r/gaming

Kojima:

“Since production is ending in 2028, this is about video games, but I grew up with physical media, so I find it really sad. Currently, I’ve been buying up a lot of Blu-rays, such as various movies, and CDs too.”

“The situation is different for games [than movies], as they are downloaded to the hard drive, that means the game data remains on your own hardware. However, if things shift to streaming in the future, that won’t be the case anymore.”

“That’s how movies work on these platforms, right? You don’t download the data, you access it directly through a subscription. And the consequence of that is that you don’t actually possess the data yourself.”

“There are companies that own these servers and let you ‘turn the tap’ for a monthly fee. However, with nations, politics and various ways of thinking, one naturally has to consider the possibility that if there is a change, the data inside will stop being distributed. And if that happens you won’t be able to watch or play the movies and games you like.”

“That is what is frightening. So, what is happening to video games in 2028, might also happen to movies. I’d like everyone to keep that in mind.”

You don’t own these games, yet there isn’t some big kerfuffle about it, yet when Sony does it it’s a huge issue? Why?

You don’t own your music on itunes or Spotify. You dont own the movies you buy on Amazon Prime.

Im not saying it’s right but if this is such a big issue why is everyone upset NOW about it as opposed for the last 10 years?

With all the hype around GTA VI and me watching some videos about older entries it got me thinking how locations in GTA main-line games progressed and how it would suck for GTA as basically the one of a kind franchise to forever just solely stick to a very small set of locations to explore: Los Santos / Los Angeles, Liberty City / New York, Vice City / Miami, Las Venturas / Las Vegas, and San Fierro / San Francisco.

Obviously even the same city in different games is not 1:1 but the feel is same, references are similar, locations look similar, etc.

I guess it makes sense in a way because those cities are centers of modern pop culture, which the game parodies. Those cities feel familiar to many people around the world, and with the budgets being so high and thus the risk as well, it is a safer bet. But it would be nice for GTA to also explore some other locations or have more freedom to even assemble completely fictional areas.

What do you think? Will main-line GTA titles only stick to these major US cities as references or will Rockstar start opening its franchise to more diverse locations and thus stories? (I mean, crime looks a bit different in Japan, Brazil, Europe, Mexico, Russia, etc.)

Talking UK prices if it matters.

I mainly want a Switch 2 for Xenoblade Genesis when it comes out just as i got a Switch 1 for Xenoblade 2.

I don't overly care for most of Nintendo's franchises so the only other games im interested in are the new Fire Emblem, The Duskbloods, Pokopia and maybe the new Pokemon if they have put a bit more effort into it this time.

I haven't gotten into an online multiplayer shooter since MW2 (2009). Should I just buy the latest COD or has the franchise moved on from its roots?

I've never played an extraction shooter but is that closer to what I'm looking for?

I really liked jumping into games of team deathmatch, sabotage, and search & destroy then adjusting loadouts in-between games.

Just an older gentleman with a question.

I'm not talking about open world games that are just a bunch of big fields. I mean games that are made of dungeon like levels that are all arranged together and interconnect with each other in a non-linear fashion, like Dark Souls 1.

Sekiro & Bloodborne both do this a bit too, but nothing like Dark Souls 1. Are there any other games out there that do this?

In most games it's pretty standard for bosses to get faster/stronger/ more aggressive with their attacks the closer you get to defeating them usually they'll activate some rage of the gods mode or break out supermoves. This can make the fight more fun and add a variety by giving them new moves and keep a challenge as well as being annoying depending on whether you have to take it from the trop each time you die or if the boss has checkpoints in the middle of it
What I rarely see is the other extreme. Bosses that show signs of injury and fatigue as you wear down their health. The only two examples I can name off the top of my mind are Sif from dark souls and Pious Augustus from eternal darkness. Who both start limping towards the end of the fight Sif even trips over which makes them seem more human/sypathetic and makes you feel like your attacks are actually having an effect.
Any other examples you can think of?

I genuinely don’t understand this from my pov and would love someone to help shed some light on the topic.

Because for me, if a game comes out that I’ve been excited for or had my eyes on, I buy it and just play that until I’m finished with it. If I didn’t like it? I don’t play it ever again and so I wouldn’t really count that as my catalogue of games to play.

So how does your backlog happen?

Do you buy a game that you’ve been wanting to play, start playing it, get 20% through it and then go “okay what’s next, new game now”.
Or does life happen and you stop playing for a while because you have no time, and you forget that game even existed, so you buy another game.

Because to me, if life happens and you don’t have any time to play anymore, wouldn’t you just go back to the last game you played? Sure there might be other games out there that have come out since, but it’s not going to go anywhere? You can just buy it later when you finish the other game no?

EDIT: I forgot how much steam sales influence purchases. But would you say that’s a backlog or library?