Slashdot Mirror


Free To Play, Expensive To Love: 'Fortnite' Changes Video Game Business (reuters.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: To see the storm that online video game "Fortnite" has unleashed on the world, just visit Jett Sacher in Brooklyn. The 13-year-old spends an hour or two every day on the game with his friends and is not afraid to spend his pocket money on it - bit by bit. "So I bought one dance, two skins and the battle pass," Sacher told Reuters TV about recent gaming sessions. "So that's, I spent $20 on both skins so $40 ... and the dance was another $10 so $50, 60 bucks, something like that."

Sacher's pay-as-you-go expenditure on dressing up his online avatar in the 'free-to-play' game helped "Fortnite" take in an estimated $223 million from in-game purchases in March, according to Joost Van Dreunen at research firm SuperData. "Fortnite," a sort of hybrid of "The Hunger Games" and "Minecraft," drops 100 people onto an island to fight each other for survival. It is a game-changer in the industry, analysts have said, because of the huge revenue it is making from "tween" and teenage boys purchasing outfits and other add-ons. Its publisher, Epic Games, is now worth $4.5 billion, according to an estimate.
Further reading: Gamers are the new stars. Esports arenas are the new movie theaters (The New York Times).

191 comments

  1. hmm by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 3, Funny

    A new age indeed ... "boys purchasing outfits" didn't use to be much of a business model ...

    1. Re:hmm by Nutria · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't you remember Saturday Night Fever? Tony Manero had to look *perfect*!!

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    2. Re:hmm by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      Don't you remember Saturday Night Fever? Tony Manero had to look *perfect*!!

      Touche!

    3. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ""boys purchasing outfits" didn't use to be much of a business model ..."

      Hasbro and GI Joe beg to differ.

    4. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you remember Saturday Night Fever? Tony Manero had to look *perfect*!!

      That's what I wondering. From this article, sounds like players are dropped onto an island, have to survive encounters with angry fashionistas, and win the dance battles, maybe while using weapons also.

    5. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's been a thing forever - dudes have been chasing ph4t lewt since before the dawn of text based Internet gaming. When the graphical age hit, it wasn't just women whining for vanity slots to change equipment appearance without giving up l33t stats.

    6. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      was that travolta's character?

      how fitting

    7. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pepperidge Farms Remembers....

    8. Re:hmm by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Don't you remember Saturday Night Fever? Tony Manero had to look *perfect*!!

      It's been going on for decades, that's for sure. Looking "fly" has always been a major expense for boys. Even if it's not the formal elegance girls go for, boys have always been trying to rock the cool, hip, or groovy look and some spend ridiculous amounts to achieve it.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    9. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you remember Saturday Night Fever? Tony Manero had to look *perfect*!!

      So... you're dropped on an Island with other people, you have to win dance battles, avoid the fashion police, and you can buy passes to actually fight other players?

    10. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A new age indeed ... "boys purchasing outfits" didn't use to be much of a business model ...

      I disagree. GI Joe is one of the best selling dolls with lots of outfits and accessories.

      EDIT: Captcha - fearsome

    11. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Would you just watch the hair? I work on my hair a long time, and you hit it. He hits my hair."

    12. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boys have always purchased outfits for their girls.

  2. The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Not sure if I should feel happy or sad that gaming is no longer just a hobby. It's entering the public imagination on the scale that kids used to be interested in playing sports.

    1. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure if I should feel happy or sad that playing sports is no longer just a hobby.

    2. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You should feel sad, as it entering the common culture to such a degree has enabled video game publishers to drive down innovation and artistry in favour of turning the entire medium into a treadmill of cash-extraction to an almost criminal level.

    3. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure which generation you grew up in... but I'm an early millennial(sp?) born in 85, and sports were definitely seen as just something all my friends and I "had to do" to get out of the way and keep our parents happy... but we hated every minute of it.

      I imagine here in a few years you might have parents willingly signing their kids up for esports leagues without first asking the kids if that's something they want.... all because "it's what so and so's kids do, so you're going to do it too" lolol

    4. Re:The end of an era by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Not sure which generation you grew up in... but I'm an early millennial(sp?) born in 85, and sports were definitely seen as just something all my friends and I "had to do" to get out of the way and keep our parents happy... but we hated every minute of it.

      I imagine here in a few years you might have parents willingly signing their kids up for esports leagues without first asking the kids if that's something they want.... all because "it's what so and so's kids do, so you're going to do it too" lolol

      I'm a late Gen-Xer (only avoided the ignomy of millennial status by a few years). I loved being outdoors and being active. Football (real football not American), jogging, tennis, Judo, etc... I used to do it all. After school I used to be outside. School lunches, we would be playing football on the playground.

      It wasn't something to keep the parent's happy- it was something to keep us happy. Sure, played on the computer too- wrote my own games starting when I was 5 (yeah... they sucked at that age but by 8 or 9 I was writing some fairly decent games for the era) but I spent way more time on sports than computers back then. I still would if I could.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    5. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fat lying sack of shit creimer. It's unbelievable how many times you have been caught lying on /.

    6. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will all of you, whoever the fuck you are, just fuck the fuck right off please?

      You're boring, boring, BORING.

    7. Re:The end of an era by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

      In my days, nobody had time to feel happy or sad because we were too busy running away from raptors.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    8. Re:The end of an era by rogoshen1 · · Score: 2

      It's a good thing for sure .. learning social skills, functioning as a team, competition, seeing hard work pay off etc -- these are just quaint, outdated notions that kids don't need to learn from playing team sports anymore.

      Here and now in 2018 schools are helping to prepare kids for entry into the real world where yes, everyone is in fact a winner, and everyone gets the same reward for simply showing up. So yeah, sports are pointless.

      Also obesity is just fat shaming, and pushing physical activity is just another form of body shaming perpetuated by a patriarchal society. I'm sure it's somehow racist as well.

      As my boy gets older i'll definitely steer him towards pwning noobs on xbox live and watching anime.

    9. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I don't believe you were programming any games at age 5.

    10. Re:The end of an era by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      I'm from the same age group I believe. School sports largely sucked. I participated a bit but it wasn't geared towards being fun. We'd spend hours doing all kinds of crap practice activities during the week so that we could have a chance at playing in a game on Friday night for a couple hours. I let myself get peer pressured into it, but I'll definitely do my best to keep my own kids out of it. If the point of the sports teams were actually to build confidence and team skills while having fun, then I'd be all for them. But usually they're really just a program for trying to get a couple kids scholarships and boost a schools reputation for a little while. I really do regret wasting part of my youth on sports.

      That said I had plenty of time out doors and being active. I learned to sail small boats, and canoes. As a Scout I did tons of camping in all weather and even hiked part of the Appalachian Trail. I learned to hunt with bow and arrow, as well as rifles. I learned and got to use construction and land clearing skills, far more than I would have liked. I spent countless hours playing PC games and reading books. A teacher asked us to keep track of our reading and it turned out I read more than 50 novels in the course of that school year.

    11. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's really just (((APK))) talking to himself.

    12. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like FCLM is trying to cash in with his own Amazon affiliate link and blame creimer for any blowback.

    13. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just shave his hairline back like every balding millennial faggot and make him suck your dick like a bitch.

      Tell him it looks very "feminist and progressive"

    14. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To me, it just looks like creimer talking with himself again and going further down into the abyss. Maybe an abyss really has no bottom.

    15. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      May the Fourth [youtu.be] be with you! Have you bought the shirt [amzn.to] yet?

      - FatCashewsLoveMe

    16. Re:The end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      May the Fourth [youtu.be] be with you! Have you bought the shirt [amzn.to] yet?

      -- FatCashewsLoveMe

  3. Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know modern graphics and shaders are a bitch to program, but that does not compute. Especially for a relatively low poly game like Fortnight. Nice work if you can get it. But it sucks for us old timers who want single player games or at least to just buy a game and call it a day.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by es330td · · Score: 2

      it sucks for us old timers who want single player games

      Amen!

      The first game I ever purchased as a kid was Wizardry for my parent's green screen Apple ][e. I just want to get immersed by myself in an epic RPG.

    2. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's a fun business model even if it feels a bit sleazy. The suckers who plop down $20 for a skin are paying for those who just want to play the game. As long as it's just the eye candy that has to be paid for, and not useful gear.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    3. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Daetrin · · Score: 2

      As an old timer gamer myself, i like this business model. You _can_ just buy the game and call it a day. If you don't want to pay for aesthetic add-ons it won't affect your gameplay at all. It's at the opposite end of the spectrum from the "gatcha" style games where you have to pay real money in order to gamble on prizes that have a significant impact on the gameplay.

      As for the price itself *shrug* they're charging what the market will bear (or at least what they think the market will bear) just like any other commodity. Do you think the actual physics clothes you buy cost as much to make as what you paid for them?

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    4. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Pricing tends not to have anything to do with how much it costs to make.

      $20 isn't a huge amount to pay, especially for kids who can spend all their money without worrying about bills, and are used to paying several times that for console games.

    5. Re: Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it isn't fun. It's atrocious. People often miss the fact that while this kind of game design model doesn't affect free players financially, it DOES affect the design of the game. If you are making revenue from cosmetics, then you have to give players a reason to buy them. These reasons translate into design effort into certain areas of the game at the cost of other, more important features.

    6. Re: Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Often, these kinds of games really end up being light on the meaningful content side. The main purpose is to get players to see and desire each other's cosmetic items, and to offer a treadmill like approach to rewards where you will get a random item after x hours of gameplay, more or less guaranteed. New items are added to the game semi regularly, usually as a cash in on a national holiday or some other commercialised event. This form of game design caters to the lowest common denominator. Thank fuck for Steam, Unity/Unreal and the Indie dev community; while many indie games have fallen into their own design hell, there is at least a much lower bar for entry into video game development now, so the true gamers of old can find solace among the smaller studios who still make games for the love of it.

    7. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      I just want to get immersed by myself in an epic RPG.

      There are some options out there. The Witcher series. Kingdom Come Deliverance. Wasteland 2.

    8. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are some options out there. The Witcher series. Kingdom Come Deliverance. Wasteland 2.

      + Pillars of Eternity.

      And pretty soon, Wasteland 3 and Deadfire.

    9. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by SinGunner · · Score: 2

      While there is no "technical" advantage to skins in the game, the psychological advantage is significant. Once I wore my John Wick skin, enemy players became much more defensive. And nobody tries to shoot me in the back at long distances anymore ("How do you shoot the Devil in the back? What if you miss?"). I've still only spent $10 on the game and received lots of skins/emotes/whatnot.

    10. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by meta-monkey · · Score: 3, Informative

      Have you played Breath of the Wild yet? Phenomenal game. Good games do still exist.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    11. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an old timer gamer myself, i like this business model. You _can_ just buy the game and call it a day.

      The game is free.

    12. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by pruss · · Score: 1

      Doesn't seem sleazy to me at all. Think of the skins as just recognition of people who donate to the project. You are welcome to use the project without donating, but perhaps you want to donate, and in addition to the good feeling of supporting a project you like, you get some in-game recognition that doesn't affect game play (except for social reasons). (That said, I would almost never spend more than about $10 on a game. Most games I play are either free or less than $5 from gog.)

    13. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by jjbenz · · Score: 1

      I miss the single player games. It just isn't much fun spawning and getting killed 5 seconds later over and over again in multiplayer. I would take something like Fallout or Skyrim over Fortnite any day. Micro transactions are pretty annoying as well.

    14. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      I know modern graphics and shaders are a bitch to program, but that does not compute. Especially for a relatively low poly game like Fortnight. Nice work if you can get it. But it sucks for us old timers who want single player games or at least to just buy a game and call it a day.

      I still avoid multi-player games and any game that requires I pay-to-play. I will buy once and that's it. Kids these days aren't good with maths. I don't get why my son buys a game that is brand new released rather than waiting a year and getting it half-priced. Sure, if you've played all existing games you might need to jump on the latest- but odds are the game will still be good a year from now- and at a better deal.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    15. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      I'll toss in a recommendation for Xenoblade. I couldn't really get into Xenoblade X, and I haven't started Xenoblade 2 yet, but the first one is one of the best RPGs I've ever played.

    16. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      As for the price itself *shrug* they're charging what the market will bear (or at least what they think the market will bear) just like any other commodity. Do you think the actual physics clothes you buy cost as much to make as what you paid for them?

      Some "value" clothes for wear and tear are probably not that far off. But this is pure vanity/brand/fashion wear like an Armani suit or Louis Vuitton handbag. It's game bling.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    17. Re: Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Big publishers make fast food.
      Small indie teams make good food.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    18. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      You son wants to play with his friends. If he waits a year before buying a game, his friends will have moved to a new one months ago.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    19. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      +1 on the witcher 3. Fantastic fantastic game in terms of graphics, story, plot, characters.. Also it draws more on eastern european lore, so it's a nice change from the faux medieval England stuff we usually get.

      Divinity is quite good too, but that's more of a turn based RPG.

    20. Re: Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These reasons translate into design effort into certain areas of the game at the cost of other, more important features.

      The thing about cosmetic purchases is that people don't continue to pay for skins in a stale, shitty game. They obviously need to balance content with the micro-transactions. Given Fortnite's popularity they must be doing something right.

    21. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      And Cyberpunk 2077.

    22. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sucks to be him. No where does it say I have to cough up hundreds of dollars so he can be more popular.

      Advice to son: Find better friends.

    23. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      I know modern graphics and shaders are a bitch to program, but that does not compute.

      Oh but it does, the whole plan of the greater tech community was to take away computer and software control from the filthy masses so they could do just this. They used the tech illiterate kids and ignorant parents of the world to rob the tech literate half of humanity blind. It began way back in the Ultima online and everquest days, there dream has always been to normalize the walled garden - you never own your software or machine we do approach.

      If you paid for any mmo you enabled all this nonsense. The whole idea of paying for software as a service is a scam from the get go, it's a far cry from the 90's when you got level editors with the game and you had open access to files.

      The internet undermines the market because you need physical proximity to stop these awful game stealing and microtransaction practices. When high speed internet reached a threshold that radically changed the nature of society and it gave companies super powers NOT to give you the software they can now "release" software and hold part it back inside company servers to require their permission for use and access while robbing you bloody blind.

      They used kids and stupid tech illiterate irrational people to do it. Companies like EA and Gabe newell of valve corp were hell bent on stealing shit and locking the software to servers inside their offices to do just this. There was outrage back in the day in 2004 or so but the outrage couldn't reach because the internet allows these corporate kings to produce and not release software and theres no way to stop the sea change because you'd need physical proximity and the threat of them getting their offices stormed so no drm would be inserted.

      The marketng lingo "Mmo/f2p/online game" is all just smoke and mirrors they've literally were at war with people owning their own software they were paying for to exploit the tech illiterate.

      There now will be a giant whole in gaming history thanks to people who fed Ultima online, wold of warcraft and steam.

    24. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its the same way I'll plop down $20 for two pints of beer. At the end of the day I have nothing but a buzz.

    25. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to agree with the "the whales are paying for us to play for free" bit. I don't anymore. The whales are enabling shitty business practices. They are shaping the market away from games that are complete at launch. They are the reason gaming quality has taken a nosedive, but anti-consumer psychology is on the rise.

      The whales are not benevolent actors, they are the ones actively supporting a bad market.

    26. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      God of War is getting terrific reviews, even from some people who didn't like the orig series.

      (I'll wait until it drops to $20, I've already got tons of other games I haven't played..)

    27. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      Hell yeah. I've got a full-time job and a kid. I bought a Switch with BOTW a month ago, and my profile tells me I've played it "130 hours or more". I didn't sleep much, though!

    28. Re:Jeez, $20 bucks for a skin? by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      I'd have to say it varries a lot per game. But I do give credit to the ones that at least make the paid items the cosmetics. Way too many games make win buttons, or at least have a noticable edge in combat as paid items. While I'd admit i do prefer a buy once model, that tends not to be particularly sustainable for online games (as you are expected to keep the server up after sales are decreasing)

  4. So glad by fluffernutter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm so glad I stopped playing video games before this pay to play nonsense. Totally destroys the experience for me. I play video games to get away from things like a real life economy, not to make me a victim of it.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re:So glad by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Try VR, for now its still a paradise.

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re:So glad by Ksevio · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've played fortnite BR and it's not pay to play. If you don't buy any outfits, you'll just get randomly assigned one of the default ones, and the dances/emotes aren't needed for anything. The stuff you can buy doesn't affect the gameplay

    3. Re:So glad by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

      Heck I still want to finish GTA IV, Diablo II, and Neverwinter Nights one day. I'll find them somewhere and make them run somehow. Don't need the newest thing. Id I recall correctly, Diablo III went to pay to play so I won't be checking that out.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    4. Re:So glad by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Oh and I am somewhere in Assassin's Creed 2 as well.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    5. Re:So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mmmm, videogames have been "pay to play" since...ever? Arcade machines?

      If you mean this microtransaction/lootbox bullshit, well, you know, there are hundreds of games that are not based on this model (yet). So no need trying to sound edgy with "I no longer play videogames".

    6. Re:So glad by sirber · · Score: 1

      Try VR, for now its still a paradise.

      kinda pay to play, and it's pretty expensive

      --
      Be or ben't
    7. Re:So glad by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There are STILL gems that don't have any of the bullshit micro-transactions.

      Two the more popular ones:

      * Minecraft
      * Terraria

      A list of great indy games:

      * AM2R
      * Braid
      * Castle Crashers
      * Cave Story
      * Cuphead
      * Fez
      * Inside
      * Limbo
      * Path of Exile -- NOTE: They have "ethical micro-transactions": Cosmetic items and stash tabs.
      * Super Meat Boy
      * Stardew Valley
      * The Witness

    8. Re:So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Diablo III went to pay to play so I won't be checking that out.

      I assume you're referring to the real-money auction house that was introduced along with the game? That was removed YEARS ago. The devs realized it was ruining the gaming experience. They made a ton of changes to stop bot farming and its a very very enjoyable experience now. I highly recommend you give it a try!

    9. Re:So glad by fluffernutter · · Score: 0

      My wife got into a couple games that technically weren't pay to play so she would play for free for months for free. For those games she experienced an exceptionally high rate of her online account status being "lost". Every time she called support and was told that it was gone and she needed to start over. They're not happy if they don't make money from you.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    10. Re:So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Only thing is that some of the outfits do give a tiny advantage. You can buy dark grey/black suits that are absolutely harder to see.

      Yet, for some reason the ones with glowing orange seem to be the most popular. So it must not make that much difference.

      But I agree in general. It is not pay-to-win.

    11. Re:So glad by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I never really played arcade machines for that exact reason.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    12. Re:So glad by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind, the GTA IV you play today is not the same as upon release. Last week most of the music in the game was stripped out due to licensing expiring. Its a massive blow to the style and tone of the game.

      --
      Good-bye
    13. Re:So glad by spire3661 · · Score: 0

      Are you kidding? Minecraft is chock full of DLC they shove in your face as you log in with absolutely nothing free in their store at all. They even toss up modals as you login. Im in the world creation screen, its offering me to buy pre-made worlds.... Minecraft (win 10)is one of the worst offenders.

      You simply cannot play the game without Microsoft taking an opportunity to try and sell you something.

      --
      Good-bye
    14. Re:So glad by magusxxx · · Score: 1

      Same. That's why I've always stuck with pinball.

      --
      Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
    15. Re:So glad by Kulahan · · Score: 0

      This sounds a lot like "durr music today is no good" There are tons of fine games out there - just because the widely-adopted ones happen to prey on children with gambling techniques doesn't mean there aren't tons of game devs dedicated to making a high-quality experience.

    16. Re:So glad by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 5, Informative

      > Minecraft (win 10)

      *facepalm*

      You are doing it wrong.

      Play the Java version which is free of all that bullshit.

    17. Re:So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Diablo III went to pay to play so I won't be checking that out.

      I assume you're referring to the real-money auction house that was introduced along with the game? That was removed YEARS ago. The devs realized it was ruining the gaming experience. They made a ton of changes to stop bot farming and its a very very enjoyable experience now. I highly recommend you give it a try!

      That may well be, but you still can't play it offline, which is a dealbreaker for me.

    18. Re: So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You buy a 'Minecraft for java' license. You log in and install the game. The dlc spam and cashstore crap is on the other versions.

    19. Re:So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm so glad I stopped playing video games before this pay to play nonsense. Totally destroys the experience for me. I play video games to get away from things like a real life economy, not to make me a victim of it.

      If you NEED a new skin or a "dance" to enjoy gaming you're doing it seriously wrong. Very, very few games are pay to win (which is what you actually mean since I assume you don't mind buying a game sometimes) and those that have done that have met severe criticism relegating themselves to a niche or casual market. The plague on the gaming industry at the moment are season passes and DLC. Releasing partially finished games for full price knowing they'll be finished later for additional cost needs to stop.

      I couldn't care less if someone wants to spend $20 (damn that's pricey) on a cosmetic item.

    20. Re:So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem is, for every one good game, there are a thousand shitty games that are F2P/P2W, or just plain suck and are not worth the time. This can be stuff from the bowels of the App Store/Play Store, all the way to AAA titles.

    21. Re:So glad by Immerman · · Score: 1

      By that metric *every* game genre is pay-to-play, unless you know somewhere handing out free consoles or PCs (in which case, please share!)

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    22. Re:So glad by zenasprime · · Score: 1

      I (or my parents when I was a wee lad) have been paying for video/computer games since the late 70s. I guess you don't remember having to put a quarter into the Space Invaders cabinet, or having (to beg your dad) to buy that copy of Zork, do you?

    23. Re: So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That main point is that "pay to play" is nothing new.

    24. Re:So glad by Mahldcat · · Score: 1

      I'm assuming that this music strip out was for everybody who bought a copy of the game? (If it were not for the fact that my kids use some of the online features of xbox live, I'd just go the route of modding it and keeping everything offline)....

    25. Re: So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A phenomenon shared by all creative industries and also known as Sturgeon's Law.

      Simply, videogames have become mainstream, with all its consequences, good and bad.

    26. Re:So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or she's just playing crappy games?

    27. Re:So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +10 cool points for mentioning Zork.

      you made my day.

    28. Re:So glad by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Well, I *do* actually remember all four, no, make that five, times I did that. I was always to cheap to pay to play video games. I did buy several computer games, but when they started requiring an on-line server, I stopped buying. (Well, they *said* buying, but they acted more like it was a lease.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    29. Re:So glad by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Recycling centers received dozens of computers every day. If you know what to look for, you can probably get a decent mid-range gaming PC for under $100.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    30. Re:So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Starbound
      Kingdom: New Lands
      Lovers in a Dangerous Spacetime

    31. Re:So glad by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I have the original version around somewhere.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    32. Re:So glad by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      My kids are absolutely disgusted with what Microsoft has done to Minecraft. They don't like the new 'more modern' textures for example, because the whole point of minecraft was the retro blocky-ness.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    33. Re:So glad by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Holy cow, Zork. I played it on a mainframe once. Didn't get very far. Is that the came that starts at a stream with water flowing out of a crack in the rock?

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    34. Re:So glad by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Microsoft doesn't have anything to do with Mojang's new textures.

      But yeah, why are we being given textures that no one asked for? Glass STILL doesn't tile properly.

      At least supposedly ghost blocks should be fixed in 1.13...

    35. Re: So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pay to play is the normal model. I think you are confusing pay to win.

    36. Re:So glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every comment you make on this site reconfirms that basic concepts and realities are difficult for you to grasp. It's bad enough that your wife phoned technical support multiple times for a freemium game. It's worse that she, or you, or both appear confounded when said game publisher treats those calls with disdain.

    37. Re:So glad by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      The console version doesn't have the PC versions always-online requirement. Try it out, and discover the bliss of direct movement control in a Diablo-style ARPG rather than indirect mouse-pointing.

    38. Re:So glad by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Diablo III pay to play? Are you referring to the Auction House? It's been gone for years, and the console version never had it in the first place.

    39. Re:So glad by barc0001 · · Score: 1

      I remember plugging quarters in and having to save/beg for games all too well from the late 70s on. The thing with quarter powered arcade games though was that if you were good enough you could make a quarter last for hours (unlikely but could be done, saw a guy play Defender for over 2 hours), so at first game makers tried to give players increasing challenge to keep the money flowing. Eventually Atari brought us the OG Pay-To-Win game in the arcade, Gauntlet. Fun to play, exciting and a good social game when it came out, and absolutely ate quarters. No matter how good you were, there was no way you were staying alive in that game without a pocket full of quarters or tokens to keep your health up.

    40. Re:So glad by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I'm so glad I stopped playing video games before this pay to play nonsense. Totally destroys the experience for me.

      How would you know?

      I play video games

      ...

      I'm so glad I stopped playing video games

      Parse error.

    41. Re:So glad by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      Games like this require lots of people to play, so even if you're not paying, you're improving the experience for people that DO pay.

    42. Re:So glad by Kulahan · · Score: 0

      This has literally been the case in every form of entertainment forever. Survivorship bias might make you think only totally great and amazing games came out during the '90s, but plenty of shitty games came out and were quickly forgotten. This is no different.

  5. Are you from 2005? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because free-to-play and making money on cosmetics has been around for several years. You speak of it as if it's a new phenomena.

    1. Re:Are you from 2005? by higuita · · Score: 5, Insightful

      steam made tons of money selling hats in team fortress 2, so yes, this is not new indeed.

      As long as this things are cosmetic, i'm fine with it... if they give a advantage, it is Pay2Win ... sadly many games are going to the latest and those that do not pay always lose

      --
      Higuita
    2. Re:Are you from 2005? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That suits me fine. I'm not that good at gaming (I don't have enough time to put into it), but I'm sure not short on money and I don't have any problem at all spending as much as is necessary to come out on top. It's really no different than any other aspect of life in that regard. And man, it's hilarious how pissed off people get! :) LOL

    3. Re:Are you from 2005? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have these people never heard of League of Legends?

    4. Re:Are you from 2005? by SinGunner · · Score: 1

      This anime from 2001 was basically a prophecy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Buy your fighting doll, then spend your entire allowance customizing it.

    5. Re:Are you from 2005? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey Dotcom! How's your lawsuit against the US government going. Are you "on top" of that?

      Heck, the only thing you'll ever be "on top" of is the output of your bathroom scale.

    6. Re:Are you from 2005? by jediborg · · Score: 1

      This is reuters, one of the oldest news reporting agencies around, so yes. These people (and what they think their most popular demographic is) probably couldn't hold a video game controller in their hands, let alone tell you weather the controller they are a holding is a PS4, Xbox One, or Steam Controller. So yes, to them cosmetic micro-transactions in a 'free-to-play' game along with the new PUBG game format is cutting edge latest technology that the 'tweens' are enjoying

    7. Re:Are you from 2005? by rhazz · · Score: 1

      I think gaming is a lot more mainstream now than it was when TF2 came out, the only real difference being how much money can be made selling to a larger audience.

    8. Re: Are you from 2005? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're the problem and exactly the person this is designed for.

    9. Re:Are you from 2005? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      even though Reuters is behind technologically, they appear to be one of the few news services that show little if any bias politically. though of course being fact based is biased according to the "Fox News" crowd

    10. Re:Are you from 2005? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where are the regulators when you actually need to them to regulate something?

      Knowing the addictive nature and the drug-addict like behavior these systems generate, why are there not imposed limits like other things?

      IDK, society broke.

  6. 60 Bucks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For a couple skins and a dance? Bhahahaha.
    Even Trump would know that's a bad deal.

    1. Re:60 Bucks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even Trump would know that's a bad deal.

      Yup, That's why Trump paid $130,000 for a different kind of skin and dance

    2. Re: 60 Bucks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sex was free. The 130k was so the whole world wouldn't find out he did a one-night stand with a porno-skank.

    3. Re: 60 Bucks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US politics is the epitome of P2W

    4. Re: 60 Bucks? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      But it's VERY COMMON among celebrities and people of wealth, so it's perfectly okay!

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  7. Microtransactions are the plauge by sinij · · Score: 2

    Targeting microtransactions (MT) at minors should be against the law. These games are designed to be as addictive as possible and to frustrate or dupe users into overspending.

    Free To Play is "free" in the same way as the first hit of crack cocaine is available for free from your friendly neighborhood crack dealer.

    1. Re:Microtransactions are the plauge by Bigbutt · · Score: 1

      I don't know. Last time I checked, $20 wasn't a microtransaction :) Then again, boardgames are running $50 and up over $100 in some cases (Gloomhaven is $150 last time I checked) and RPG books are in a similar price range with the smaller thinner adventure books running around $20.

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    2. Re:Microtransactions are the plauge by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Before the Free to Play games were around (mostly due to lack of bandwidth to download such add in's and servers reliable enough to handle the load) These games would normally cost $10.00 for a bargain bin cheapo game. $50/$60 for a decent game to around $100 for the big Ultra Mega Epic Game (opposed to the company Epic Mega Games) .

      These Free to Play games are akin to Shareware of the 1980s and 1990's Where you get to use the program get hooked on it, and decide to pay more for more content. Except for paying for the Whole program, you now buy parts, So Free to Play, $10 for some features... $100 for the Epic Experience.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:Microtransactions are the plauge by toeonly · · Score: 1

      I cant find the crack dealer that will give you the first one free, let alone lots of them. I had a plan to take the free hit from lots of them and then sell them to others.

    4. Re: Microtransactions are the plauge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Even Doom was a free to play game. You only had to pay for the additional zones.

    5. Re:Microtransactions are the plauge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most I've seen require tons of money to actually have a chance at winning. I've seen people throw thousands of dollars a month just so they don't get completely pwned every match in Clash of Clans, World of Tanks, and virtually all the MOBAs around.

      Why not have a game where one pays money, and for each match, the person who paid the most wins. That basically is what 99.9% of gaming is these days on mobile.

      I remember when in-app purchases came in. It changed gaming on iOS and Android almost immediately and for the worst. Games which were interesting were changed to be just too hard for most people unless they went and bought powerups. This could be tower defense games, but it spread to every single genre of game.

      At least with console gaming, I spend $90 on a game, and $250 for the DLC, I know that I will have everything I need. Of course, the days of spending $50 on a game and getting everything and anything are long gone...

    6. Re:Microtransactions are the plauge by Aqualung812 · · Score: 1

      Targeting microtransactions (MT) at minors should be against the law.

      Absolutely not.
      Parents/guardians should keep control over their credit/debit cards. Every platform that supports MT also supports parental control over purchases.
      We don't need laws to protect the cash of spineless adults.
      On the other end, if kids are working their ass off to pay for MT, awesome. Good work ethic.
      They'll eventually grow out of it, and will learn a lot about hard work and how easy it is to blow it.

      --
      Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
    7. Re: Microtransactions are the plauge by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      "Episodes" not zones. Only the first episode of 9 levels "Knee Deep in the Dead" was part of the shareware package.

    8. Re:Microtransactions are the plauge by foradoxium · · Score: 1

      I know right!?

      I don't recall having any sort of microtransactions back when I was playing Gauntlet in the 80's having to stick in 2-3 quarters every 3-5 minutes. Although it was easy to spend 20 bucks in one session. ;)

      At least with today's microtransactions once you pay 20 bucks for some DLC component it sticks with you (unless you're buying ingame consumables..)

    9. Re:Microtransactions are the plauge by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1
      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    10. Re:Microtransactions are the plauge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the same way as the first hit of crack cocaine is available for free from your friendly neighborhood crack dealer.

      Has anyone every actually met this mythical drug dealer who gives away free product to try to hook new customers? I've seen him referenced for decades, but you'd think there would have been at least one reported sighting by now.

      Given the degree of violence you tend to read about associated with dealers and their customers, I'd be very surprised if a "first one's free" drug dealer is any more real than Nessie, Bigfoot, or anus-probing aliens.

    11. Re:Microtransactions are the plauge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, the days of spending $50 on a game and getting everything and anything are long gone...

      It's still here: board games. Each player isn't required to purchase their own copies, and you can open the box and play without first calling the Milton-Bradly Corporation to verify that your purchase is still valid and that you have permission (for now) to use it. It's great!

  8. Games are dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go outside.

  9. I may never understand vanity purchases in games by ausekilis · · Score: 1

    Somehow spending $5 for that shirt, or $10 for that character, or $nn for whatever cosmetic thing just doesn't appeal to me.

    I can appreciate that the game isn't pay-to-win and they gotta make money somehow... I just don't get how people can spend so much money on so little real content.

  10. Change in Business? by CodeHog · · Score: 1

    Serious question what is the change here? This model has been in place for years now with DLC. What's the shift away from that model?

    --
    Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son.
    1. Re:Change in Business? by CodeHog · · Score: 1

      Ok, rtfa - boys buying outfits is the game changer. Eh, it's the same thing as them buying weapons or other items. Outfits are just an extension and not a game changer. Most of them just want their character to look like their idea of cool, be it some armor or a tutu.

      --
      Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son.
    2. Re:Change in Business? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      What changed? The editor has been living under a rock for the past decade and just now realized what games have been doing. i.e. Beginners play Warframe, Vets play FashionFrame, etc.

      People will pay Real Money for cosmetic items! News at 11.

      Valve's TF2 popularized micro-transactions for cosmetics almost a decade ago when Team Fortress 2 hats became available on May 21, 2009.

    3. Re:Change in Business? by CodeHog · · Score: 1

      LOL! In other news water is wet and sky is blue.

      --
      Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son.
    4. Re:Change in Business? by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Second Life was doing micro-transactions for cosmetic items, some of which were/are actual makeup style cosmetics, years before Valve had their hats.

      Avatar Appearance is such a big part of Second Life and has so many items available, that there are blogs dedicated to Second Life fashion.

      Here's one of my favorites: http://www.strawberrysingh.com...

      You may have seen that article on PC Gamer where they mentioned her:

      https://www.pcgamer.com/second...

  11. Dear Jett by magusxxx · · Score: 1

    Black Mirror - Season 1 - Episode 2 - 'Fifteen Million Merits'

    Watch it before you buy anything else.

    --
    Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
    1. Re:Dear Jett by Ozeroc · · Score: 1

      This is exactly what I was thinking of when I read the summary.

      --
      ...
  12. A 13-year-old has $60 pocket money? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And how does he pay? With his own credit card? I'm confused.

  13. Re:I may never understand vanity purchases in game by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2

    > I just don't get how people can spend so much money on so little real content.

    ePenis bragging rights, aka Vanity.

    The same morons (*) who pay thousands of dollars for a Rolex watch or a Gucci bag ($2,000+ WTF?)

    (*) Paying $20 - $500 for a watch is fine.
    Paying $5,000 for a watch is vanity, aka More money then brains.

  14. Grown Men Taking 13 Year Old Boys' Pocket Money by dryriver · · Score: 1

    Good description of the game industry at present?

    --
    Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
    1. Re:Grown Men Taking 13 Year Old Boys' Pocket Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sure. And the bubble gum industry and the baseball card industry and the pokemon card industry and the No Fear t-shirt industry and the kickball industry and the...

    2. Re:Grown Men Taking 13 Year Old Boys' Pocket Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sounds like the Arcade's of the 1980's

    3. Re:Grown Men Taking 13 Year Old Boys' Pocket Money by ctilsie242 · · Score: 1

      The gaming industry needs another 1983. Desperately.

    4. Re:Grown Men Taking 13 Year Old Boys' Pocket Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you only limit this to the present? Ever since computer games/console games existed, teenage boys were spending their pocket money on games.

      This boy spent $60 on a game, that is actually free to play. Full price titles these days are $60 to $70 on release date

      When I was his age, I spent $45 on Wing Commander, and another $25 on the speech pack, which would contain the character voice-overs for owners of SoundBlaster or Ad-Lib cards. Later on, they even released 2 sets of mission packs

      Alltogether that was over a hundred bucks of early 90ies money value

      Times haven't changed and entertainment, done right, will cost money. If those kids have buyer's remorse, there's probably a lesson for them in there somewhere. It's definitely not like that kid had to work for that money or lacks food on the table for having bought virtual vanity goods. He probably still got a better value of entertainment per hour than watching a movie at the cinema.

    5. Re:Grown Men Taking 13 Year Old Boys' Pocket Money by coolsnowmen · · Score: 0

      nope, this is perfect Socialism. Everyone can play for free, but those that have extra money spend it to support the community.

  15. Re:I may never understand vanity purchases in game by jellomizer · · Score: 2

    People make vanity purchases all the time.
    That fancy Car costing over $50k will last and work just as well as a $25k car. You may be getting some extra luxuries that will cost the car manufacture a couple of thousands of dollars. But you are really paying for the vanity of saying you have that type of car.

    Or people paying extra money on clothing with a logo on it.

    Apple caters to the vanity purchase.

    Is it the most optimal use of your money? No.
    However it may be worth it if it makes you feel better.

       

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  16. What wonders me ... by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    ... is why we still haven't seen modders, foss developers and artists get together to build their own games. Big style. Where are the awesome arena shooters from back then? Where are the mech games and foss games with own IP? Wesnoth and Xonotic can't be the end of it, no?

    Is overwatch really the last answer to this?

    Xonotic should have some foundation organizing events, leagues and prizes or something. It's not like the enthusiasts community can't do their own games today.

    My 2 cents.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:What wonders me ... by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      Because online gaming is about shared culture. It's having the same experiences of lots of other people. It's no fun to play a game when there aren't enough other players, and you see the same ones over and over. It's not as much fun when you're the weirdo at school talking about a game nobody has ever heard of while they share conversation about the game they're all playing.

      What the mega software corporations have is an advertising budget. And far too many people just buy whatever they're told to buy, and don't take it upon themselves to investigate other options. Or they are busy adults and assume that the kids that they're buying for want to play what everyone else plays. This leads to a giant pool of people playing the next AAA game, and not enough people playing the free ones.

      Back in the day I was part of a pretty amazing FPS clan where we did tons of modding and map making. As people grew older and lives got more complicated, that largely faded away. A good part of the reason is that our free time got squeezed, and we wanted to play games in our free time, not spend that time working on the game instead.

      Even though it's for entertainment, building and modding a game is still work. It's easy to pay someone to do that. It's much harder to get people to donate a lot of their time to that effort. Unlike most FOSS, games aren't needed for work. While working on a game will definitely scratch the itch of a small percentage of people, it's never going to reach the development scale of a AAA game. Combined with the lack of advertising, that puts a community built game at a serious disadvantage.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    2. Re:What wonders me ... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      It's not as much fun when you're the weirdo at school talking about a game nobody has ever heard of while they share conversation about the game they're all playing.

      Unless you're a hipster.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:What wonders me ... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ex professional game developer here. (I've shipped games on PS1, PS2, PC, Wii, DS, and helped numerous companies with their PS3 engines and toolchain. Left the professional industry in 2011 for a stable paycheck but I do my own (indie) game programming and design now, am a hardcore gamer, and help fellow game developers with advice.)

      Sorry for the LONG read, but think I can lend some information that will be insightful and not inciteful. =P

      > why we still haven't seen modders, foss developers and artists get together to build their own games.

      We have, but on a limited scale.

      TL:DR;

      * Tech Hurdle
      * Too many cooks in the kitchen
      * Co-dependency upon the Game Engine and everything else
      * Theory vs Implementation
      * The "good" modders get "poached"

      The LONG answer:

      There are numerous reasons for this:

      * Tech Hurdle

      The first hurdle was the tech hurdle. Up until recently writing a "general purpose engine" was folly. Was the game 2D or 3D? If 3D, you HAD to optimize for indoor or outdoor environments for the most part with various kludges to support the other. If you notice both Unity and Unreal now offer a "2D" mode -- Unity with 2D Game Kit and Unreal with Paper2D

      Examples where tech matters:

      Trying to do "dense jungle environments" in a 3D shooter was basically a recipe of framerate FAIL until Crysis came along:

      Doctor, it hurts when I do this.
      Don't do that!!

      We "solved" this problem by basically throwing more money at hardware (GPU / CPUs)

      How does the engine handle the "contradictory" nature of transparency?

      * Opaque objects can be rendered front-to-back using the hardware's "Early Z Test".
      * Transparent objects need to be rendered back-to-front so you get the correct colors.

      How does an engine handle thousands of lights?

      * Deferred rending "solves" this problem but doesn't work for transparency. DOH!

      People are using hybrid approaches of Forward Render vs Deferred Render. If the "big boys" are STILL figuring this out, Unity 2018.1 with their High Definition Render Pipeline (HD RP) (Preview) -- what chance does amateurs have? Yes, we see engines like Irrlicht but that is a steep learning curve for non-technical people.

      We've seen SOME limited success. Back when Quake 2 was popular we Cube 2: Sauerbraten as a good example of the community coming together to produce something "good."

      Open Source engines have typically performed like crap. I've posted in the past

      how Mike Acton reviewed Ogre 1.9's OrgreNode.cpp pointing out its horrible design and performance.

      As a result Orge 2.x game up with a gameplan -- they put together a PDF of how OOP screwed their performance over.

      Turns out, Mike Acton was right. They ended up with a 5x performance increase by ditching OOP and using DOD.

      How many people own Jason's quintessential engine development book Game Engine Architecture? How many understand it?

      * Too many cooks in the kitchen.

      C++ is "good" example of "Design by committee." Everybody has their favorite pet peeve bloating the core user experience until it is an over-engineered clusterfuck.

      You'll notice that almost all of the

    4. Re:What wonders me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It turns out that there are only a handful of skilled FOSS game developers willing to work for free and be abused by ungrateful players with high standards. Steam for Linux also devastated their niche.

    5. Re: What wonders me ... by cornjones · · Score: 1

      No mod points so I'll just say thanks for an excellent post

  17. Man I feel old by DarkRookie · · Score: 1

    And I am only 30. What the hell.
    These games aren't even fun to play once you have the system figured out.

    --
    The millennial that doesn't like most of the stuff designed for millennials.
  18. Value of a dollar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What forms of payment do these games accept?
    PayPal, Credit Cards, Game specific gift cards?
    Does he have his own, or does he use mom's?
    I encourage my children to buy meaningful or at least things that may last a few years.
    Buy a tool set and learn a trade.
    Buy a book and learn something new.
    Buy a CD or DVD and you have a physical disk that belongs only to you and doesn't dissappear when your digital service goes tits up.

    Someone commented about baseball cards or Pokémon cards. At least some of those held some value or went up in value.

  19. P.T. Barnum would laugh his ass off by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    "There's a sucker born every minute", 2018 video gaming editon.

    1. Re:P.T. Barnum would laugh his ass off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he would not. Unlikely he ever uttered the phrase. And it doesn't apply to someone who purchases an item you think is expensive but they do not. They are just wealthier than you or have different priorities.

      "There's a sucker born every minute"

    2. Re:P.T. Barnum would laugh his ass off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are just wealthier than you or have different priorities.

      Trollololol. Go back to 4chan.

  20. Outfits effect gameplay by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    since a) there are teams and b) visibility matters. Being able to pick out a character from an outline to shoot in a split second is important in an FPS. It's why Team Fortress characters have such distinct body builds.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Outfits effect gameplay by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      a) The outfits aren't how you tell your team (and people often play without teams) b) most of the outfits seem to make people MORE visible with bright colors. The outlines don't change.

  21. Yeah, it just means there's less out there by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    for guys like me. Like, I'm probably never going to see another Sonic themed Cart racer from Sumo Digital. And RTS is a dead genre since most games devolve into twitch fests with Actions per Minute being how you win.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re: Yeah, it just means there's less out there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen! I would freaking kill for an RTS with a solid single-player campaign. Gray Goo was close, but the campaign was less than 5 hours long.

    2. Re:Yeah, it just means there's less out there by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      My, how fun was sonic and all stars racing transformed? easily 300 hours on steam -- a sequel would be fantastic.

    3. Re:Yeah, it just means there's less out there by nmb3000 · · Score: 1

      And RTS is a dead genre since most games devolve into twitch fests with Actions per Minute being how you win.

      To be fair, that is kind of the "real time" part of the name. There are still some good turn-based strategy games like Civilization out there where reaction time is irrelevant.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
  22. Tech support is really customer support by LordZardoz · · Score: 2

    For free to play games, the tech support is primarily viewed as customer support. They know how much you pay, and the level of attention you get will be scaled to how much you are known to spend. I know this from a previous job where I was implementing the code for our game to use a 3rd party tech support service.

    It is not the fault of whoever ended up speaking to your wife, as call center employees are basically doing what they are told. But for the developers and publishers of Freemium games, helping or catering to players that generate zero revenue is not a priority. There is literally no incentive for the publisher to pay a customer support tech to help your wife who is not spending any money, as she is not really a customer.

    END COMMUNICATION

    1. Re:Tech support is really customer support by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      So you just repeated what I said.. they don't like people who don't spend money. Your account will get deleted for no reason and they won't help you, so it's not really free forever, just as long as they want it to be. 'free' normally implies 'use forever for free' if not qualified, such as 'free 30 day trial'.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  23. Prepaid cards are a thing by LordZardoz · · Score: 1

    Next time your in a 7/11, take a look at the section with prepaid cards for iTunes and Android. You can buy those with cash.

    https://www.apple.com/ca/shop/...

    END COMMUNICATION

  24. Re:I may never understand vanity purchases in game by Whorhay · · Score: 1

    Once upon a time I was visiting New York City with my kid Sister when I saw a gaggle of teenage girls carrying diaper bags. When I pointed them out to my sister and wondered aloud why they all had diaper bags when there wasn't a child in sight, she about lost it. Apparently the latest fashion at the time in purses was these really large bags made with bright floral and polka dot prints. Those bags were high fashion and easily cost more than the entirety of my adult wardrobe. Kids spending large sums of money on fashion items only to come out looking like middle class soccer moms is kind of hilarious.

  25. So he paid 60 bucks for the game he wants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tell me, what do AAAAA games usually cost, nowadays? Oh, right, 60 bucks PLUS microtransactions.

  26. A fool and his money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are soon parted.

  27. Re:I may never understand vanity purchases in game by Glarimore · · Score: 1

    > I just don't get how people can spend so much money on so little real content.

    ePenis bragging rights, aka Vanity.

    The same morons (*) who pay thousands of dollars for a Rolex watch or a Gucci bag ($2,000+ WTF?)

    (*) Paying $20 - $500 for a watch is fine. Paying $5,000 for a watch is vanity, aka More money then brains.

    I know, right?! It's almost as if humans have different preferences so choose to spend their money in different ways!

  28. Neato by bistromath007 · · Score: 1

    Welcome to 10 years ago, people who don't give a shit about videogames.

  29. Re:I may never understand vanity purchases in game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (*) Paying $20 - $500 for a watch is fine.
    Paying $5,000 for a watch is vanity, aka More money then brains.

    Paying $5K for a watch is a signal about your fitness for mating. Just be aware of the type of mate you are signalling for.

  30. Re:I may never understand vanity purchases in game by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    Still doesn't change the fact that someone who spends $34,850 for an Day-Date 40, etc is an idiot, aka, Hipster.

  31. It didn't change shit by war4peace · · Score: 1

    This F2P with microtransactions model has been going on for quite a few years now.

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  32. Can confirm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My 13 year old spends his allowance on a fortnight battlepass.

    If that's what it takes to keep him cleaning the bathroom, emptying the catbox, and taking out the trash- so be it.

  33. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  34. Re:I may never understand vanity purchases in game by Cederic · · Score: 1

    Paying $5,000 for a watch is vanity, aka More money then brains.

    I spent a little more than that. The watch is worth more now than when I bought it. I've also had the pleasure of owning it.

    Why would that qualify as more money than brains? Come to that, what's vain about liking cutting edge precision engineering?

  35. Skins are optional by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They don't help you in the game in any way. In other words suckers are subsidizing the game for the more clever players who enjoy the game completely free of charge. Sounds good to me.

  36. Re: I may never understand vanity purchases in gam by wolf12886 · · Score: 1

    I play Pubg, counterstrike, rainbow 6 seige, and a few other games that have cosmetic microtransactions, and ill say this. It seems stupid, until youve played like 200 hours, and youve only spent 15 bucks on the game. At that point its like "why not spend another 5 bucks to get something cool that you want?" The game is still practically free in terms of money per hour of gameplay. The only difference with fortnight is that its *literally* free up until that point.

  37. Re:What wonders me ... Darkplaces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Darkplaces is a good opensource engine.

    Fucking noob.

  38. Changed in what way? by Krakadoom · · Score: 1

    Microtransactions have been a thing for a long time. So has free to play. So has free to play with microtransactions. Exactly how is Fortnite changing anything, except the transactions aren't so micro anymore? That's hardly revolutionary. Price gouging at it's best. (Which incidentally has also been around for ages).

    1. Re:Changed in what way? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it's a shameless advertisement of this game.