>NFTs
>blockchain
>loot boxes
>f2p
>delisting your digital game and removing it
What is the next anti consumer horror waiting in the wings?
>NFTs
>blockchain
>loot boxes
>f2p
>delisting your digital game and removing it
What is the next anti consumer horror waiting in the wings?
how long until we go back to an arcade system where you have to pay to play each time you die
GIVE ME YOUR HAT
>describe dystopian hell
>but good!
These """"people""""" must be stopped.
Barcades are a thing now, so now I guess.
But I think they run on a subscription pass system now.
What does blockchain have to do with anticonsumerism? Do you even know what it is?
never, because the most profitable arcade systems were those that were either the most fun or the most casual
whereas the most profitable mobile games eclipse the most profitable arcade games simply by hooking in the most whales and being the most efficient at turning tourist players into whales
>5% drop rate
>only four in existence
That means, on average, less than 100 people play that game
Which is a fair metric
It doesn't matter whats next, the ultimate anti-consumer tactics already won: DLC and paid online. Proving they can access your wallet almost on a whim has already ruined video games, as now things that used to be standard parts of games are chopped off and sold piecemeal to you faggots.
If you dumb faggots didn't buy fucking Xbox's and XBL and fucking horse armor, the rest of us wouldn't be fucked today.
Theres already an arcade game out there, 1$ 3 matches or you can pay 20 dollars iirc per month, what a steal, huh?
DLC isn't inherently bad, moron. It's only a digital form of the expansion packs or full-price updated versions that used to be sold (like every fighting game on home systems that would come with several full-price updated versions which tweaked the balance a bit and added a few new characters), which even back then could reach Paradox levels (just look at The Sims before The Sims 3). DLC can both mean several hours of new content or a small cosmetic item. Moreover, DLC is simply an inevitable byproduct of games being sold more and more on digital markets rather than physical, which itself is an inevitable byproduct of increasing internet bandwidth speed for consumers and the desire for developers to sidestep the need for a publisher + setting up their own digital payment infrastructure to sell their games with.
Blaming DLC just for existing and becoming popular is not only inaccurate but also frankly useless, just as it is useless that new technologies eventually eclipse the need for older ones. It assumes that a parallel universe even exists where people would reject a newer more convenient technology, although that is frankly impossible in our current neoliberal climate.
>it's not bad!
>it's just only used in the worst possible ways
Sounds like it's fucking bad then, asshole.
>>it's just only used in the worst possible ways
if your claim is that it's just used in "only" the worst possible ways, then [citation needed]
not only is it extremely inefficient for video games, it lends itself very well to scams and the most Jewish of payment models: Play-to-earn
That's a great way to kill people's interest on videogames.
Actually, this market needs another 1983's crash, but this time Nintendo needs to give a middle finger to it.
Rent only monthly subscription
>the year is 2030
>not starving to death or working in a reeducation camp, starving to death
Nintendo is the fucking Disney of gaming, they need to crash harder than anyone else at this point with their shitty practices you dullard fuck.
yeah, how dare they make gameplay-focused games that are good and fun instead of 8-hour-long cinematic experiences
>defending Disney vault era Nintendo
Imagine being this much of a knob slobbering faggot.
>REEEE WHY DO THEY KEEP MAKING VIDEO GAMES THAT ARE ACTUALLY FUN TO PLAY THEY'RE MAKING MY BELOVED PLAYSTATION LOOK BAD