Messages

1

Classic Video Games / Re: Letting go of the CRT

« on: December 04, 2020, 04:33:16 am »

No, why would I get rid of something that still works and/or can be repaired and that I use?
They really don't take up much space, minimalists and people that pay for digital over exaggerate how much space objects take which has infected peoples' minds. A subtle form of marketing really, unfortunately it works.

2

Modern Video Games / Re: Game Collections You Would Love To See

« on: November 10, 2020, 10:18:50 pm »

Anything for PC as long as it is a real physical copy which means all game content on the physical media (preferably disc), no online authorization, and no platform such as Steam or any of the others.

3

Classic Video Games / Re: About that physical cartridge of Shantae by LRG...

« on: November 10, 2020, 10:11:12 pm »

I don't like LRG for them promoting "Forever Physical" while selling download codes for PC
The only reason they exist is because digital was accepted in the first place, if it wasn't then publishers would have to do the physical releases themselves like they used to. Developers going through them for their physical releases instead of a full retail physical release only further adds to industry executives' belief/desire that physical copy demand is so low that going through someone like LRG is acceptable.

4

Site Feedback / Re: Feature Request - Count Digital Games as Part of a Console's Collection

« on: November 10, 2020, 10:03:54 pm »

Download licenses shouldn't even be on this website to begin with

5

General / Re: What Style Or Type Of Graphics Do You Prefer In Video Gaming?

« on: June 09, 2019, 12:55:00 am »

I'd be fine with new games having 6th gen graphics at best (with modern resolutions) if it meant games were sold physical only again and all the positives that come with that such as no DLC or micro transactions, entire game is on the physical copy, no paying for a download, no patches or updates because the game has to be on the physical copy because they have no way to patch or update it, no early access, etc.

6

Modern Video Games / Re: Do you think games are often worth full retail price? (e.g. $60 USD)

« on: February 13, 2019, 08:38:09 pm »

I am willing to pay a full $60 if it is a physical copy with the entire game on disc/cartridge and it has no DLC or micro transactions and is playable without a patch, unfortunately that is rare these days. I'm not willing to pay even 25 cents for a digitally distributed game.
Games are more expensive than ever when you take into consideration you don't get a manual, DLC and micro transactions exist, and games are intentionally released unplayable since they can be patched through some online platform. Digitally distributed games are the most expensive by far since on top of what I already listed, you obviously don't get a physical copy either.
Some people say sales make digital cheaper, but low cost does not equal cheap. If a restaurant charges $5 for a sip of water, that sip of water is not cheap just because it is only $5. $100 might be expensive for an ounce of silver, but that is cheap for an ounce of gold. Paying for a digitally distributed game is essentially giving a donation to a company, and the game and digital distribution companies won't even admit it.

7

Modern Video Games / Re: What platform do you play on most?

« on: February 13, 2019, 08:29:46 pm »

PC.
I'm forced to pirate almost all my games though since PC has been digital only for a while. I have never used Steam or any "service" like it and have never paid for a digitally distributed game and never will. It is a shame that my preferred platform is the one that started or popularized most of the cancers plaguing gaming today such as paid digital distribution and all the negatives that come with it such as easy distribution of DLC and micro transactions which encourages them, digital only, games being intentionally released unfinished since they can be patched through some platform, etc.

8

General / Re: PC Gaming Takes More Know How Than Consoles In My Experience To Keep Working

« on: January 29, 2019, 04:59:35 pm »

Valve has done more damage to gaming than any other company.

You're going to need to explain that one.

To me, Steam is a storefront that provides a simple, cheap, and easy way to accumulate, play, and maintain a PC game library across multiple devices. While they have been a bit of a monopoly in the past, I'm not seeing how that is damaging in the slightest.

Valve is the one that popularized games being digital only and all the negatives that come along with it. Paid digital distribution has created the environment for disgusting business tactics such as early access aka paying to test a game when devs used to have to pay people to test their game, DLC, micro transactions, intentionally releasing unfinished/buggy games to the point of being unplayable since they can just be easily patched later, doesn't leave a sour taste in your mouth for paying for a game that is unfinished/buggy to the point of being unplayable since it is so easy to update, games as a service which digital distribution is, not being able to sell it, being expected to pay for a digital download, making games even more popular from easy access to people who otherwise wouldn't play or play as much thus making them a huge market which makes companies make games focused on them instead of actual gamers, lowered the barrier for entry, etc.
Gabe Newell said it was a bad thing that developers in the NES days had to release their games complete and whole since they had no way of patching it. Same thing is happening to consoles these days, most "physical" copies aren't even physical copies since they don't have the entire game on disc and can't be played without a patch. I think they are doing it on purpose to get people to switch to digital. I've seen a lot of people say they pay for digital on consoles now since the "physical" copies dont have the entire game on disc anyways, but that is exactly why they are doing it.  Half Life 2 was the first case of online client DRM for a single player game even if you bought it physically, you still had to keep the disc in the drive even after authorizing it on Steam. Make physical copies as hard to deal with as possible to get people to switch to digital. Games on consoles at least used to be released complete and whole, playable without a patch. That all changed when they expected people to connect to each console's digital distribution platform.
A lot of the "positives" Valve and paid digital distribution users tout are not positives, they are negatives. Updates are a good example, those are not a good thing, that means the developer did not release a complete and/or playable game and being able to easily update encourages developers to release unfinished or unplayable games since they can just patch it later.
The rest of the industry picked up Valve's tactics after they saw the "PC master race" fell for it.
"Cheap"
Nope, games are more expensive than ever when you take into consideration you are no longer getting a physical copy or manual, DLC and micro transactions exist, games are released unplayable without a patch, only paying to access files from a server, etc. Steam or any other digital sale is not cheap. Regular physical PC copies used to be better than most modern collector's editions. If a restaurant charges $5 for a sip of water, that sip of water is not cheap just because it is only $5.
Whatever convenience is provides is insignificant. I don't need the "cloud" (aka someone else's computer), the very few save files I want to keep I already back up myself. I already back up my own media, whether it be ripped from my physical copies or pirated. When you pay for digital you are essentially giving a donation to a company and as consolation get a license to access a part of their special server, they won't even admit it is a donation, instead they try to brainwash you with the "support the developer" line which a lot of people have fell for.  Piracy is just as easy, easier in a lot of ways since you don't have to have an account or proprietary client, and allows you to play games without financially rewarding paid digital distribution and all the negatives that are inherent with it.
The entire industry and all PC developers were pushing it as hard as they can, all the "journalists" were pushing for it too and did not explain the many negatives.
The more popular paid digital distribution has got, the worse things get. It is being pushed so hard for a reason.

9

General / Re: Game Cases for Digital Titles: Yay or Nay?

« on: January 25, 2019, 11:32:58 pm »

No. You obviously want physical copies but paying for digital distribution is a vote against physical copies, making your own cases gives the developer even more of an excuse to not give their games a physical release.

10

Modern Video Games / Re: How important are graphics to you?

« on: January 25, 2019, 11:26:52 pm »

Depends, I don't like modern indie pixel art garbage but I would be fine with new games having 6th gen or early 7th gen graphics if it meant all games only got proper physical releases and no digital release which means no DLC, no micro transactions, and no patches or updates.

11

General / Re: PC Gaming Takes More Know How Than Consoles In My Experience To Keep Working

« on: January 25, 2019, 10:58:18 pm »

Having a modern PC and buying PC games exclusively on Steam I have almost never had any issues.

I started pirating when PC went digital only. I have never had Steam or any other digital distribution platform like it on my machine and never will. Valve has done more damage to gaming than any other company.

12

General / Re: Are you satisfied with your game collection?

« on: June 10, 2018, 04:32:45 am »

No, I would love more physical PC games with the game on disc and without requiring some extra platform like Steam, but PC games rarely get physical releases anymore and even if they do they are usually just a Steam code in a box. I refuse to pay for a digitally distributed game and I obviously like physical copies but PC is my favorite platform which happens to be the platform that popularized digital distribution and pretty much all PC gamers these days are fine with throwing money away to Steam or GOG which sucks for me.

13

Modern Video Games / Re: E3 2018: Devolver Digital

« on: June 10, 2018, 04:24:58 am »

Not a fan of them, they don't like putting out physical copies of their games even though they seem to be doing pretty well.

14

Modern Video Games / Re: Why Have Modern Games Become Mostly Digital (besides patches)

« on: January 08, 2018, 05:24:30 am »

Several reasons, and none of those reasons are to make it better for the consumer aside from convenience.
Digital distribution is a prerequisite for business tactics such as DLC, micro transactions, games being unfinished/buggy to the point of being unplayable, and early access (aka paying to test someone's game when devs used to have to pay to test their game). Valve are the ones who popularized it on PC but also influenced it for consoles since it worked for Valve on PC. The first case was when Half-Life 2 was released, it required Steam even if you bought a physical copy it.
The rise of Steam from the mid to late 2000s was an ominous event that was met with blissfully ignorant cheers. As they became more influential, Steam marketed itself to producers as a far more lucrative alternative to physical copies of games, and at the disadvantage of players, physical PC games almost entirely evaporated around 2009.
Now the dominant market, Valve shat all over PC gaming and gaming as a whole, a lot of later "standards" they popularized (like our very current cries against loot Boxes and microtransactions) would be picked up by everyone else, especially the scumbag companies like EA.
In an interview, Gabe Newell implied that it was bad that developers pre digital distribution had to actually release a game that was playable since they couldn't just patch it later like they can on Steam or Xbox live or PSN.
I have only gotten two arguments in favor digital distribution. One is that "it's the future, get used to it" and the other is that it is more "convenient."
Not all technological advancements are advancements. If someone said that being forcibly chipped by the government is the future, does that mean you should sit back and accept it? Sure digital distribution might be good for the publishers, developers, and digital distribution marketplaces, but it's only advantage for the consumer is convenience of not having to use discs.  On PC, most of my physical releases only require me to use the discs once to install the game, I never have to use them again, even on console is it really that big of a deal to get off your couch to switch out discs? Some people obviously think so. To me, that convenience isn't worth all the negatives that come with digital distribution, on top of the fact that you never actually own a copy of the game you are paying for with your hard earned money. Some people are willing to bend over and get molested by developers, publishers, and digital distributors just so they don't get up and change discs, but not me.
I play mostly on PC, and PC is by far the worst when it comes to getting proper physical releases. I personally refuse to pay for digitally distributed games, and I suggest everyone else do the same, but I make sure to buy the few physical releases that have the entire game on the disc, are DRM free, and don't require some "service" like Steam or GOG.
For higher priced games on PC, the publishers/developers would actually keep more of the money from the sale of the game if they released it physically. Steam and GOG take 30% of the sale. A physical copy costs under a dollar to manufacture, and if they sold it online via Amazon, who takes 15%, or sold it on their own online store, they would end up making more profit than selling it digitally via Steam or GOG.
Digital distribution is inherently DRM, there is no such thing as "DRM free" digital distribution, even if GOG claims to be.