undefined | Better HN

0 pointsPostOnce7y ago0 comments

Rather I'm not happy with the foreboding.

I really like video games, and they keep getting worse... not the games themselves, but everything around them (due to "business" concerns), such as my above concerns, and IAP/DLC, and Xbox Live/PSN/Nintendo all charging money to play games on your already-paid-by-you internet connection, where it used to be free (since you can act as a server).

For DLC, in some cases, it's never sold on physical media, so for example you buy a playstation game, and half the game is DLC, and then 5 years later Sony shuts down the service that delivers the DLC, and you're left with half a game, so when your kid turns 10 and you want to show him this cool game, now you only have half of what you paid for.

Games now require mandatory updates to play alone by yourself (GTAV needs gigabytes of updates, no option to play the game offline alone and update later)... so you get home after work and want to play for 30 mins but have 2 hours of updates to download or more.

And a million other little things. Pardon me for not wanting Google to pour more gas on the garbage fire.

0 comments

flavmartins7y ago

I understand the concern.

To play Devil's advocate, I would love to see real data on how much these older games get played.

The idea is that we buy a game and will continue to play it off and on for YEARS. But is that reality? Or do we finish a game or get tired of a game and then move on to a newer title and never return to those older games we thought we'd continue playing in the future?

I have MANY PS3/PS4 games I thought I would pick up again eventually. My PS3 has now been donated to goodwill after years of being disconnected and gathering dust in my media room.

And on my PS4, the disc games I can't even find. Most titles are digital buys and I've actually deleted from from the console since I'm not playing them. I find myself moving from new game to new game every 6 months or so. A few multi-player games I'll stick with periodically while it's active, but once the sequel is released I'll move on too.

restingrobot7y ago

To be fair, many of the problems you just described are specific to console games. But more specifically to your point this service would actually eliminate the need to keep the game up to date, as the centralized server would maintain an update product. So this might actually improve your game experience, as you would never have to wait for an update again!

Plus it runs in chrome so you don't even have to worry about installing/tweaking settings/finding the disk anymore either.

PostOnceOP7y ago

This will be adding those problems (centralization of services, recurring costs to play your existing games, and to play multiplayer) where they don't already exist.

PC game companies are already making single player games that run on your local machine require an "always-on" network connection to "thwart piracy".

I've posted more above, but I have also posted this yesterday detailing why these multiple-clients-required games can and will personally sting you, and are a benefit to absolutely no one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18111288

tl;dr: steam doesnt tell uplay you own the game, uplay uses a separate key, it takes days to go via tech support to fix your game, or just minutes to pirate it. Google is going to amplify this already crappy situation.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse