Whatever your opinion on the proposed Microsoft/Activision merger,
there's one good thing coming out of it: more transparency about how
these companies work.
Take, for instance, this fact from a recently poorly redacted
document: of all the people owning a Playstation 5, 1 million of them
use the device /only/ to play "Call of Duty", while 20 million
Playstation owners use it mainly play the same game.
Which, honestly, makes me feel a little sad. Look, I'm no fan of the
"Call of Duty" games; I think they are shallow, repetitive and haven't
done anything new or original in almost two decades. I've given up
playing the games because (amongst other reasons) they aren't
different enough from earlier games for me to want to pay for the
newest iteration.
But that's me. Others love the series and - even though I rue the franchise's grip on the genre - I understand that tastes differ, and
if people actually LIKE the gameplay in "Call of Duty", then more
power to them.
So it's not sad that so many people love the "Call of Duty" games.
What /is/ sad is that these 20 million strong gamers aren't expanding
their horizons. Of course they 'love' "Call of Duty" if that's all
they are playing. But it's such a limited view of gaming and they
deserve to have a wider scope before making that decision. Yet - like
too often happens - they've cloistered themselves in their little COD
bubble and are missing out on so many great games.
Worse, this narrow mindedness makes them easier to victimize by
rapacious corporations; if they're not going to jump to another game,
then Activision has no incentive to make the games better or not
overload it with MTX. And, sadly, those corporate decisions effect
other gamers too.
I've no conclusion or fix for this issue; it's just a bit of data that
I've come across that I thought I'd share. It was something that made
me think that I thought might be interesting.
Worse, this narrow mindedness makes them easier to victimize by
rapacious corporations; if they're not going to jump to another game,
then Activision has no incentive to make the games better or not
overload it with MTX. And, sadly, those corporate decisions effect
other gamers too.
I've no conclusion or fix for this issue; it's just a bit of data that
I've come across that I thought I'd share. It was something that made
me think that I thought might be interesting.
On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 7:08:41?AM UTC-7, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Whatever your opinion on the proposed Microsoft/Activision merger,
there's one good thing coming out of it: more transparency about how
these companies work.
Take, for instance, this fact from a recently poorly redacted
document: of all the people owning a Playstation 5, 1 million of them
use the device /only/ to play "Call of Duty", while 20 million
Playstation owners use it mainly play the same game.
Which, honestly, makes me feel a little sad. Look, I'm no fan of the
"Call of Duty" games; I think they are shallow, repetitive and haven't
done anything new or original in almost two decades. I've given up
playing the games because (amongst other reasons) they aren't
different enough from earlier games for me to want to pay for the
newest iteration.
But that's me. Others love the series and - even though I rue the
franchise's grip on the genre - I understand that tastes differ, and
if people actually LIKE the gameplay in "Call of Duty", then more
power to them.
So it's not sad that so many people love the "Call of Duty" games.
What /is/ sad is that these 20 million strong gamers aren't expanding
their horizons. Of course they 'love' "Call of Duty" if that's all
they are playing. But it's such a limited view of gaming and they
deserve to have a wider scope before making that decision. Yet - like
too often happens - they've cloistered themselves in their little COD
bubble and are missing out on so many great games.
Worse, this narrow mindedness makes them easier to victimize by
rapacious corporations; if they're not going to jump to another game,
then Activision has no incentive to make the games better or not
overload it with MTX. And, sadly, those corporate decisions effect
other gamers too.
I've no conclusion or fix for this issue; it's just a bit of data that
I've come across that I thought I'd share. It was something that made
me think that I thought might be interesting.
Call of Duty? I just made one!
So it's not sad that so many people love the "Call of Duty" games.
What/is/ sad is that these 20 million strong gamers aren't expanding
their horizons. Of course they 'love' "Call of Duty" if that's all
they are playing. But it's such a limited view of gaming and they
deserve to have a wider scope before making that decision. Yet - like
too often happens - they've cloistered themselves in their little COD
bubble and are missing out on so many great games.
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 10:08:28 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Worse, this narrow mindedness makes them easier to victimize by
rapacious corporations; if they're not going to jump to another game,
then Activision has no incentive to make the games better or not
overload it with MTX. And, sadly, those corporate decisions effect
other gamers too.
Easy. We get them all a copy of Psygnosis' Lemmings. They will love it.
Raise your hand if you can still whistle some (most/all) of the music
from the original game. 'Cause I sure can. Those were some catchy
tunes.
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 21:02:19 -0500, Zaghadka <zagh...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 10:08:28 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, >Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Side note: Everytime I abbreviate "microtransactions", I'm reminded ofWorse, this narrow mindedness makes them easier to victimize by >>rapacious corporations; if they're not going to jump to another game, >>then Activision has no incentive to make the games better or not >>overload it with MTX. And, sadly, those corporate decisions effect
other gamers too.
the awful MTX Motocross game (coincidentally, also made by
Activision).
Although these days, I'm half convinced that if Activision released a
new MTX game it would be using the newer form of the abbreviation: no
game, all microtransactions. ;-)
On Friday, June 30, 2023 at 5:53:18 AM UTC-7, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 21:02:19 -0500, Zaghadka <zagh...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 10:08:28 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Side note: Everytime I abbreviate "microtransactions", I'm reminded ofWorse, this narrow mindedness makes them easier to victimize by
rapacious corporations; if they're not going to jump to another game,
then Activision has no incentive to make the games better or not
overload it with MTX. And, sadly, those corporate decisions effect
other gamers too.
the awful MTX Motocross game (coincidentally, also made by
Activision).
Although these days, I'm half convinced that if Activision released a
new MTX game it would be using the newer form of the abbreviation: no
game, all microtransactions. ;-)
I've been wondering how MTX = microstransactions every time I see it,
I also don't know the new abbreviation either. Microtransactions
itself also sounds too mild. It should be called something like flim-flam.
On 6/30/2023 11:14 AM, Justisaur wrote:
I've been wondering how MTX = microstransactions every time I see it,
I also don't know the new abbreviation either. Microtransactions
itself also sounds too mild. It should be called something like flim-flam.
Financial Death By A Thousand Currency Cuts.
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 11:17:27 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 6/30/2023 11:14 AM, Justisaur wrote:
I've been wondering how MTX = microstransactions every time I see it,
I also don't know the new abbreviation either. Microtransactions
itself also sounds too mild. It should be called something like flim-flam.
Financial Death By A Thousand Currency Cuts.
Yeah, but FiDBATCuC doesn't roll of the tongue the same way. ;-)
Take, for instance, this fact from a recently poorly redacted
document: of all the people owning a Playstation 5, 1 million of them
use the device /only/ to play "Call of Duty", while 20 million
Playstation owners use it mainly play the same game.
Which, honestly, makes me feel a little sad. Look, I'm no fan of the
"Call of Duty" games; I think they are shallow, repetitive and haven't
done anything new or original in almost two decades. I've given up
playing the games because (amongst other reasons) they aren't
different enough from earlier games for me to want to pay for the
newest iteration.
But that's me. Others love the series and - even though I rue the
franchise's grip on the genre - I understand that tastes differ, and
if people actually LIKE the gameplay in "Call of Duty", then more
power to them.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 297 |
Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
Uptime: | 101:27:23 |
Calls: | 6,660 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 12,209 |
Messages: | 5,334,862 |