@Titntin Eh. It's a sign of passion, at the very least. As someone typically more reserved and outright apathetic at times, I don't think a little passion is anything to be ashamed of. Especially when, in this case, you were still stringing together fair arguments. So you weren't lost in your passion. Just passionately defending your stance.
@streetshadow Which all makes sense. And it's about as obvious as his claims about Bungie.
However, given that this article is specifically about said claims about Bungie, and what that means for Sony brass, all that is mostly irrelevant. He's not making a prediction, or even saying anything that thousands haven't been saying for years. Yet, the way a lot of people here are talking, Sony management isn't incompetent because Pachter has frequently been wrong in the past. The leap in logic boggles one's mind...
Him being objectively wrong about two points doesn't mean this comment on Bungie isn't inarguably correct. I'm not defending him, his career, or every single claim he's ever made (a lot of which, I agree, were rubbish). But I also don't abjectly resent the guy, and don't judge everything he says based on some preconceived hated.
@Titntin I'm very aware of who he is. This isn't a rubbish prediction. This is a largely inarguable observation of Sony's recent moves.
His ethos doesn't change that. It's obviousness doesn't mean he's wrong to point it out. If you're whole argument is you hate the guy, that says more about you than Pachter.
@Titntin I think you're the only one here calling any of this a prediction. He's an analyst, analyzing the current state of the industry.
If you agree about Bungie, you agree with him. At that point, the only thing to disagree with is his criticism of contemporary PlayStation management and the need to replace all of them.
@naruball You hit the nail on the head. The only reasonS PlayStation is thriving right now is because Xbox s*** the bed AND Sony established a stranglehold on the market 10 years ago.
Imagine if the Sony of today switched places with the Sony that had to salvage the PS3...
@Titntin I mean, this isn't really nonsense. Mostly, he's just saying the Bungie acquisition was stupid. Which it was. And no amount of "Helldive this" or "sales records" that makes buying a troubled company for billions any less clueless.
@Ricky-Spanish Listen, I'm sorry you feel attacked. But you literally came here, asked what the big deal was, had several commenters explain the MANY issues surrounding the topic, and just tried to downplay their arguments.
No one should be attacking you over this, but I would hope this has at least provided you some food for thought.
@Ricky-Spanish If you're not defending AI holistically, then why even chime in here? Yes, it has good uses, but that doesn't mean the bad uses are irrelevant.
And it's great you feel secure in your news sources. But not everyone has a go-to place for news, and, ideally, that doesn't mean they shouldn't get to live in reality. Also, trustworthy news sources will become increasingly nebulous as AI becomes increasingly convincing.
@Ricky-Spanish I think you're confusing an active aversion to AI with a legitimate criticism of a company's abuse of it. You can even argue the AI is the least offensive part of this specific story; of a company hired a lookalike and made an ad passing them off as an actual celebrity/influencer, it would be just as problematic. What most people here are bothered by is how AI makes doing just that easy and practically free.
And still, it's weird you would say it's easily detected when you misfired. And in the real world, a recent AI photo of the POTUS falling was making the rounds, some idiot political personality posted an OBVIOUS AI video of AOC going on some rant in the House, and the 2024 elections were filled with AI misinformation — and that's just in America, in the last year. This is already happening, and the technology gets more convincing by the month.
@Artois2 People generally don't like AI because it offers an alternative to actually hiring people, and only works because it's trained on people's work without licensing or any appropriate compensation.
This is an extreme case where, not only is what's formerly mentioned true, but they also just straight up stole the likeness of content creators. Unless there paid for them, but at that point they could've easily had them make a 10 second 'react' ad themselves. So probably without permission.
I'm not one to hate on AI whenever I see it, but this is clearly a worst case scenario if its implementation.
@Ricky-Spanish I can't find any evidence to corroborate your claim that Seal-Seal commercial was AI. It also doesn't look like AI at all to me, just normal CG.
So I'm not sure where that's coming from... Coca-Cola had an AI Christmas commercial that WAS me with condemnation, though. And they didn't even steal anyone's likeness for that one.
So you could only finish the story if you're online? That doesn't make much sense. Maybe this'll be a post-credits bonus mission. Or the rumor is complete BS. But I can't imagine this is true, unless the entire campaign is only playable with online co-op.
Playing a bit more of the Battlefield 6 beta with a friend. It's...fine. The gunplay is a lot more satisfying than previous entries. But, aside from that, it's really just the same Battlefield. I don't think any of the beta's maps are particularly interesting, though. Kinda makes me miss Battlefield 1 in that regard.
Hoping to finally finish Donkey Kong Bananza. I've been collecting every banana (oooh, banananaaa), so it's been a long process. I am a Bananza stan that would say it's one of the best games I've played in years. But, to be fair, I haven't played half of the GotY candidates from the last 5 years. Still, though, Bananza is phenomenal regardless.
I don't expect this to happen this weekend, but after I'm done with Bananza I'm planning on starting Expedition 33 and returning to Tears of the Kingdom to beat it already.
Whenever anyone says any contemporary release is the 'worst game ever,' the memory of Bubsy 3D flickers in my heart and I immediately realize they don't know what the f*** they're talking about.
@Rich33 I think it's pretty hard to directly correlate GamePass with the state any of those games released. Halo was delayed a year. Doom was a complete, functional game. Oblivion was a shadow dropped remake of an already glitchy game. Starfield was almost certainly mismanaged and conceptually inadequate. Hellblade II was probably short because it was unsustainably expensive due to graphics and performances. Redfall was in development for years before they just threw it out into the market.
For the ones that actually released in a sorry state, there's just not much reason to believe it was caused by GamePass
@AhmadSumadi I think that ship has sailed. We already have a few — GamePass, PS+, Nvidia, EA Play, Ubisoft+, uhhh Antstream (which isn't really relevant, but ANTSTREAM SHOUTOUT). They've been around for a long time now, and have yet to have any exclusive content. The closest thing to what you're concerned about was Stradia, and that died...hard.
If it made sense financially to offer games through monthly subscriptions exclusively, GamePass would already be doing it. So the overbearing streaming service epidemic will likely stay exclusive to the movie/tv industry.
Besides, companies already have microtransactions to prey on addictive personalities. Undoubtably more profitable than offering every customer flat-rate access to their content.
@AhmadSumadi I mean, 2025 has probably been one of the best years for movies in a long time. You could argue that that's DESPITE streaming services, and the movie industry has only gotten better since distancing itself from streaming. But I think I would argue there were much bigger things getting in the way of movies. And, at the very least, streaming didn't permanently cripple the industry, or anything.
@Rich33 I guess... I mean, there's still plenty of low-cost, low-effort titles on PlayStation and Switch. Just look at the whole ai slop phenomenon. None of which are even on GamePass or PS+.
Or are we saying AA titles gamers supposedly clamor for, like South of Midnight, are a blight upon gaming...?
Always confused why PS+ is excluded from these conversations despite being practically the same service. Only real difference apropos this topic is that Sony doesn't offer 1st-party games day 1. That's literally it; there's still plenty of 3rd-parties that sign up for PS+ day 1.
Well the account was definitely made by a Sony employee, so it makes sense they would only link it with Sony accounts. I hadn't thought about it before, but I guess it makes sense Sony will be handling the marketing for the film.
I'll be really curious to see if Sony Pictures pulls this off. Partially because a not-embarrassing Legend of Zelda movie would be cool to see. But also, I imagine if it's a success, Nintendo will just work with Sony on all their live-action adaptations. I do kinda think Nintendo will have illumination handle all things Mario going forward. So presumably they're looking for partnerships rather than shopping out all their IP to different studios.
Heck, maybe if Sony plays their cards right, they can be Nintendo's primary movie partner. I wouldn't mind their take on Metroid — or SPA's Star Fox or Splatoon.
@Skippermonkey That's only in reference to Dragon Age, Titanfall, EA Sports, and most of their other IP.
But because people only this year realized CoD has cosmetics tonally at odds with realistic military action, Battlefield has been positioned as the underdog savior of military shooters. At least until the game has a mildly buggy launch, and the Internet tells everyone to hate 6, like they did 2042.
I like that it's based on a Korean novel. And there's literally nothing else currently exciting about a CG trailer that looks like 90% of games coming out of China and Korea.
"Jaw dropping" is a stretch. Maybe eyebrow raising at most... And now I'm thinking we should make a facial expression qualitative metric.
I like how people are hyping themselves up for this one for no real reason. CoD has Beavis and Butthead? Let's pretend that Battlefield hasn't had constant missteps for the last 10 years, and act like the latest has done ANYTHING to stand out from its predecessors.
I'll play it. 'Cause even mediocre Battlefield is worth a whirl. Do I expect it to be significantly better than 2042, V, or 1? No — why would I. Also confused people are clamoring for a realistic military sim as though CoD and Battlefield are the only military shooters in the market...
On the one hand, I love seeing emerging video game markets in is as of yet neglected regions, and think it's great Sony is investing in them. On the other hand, every single Chinese video game I've seen looks like a derivative bore.
So while I appreciate this, it's nothing that's got me personally excited. At least it helps supplement Sony's MIA first-parties, though.
While I agree people are too hard on this service, I don't think any sort of objective analysis of it's value is warranted or worthwhile. If someone doesn't like the games catalog, that's a subjective opinion that won't really be swayed any which way.
Now, why those players still find themselves subscribing to the service is beyond me.
Curious to see where the Pal Bros sit with this. There's really no reason to give Sony a pass on this one when the circumstance is barely different than Pokemon/Palworld. And I'd say the shamelessness is equal.
Also, weren't people congratulating Sony for marketing this shameless Horizon clone in light of the Nintendo drama? Heh. Just remember, people, mega-corporations aren't about being ethical.
Battlefield already does the 'lotta people in a big map' thing, so I don't necessarily think a BR mode would add much besides a looting gameplay loop. I can see the implementation of BF's kinda overpowered vehicles making it more interesting, but not by much.
The only legacy online shooter I wanted to see a BR for was Halo. And I think that ship has sailed.
@rjejr Sooo, there isn't really a S2 version of Jamboree. There's a S2 exclusive expansion that doesn't alter the OG game at all — counter to what I wrongly assumed.
"I also thought that I might've misunderstood you, and you were saying you can't get the S2 edition technical upgrades at $60. Which would be a more cohesive argument."
This is why I suggested Zelda would be a better example of this specific thing. Because there, the S2 editions are specifically for technical upgrades (I mean, Nintendo wants us to think it's for Zelda Notes. But nah). JTV, on the other hand, is essentially standalone game modes and extra mini games. But then you criticize how JTV doesn't upgrade Jamboree's performance, which is another argument entirely that contradicts this "S2 edition is $80" point.
You're just saying a lot of random things that, apart from another, are sensible criticisms, but together obfuscate exactly what your point is. Now you're taking specifically about getting a box that says Switch 2 on it. Which — I don't know — can't they just buy the S1 version and put it on their shelf? Does it really matter that they aren't offering a S1 game branded as a S2 game? If someone's so OCD about it, I'd hope they know they can easily make their own case inserts at a print shop...
I don't know — I guess let me tersely address every point I've deciphered. Just so my stance is clear:
Jamboree is an $80 game: Jamboree+JTV is $80. That's a $60 S1 game and a $20 S2 expansion.
You can't get a physical copy of S2 Jamboree: Literally don't care about case branding. There isn't really a S2 Jamboree, anyway. And if there was...
The S2 Editions of games cost $70-$80: Yes they do. It's debatable if they should. And I still think that's different from, 'these games cost $70-$80. Nintendo at least seems to think that they should have extra content of some sort if they're charging money for upgrades. But that leads to the problem...
S2 technical upgrades are locked behind premium DLC (Some of them, at least): Nintendo didn't start the practice of charging for next-gen editions. So I wouldn't say $10 asking price is too egregious. If it comes with extra content, cool. As for the $20s, I don't really see why it can't be a la carte; $10 for technical improvements and $10 for new content. I'm guessing Nintendo just didn't want to make this more confusing than it already is. But still, I support them offering it separately.
Nintendo is forcing you to buy these packs on S2, making these games $70-$80: I mean, not really. You don't have to buy the upgrades for any of these games if you don't think it's worth it. They're all still very playable on the S2.
@Starkei While I agree that Disney has oversaturated Star Wars, I never like this idea that they ruined the IP.
Aside from the brief EU stuff that really only had mass appeal on the gaming front (and not even much therein), Star Wars has mostly been a mediocre affair propped up by the nostalgia of genX.
I'd argue the original trilogy is only pretty good, with RotJ stumbling a lot. The IP was forever tarnished by Lucas himself with the prequel trilogy (RotS is barely decent. The other two actively suck). And there were actually more than 3 movies when you were a kid. There was an infamous Holiday Special. Two Ewok movies the biggest fans couldn't be bothered with. Two animated series the biggest fans couldn't be bothered with. I'm not going to look into the history of SW comics, but I don't think Marvel's stuff from back then is remembered too fondly.
In contrast, Disney put out a decent movie trilogy (if RotSW wasn't so 'by-committee,' I'd probably say a good movie trilogy). Arguably some of the best SW ever with Andor. A movie which is retroactively loved (still think Rogue One was boring). And too many series...which range from mediocre to pretty all right. Really not much different than Star Wars in the past, honestly. Content output is just denser and more consistent.
EDIT: Oh, and even though it doesn't get nearly as much appreciation after season 3, it can't be understated that Mando was probably Star War's biggest mainstream moment since the release of Phantom Menace.
@rjejr You can absolutely buy that $60 S1 game and play it on the S2. If you're saying there should be a S2 upgrade, that's a different argument. You can play Jamboree on the S2 without buying JTV, that version just isn't marketed as the S2 version.
You can also play BotW and TotK on the S2 without the upgrade packs. Repeat: you DO NOT have to buy the upgrade packs. And I have been playing Kirby and the Forgotten Land on the S2 without its upgrade pack (which isn't even out yet. It's not like Jamboree has been incompatible with the S2 for the last month).
EDIT: In fact, with the Zelda games and a good chunk of BC titles, even the S1 versions see a performance boost natively on the S2 (more like they hit they max targets if they struggled before). For free. There's also several Nintendo games that did get free S2 updates that increased their resolution and/or performance — like Odyssey. Honestly, it just sounds like you have no idea what you're talking about.
Even to answer your original request ("show me the S2 version sold w/o the DLC digitally..."), you already found that. It's the page for the S1 version. It's like how you can play the PS4 version of Forbidden West on the PS5 — literally the same thing.
@kcarnes9051 Then we're not really talking about repetition per se. We're talking about bad game design.
I would argue this iterative and compounding approach to chasing the fox you're proposing is very different from Rebirth's 20ish mini-games. Though I understand you just brought up Rebirth to disprove my claim about the inescapable nature of repetition in open-worlds. And you've now conceded that repetition is inevitable in most every instance in life. And I've conceded that it's entirely feasible that a team with enough time and money would create a game free of repetition. So it's hard to say where we really stand at this point...
Like I said in my original comment, it sounds like Yotei will still have categorical side-activities (hence my assertion that the game will still have repetition), but they've put extra work into keeping them fresh and subversive (hence your insistence that the game can easily be less 'braindead' than its predecessor). Whether or not that constitutes "do[ing] the same thing over and over again" is up to interpretation. I think if you are chasing an animal 20 times in a game, regardless of how it's reinvented, you're still doing the same thing over and over again. It can just be varying degrees of braindead and grating, and its repetition can be correspondingly more or less apparent. That's the spirit of what I was getting at: his wording seemed a little misleading — especially the part that was emphasized in the article — in that you will certainly still experience repeat side-content. Because such is the nature of a contemporary open-world, AAA game — and really open-world games in general.
Now if you're just saying Yotei could and should have more variety than Tsushima, cool. I never really commented on degrees of variety, only some guaranteed degree of repetition. If you're saying that's exactly what Fox was saying, well...yeah, probably. Like previously stated, it's a little vague and open to interpretation. So me taking the 'not do same over and over a-blah' comment literally isn't, I don't think, too unreasonable. And I think my original comment still stands as a notable observation upon the nature of open-world games apropos this topic, regardless of any miscommunications therein.
I do still kinda resent this hang up on mine not playing the game, though. Sure, I don't have intimate knowledge about the specifics of repetition in Tsushima. But I still have well-informed thoughts on the matter, despite my armchair player status (@Michael2008ish -XOXO). For that matter, that's also why I spoke about open-world games in a general sense instead of commenting out of my depth on any specifics of Ghosts. I knew Tsushima had repetitive side-content due to a lack of iteration and variety, I surmised that Yotei will similarly have repetitive side-content due to its genre. I don't feel like I need to have played Tsushima to justify that opinion. Nor do I feel like its undermined for said reason.
@kcarnes9051 I did immediately follow that comment by saying that applies to open-world holistically. But I did refer to side-content first, so we'll just focus on that.
If there's no instance in Rebirth wherein the player engages with side-content iterative of other side content, cool. That would disprove my comment as an absolute. I don't, however, believe any anecdotal examples to the contrary dismantles my claim as a general rule. One of the biggest disparities here is I'm saying non-repetitious side-content is hindered by logistical realities. Whereas you're saying it's just a matter of no imagination and/or logistical mismanagement. I think your position is right and wrong. Right in the sense that, yes, without logistical hurdles and with noodles of imagination, a studio could hypothetically craft a game with no repetition. Wrong in the sense that it oversimplifies logistical complexities often outside the team's control, and imaginative side-content isn't necessarily good content nor aligned with the vision of the game — even repetition can be good design given execution.
I guess my base claim is that repetition is a necessity of open-world design because teams have deadlines and priorities. Hazelight is kinda a bad example, because their games can have so much variety because they're linear. Even in the case of Rebirth, they had the unique advantage over something like Ghosts because it was a sequel. So the foundation of the game was already there, meaning the team could allocate more resources to side-content. And, even generally, I wouldn't doubt that the core of the FF7remake series takes less labor than that if Ghosts, just given the nature of their respective genres. For instance, one might question why Rebirth doesn't have an in-depth stealth mechanic when Ghosts is managing combat, stealth, traversal, and exploration as its core mechanics.
But moving a little away from my comment, I do want to briefly touch upon your seeming praise for core mechanical subversion. I do not think a game incorporating foundationally different gameplay mechanics is an absolute good. Even in Rebirth's case, I'm guessing there's a subsect of players that found them gimmicky and a waste of time. While Ghosts' implementation might be clunky, certain games might want to keep their core mechanics at the forefront of every moment of gameplay. A JRPG, I might argue, works well with such diversity because they generally have a much less brisk pace. And a much more slice-of-life tone, somehow even when all life is on the line. I can think of a dozen other reasons why mechanical subversion might not be a great design direction — like if it's bad leers at Ratchet & Clank — but I don't really think I should write 12 more paragraphs...
@GigaGaia Then it's literally a $60 S1 game with a $20 expansion exclusive to the S2. So why is OP calling it an $80 game?
Like, we can criticize the worth of JTV (Lord knows I had no plans on buying it to begin with). But, focusing on the premise of OP's argument, all this information does is reinforce that Jamboree is indeed a $60 game.
@Bsb56 That's a really s*** marketing plot. "Hey, let's make everyone mad at us, so we can retreat like a coward and do the normal thing that wouldn't have made us look good in the first place."
More likely series of events:
Microsoft: "Nintendo is charging $80? It's time we do the same!"
Obsidian: "Well, they're charging $80 for the sequel to one of the best selling games of all time."
Microsoft: "Aren't you coming out with Fallout, or something? Let's charge $80 for that."
Obsidian: "No one is going to pay $80 for our esoteric, barely established IP. You're going to cannibalize our revenue if you do that."
Microsoft: "Haha, $80 it is!"
Months later
Microsoft: "Why aren't people pre-ordering your game!? This is our biggest release this year."
Obsidian: "Why is our obscure RPG your biggest release? Whatever. Probably because you went over our heads and set the price to $80."
Microsoft: "So if it's $70, it'll sell as much as the Switch 2?"
Obsidian: "W-who the hell is in charge over there? Do you guys know anything about this industry?"
Microsoft: "We know it makes us money."
Comments 1,155
Re: 'They Don't Know What They're Doing': Analyst Sticks the Boot in Sony's 'Clueless' Management
@Titntin Eh. It's a sign of passion, at the very least. As someone typically more reserved and outright apathetic at times, I don't think a little passion is anything to be ashamed of. Especially when, in this case, you were still stringing together fair arguments. So you weren't lost in your passion. Just passionately defending your stance.
Re: 'They Don't Know What They're Doing': Analyst Sticks the Boot in Sony's 'Clueless' Management
@streetshadow Sure. I'm just saying, that has no real baring on these specific comments.
Re: 'They Don't Know What They're Doing': Analyst Sticks the Boot in Sony's 'Clueless' Management
@Titntin I mean, you really said the exact same thing, just more abrasively.
Which didn't really obscure your points, just provided a light distraction.
Re: 'They Don't Know What They're Doing': Analyst Sticks the Boot in Sony's 'Clueless' Management
@streetshadow Which all makes sense. And it's about as obvious as his claims about Bungie.
However, given that this article is specifically about said claims about Bungie, and what that means for Sony brass, all that is mostly irrelevant. He's not making a prediction, or even saying anything that thousands haven't been saying for years. Yet, the way a lot of people here are talking, Sony management isn't incompetent because Pachter has frequently been wrong in the past. The leap in logic boggles one's mind...
Re: 'They Don't Know What They're Doing': Analyst Sticks the Boot in Sony's 'Clueless' Management
@Titntin Holy s***, you really hate this guy...
Him being objectively wrong about two points doesn't mean this comment on Bungie isn't inarguably correct. I'm not defending him, his career, or every single claim he's ever made (a lot of which, I agree, were rubbish). But I also don't abjectly resent the guy, and don't judge everything he says based on some preconceived hated.
Re: 'They Don't Know What They're Doing': Analyst Sticks the Boot in Sony's 'Clueless' Management
@Titntin I'm very aware of who he is. This isn't a rubbish prediction. This is a largely inarguable observation of Sony's recent moves.
His ethos doesn't change that. It's obviousness doesn't mean he's wrong to point it out. If you're whole argument is you hate the guy, that says more about you than Pachter.
Re: 'They Don't Know What They're Doing': Analyst Sticks the Boot in Sony's 'Clueless' Management
@Shepherd_Tallon ...? What are you guys talking about? At most the article frames it as a revelation — and I wouldn't even go that far.
This has got to be the most nonsensical reason to discount what he said...
Re: 'They Don't Know What They're Doing': Analyst Sticks the Boot in Sony's 'Clueless' Management
@Titntin I think you're the only one here calling any of this a prediction. He's an analyst, analyzing the current state of the industry.
If you agree about Bungie, you agree with him. At that point, the only thing to disagree with is his criticism of contemporary PlayStation management and the need to replace all of them.
Re: 'They Don't Know What They're Doing': Analyst Sticks the Boot in Sony's 'Clueless' Management
@naruball You hit the nail on the head. The only reasonS PlayStation is thriving right now is because Xbox s*** the bed AND Sony established a stranglehold on the market 10 years ago.
Imagine if the Sony of today switched places with the Sony that had to salvage the PS3...
Re: 'They Don't Know What They're Doing': Analyst Sticks the Boot in Sony's 'Clueless' Management
@Titntin I mean, this isn't really nonsense. Mostly, he's just saying the Bungie acquisition was stupid. Which it was. And no amount of "Helldive this" or "sales records" that makes buying a troubled company for billions any less clueless.
Re: 'They Don't Know What They're Doing': Analyst Sticks the Boot in Sony's 'Clueless' Management
I'm already guessing that most of these comments will misunderstand 'profitability' for 'knowing what they're doing.'
Re: Shameful AI Ads Put the Spotlight on The First Descendant
@Ricky-Spanish Listen, I'm sorry you feel attacked. But you literally came here, asked what the big deal was, had several commenters explain the MANY issues surrounding the topic, and just tried to downplay their arguments.
No one should be attacking you over this, but I would hope this has at least provided you some food for thought.
Re: Shameful AI Ads Put the Spotlight on The First Descendant
@Ricky-Spanish If you're not defending AI holistically, then why even chime in here? Yes, it has good uses, but that doesn't mean the bad uses are irrelevant.
And it's great you feel secure in your news sources. But not everyone has a go-to place for news, and, ideally, that doesn't mean they shouldn't get to live in reality. Also, trustworthy news sources will become increasingly nebulous as AI becomes increasingly convincing.
Re: Shameful AI Ads Put the Spotlight on The First Descendant
@Ricky-Spanish I think you're confusing an active aversion to AI with a legitimate criticism of a company's abuse of it. You can even argue the AI is the least offensive part of this specific story; of a company hired a lookalike and made an ad passing them off as an actual celebrity/influencer, it would be just as problematic. What most people here are bothered by is how AI makes doing just that easy and practically free.
And still, it's weird you would say it's easily detected when you misfired. And in the real world, a recent AI photo of the POTUS falling was making the rounds, some idiot political personality posted an OBVIOUS AI video of AOC going on some rant in the House, and the 2024 elections were filled with AI misinformation — and that's just in America, in the last year. This is already happening, and the technology gets more convincing by the month.
Re: Shameful AI Ads Put the Spotlight on The First Descendant
@Ricky-Spanish And you're still indifferent...?
Re: Shameful AI Ads Put the Spotlight on The First Descendant
@Ricky-Spanish It won't always just be an ad. That's what I'm saying.
Re: Shameful AI Ads Put the Spotlight on The First Descendant
@Ricky-Spanish Okay... Still concerning when anyone doesn't recognize/wrongly acuses AI.
I'd suggest you learn from your mistake and hone your AI detector. You're gonna need it when the stakes are a little higher than a Mountain Dew ad.
Re: Shameful AI Ads Put the Spotlight on The First Descendant
@Artois2 People generally don't like AI because it offers an alternative to actually hiring people, and only works because it's trained on people's work without licensing or any appropriate compensation.
This is an extreme case where, not only is what's formerly mentioned true, but they also just straight up stole the likeness of content creators. Unless there paid for them, but at that point they could've easily had them make a 10 second 'react' ad themselves. So probably without permission.
I'm not one to hate on AI whenever I see it, but this is clearly a worst case scenario if its implementation.
Re: Shameful AI Ads Put the Spotlight on The First Descendant
@Ricky-Spanish I can't find any evidence to corroborate your claim that Seal-Seal commercial was AI. It also doesn't look like AI at all to me, just normal CG.
So I'm not sure where that's coming from... Coca-Cola had an AI Christmas commercial that WAS me with condemnation, though. And they didn't even steal anyone's likeness for that one.
Re: Rumour: Call of Duty: Black Ops 7's Campaign May Force You into Multiplayer
So you could only finish the story if you're online? That doesn't make much sense. Maybe this'll be a post-credits bonus mission. Or the rumor is complete BS. But I can't imagine this is true, unless the entire campaign is only playable with online co-op.
Re: Talking Point: What Are You Playing This Weekend? - Issue 594
Playing a bit more of the Battlefield 6 beta with a friend. It's...fine. The gunplay is a lot more satisfying than previous entries. But, aside from that, it's really just the same Battlefield. I don't think any of the beta's maps are particularly interesting, though. Kinda makes me miss Battlefield 1 in that regard.
Hoping to finally finish Donkey Kong Bananza. I've been collecting every banana (oooh, banananaaa), so it's been a long process. I am a Bananza stan that would say it's one of the best games I've played in years. But, to be fair, I haven't played half of the GotY candidates from the last 5 years. Still, though, Bananza is phenomenal regardless.
I don't expect this to happen this weekend, but after I'm done with Bananza I'm planning on starting Expedition 33 and returning to Tears of the Kingdom to beat it already.
Re: Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 Will Go Up Against Battlefield 6 from 14th November
Yeah...no. It's Call of Duty. It's always one of the best selling games of the year by default.
This is getting kinda asinine.
Re: Make Up Your Own Mind About Critically Panned PS1 Platformer Bubsy 3D from 9th September on PS5
Whenever anyone says any contemporary release is the 'worst game ever,' the memory of Bubsy 3D flickers in my heart and I immediately realize they don't know what the f*** they're talking about.
Re: Xbox Game Pass May Make Devs 'Wage Slaves', Says Ex-PlayStation Exec
@Rich33 I think it's pretty hard to directly correlate GamePass with the state any of those games released. Halo was delayed a year. Doom was a complete, functional game. Oblivion was a shadow dropped remake of an already glitchy game. Starfield was almost certainly mismanaged and conceptually inadequate. Hellblade II was probably short because it was unsustainably expensive due to graphics and performances. Redfall was in development for years before they just threw it out into the market.
For the ones that actually released in a sorry state, there's just not much reason to believe it was caused by GamePass
Re: Xbox Game Pass May Make Devs 'Wage Slaves', Says Ex-PlayStation Exec
@AhmadSumadi I think that ship has sailed. We already have a few — GamePass, PS+, Nvidia, EA Play, Ubisoft+, uhhh Antstream (which isn't really relevant, but ANTSTREAM SHOUTOUT). They've been around for a long time now, and have yet to have any exclusive content. The closest thing to what you're concerned about was Stradia, and that died...hard.
If it made sense financially to offer games through monthly subscriptions exclusively, GamePass would already be doing it. So the overbearing streaming service epidemic will likely stay exclusive to the movie/tv industry.
Besides, companies already have microtransactions to prey on addictive personalities. Undoubtably more profitable than offering every customer flat-rate access to their content.
Re: Xbox Game Pass May Make Devs 'Wage Slaves', Says Ex-PlayStation Exec
@AhmadSumadi I mean, 2025 has probably been one of the best years for movies in a long time. You could argue that that's DESPITE streaming services, and the movie industry has only gotten better since distancing itself from streaming. But I think I would argue there were much bigger things getting in the way of movies. And, at the very least, streaming didn't permanently cripple the industry, or anything.
Re: Xbox Game Pass May Make Devs 'Wage Slaves', Says Ex-PlayStation Exec
@AdamNovice As someone with a huge backlog of games I paid for, played for 1-5 hours, then never found the time to go back to, I feel attacked.
Re: Xbox Game Pass May Make Devs 'Wage Slaves', Says Ex-PlayStation Exec
@Rich33 I guess... I mean, there's still plenty of low-cost, low-effort titles on PlayStation and Switch. Just look at the whole ai slop phenomenon. None of which are even on GamePass or PS+.
Or are we saying AA titles gamers supposedly clamor for, like South of Midnight, are a blight upon gaming...?
Re: Xbox Game Pass May Make Devs 'Wage Slaves', Says Ex-PlayStation Exec
Always confused why PS+ is excluded from these conversations despite being practically the same service. Only real difference apropos this topic is that Sony doesn't offer 1st-party games day 1. That's literally it; there's still plenty of 3rd-parties that sign up for PS+ day 1.
Re: Sony's Zelda Movie Now Has an Official Social Media Account, and It's Only Following PlayStation
Well the account was definitely made by a Sony employee, so it makes sense they would only link it with Sony accounts. I hadn't thought about it before, but I guess it makes sense Sony will be handling the marketing for the film.
I'll be really curious to see if Sony Pictures pulls this off. Partially because a not-embarrassing Legend of Zelda movie would be cool to see. But also, I imagine if it's a success, Nintendo will just work with Sony on all their live-action adaptations. I do kinda think Nintendo will have illumination handle all things Mario going forward. So presumably they're looking for partnerships rather than shopping out all their IP to different studios.
Heck, maybe if Sony plays their cards right, they can be Nintendo's primary movie partner. I wouldn't mind their take on Metroid — or SPA's Star Fox or Splatoon.
Re: EA's Stock Reaches a Record High on the Back of Explosive Battlefield 6 Open Beta
@Nepp67 ...How?
Re: EA's Stock Reaches a Record High on the Back of Explosive Battlefield 6 Open Beta
@Skippermonkey That's only in reference to Dragon Age, Titanfall, EA Sports, and most of their other IP.
But because people only this year realized CoD has cosmetics tonally at odds with realistic military action, Battlefield has been positioned as the underdog savior of military shooters. At least until the game has a mildly buggy launch, and the Internet tells everyone to hate 6, like they did 2042.
Re: EA's Stock Reaches a Record High on the Back of Explosive Battlefield 6 Open Beta
A perfect reminder that stocks are stupid and move for the most arbitrary reasons all the time.
Also a reminder of why 'player count' is what's often being pitched to investors.
Re: Jaw Dropping PS5 Action Game Woochi the Wayfarer Inspired by Classic Korean Novel
I like that it's based on a Korean novel. And there's literally nothing else currently exciting about a CG trailer that looks like 90% of games coming out of China and Korea.
"Jaw dropping" is a stretch. Maybe eyebrow raising at most... And now I'm thinking we should make a facial expression qualitative metric.
Re: Battlefield 6's Open Beta Has Completely Blown Up
I don't get it; why are we pushing this CoD vs. BF thing now...? I feel like this fanboy war hasn't been relevant since BF4.
Re: Poll: Are You Playing the Battlefield 6 Beta?
I like how people are hyping themselves up for this one for no real reason. CoD has Beavis and Butthead? Let's pretend that Battlefield hasn't had constant missteps for the last 10 years, and act like the latest has done ANYTHING to stand out from its predecessors.
I'll play it. 'Cause even mediocre Battlefield is worth a whirl. Do I expect it to be significantly better than 2042, V, or 1? No — why would I. Also confused people are clamoring for a realistic military sim as though CoD and Battlefield are the only military shooters in the market...
Re: Poll: What Was Your PS5 Game of the Month for July 2025?
Is Donkey Kong an instrument?
Re: Sony Will Fund the Next Wave of PS5 Hits from China
On the one hand, I love seeing emerging video game markets in is as of yet neglected regions, and think it's great Sony is investing in them. On the other hand, every single Chinese video game I've seen looks like a derivative bore.
So while I appreciate this, it's nothing that's got me personally excited. At least it helps supplement Sony's MIA first-parties, though.
Re: Reaction: PS Plus Essential Deserves Much More Credit for Its Free PS5, PS4 Games in 2025
While I agree people are too hard on this service, I don't think any sort of objective analysis of it's value is warranted or worthwhile. If someone doesn't like the games catalog, that's a subjective opinion that won't really be swayed any which way.
Now, why those players still find themselves subscribing to the service is beyond me.
Re: Swery65, Suda51's Wild Collab Game Hotel Barcelona Hits PS5 in September
It looks bad, but also kinda amazing (...?). Makes sense given the collab.
Re: Sony Sues Tencent Over 'Shameless' Horizon Copycat Coming to PS5
Curious to see where the Pal Bros sit with this. There's really no reason to give Sony a pass on this one when the circumstance is barely different than Pokemon/Palworld. And I'd say the shamelessness is equal.
Also, weren't people congratulating Sony for marketing this shameless Horizon clone in light of the Nintendo drama? Heh. Just remember, people, mega-corporations aren't about being ethical.
Re: PS5's Battle Royale Craze Appears to Continue in Battlefield 6
Battlefield already does the 'lotta people in a big map' thing, so I don't necessarily think a BR mode would add much besides a looting gameplay loop. I can see the implementation of BF's kinda overpowered vehicles making it more interesting, but not by much.
The only legacy online shooter I wanted to see a BR for was Halo. And I think that ship has sailed.
Re: Xbox Backtracks on $80 Price Tag for The Outer Worlds 2 Following Public Outcry
@rjejr Sooo, there isn't really a S2 version of Jamboree. There's a S2 exclusive expansion that doesn't alter the OG game at all — counter to what I wrongly assumed.
"I also thought that I might've misunderstood you, and you were saying you can't get the S2 edition technical upgrades at $60. Which would be a more cohesive argument."
This is why I suggested Zelda would be a better example of this specific thing. Because there, the S2 editions are specifically for technical upgrades (I mean, Nintendo wants us to think it's for Zelda Notes. But nah). JTV, on the other hand, is essentially standalone game modes and extra mini games. But then you criticize how JTV doesn't upgrade Jamboree's performance, which is another argument entirely that contradicts this "S2 edition is $80" point.
You're just saying a lot of random things that, apart from another, are sensible criticisms, but together obfuscate exactly what your point is. Now you're taking specifically about getting a box that says Switch 2 on it. Which — I don't know — can't they just buy the S1 version and put it on their shelf? Does it really matter that they aren't offering a S1 game branded as a S2 game? If someone's so OCD about it, I'd hope they know they can easily make their own case inserts at a print shop...
I don't know — I guess let me tersely address every point I've deciphered. Just so my stance is clear:
Jamboree is an $80 game: Jamboree+JTV is $80. That's a $60 S1 game and a $20 S2 expansion.
You can't get a physical copy of S2 Jamboree: Literally don't care about case branding. There isn't really a S2 Jamboree, anyway. And if there was...
The S2 Editions of games cost $70-$80: Yes they do. It's debatable if they should. And I still think that's different from, 'these games cost $70-$80. Nintendo at least seems to think that they should have extra content of some sort if they're charging money for upgrades. But that leads to the problem...
S2 technical upgrades are locked behind premium DLC (Some of them, at least): Nintendo didn't start the practice of charging for next-gen editions. So I wouldn't say $10 asking price is too egregious. If it comes with extra content, cool. As for the $20s, I don't really see why it can't be a la carte; $10 for technical improvements and $10 for new content. I'm guessing Nintendo just didn't want to make this more confusing than it already is. But still, I support them offering it separately.
Nintendo is forcing you to buy these packs on S2, making these games $70-$80: I mean, not really. You don't have to buy the upgrades for any of these games if you don't think it's worth it. They're all still very playable on the S2.
Re: Star Wars Outlaws Sequel Reportedly Cancelled, Will Stay in a Galaxy Far, Far Away
@Starkei While I agree that Disney has oversaturated Star Wars, I never like this idea that they ruined the IP.
Aside from the brief EU stuff that really only had mass appeal on the gaming front (and not even much therein), Star Wars has mostly been a mediocre affair propped up by the nostalgia of genX.
I'd argue the original trilogy is only pretty good, with RotJ stumbling a lot. The IP was forever tarnished by Lucas himself with the prequel trilogy (RotS is barely decent. The other two actively suck). And there were actually more than 3 movies when you were a kid. There was an infamous Holiday Special. Two Ewok movies the biggest fans couldn't be bothered with. Two animated series the biggest fans couldn't be bothered with. I'm not going to look into the history of SW comics, but I don't think Marvel's stuff from back then is remembered too fondly.
In contrast, Disney put out a decent movie trilogy (if RotSW wasn't so 'by-committee,' I'd probably say a good movie trilogy). Arguably some of the best SW ever with Andor. A movie which is retroactively loved (still think Rogue One was boring). And too many series...which range from mediocre to pretty all right. Really not much different than Star Wars in the past, honestly. Content output is just denser and more consistent.
EDIT: Oh, and even though it doesn't get nearly as much appreciation after season 3, it can't be understated that Mando was probably Star War's biggest mainstream moment since the release of Phantom Menace.
Re: Star Wars Outlaws Sequel Reportedly Cancelled, Will Stay in a Galaxy Far, Far Away
@EK42 This is either an out-of-touch youth or satire thereof.
Re: Xbox Backtracks on $80 Price Tag for The Outer Worlds 2 Following Public Outcry
@rjejr You can absolutely buy that $60 S1 game and play it on the S2. If you're saying there should be a S2 upgrade, that's a different argument. You can play Jamboree on the S2 without buying JTV, that version just isn't marketed as the S2 version.
You can also play BotW and TotK on the S2 without the upgrade packs. Repeat: you DO NOT have to buy the upgrade packs. And I have been playing Kirby and the Forgotten Land on the S2 without its upgrade pack (which isn't even out yet. It's not like Jamboree has been incompatible with the S2 for the last month).
EDIT: In fact, with the Zelda games and a good chunk of BC titles, even the S1 versions see a performance boost natively on the S2 (more like they hit they max targets if they struggled before). For free. There's also several Nintendo games that did get free S2 updates that increased their resolution and/or performance — like Odyssey. Honestly, it just sounds like you have no idea what you're talking about.
Even to answer your original request ("show me the S2 version sold w/o the DLC digitally..."), you already found that. It's the page for the S1 version. It's like how you can play the PS4 version of Forbidden West on the PS5 — literally the same thing.
Re: 'We Won't Make You Do the Same Thing Over and Over': Ghost of Yotei PS5 Will Keep You Guessing
@kcarnes9051 Then we're not really talking about repetition per se. We're talking about bad game design.
I would argue this iterative and compounding approach to chasing the fox you're proposing is very different from Rebirth's 20ish mini-games. Though I understand you just brought up Rebirth to disprove my claim about the inescapable nature of repetition in open-worlds. And you've now conceded that repetition is inevitable in most every instance in life. And I've conceded that it's entirely feasible that a team with enough time and money would create a game free of repetition. So it's hard to say where we really stand at this point...
Like I said in my original comment, it sounds like Yotei will still have categorical side-activities (hence my assertion that the game will still have repetition), but they've put extra work into keeping them fresh and subversive (hence your insistence that the game can easily be less 'braindead' than its predecessor). Whether or not that constitutes "do[ing] the same thing over and over again" is up to interpretation. I think if you are chasing an animal 20 times in a game, regardless of how it's reinvented, you're still doing the same thing over and over again. It can just be varying degrees of braindead and grating, and its repetition can be correspondingly more or less apparent. That's the spirit of what I was getting at: his wording seemed a little misleading — especially the part that was emphasized in the article — in that you will certainly still experience repeat side-content. Because such is the nature of a contemporary open-world, AAA game — and really open-world games in general.
Now if you're just saying Yotei could and should have more variety than Tsushima, cool. I never really commented on degrees of variety, only some guaranteed degree of repetition. If you're saying that's exactly what Fox was saying, well...yeah, probably. Like previously stated, it's a little vague and open to interpretation. So me taking the 'not do same over and over a-blah' comment literally isn't, I don't think, too unreasonable. And I think my original comment still stands as a notable observation upon the nature of open-world games apropos this topic, regardless of any miscommunications therein.
I do still kinda resent this hang up on mine not playing the game, though. Sure, I don't have intimate knowledge about the specifics of repetition in Tsushima. But I still have well-informed thoughts on the matter, despite my armchair player status (@Michael2008ish -XOXO). For that matter, that's also why I spoke about open-world games in a general sense instead of commenting out of my depth on any specifics of Ghosts. I knew Tsushima had repetitive side-content due to a lack of iteration and variety, I surmised that Yotei will similarly have repetitive side-content due to its genre. I don't feel like I need to have played Tsushima to justify that opinion. Nor do I feel like its undermined for said reason.
Re: 'We Won't Make You Do the Same Thing Over and Over': Ghost of Yotei PS5 Will Keep You Guessing
@kcarnes9051 I did immediately follow that comment by saying that applies to open-world holistically. But I did refer to side-content first, so we'll just focus on that.
If there's no instance in Rebirth wherein the player engages with side-content iterative of other side content, cool. That would disprove my comment as an absolute. I don't, however, believe any anecdotal examples to the contrary dismantles my claim as a general rule. One of the biggest disparities here is I'm saying non-repetitious side-content is hindered by logistical realities. Whereas you're saying it's just a matter of no imagination and/or logistical mismanagement. I think your position is right and wrong. Right in the sense that, yes, without logistical hurdles and with noodles of imagination, a studio could hypothetically craft a game with no repetition. Wrong in the sense that it oversimplifies logistical complexities often outside the team's control, and imaginative side-content isn't necessarily good content nor aligned with the vision of the game — even repetition can be good design given execution.
I guess my base claim is that repetition is a necessity of open-world design because teams have deadlines and priorities. Hazelight is kinda a bad example, because their games can have so much variety because they're linear. Even in the case of Rebirth, they had the unique advantage over something like Ghosts because it was a sequel. So the foundation of the game was already there, meaning the team could allocate more resources to side-content. And, even generally, I wouldn't doubt that the core of the FF7remake series takes less labor than that if Ghosts, just given the nature of their respective genres. For instance, one might question why Rebirth doesn't have an in-depth stealth mechanic when Ghosts is managing combat, stealth, traversal, and exploration as its core mechanics.
But moving a little away from my comment, I do want to briefly touch upon your seeming praise for core mechanical subversion. I do not think a game incorporating foundationally different gameplay mechanics is an absolute good. Even in Rebirth's case, I'm guessing there's a subsect of players that found them gimmicky and a waste of time. While Ghosts' implementation might be clunky, certain games might want to keep their core mechanics at the forefront of every moment of gameplay. A JRPG, I might argue, works well with such diversity because they generally have a much less brisk pace. And a much more slice-of-life tone, somehow even when all life is on the line. I can think of a dozen other reasons why mechanical subversion might not be a great design direction — like if it's bad leers at Ratchet & Clank — but I don't really think I should write 12 more paragraphs...
Re: Xbox Backtracks on $80 Price Tag for The Outer Worlds 2 Following Public Outcry
@GigaGaia Then it's literally a $60 S1 game with a $20 expansion exclusive to the S2. So why is OP calling it an $80 game?
Like, we can criticize the worth of JTV (Lord knows I had no plans on buying it to begin with). But, focusing on the premise of OP's argument, all this information does is reinforce that Jamboree is indeed a $60 game.
Re: Xbox Backtracks on $80 Price Tag for The Outer Worlds 2 Following Public Outcry
@Bsb56 That's a really s*** marketing plot. "Hey, let's make everyone mad at us, so we can retreat like a coward and do the normal thing that wouldn't have made us look good in the first place."
More likely series of events:
Microsoft: "Nintendo is charging $80? It's time we do the same!"
Obsidian: "Well, they're charging $80 for the sequel to one of the best selling games of all time."
Microsoft: "Aren't you coming out with Fallout, or something? Let's charge $80 for that."
Obsidian: "No one is going to pay $80 for our esoteric, barely established IP. You're going to cannibalize our revenue if you do that."
Microsoft: "Haha, $80 it is!"
Months later
Microsoft: "Why aren't people pre-ordering your game!? This is our biggest release this year."
Obsidian: "Why is our obscure RPG your biggest release? Whatever. Probably because you went over our heads and set the price to $80."
Microsoft: "So if it's $70, it'll sell as much as the Switch 2?"
Obsidian: "W-who the hell is in charge over there? Do you guys know anything about this industry?"
Microsoft: "We know it makes us money."