PlayStation 4 Discussion

[Rockie_Fresh88]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

Still doesn't excuse the fact that there has been a negative element to this online stuff

Everything isn't about money

Sent from my LG-LS840 using Tapatalk 2

Wait ...Yes it is

[23]

Wait ...Yes it is

That sounds like EAs motto

Sent from my LG-LS840 using Tapatalk 2

[mestevo]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

That sounds like EAs motto

Sent from my LG-LS840 using Tapatalk 2

It's every solvent company's motto.

Most-played lists are utterly dominated by games which feature an online component. If that's such a big problem for you it's time to accept that you've either outgrown current console gaming or it's simply passed you by because it's going to continue to trend in that direction. It's certainly not my cup of tea outside of my CCM with friends.

[authentic]

It's every solvent company's motto.

Most-played lists are utterly dominated by games which feature an online component. If that's such a big problem for you it's time to accept that you've either outgrown current console gaming or it's simply passed you by because it's going to continue to trend in that direction. It's certainly not my cup of tea outside of my CCM with friends.

Couldn't agree with this more. I've come to accept that the online part of these games is always going to be there. It's whatever to me, but it does get annoying. No reason to say that's why someone won't buy a console.

[Cod]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

With the new consoles favoring digital distribution more and more, I wonder if we will see any "Steam-style" sales in the future. I know I'd play my console a lot more if I could get games for great deals a few times a year. The biggest problem with digital distribution on consoles is that the prices are the exact same as getting a physical copy...the only incentive is you're allowed to be lazy. Also, MS and Sony need to fix their networks / network hardware (at least Sony on this one). The NIC is awful in the PS3.

[Cubfan]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

With the new consoles favoring digital distribution more and more, I wonder if we will see any "Steam-style" sales in the future. I know I'd play my console a lot more if I could get games for great deals a few times a year. The biggest problem with digital distribution on consoles is that the prices are the exact same as getting a physical copy...the only incentive is you're allowed to be lazy. Also, MS and Sony need to fix their networks / network hardware (at least Sony on this one). The NIC is awful in the PS3.

I don't see DD coming for the next playstation or xbox anytime soon. The ISP's in the US couldn't handle that plus the cap limits cable companies like Comcast use. Downloading a full could eat up most of what some get each month.

[23]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

It's every solvent company's motto.

Most-played lists are utterly dominated by games which feature an online component. If that's such a big problem for you it's time to accept that you've either outgrown current console gaming or it's simply passed you by because it's going to continue to trend in that direction. It's certainly not my cup of tea outside of my CCM with friends.

The problem with this is quality vs. them just making money

I could give 10 cares about online components, as long as they dont keep ignoring the staple of gaming to try to shove online in a game like a hot twinkie.

I don't care to play Halo, or COD online so I either don't buy or don't waste time on the game until the price drops significantly to justify that 29.99 price tag ya understand?

I love reading all of the online posts where people are constantly complaining about lag, or cheating yet can't stop going back for more of the same abuse.

Doesn't mean I won't play anything online, but primarily im an offline gamer and the SP always has an always will be the staple of gaming, not a trend.

[mestevo]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

The problem with this is quality vs. them just making money

I could give 10 cares about online components, as long as they dont keep ignoring the staple of gaming to try to shove online in a game like a hot twinkie.

I don't care to play Halo, or COD online so I either don't buy or don't waste time on the game until the price drops significantly to justify that 29.99 price tag ya understand?

I love reading all of the online posts where people are constantly complaining about lag, or cheating yet can't stop going back for more of the same abuse.

Doesn't mean I won't play anything online, but primarily im an offline gamer and the SP always has an always will be the staple of gaming, not a trend.

So passed you by is the answer then. With a few exceptions (some AAA even), online functionality is and will be the staple of all games going forward. You can pick up a SNES or Wii for pretty cheap though if you want to hold onto that single player dream.

I'm an offline gamer too, but my knuckles aren't white from holding on so tight. Single player Modern Warfare ranks up there as one of the most memorable gaming experiences for me and like you if I buy them I wait until they're cheaper, so has little to do with 'quality vs them just making money'.

[23]

I have no idea what the heck you're talking about.

Just because I think SP is the staple of games,which it is doesn't mean anything has passed by me.

How about you go play your wiiu and let me worry about what i play

It's obvious what i said went over your head and your experiences online compared to others doesnt mean anything to their pocket book.

I enjoyed Ghost recon online with some of the guys here....but that doesn't mean i can't enjoy the sp experience which seems to have gotten the short end of the stick in favor of bugged out online.


Sent from my LG-LS840 using Tapatalk 2

[mestevo]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

I have no idea what the heck you're talking about.

Just because I think SP is the staple of games,which it is doesn't mean anything has passed by me.

Based on the most popular games this generation, single player gaming is secondary to online and will dictate the path of gaming next generation and onward. That would make it a 'staple' of gaming. I welcome your rationale to the contrary. I expect you will decline to answer that.

How about you go play your wiiu and let me worry about what i play

Is this supposed to be some kind of insult? You're the one complaining about single player gaming and holding it up to be the pure bug-free (since everything online apparently is bug-ridden as you've repeatedly said?) magical gaming experience. Oh yeah, and I don't have a Wii U.

It's obvious what i said went over your head and your experiences online compared to others doesnt mean anything to their pocket book.

I enjoyed Ghost recon online with some of the guys here....but that doesn't mean i can't enjoy the sp experience which seems to have gotten the short end of the stick in favor of bugged out online.

So to be clear, if a game is online it's "bugged out", but you've got cred to complain about online being a big deal because you played Ghost Recon with the guys (how "bugged out" was that experience, anways?) When did I say you couldn't enjoy the SP experience? Which part, specifically, went over my head?

Time to just agree to disagree if you're not going to actually discuss the industry and whatnot and would rather insult and minimize anything you disagree with.

[23]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

Single player is not ever a secondary experience and it falls in line with what the article hit on.

Matter of factly, I guess it depends on what game you have in your console. Take NBA 2k13 for example. As many people who complain about their online being junk, it still isnt the majority of the number of people who buy the game... you will probably never see 5 or 6 million not even 4 million of their customers playing a bunch of online games, because its just not that type of game.

If the industry was that confident, it would try what Sony did once and make an online only game and see how well it would sell or stay alive out there... remember that didn't work out too well did it?


Secondly I wasn't insulting you, merely telling you to go play your wii since you think that's what all SP users do it play wii games, and I didn't say that its bug free, but it sure is alot less self torture than alot of these online servers.

Lastly, you are the one who responded to something I posted so you can move on and you wont have to worry about me responding to you. Next time don't come in here commenting on me when I made specific statements about the article posted in here, then acting like im off the topic. I could care less if you agree with me or not.. to be honest with you my day would be better if you didn't say another word to me about any of this.

One thing I agree with you on is the next time you post, keep it on the thread or the article and not on me and what I should be playing.

[Burns11]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

Last year there were 87 games that sold over a million copies globally, according to vgchartz.

38 (43%) of those had an online component

15 (17%) were online at their core

41 (47%) had a deep, story based, single player experience at their core

[Cyros]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

Last year there were 87 games that sold over a million copies globally, according to vgchartz.

38 (43%) of those had an online component

15 (17%) were online at their core

41 (47%) had a deep, story based, single player experience at their core

Is there overloaded between those categories?

[CMH]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

Last year there were 87 games that sold over a million copies globally, according to vgchartz.

38 (43%) of those had an online component

15 (17%) were online at their core

41 (47%) had a deep, story based, single player experience at their core

This seems a bit nitpicky, though, I get what you're pointing out here.

But one million copies for 87 titles almost makes me feel like selling one million copies if you're a AAA title isn't exactly that impressive. How many AAA titles get released a year? I bet it's not all of those 87.

Anyway, my point is: How many copies did those 17% online at their core games sell in comparison to the 83% that either had an online component or were single player at their core?

That's a real answer because if, for example, that's 17% equated to 150 million copies and the other 83% equaled 150 copies combined, then there is a definite reason for a company to approach multiplayer at its core.

Please don't read the above as a statement for multiplayer at its core. I'm not a multiplayer guy, but I do think the quoted statistics are misleading.

To take the opposite approach:

Just because 17% of those games might have made more than the other 83% (hypothetically speaking) does not mean all game companies should focus on online only.

We know which multiplayer games tend to sell a load (Halo, Call of Duty, to name two). But for every Call of Duty there are probably ten games that are multiplayer at their core (though I wonder if Halo or CoD are actually considered multiplayer at their core if they have single player campaigns?) and do not sell well at all.

So, companies/publishers/developers need to be careful. I see a potential issue where games enter that film & television realm where most developers try to copy the successful brand and fail, leaving gamers with little options, just as movie viewers continue to grow frustrated and bored with the cookie-cutter films that are being released and have subsequently equated to less new releases every year and declining attendance figures in theaters.

Perhaps, as another article pointed out with sales going down, this is already happening and how much of that is the gamer's fault? If we get only one AAA title a month, and can complete the game in one week, what are we to do with the other 40 weeks in the year but twiddle our thumbs and not throw our money at the gaming industry?

[Burns11]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

This seems a bit nitpicky, though, I get what you're pointing out here.

But one million copies for 87 titles almost makes me feel like selling one million copies if you're a AAA title isn't exactly that impressive. How many AAA titles get released a year? I bet it's not all of those 87.

Anyway, my point is: How many copies did those 17% online at their core games sell in comparison to the 83% that either had an online component or were single player at their core?

That's a real answer because if, for example, that's 17% equated to 150 million copies and the other 83% equaled 150 copies combined, then there is a definite reason for a company to approach multiplayer at its core.

Please don't read the above as a statement for multiplayer at its core. I'm not a multiplayer guy, but I do think the quoted statistics are misleading.

To take the opposite approach:

Just because 17% of those games might have made more than the other 83% (hypothetically speaking) does not mean all game companies should focus on online only.

We know which multiplayer games tend to sell a load (Halo, Call of Duty, to name two). But for every Call of Duty there are probably ten games that are multiplayer at their core (though I wonder if Halo or CoD are actually considered multiplayer at their core if they have single player campaigns?) and do not sell well at all.

So, companies/publishers/developers need to be careful. I see a potential issue where games enter that film & television realm where most developers try to copy the successful brand and fail, leaving gamers with little options, just as movie viewers continue to grow frustrated and bored with the cookie-cutter films that are being released and have subsequently equated to less new releases every year and declining attendance figures in theaters.

Perhaps, as another article pointed out with sales going down, this is already happening and how much of that is the gamer's fault? If we get only one AAA title a month, and can complete the game in one week, what are we to do with the other 40 weeks in the year but twiddle our thumbs and not throw our money at the gaming industry?

Catagory: # sold, % of top 87 releases, % of top 87 sales

Online core games: 44 million, 17%, 20%
Story core games: 76 Million, 47%, 35%

Online core minus the one major title release: 22 million, 15%, 10%

One major series doesn't mean there is a paradigm shift in the future of gaming. Reminds me of when GTA started racking up sales and people tried to say all future games would be nothing but GTA clones.

These numbers are from 2011, not sure why vgchartz defaulted to 2011 instead of 2012, but it did. When I say a game is "online at their core", it's a game where the online component is it's main selling point. Some of those do skirt a bit of balance between an offline campaign and online component, but ultimately the main focus tends to be the online component.

Is there overloaded between those categories?

Yes, the 15 online core games are all counted in the 38 online component games, the rest of those are made up of some of the story core category as well as sports, racing, and one MMO (which I didn't actually count in the online core because, while it is online, it's really it's own separate beast, it's not really statistically relevant either way anyway).