JLSlone

I keep seeing folks throw out this grenade analogy and just thought I'd point out that if you throw a grenade in a room and then stand there, you get blown up too.

So technically, Sony did the right thing in this analogy. They threw the grenade and then ran for cover.

In short, maybe time to go with a non grenade analogy.

@Boxmonkey you started your post with no, but then confirmed you're only placing value on what these people can produce.

@Boxmonkey that's because you've been brainwashed to only value others by what they produce, not as people.

The more absurd prices get for everything, the more painfully obvious it becomes that economics and value are just a shared delusion that's gotten out of hand.

Eventually, things are going to need a reset.

@get2sammyb even from Sony themselves.

For example, listing a profit boosting reason of "improvement to costs" the same year you're raising prices is...well, it's something! Feels great as a consumer!

@Mr-Cage I'm actually a bit more in your camp! "Billions dollar corporation adds extra billions" doesn't really get me smiling!

@get2sammyb I'll be honest, and maybe I just didn't understand the technology, but I always thought things like block chain could really help to create a digital "used" market.

They could even do a typical corporate thing and say "hey, we get 5 dollars for every 'used" game transaction" and most people wouldn't bat an eye.

@Mr-Cage I guess technically , if you enjoy Sony 1st party games, yes this affects you. Sony being healthy in theory leads to more 1st party games in the future.

@get2sammyb I think overall Nintendo is just handling all of this a bit better than everyone else. They were at an advantage by cushioning the price at the beginning at a point a bit higher than the public expected (leading to a inconsequential "drop the price" revolt), but earned dividends on the strategy when their price rise seemed modest in comparison to everyone else.

They also seem to be doing better on game pricing strategies at the moment. Things like Splatoon and Star Fox and Rhythm Heaven not being priced at 69.99 seems to indicate they may have learned a bit from the outrage of MKW release.

"I'm going to buy this thing, half with money I need to borrow, but I'll never actually own the debt, I'll just pass it on to the thing I don't own yet."

Yeah, no need for more regulation here folks! It might interfere with the "creativity" of the market!

Somehow I knew this would lead to a bunch of "OHHH SEE!!!" from the physical disc people.

So, for analogy sake, let's run through some scenarios.

If this was a hack/DDOS attack: it would be like me saying we shouldn't have physical games because your house or retailers can be robbed.

If services are just down for a bit: it would be like me saying we shouldn't have physical because sometimes the power goes out or shops close for the night.

This doesn't prove or disprove anything about physical vs digital. It's just a thing that happened.

@Dalamar sure, that's possible, though I don't feel it's reflective of the majority of either side of this discussion.

@GamingGod yep! I believe all the way up through C&C Tiberian Sun. Then EA came calling.

And Ensemble made the Age of Empires games back in the day.

@Dalamar I know this is difficult in the age of the Internet to believe, but people can disagree with your idea and also not be morons/fanboys/useless feeders. They can just disagree.

@RobN @ElPenitente Westwood, Ensemble, Maxis...gosh I miss those studios.

@Dogbreath or since Bluebird isn't a super established character like those other 3, you'd name it that so folks in the general public would say, "Oh hey, it's a character from Batman."

And then if it's good and catches on, and Bluebird becomes a hit character with the public, 30 years later you wouldn't need the Batman in the title.

Kind of like how Wolverine (that lazy layabout) had to hitch his wagon to the X-Men a decade into that comics existence. But now, he can stand on his own as a character.

Once again, it's pretty easy marketing. Kind of like, I'm not sure...naming a game something from established myth...something super popular from mythology...maybe like "God of War"... because people would hear "Kratos" and go "who the hell is that?" and be less interested in the game.

@Psofo if you don't care what your character looks like, then why is pushing for them to look different dumb? That seems to imply you do care if they look different.

@ButteredCrumpet you can keep me on standby, but unfortunately, if asked to defend you, you'd probably end up in prison!

That said, this whole thing is starting to remind me of a a point I heard someone make the other day. "Arguing with grifters is like playing chess with a pigeon...it's just going to knock over the pieces and strut around like it's won."

But at least some folks are getting something out of this back and forth!

@Dogbreath so just to be clear, if someone said "I'm not buying this game because it has a white, male lead" you would be defending them this vigorously in a comment section?

Because you seem to keep framing those people as "whining" and "complaining" in your comments, as opposed to these other people who don't dare deserve to be critiqued for their purchasing decisions.

@Alpine there's a lot of literature that one can read about how the actions of the past affect the current pain people go through. It isn't disingenuous, it is factual.

@Dogbreath if all they're asking for is to be represented, then guess what...they already won.

Find me a genre that doesn't have male representation.

Sports games? Basically 100% male representation.

Action games? I wouldn't even know where to start. Link? Ezio? Kratos in about 10 other games? Nathan Drake?

RPGs? Cloud. Sepirtoth. Other people that aren't in Final Fantasy.

Platformers? Mario, Sonic, Kirby (could be claimed be either probably?).

So if that's their only complaint, that they want representation...is it really a valid complaint given the vast majority of games already have them represented?

@Alpine yeah...it'd be nice if we could maybe start fixing some of that and not get distracted by who goes first.

@Dogbreath alright, let's try this again, since perhaps my last post was getting a bit argumentative. Sorry to the mods.

I'm sorry you feel like something is being taken from you or you're being treated unfairly. But I'd ask you to imagine how the groups of people that have been treated that way for centuries might feel. Not only treated that way, but in many facets of life had it codified into law.

Is video games the best place to start changing that cultural norm. Maybe. Maybe not. I can't say for sure. And I genuinely don't want anyone to feel left out or made to feel they're somehow villains, males included.

Maybe the game will be good. Maybe even good enough that you come around and play it. But do you know what happens if it's bad? A parade of right wing hucksters who will insist it's bad because it features a female lead. And those some vile people will never come out and call a game with a white, male lead bad for that reason. It's subtle, but it's just as heinous.

All that said, I do empathize that you feel targeted or vilified for just being who you are. I don't think the vast majority on the progressive side feel that way towards you, and it's unfortunate that the very loud minority that might get amplified by right wing trolls.

I hope you come around on this game, but if not, that's fine too.

And with all that said...I don't like GoW and won't be playing it either way. Cheers!

@Dogbreath again, take some time to reflect on your characterization of the situation.

Men: cool, calm, just asking for something
Women: hysterical, crying, whining, tantrums

Really take a second and do some inner reflecting. Maybe ask yourself if you haven't also been caught up in a narrative.

@Dogbreath this is a clear waste of time, but why not? Let's start from the top.

Why isn't it called Spider-Man: Wolverine?

Probably because they share a setting, but entirely different stories. A quick Google search is really all you need to understand this one, assuming you actually have any interest in understanding it.

Your next point is ACTUALLY hilarious. Wolverine wasn't in the original X-Men comics. In fact, he didn't even appear until a decade in. So I guess by your metric, Wolverine is in fact not a strong character who can stand on his own. He had to leach off the success of X-Men to get anywhere in this world. Are you going to bypass buying Wolverine now because he's a fraud who couldn't stand on his own two legs and had to be helped?

Why wasn't Laufey chosen for the original games? Well...I'm not sure. It was a different set of writers writing a different kind of story? Maybe it didn't occur to them? Where does any creative idea really come from? Who is to say? I don't think that means that new ideas can't exist just because someone else had other ideas in the past.

Why isn't Laufey like Bayonetta? Because she isn't? The same reason Mario isn't like Sonic? Alucard isn't like Ezio? Women can be different types of women! NEAT!

And your last point is just you pretending one opinion is a monolith. It isn't.

Again, probably a waste of time to type all this, but why not?

@Dogbreath it's hard not to notice that you portrayed the female in this example as a hysterical, crybaby and the male counter argument as thoughtful and composed.

Maybe take a minute to reflect on what that says about your view of the world.

@Dogbreath good job, buddy, you did it! You won the culture war!

That said, it's way more simple than people want to make it. This game has God of War on it because it's in the God of War universe and you'd be an absolute marketing moron to not take advantage of that in the title. And I mean a literal, actual moron.

My middlest daughter was playing around in Astro's Playroom last night and having a blast, so needless to say I was very happy to see Astrobot on sale for the first time since I got a PS5!

Me - still rolling through FFVIIR (Switch 2) over here. I've also downloaded a boat load of demos to try out this weekend. I may give RE2R (PS5) some more attention as well.

Wife - she's gotten very heavy into her Ghosts of Tsushima (PS5) playthrough.

Kids - Tomadachi Life (Switch Lites) and Minecraft (Switch Lites/PC)

@bluemage1989 your posts in this topic are so wildly insulting to actual marginalized communities in this world that they're borderline reportable to the mods.

"Wow" is the only word I have.

At this point in life, I just don't need gaming to turn into the existential battle the Internet wants to make everything into.

Still buying a PS6? You're a bootlicking, selfish, corpo loving, sheep who is actively destroying the rights of game ownership.

Not buying a PS6? yes you will, don't lie, yes you will, you're not going to give up and they know it and none of this matters and you're all whiners and haters and children yelling for a toy.

How about neither? How about whether my lightning box uses discs to make my glowy box show me fast pictures doesn't need to be a battle about society at large?

I've got plenty of other, honest to god, life and death things to worry about in the current state of the world. I'm living in a country where my daughters have fewer rights than my wife did. So no, whether I "own" a game isn't something I need to be a cataclysmic discussion on corporations vs capitalism vs socialism vs piracy vs etc etc etc.

End of speech.

@Zuljaras that would actually be the best free market solution. Unfortunately, I think it undercuts Sony's aim of putting people in their digital storefront.

That said, I also don't think it will mean discounts and sales will disappear. Most companies don't have the patience of a Nintendo and just wait people out on purchasing.

@naruball sure, but people are criticizing them for going silent and then criticizing them for being tone deaf.

But if they didn't have any intention of changing their mind, what they're doing now is really the only option they have when it comes to social media.

@naruball isn't the issue that your only form of acknowledgement is for them to reverse course in their decision? What if they have no intention of reversing course on their decision? What message can you write up that doesn't just lead to more mobbing?

Me:
FFVII Remake (Switch 2) - at the end of chapter 9 and I've had a really good time with it so far.
RE2R (PS5) - I'm not too far in and playing it very sporadically. It's been a while since I've played a RE game, so I'm finding in criminally short on ammo at all times!

Wife:
Magical Princess (Steam) - definitely not my kind of game
Ghosts of Tsushima (PS5) - heavy discount on this one so I got it for her. She really likes it and it's absolutely gorgeous.

@rjejr I was able to use the Cohen Mets for a time to point and say, "See, you can't just buy a World Series!"

Thanks a lot, Dodgers. sad trombone

Ghosts of Tsushima is also on sale?

Is it worth getting the 30 dollar PS5 version compared to the 20 dollar PS4?

@TheOldHunter4K no idea what a Bill Sykes is.

I honestly wasn't judging you. It's just a pet peeve of mine I guess! I also have the entire NES, SNES, and N64 catalogs on several devices. Spoiler alert: I stole them.

@Lanmanna I hear you. Heck, I only bought a PS5 last month.

But I'm just saying, reading a lot of, "no physical, I'm out!" I'd just be curious how many actually stuck to it.

I remember when I was 9 or so and we got a Nintendo 64. And I went to put my Super Mario World cartridge into it, so I could go back and play a few levels, and you'll never guess it: the damn thing didn't fit!

I was so angry! I immediately went to reddit and posted about corpos and consumer rights!

Also, I'm not normally a "let's put you on a list" guy, but I feel like we need a list of everyone claiming they won't buy a PS6.

@TheOldHunter4K as in you stole them all, I'm guessing?

I'm not sure why folks that pirate don't just state it more bluntly. It's always "I sailed the seas" or "played it for free."

Don't dance around it. You stole it.

@RobN I think it's fairly safe to assume I'm not going to convince you and you aren't going to convince me on this one. Thanks for the conversation though!

@RobN except that the hundreds of people being laid off aren't being laid off because of their bad choices. They're being laid off because of someone else's.

Government isn't someone's "mommy" because they say it might be a good idea to not let billion dollar corporations step all over people that had no say in those choices.

It also creates a healthier industry because it lets studios live or die on their own merits, not be smothered by larger competitors who gobble them up with more capital, regardless of their good or bad intentions.

You also really keep leaning hard on the "what do government bureaucrats know better" angle, as if they can't be experts in things like economics and free market policy. They can, and often used to, know far more than executive who's one goal is to make the numbers go up. They can also step in to protect not just those studios who were at risk of consolidation, but also the consolidatior from its own worst tendencies.

That's why it's important for government to be involved in oversight and prevent this very predictable thing from happening.

@RobN more government oversight would have stepped in to keep Microsoft from gobbling up more studios, because we've learned from the past what happens when we allow it. Everyone loses, including Microsoft.

@RobN I'll just copy my comment from the last article because it perfectly ties in with what you're saying here.

This is why government oversight is so important. Having a giant corporation come in slinging money is all well and good, until it decides it's done slinging money.

If some of these devs had been left alone, would their studios have been shuttered? Probably. Most likely even. However, they also could have pivoted, kept a closer eye on their financials, and shipped a game with a bit less scope but just as much heart. Maybe that would have broken through and given gamers something exciting.

Instead, Microsoft says "do what you want, money is no object!...until it is." And now they're trying to salvage a situation where they don't look like a viable business.

Government regulations can be cumbersome and irksome, but almost all of them come from a mistake in the past that we desperately want to avoid in the future. This is just our latest example.

This is why government oversight is so important. Having a giant corporation come in slinging money is all well and good, until it decides it's done slinging money.

If some of these devs had been left alone, would their studios have been shuttered? Probably. Most likely even. However, they also could have pivoted, kept a closer eye on their financials, and shipped a game with a bit less scope but just as much heart. Maybe that would have broken through and given gamers something exciting.

Instead, Microsoft says "do what you want, money is no object!...until it is." And now they're trying to salvage a situation where they don't look like a viable business.

Government regulations can be cumbersome and irksome, but almost all of them come from a mistake in the past that we desperately want to avoid in the future. This is just our latest example.

On topic, I did my part in June and bought one.

I'll wait on my thank you card from Sony!

@Dogbreath sure... Except for that housing, food, and (in the USA at least) medical care are wildly more expensive than they were in the 90s.

I'd say you could work hard and better yourself with an education but...sad trombone

@viktorcode I think this gets lost a bit in the sadness of the layoffs. Keeping on that many employees had to be costing them 4-5 million dollars a month by the time you take everything into account. Just to cover the laid off people, you'd need to be selling 60,000 copies of a full priced game every month.

I'm a little out of the loop here, so can someone tell me: did Bungie want to make a Destiny 3? Or were they not allowed to make a Destiny 3?

I see a lot of people bringing up Destiny 3 and blaming management, so I'm assuming we've got a smoking gun that says everyone at Bungie wanted to make it but were forced to do Marathon?