I still believe their naming conventions has destroyed the brand.
Grandma that wants to buy a toy for their kids can go to the store and buy the next PlayStation. Xbox… which one do they buy? They don’t, they buy the easy option.
The only thing I will concede is that being able to shorten Xbox One X to XbOX was clever. Naming it the Xbox One in the first place was mind numbingly stupid, though.
This is exactly what happened with my mom trying to buy a Christmas gift for my nephew. She knew he had an Xbox but had no clue which version it was so she didn't know which version of a game to get. I told her to just buy an Xbox store gift card and call it a day, much easier than trying to figure out which version of the console he had. Didn't want her to buy him a disc if he had the Series S.
This happened to me! I thought I was buying the newest gen. But then…games I was trying to buy were “not optimized for your console.”
I’m still not sure which one I have. I think I have the ONE S. But the games I’m looking to buy are “optimized for X|S series,” but…don’t work on my console. I’m moving to PlayStation soon.
Also, I have a feeling all that news a few months ago about how they’re gonna stop support for Xbox and may not continue to make games for it or will shut down the console division or whatever cannot have helped sales. I don’t remember the articles exactly. But the impression I was left with was Xbox was on its way out. Why would I buy another if they’re unsure of its future?
I have seen people very confused about which games will run on their system, though. Most are still cross compatible with XB1 and Series X, but some are Series X only now and the boxes aren't marked clearly enough for some people to tell the difference.
Admittedly I don't play on Xbox, but yeah their console naming is baffling to me and I honestly don't know/can't be bothered to figure it out. PlayStation is simple. Bigger numbers equal newer. Pro version? Just a modest step up but still clearly identifies as the same Gen.
When Xbox launched the One, I thought, "oh they're going to reset the numbering convention. It's awkward now but will be easier going forward." Boy was I wrong.
On the other end there's Nintendo, but the names are so different and distinct it's easy enough to distinguish (except whatever the hell Wii U was).
Microsoft seems caught in the middle. They clearly didn't want to be like PlayStation, but they don't want to/can't come up with unique names, so you get just a mouthful of nonsense letters and numbers.
Microsoft have sucked at naming things basically forever. Look at their windows versions. First they were numbered after the year release which made sense, they kind of break the trend with millennium edition but it's still sort of worked because it came out in 2000. Was also a 2000 which confused things and then after that it just continued to go downhill.
95, 98, 2000 (presumably because they didn't want to call it 00), XP, Vista, 7, 8, 10 (because nine is evil for some reason), 11
There's a rumor the next version is going to be called X, I assume because they haven't really advanced as a company since the '90s and they still think that's cool.
Keeps support for poorly coded programs working. In the old days, a quick and hacky way to determine which Windows version the system was on was to have the program check the OS name. If the name started with the characters "Windows 9" you knew it was either Win95 or Win98 and ran in one mode, but if it was something else it ran in the other mode. If the new OS was named Windows 9, then certain old programs would break when run on it. Yes, the people who would have coded that way are idiots, and sure, the number of people running those programs may be in the single digits, but Microsoft has been pretty serious about maintaining backwards compatibility, even if that means ever more cruft and jank.
The other reason is marketing. "See? It's not anything like that awful Windows 8! We skipped all the way to 10 to demonstrate how different it is! Please come back!"
I used to have a black XBox sitting beneath the TV gathering dust. I think it is a One by the shape. As for the new ones I have no idea off the top of my head which is the best. I've seen some on sale in places, but the impulse buy isn't there because I have no idea what I would be getting. I don't own a PlayStation, but if I wanted one I know that 5 is the newest, and you can get the small slim one or the big Pro one.
My observation since the very first Dead or Alive from the 90s: People having problems with bouncing boobs in games are more nasty than those who actually enjoy them.
TL;DR: Devs asked their Twitter if they wanted to see 150% breast jiggle physics, deleting the tweet and apologizing after some backlash, which in turn got them more backlash from the other side for caving in.
It was rather obviously meant as a joke, so I'm confused about what people were mad at. Did they think they actually intended it to be included in the game? I would've just liked to see that gif, sounds funny af.
It seems pretty clear to me that they definitely intended to include breast jiggle physics at some level, and they decided that that was something that should be decided by the community. That would indicate to most casual readers that it's a priority for the devs. If they didn't realize that would strike a chord with both the pro-sexualization and anti-sexualization people, they weren't thinking at all.
This looks like a cutesy, cozy game that probably shouldn't even have jiggle physics. If they really wanted it in there, they should have just done it and said nothing. The "nasty people" they don't want to "attract" would have appreciated the jiggle, and everyone else would have just ignored it.
The devs brought it into the spotlight and it got talked about. I'm not surprised at that outcome at all.
Probably wasn't clear on that. I meant the 150% thing being a joke, not the jiggle physics. People having a problem with the inclusion of realistic jiggle physics is something that I didn't even consider tbh...
Yeah, I got that the 150% was a joke. But I think the meat of the uproar wasn't the joke, but the whole situation of posting this for the community as if it's an important thing to decide. The joke didn't help, either, as it shows they weren't taking this seriously, further enraging people.
Sweeping it under the rug then rubbed everyone the wrong way.
Done well, I think "jiggle-physics" actually call less attention the chest, as it doesn't look unnatural. The games that get noticed aren't implementing it that way, though, so it gets a bad rap.
Anytime I see unrealistic boob physics I just point out that they need a sports bra, because that usually fixes the issue in real life. It is distracting but I don't care.
The amount of fucking hate and vitriol that appearance and shit like this gets from everyone involved on social media is the literal definition of "pointless squabble" and people can act like, well, people are passionate about games like any other media. No they aren't. Gamers are dumbasses, and they're being played like fiddles by someone. If you don't like it, you can play so many other games.
I think you're on to something actually. Back when Saints Row 3 came out I read an article explaining how it's childish irreverence toward gender was actually sort of progressive. In character creation there is a boob slider and a dick slider (with insane proportions for both), character voice doesn't have to match the body type, there are no gender restrictions on clothing, characters are available to romance no matter your gender, etc.
Basically the game was so unrestrained and goofy that it subverted some uncomfortable gaming tropes like boob sliders by just letting players do whatever they wanted and not taking it too seriously.
have they paid 2.4 million? Last time someone with supposedly that much funding got fucked over by Nintendo they have been sent to jail, and once they came out had to basically pay rent to nintendo for the rest of time.
The reason we didn't hear anything of that, if I had to guess, is probably an NDA.
Cheaper price tag AND doesn't beg you for more money constantly. Helldivers 2 has premium content but they don't shove it in your face unless you bring up the specific menu for it.
I think they came to the wrong conclusion. Yes those games were cheaper, but really they were just good, and mostly finished at launch. Didn't feel like we were nickle and dimed for more DLC or season passes or mtxs, we got whole games that were fun.
All the big "AAA blockbuster" games anymore are reskinned, half finished versions of the last version, and the only thing they've put a ton of time into is analyzing how to get addicts hooked and spending the maximum amount on micro transactions.
I'm not sure how anybody can look at the way GTA 5 online was monetized to hell and not seriously question how far they're going to try to go with GTA 6. I'm fully expecting it to leak into GTA 6's single player with an intense focus on getting more and more out of mtx.
If GTA 5 came out today it wouldn’t be worth $60. The “big open sandbox” experience isn’t as big a pull as it used to be.
I bought 5 because it was “the next GTA” and I remembered having a good time with 4. Today it’s a little harder to remember the last time i even played a GTA game. 5 released a decade ago, 4 is going on 16 years old, fucken San Andreas turns 20 this year.
The next release is just gonna be GTA Online 2, we all know it already.
There comes a price point where it'll push more people to wait for discounts, and when that happens it makes it more likely those people will end up waiting even longer as the hype dies down.
There's stuff like inflation and so on, but it's also affected people's buying power which will lead to them starting to cut down luxury goods.
The discount cycle is on purpose. First you bank with the impatient whales who will buy not even the full version at $70 but the deluxe version with useless cosmetics at $100+.
Then after some times has passed, you do a sale at $45 so people who are willing to pay just this price buy it.
Then lower again, and again until all potential customers have bought the game at the maximum they're willing to.
Already aware of trying to capture price tiers. Pointing out that perception of cost is still generally the same despite inflation and that out the door lower prices that the competion have sometimes led to more financial success than that strategy.
kotaku.com
Oldest