been my hobby for almost 25 years. I've met so many great friends, I've connected to my dad more and more because he bought a Nintendo DS back in the days and I was always the one to help him (even in his last weeks on this planet), my mom still plays Animal Crossing on her DS and I love asking her about what she did in the game...sometimes I wake up and play 30 minutes before I have to leave for work...sometimes I skip social gatherings or studying sessions to play...

Why did games that I grew up with have to adopt mechanics to prey on mentally ill people? People that cannot defend themselves against it? People that need help? 

I will not buy Fifa again, I will not buy CoD...while I never fell victim to those games' gambling mechanics I won't give the developers/publishers any more of my money unless they drop that shit. And it's sad...CoD with my best friend is always a blast. Fifa with my mates from football? The laughs, the banter...  

I don't know...I just pretty much wrote down everything that came into my head after I watched the video...

Edited July 1, 2019 by drahkon

[S.C.G]

That video pretty much hit home for me as well, for a number of different reasons but one of them is that I think I finally have to admit to my game purchasing addiction, especially when it comes to physical Switch games, I mean just look at what I just posted mere minutes ago in the Transistor thread upon learning about the Limited Run games release of it...

Just now, S.C.G said:

Just the game for me then, as I really shouldn't be pre-ordering any more games as it is, but when it comes to limited release Switch games... I can't help it.*

Time to sell more stuff but soon I'll have to address this physical Switch collection, as there might be some that I might not need afterall ultimately.

Transistor is one of those games that I have really wanted to play though, so it makes sense to go for it.

*maybe its taken me a while to realise this, as it feeds into part of gaming addiction which has just been covered in the Jimquisition thread but I may have a game purchasing addiction... I will make a thread about this later in the evening as I feel like I finally need to address it.

I'm not trying to take away from anyone who has a problem with addiction when it comes to loot boxes etc either, but I will be making a thread about gaming addiction.

I realise that I can't keep buying all of the Switch games (other games as well but Switch is my latest vice it would seem) just out of habit... yes I will play a lot of them but other titles, probably not and I really have to stop this while I can, but anyway, I'll continue to talk about this when I make the thread...

Back to all of these "AAA" game companies who are exploiting vulnerabilities in people, there's basically no excuse for it at all and I will not support these companies at all.

I've been selling a lot of games from my collection from any of these companies who have been known for implementing these mechanics and/or generally abusing their workers.

There are still probably more that I could purge from my collection, but I think I've gotten rid of the worst offenders and as a general rule, they won't be getting money from me.

It's a start at least...

Now about that thread, should it be one in the General Gaming section titled "Addiction in gaming" or in General Chit Chat just titled "Addiction"? Let me know, then I'll make it.

[Dcubed]

Chilling to the absolute bone.  That talk from Torulf Jernstrom is just too foul to be spoken of.  It is just pure evil, delivered with the most utter of malice for its target audience.

 

It's all the same strategies as what drug dealers use.  There's no difference.

 

I hope with all my heart that the entire AAA industry gets regulated into the fucking ground.  Let them burn in a fire of legislation; raze the thing to the ground!

[Jonnas]

1 hour ago, Dcubed said:

I hope with all my heart that the entire AAA industry gets regulated into the fucking ground.  Let them burn in a fire of legislation; raze the thing to the ground!

That's... Destruction is not what regulation is meant to do. In fact, if regulation does come, it'll likely lead to a healthier industry overall.

Mainly because, for all that videogames have evolved, there is still the old stigma that they're toys or "not meant to be taken seriously", and so they're ignored by people who have the power to help. If the industry gets regulated in any capacity... that's taking the industry seriously. And lord knows legislators need to take it seriously (off the top of my head, there is still a lack of an effective "Developer's Union" of sorts). If you read up on the history of Hollywood and other major film markets, and you see that they didn't get where they are today (with their prestige, work safety, and other boons) without a lot of activism, lobbying and politics getting involved.

(And to be fair, strides have already been made. Remember the voice actor strike? No surprise that such a move came from a profession that's used to unions)

Without legislation, I imagine parts of the industry will eventually implode/cease to exist. That's where the fire metaphor might make some sense

[Dcubed]

6 hours ago, Jonnas said:

That's... Destruction is not what regulation is meant to do. In fact, if regulation does come, it'll likely lead to a healthier industry overall.

Mainly because, for all that videogames have evolved, there is still the old stigma that they're toys or "not meant to be taken seriously", and so they're ignored by people who have the power to help. If the industry gets regulated in any capacity... that's taking the industry seriously. And lord knows legislators need to take it seriously (off the top of my head, there is still a lack of an effective "Developer's Union" of sorts). If you read up on the history of Hollywood and other major film markets, and you see that they didn't get where they are today (with their prestige, work safety, and other boons) without a lot of activism, lobbying and politics getting involved.

(And to be fair, strides have already been made. Remember the voice actor strike? No surprise that such a move came from a profession that's used to unions)

Without legislation, I imagine parts of the industry will eventually implode/cease to exist. That's where the fire metaphor might make some sense

I would hope that it would lead to a healthier industry overall; but quite frankly, I don’t think this bubble will ever burst without outside intervention.  The gambling industry has continued to thrive, despite heavy regulation and a limited resource of problem gamblers to exploit.  I don’t think that the allure of “free” games and microtransactions will ever wane.  The only part of the industry that will eventually completely cease to exist (and is already barely gasping for air), is the side of the industry that ISN’T exploitative.  Games without microtransactions are struggling for survival; and THEY are the games/companies that need protecting! 

 

I don’t think that the current AAA and mobile industries can be salvaged at all at this point.  They simply need to be shut down and restarted from scratch.

 

These companies are run by outright sociopaths who have no sense of morality and cannot be reasoned with.  As far as I am concerned, the only real solution is to outright cut this side of the industry off completely.  So I am in favour of heavyhanded regulation that is aimed at outright closing off  in-game purchases; regardless of the splash damage that would happen.

 

As for the issue of unions? Yes, Sag Aftra did achieve a (limited) victory; because they are a well established actors guild that stemmed from Hollywood.  As a result, they have a level of clout that a video game developer union simply could never achieve.

 

At no point in Hollywood’s history were they ever even remotely as exploitative, underhanded and fundamentally sociopathic as the video game industry.  Nor was so much power concentrated amongst so few people/brands, whose faces were completely hidden.  Actors around the world were able to unionise because THEY held all the power; their presence in a movie was the big selling point for most blockbuster movies!  Video game developers however, do not have this luxury; and have no such power to speak of.  These industries fundamentally operate in different ways, and the video game industry operates much more like the textile industries than Hollywood (as much as publishers would have you think otherwise).  You don’t buy a Will Wright game, you buy a The Sims game.

 

So no, I do not think that light regulation of gambling mechanics in video games is enough.  I think that governments around the world need to take a destructive approach to regulation, because the heads of these major AAA and mobile publishers/developers have proven time and time again that they simply cannot be trusted.  Nothing they can produce is worth the tremendous societal damage that they are inflicting on both their developers and their target audience; and they need to be stopped.

 

But as you rightfully said, the situation (and the industry) needs to be taken seriously by worldwide governments before anything can be done... and that’s perhaps the biggest hurdle to be overcome.  That’s not going to happen unless activists continue to pile on the pressure though!

[Glen-i]

I haven't had an opportunity to watch the above video yet due to my limited internet access during the weekdays. I will at some point, don't get me wrong. I'm probably gonna be more appallled when I do.

But this is why I pulled all those dramatic theatrics when Pokémon GO was revealed, I couldn't care less what format it was on, but I just knew there'd be microstransactions. I still think it's been a negative influencer on Nintendo and especially The Pokémon Company when it comes to Mobile Gaming. The upcoming "Pokémon Masters" is going in hard on the Gacha element, and it makes me sad that a few will spend thousands to get Cynthia (Guarantee she'll be super rare to get, and once I'm proven right, I'm gonna call it out)

Now I'm not claiming the games those two have made are as egregious as some other examples. Not one bit, but it's still a dangerous combination of Nintendo's child-friendly franchises and Microstransactions.

It's a shame too, because I can guarantee there are some quality titles on mobiles (I really enjoyed Puzzles & Dragons when it ditched microstransactions for the 3DS version), but I'm never gonna find them, because the kind of game I think would be worth my time and deserves success would never be successful on the mobile market.

Edited July 2, 2019 by Glen-i

[Sheikah]

That's... Destruction is not what regulation is meant to do. In fact, if regulation does come, it'll likely lead to a healthier industry overall.

 

You realise that's not always true, right? Regulators can rule that lootboxes are illegal gambling. In fact, that's exactly what happened in Belgium.

[S.C.G]

I didn't even know about G2A, I wasn't going to use them to buy games anyway but it's good to know that it's not worth buying keys for games from them.

There are plenty of genuine places which sell keys for games for good prices, CDKeys are supposed to be reputable? At least that's from what I've heard.

I suppose the cost for these cheaper games comes from somewhere and I have often wondered how these places can offer games for such cheap prices.

At least buying games in a sale directly from digital store fronts such as on the Nintendo eShop, PSN or Xbox Live makes sure some money goes to the developers.

Or at least I hope so...

[Jonnas]

13 hours ago, Dcubed said:

I don’t think that the current AAA and mobile industries can be salvaged at all at this point.  They simply need to be shut down and restarted from scratch.

These companies are run by outright sociopaths who have no sense of morality and cannot be reasoned with.  As far as I am concerned, the only real solution is to outright cut this side of the industry off completely.  So I am in favour of heavyhanded regulation that is aimed at outright closing off  in-game purchases; regardless of the splash damage that would happen.

(...)

So no, I do not think that light regulation of gambling mechanics in video games is enough.  I think that governments around the world need to take a destructive approach to regulation, because the heads of these major AAA and mobile publishers/developers have proven time and time again that they simply cannot be trusted.  Nothing they can produce is worth the tremendous societal damage that they are inflicting on both their developers and their target audience; and they need to be stopped.

...Shutting down an entire branch of the industry is far bigger than what you're proposing here. Something like "Videogames cannot have a budget above X dollars" or "You can't have in-game transactions of any kind". Either of those would be ridiculous, but they would shut down the AAA and mobile game industry respectively. And then the sociopaths would find a new exploit.

There are reasonable restrictions to be made, though. Japan and China have restrictions on Gacha games, and Belgium's law is much stronger than even that. And since they're designed to cull the exploitative elements of videogames specifically, there's very little splash damage, the only thing they're shutting down is what they meant to shut down. And then the sociopaths will find a new exploit, but at least I can still buy reasonably-priced DLC.

As a rule of thumb, legislation meant to "help" the innocent is almost always preferable to legislation meant to "hurt" the bad guys. There are decades-old taxes in Brazil meant to hurt profits from foreign companies, but in practice, they only lead to fridges being more expensive than cars, or the PS4 having a launch price of 1000€ (I also remember stories of the Gamecube costing €600, but that was word of mouth). Attempts to go heavy-handed on an industry can easily makes things worse for the consumer.

Just saying, you can pull out harmful weeds without torching the garden.

(This argument might be born of the fact that you mean hyperbole and I'm reading you literally)

13 hours ago, Dcubed said:

As for the issue of unions? Yes, Sag Aftra did achieve a (limited) victory; because they are a well established actors guild that stemmed from Hollywood.  As a result, they have a level of clout that a video game developer union simply could never achieve.

At no point in Hollywood’s history were they ever even remotely as exploitative, underhanded and fundamentally sociopathic as the video game industry.  Nor was so much power concentrated amongst so few people/brands, whose faces were completely hidden.  Actors around the world were able to unionise because THEY held all the power; their presence in a movie was the big selling point for most blockbuster movies!  Video game developers however, do not have this luxury; and have no such power to speak of.  These industries fundamentally operate in different ways, and the video game industry operates much more like the textile industries than Hollywood (as much as publishers would have you think otherwise).  You don’t buy a Will Wright game, you buy a The Sims game.

It's not clout, it's experience. Voice actors aren't superstars, they're just willing to fight for their rights. Names like Crispin Freeman or Erica Lindbeck aren't big enough to assert dominance, but they do know how to stage a strike.

I'm not just talking recent history, here, the actor's guild goes a long way back: "contracts [...] did not include restrictions on work hours or minimum rest periods, and often had clauses that automatically renewed at the studios' discretion. These contracts were notorious for allowing the studios to dictate the public and private lives of the performers who signed them, and most did not have provisions to allow the performer to end the deal". The article only talks about actors, so it doesn't mention stuff like the early-day monopolies (when production and distribution were all handled by the same people), or the struggles that other professions face (writers, special effects crew, etc.).

Actors don't "hold all the power", studio owners do. If they can't get the actor they want, the film moves on with a different actor, they'll make someone else a star. The amount of actors with influence on those guys is much smaller than you suggest, especially back then.

Like you say, game developers aren't public figures, but they don't need to be. Screenwriters aren't public figures either, and they formed their guild even earlier.

All this to say, the videogame industry doesn't need to be like Hollywood to get its shit together, but it can learn from those fights. What is lacking right now is someone campaigning to get the ball rolling (even a minor name like, say, Tim Schaefer, could start something significant). The lack of a known movement might be because the industry's still relatively immature, but certainly not because it's impossible.

12 hours ago, Sheikah said:

 

You realise that's not always true, right? Regulators can rule that lootboxes are illegal gambling. In fact, that's exactly what happened in Belgium.

Ruling lootboxes illegal is not the same thing as "razing the AAA industry to the ground", which is the comment I was responding to. It's a strong piece of legislation for sure, but not something that cripples an entire industry.

[Sheikah]

Ruling lootboxes illegal is not the same thing as "razing the AAA industry to the ground", which is the comment I was responding to. It's a strong piece of legislation for sure, but not something that cripples an entire industry.

 

Right, but "regulation" can mean the destruction of a component - gambling/lootbox mechanics in Belgium, for instance. Sometimes the best form of regulation is to ban something rather than soften it.

[S.C.G]

 

[killthenet]

I know I'm close to it, being a Kickstarter backer, but I don't think Jim Sterling's assessment that Epic stepping in to issue refunds is Ysnet begging for money or makes them look ineffectual isn't exactly fair. Of course they don't have enough money in the bank to pay the refunds, the Kickstarter campaign happened 4 years ago now I'm sure any money they garnered from that has long since been spent. If they had been sitting on the money until now backers would have been questioning why it hadn't been spent on development. 

I understand it has taken a long time and partnering with Deep Silver wasn't the smartest move but I think it's incredibly unfair to compare this to Might No.9. Yu Suzuki is not Inafune, he hasn't spent the last 4 years spread thin on numerous projects or launching more Kickstarter campaigns - he has been focused solely on making Shenmue 3. Epic aren't stepping in to pay refunds just for the goodwill, they know what a PR disaster the Epic Games Store has been so far so it behoves them to change the narrative in any way that they can. 

I barely watch any of Jim Sterling's output, he definitely does a lot of good work (that last Jimquisition about loot boxes was in particular very much needed) but when it comes to Shenmue it seems like he delights in pissing off the series fanbase. Also I can't stand his sneering voice most of the time - he always sounds like he's out of breath.

Edited July 4, 2019 by killthenet