By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Have You Ever Criticized A Game/ Gaming Service Without Ever Trying It?

binary solo said:
Samus Aran said:

Sony is also a publisher. And they give away free games based on a subscription. I call a spade a spade.

Sony is a publisher, but it is giving away games based on subscription as a platform provider. Unless you're telling me Tomb Raider and Bioshock Infinite are Sony published games. I got those games, and lots more, "free" through Sony's subscription and the only association these games have with Sony is that they are available on a Sony platform. So what you're doing is confusing the actions of the platform provider with the actions of a publisher because one company happens to do both things. That's not calling a spade a spade. That's calling a pick axe a spade and then trying to convince people that its the same as an actual spade because the spade and the pick axe are made by the same company.

What does it matter if they don't own the game? It's still the same principle of giving games away if you pay a monthly fee (i.e. a subscription). You're telling me Sony has never offered their own games on PSPlus?

It's ok if a platform provider does it, but not when a publisher does it?



Around the Network
Samus Aran said:
Normchacho said:

Nope. Not sure how you came to that conclusion to be honest. EAA in itself is fine, but I'm not too comfortable with the idea of a publisher having it's own subscription service. I say that because what happens when Ubisoft, Square, Activision, Capcom, ect. decide to launch their own services? What happens when EA decides that EA Acess subscribers should get exlusive content for games? What happens when the rest of the publishers follow suit? What happens to someone who loves game from EA, Capcom, and Activision and they each want $5 a month from you so you don't miss out on stuff?

It's the precedent that EA Acess sets that is bothersome.

You mean like how Sony (and MS) pay for exclusive content from third party developers?

It seems to me Sony and MS are the bad trendsetters here. Locking online play behind a paywall is what makes them worse.

One, pretty obvious difference here, is that there are 3 major platform holders and way more major publishers. On top of that, people tend to have a prefered platform holder, and most people don't even think about who publishes the games they play. That's important because it often means that platform holder comes into play when someone is buying a console.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

well a lot of people here just complain about Gamepad, does it count?

And I just can't give more f**ks to PS Now and XOne.



Click HERE and be happy 

Great question! I try not to be too judgemental about games I haven't played, but there's just some of them I know I won't like because of their setting, genre, etc. My biggest frustration is Call of Duty. The original blew my mind at the time and I've played a bit of CoD 2 on the Gamecube, which I thought was decent. My first experience with the PS3 was the MP of Modern Warfare 3 at a friend's house, and I played the demo for the single player campaign of Black Ops.

My problem with the series are not the games themselves. I'm not a fan of the FPS genre, but the games are mostly very polished... What frustrates me is what the series has done for gaming. It has single handedly turned the AAA games biz into something which isn't my cup of tea. Why I applaud them for this accomplishment, it saddens me that this focus on big MP shooters is giving ME less games to play. I stll haven't bought a PS4 or XOne because of this. I know the Witcher III is coming up and we'll get FF, Batman, Persona and Kingdom Hearts in the future, but still ... Things have changed, and I find myself turning to Nintendo more and more often. Still, I love games like Lost Odyssey on X360, Sly Cooper on PS3, but I doubt we'll see a whole lot of games like this on the next gen.

To round up, I'm just really happy Nintendo is doing its own thing. And while I may criticize some annualized action heavy series sometimes I don't do so because of the games themselves (which may be great), but because of the changes they've made to the games industry. I know I will get a PS4 and XOne in the future, but it's the first time in a long time that "new" consoles have not been able to sway me right of the bat.



Check the Make Account Later blog @ www.makeaccountlater.wordpress.com

Follow me on Twitter @MCJFranck

Samus Aran said:
binary solo said:

Sony is a publisher, but it is giving away games based on subscription as a platform provider. Unless you're telling me Tomb Raider and Bioshock Infinite are Sony published games. I got those games, and lots more, "free" through Sony's subscription and the only association these games have with Sony is that they are available on a Sony platform. So what you're doing is confusing the actions of the platform provider with the actions of a publisher because one company happens to do both things. That's not calling a spade a spade. That's calling a pick axe a spade and then trying to convince people that its the same as an actual spade because the spade and the pick axe are made by the same company.

What does it matter if they don't own the game? It's still the same principle of giving games away if you pay a monthly fee (i.e. a subscription). You're telling me Sony has never offered their own games on PSPlus?

It's ok if a platform provider does it, but not when a publisher does it?

Yes. You only need to think about it for a moment to understand why, and that there is actually a difference. But if you chose to willfully ignore what is obvious that is no concern of mine.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Around the Network

I complain a lot about games that i haven't played.

Usually my main complain would be that they release it already so i can play it.



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Toxy said:
I criticised the sequels to Final Fantasy XIII. I had not played the sequels, but they were sequels to my least favourite Final Fantasy, so it was safe to assume they were just as bad, as well as the general consensus that they were indeed bad, possibly even more so than the original Final Fantasy XIII.
It was a shame too. I was really hyped for Final Fantasy XIII. Final Fantasy is one of my all time favourite video game series.

I have and you're absolutely right. Hell, in some cases they're worse!



I like to play what other people are exaggerating about and then attack it
It keeps them in their place.

I try to play everything and even tend to do comparisons while I post just to be sure I know what I'm talking about.... but I am still guilty of jumping on hate bandwagons. Last time I did, it was for Knack. I guess my anti-Sony bias shines through sometimes.



Emo Dante. Castlevania Lord of the Rings. I tried them out in the future and loved the games.



Yes, paying for online on consoles.



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.