Category General Gaming

EA Has To Be Feeling The Burn Right Now

Sean Alexander 1 Comment

Star Wars Battlefront II sales figures are in for physical copies at retail from around the world. Oh boy.

 

 

So after the micro transactions mess and now lame excuses from EA, they have now revealed that maybe, just maybe, lootboxes won’t return to Star Wars Battlefront II at all.

EA has previously stated that the game will meet targets of around 14 million by March 2018, and at least match the 2015 predecessor, but now, it looks like that won’t happen.

 

Analysts in the US expected the game, at retail (So physical only) to chart below the original, due to the more prominent digital scene for game distribution now. Estimates coming out before the news breaks tomorrow, is it sold less than 1 million physics units in November.

untitled3

That is actually shocking, more so when that is believable, with Black Friday images showing the game going untouched in many stores. Evidently the backlash hit such mainstream presence, it damaged the reputation.

At the same time, it was also Black Friday, better deals and all that. Plus, EA did announce before the game launched that it would be discounted alongside the new Star Wars movie, so both could have had an impact. Either way, those remaining sales won’t have been made up digitally, that is for certain.

battlefront-2-star-cards

More over in Japan the game debuted…at a solid 30,000 or so, and then fell from the charts. In the UK it’s hung around the top 3, ahead of single platform release Super Mario Odyssey (Which given the circumstances some would say is a sin) but for a game on multiple platforms, not hot, especially as both Call of Duty and FIFA are outselling it still. Granted, those games aren’t innocent either.

So what does this mean? Well, we can only hope EA is re-evaluating its stance, and so is Disney most likely, now more government bodies are looking into the lootbox issue. EA has to be sweating about whatever happens next, and the rest of the industry is now being scrutinised heavily, with Destiny 2 under fire for gating off content you could access in the game behind DLC, even though you had access to it prior the DLC release date.

vader-nooooo

Battlefront II won’t hit it’s projected sales targets, and investors won’t be happy. EA had $3bn wiped from their value over the course of this controversy, and while that is small change for them, it shows investors were absolutely not pleased, at least briefly.

EA also said micro transactions weren’t necessary to the game making a profit (Despite many publishers saying they are in fact necessary to do so), but under the current circumstances, they humorously may well have been!

Either way, EA’s monumental screw up has had a huge knock on effect. No one company is safe from scrutiny now, and all it took was one last push, and EA was the one to do it. They pushed too hard too fast, though honestly, I would have expected this event to happen eventually anyway.

Whether they alter their course or not remains to be seen, but we are now in the stage where publishers are attempting tactics and having to apologise afterwards with their tails between their legs.

 

Plus, we get to see every other developer fire shots. That’s something amazing to witness.

 

If you enjoyed this piece as always share and leave some feedback on social media, and I will see you next time. Until then, Happy Gaming!

Preview: Yooka-Laylee on Nintendo Switch! (Spoiler Free)

Sean Alexander

I got my Backer Code of Yooka-Laylee for Nintendo Switch in today, and I’ve spent some time blasting away at the game, so what are we looking at?

 

First off, I have mostly played in handheld/tabletop mode, so take that for what it’s worth.

Yooka-Laylee is presented as stated by the developers, just below full resolution on both modes. So the image is slightly softer. What is interesting about this and what I noted first, is the game simply feels better being played handheld, as though it fits the screen more than it did when I played on PS4 on my 40″ TV earlier this year.

That seems like an odd compliment but it really does feel at home here. The worlds are very pick up and play via Sleep Mode and with regards to controls, everything is just within reach.

yl2

The game is the same as it has been since launch, only some improvements not available on other systems at launch are standard here. manual camera, audio toggles, fast speech and brief voice snippets, are all welcome additions. This is very much the best version out of the box.

Performance wise, the game is interesting, at 30 FPS, it does occasionally pause, albeit very briefly, seemingly to load something, at least in handheld mode, as well as very brief, very slight, and rare frame rate drops, if only for a second.

When docked, the game runs the same, though the little frame drops don’t seem present, or at least I haven’t encountered them yet within the first world. The image is again, below full resolution of the system, but looks fine, if a little soft.

yl3

So in terms of drawbacks, the main thing is shadows and particles. Shadows are softer and particles seem paired back just slightly, but outside of those honestly minor things, the game seems as is. Maybe water effects are reduced, but those have been so brief in the world so far. It’s entirely possible other effects from elsewhere in the game are reduced further.

yl1

But yes, Yooka-Laylee on Switch certainly is technically below the other verions, but it doesn’t feel like a significant drawback to draw ire. The wait has been worth it, assuming you like this style and structure of game, as obviously that remains unchanged. Yooka-Laylee certainly feels best here.

Valve: Why Did You Stop Evolving?

Sean Alexander 2 Comments

Valve created Steam well over a decade ago now, with the sole purpose of reinvigorating, restoring, and evolving the PC Gaming place. So why the hell did they stop?

 

I will open this by saying, while I am very much a periphery to PC Gaming and its largest audience, I have been aware, involved in, and observant of it for well over 5 years. In those 5 years, I have seen my housemates, friends, colleagues, all using it, but I never dived in. Something felt wrong.

That something, was how I was always reminded I was looking at something from the mid 2000s. Clunky, albeit robust in a way, but the impression I always got from it was the “Ma and Pa store on the high street”. Quaint. Funny. Quirky. A great idea that needs to grow. That’s what people said about it. In some ways, yeah back when it was new, that probably actually was the image it had. So why in 2012 did I still see that?

steam-greenlight

The thing with Steam is that it’s the primary digital distribution platform for PC. Sure you have Humble and GOG, but they don’t come close to the market share. If you want games, you use Steam. If you want deals, they can often offer great deals, just to keep that competition down, as they’ve been there the longest, and have accumulated a lot of wealth in the back pockets.

Valve created Steam as a way to revitalise PC Gaming. It had hit a slump when Steam first came along, it needed some solid store presence, and that was Steam. You can get refunds, you can get games with great deals, download them to your device, and pray you can play them without some additional DRM getting in the way (I mean, Steam is DRM).

In the mid 2000s, sure, that was awesome. in 2017 though, and even back when I first saw it in 2012, has it evolved much? No, not really. Steam has numerous problems, all traceable, as far as I am concerned, back to one thing and one thing only. The two main problems I want to focus on though, is functionality, and content. They have the same root cause however.

why

Look how far I had to go before I stopped seeing “Released on Today’s Date!”

 

Starting with functionality, Steam is a bit of a mess. It’s all algorithms, something now even YouTube is realising probably isn’t the best way to handle things. Games are suggested half-heartedly, there are “Alleged” content filters for you, it’s very automated. It’s mechanical, a process. That very process with some things is unrefined. Take for instance screenshots, because you can’t just PrintScreen stuff, you press F12. But to view said screenshot in your accounts gallery, listed under your account, there are steps to take.

I actually asked some PC aficionados why this is. They said it’s because you don’t want all your screenshots being viewed publicly. I told them, well like on any other platform, they should just be saved to your gallery, where you can then edit and set permissions as to whether some are private or not. Simple stuff. Turns out, you can set permissions like that, but not from within the gallery, but from within the incredibly small “Main” menu at the very top of the UI, under Screenshots, which is where you go to publish screenshots before they enter your gallery, and I have to ask, why? Why has this system been left in place when across almost every platform imaginable, it is streamlined and simple? Why did Valve simply stop evolving Steam, something they made Steam to do in the first place?

wut

But that isn’t all. That is minor functionality compared to refunds. In the event of a refund, it is only eligible within two weeks, and two hours of play time. So why, please someone tell me, can someone live stream an entire game, just under 4 hours, and then live stream themselves being awarded a refund with a false reasons given being “I bought the wrong game”? Let’s ignore the fact they live streamed it, and question why the hell Steam awarded a refund for a play time that was out of the rules they themselves set? Do they just not care? There has to be someone on the other side right? Otherwise that wouldn’t just go through an automated system!

This is baffling. Steam has these rules in place and they can just be walked around. Casually is if nothing is wrong with that. This loops back to the problem of content now.

It has been well documented by critics such as Jim Sterling and others, that Steam has a curation issue. No one is actually at their desk doing anything, and if reports are anything to go by, Valve doesn’t have a defined structure, staff just do whatever, and having seen Half-Life get a patch earlier this year I can believe that.

steam-greenlight

Steam left curation to the community. A bold idea, back when it had the Ma and Pa store look to it, but now, Valve Corporation, you should have staff. God knows you have the cash to do it! But back to curation, Greenlight, as anyone who leaves something up to a community will know, was a disaster. Abused, broken down, and indies felt their genuinely good games are, well, buried really. They are.

Now with Steam Direct….let’s not even go there. It’s done nothing. It hasn’t helped. The entry fee is the same as it was for Greenlight, which doesn’t help matters, and it seems like there is less curation. Indies have become openly resentful of the situation, and I have to agree.

In a 10 month period where 6000 games are released on Steam (Yes 6000), which is a 50% increase over the whole of 2016 at 4000, one has to wonder why a single platform is getting triple the games that the PS3 got in its lifetime, in less than a single year. Why is this the case? Does Valve not have any concept of curation? No, they don’t, and we come to what I believe is the root of the issue.

csgo.0

Money. Valve is swimming in it. They evolved the PC space and made bank, competitors can’t come close to their market share as they have the funds to flash sale away and keep people in the ecosystem.

Valve even makes games! Well, I say that loosely. They made a few games, maybe once or twice a decade, and just rolls in micro transactions and DLC sales, and of course, a cut of all those submission fees they get from Steam Direct, and every game sold on Steam. Now as for why I say they make/made games in a loose manner, is because…well a lot of them they just bought, or were mods of games that they published. Valve themselves do very little, they don’t need to. They can sit and be happy.

Steam was created to evolve PC gaming. But Valve, being a corporation, as much as they like to say and act otherwise, has hit the gold rush and stopped. They don’t need to anymore. They don’t need to be proactive, keep pushing with their philosophy, or even make games! Money just makes itself now, and the rest of the world is evolving past them. Valve has become purely reactionary, you can see that with how they handle even controversy and poor games: It’s all after the fact.

 

 

Valve….I mean at this point my only suggestion is hire people. Get a corporate structure, get people to actually work. Or any day now, hopefully, someone will come and evolve the market in a way you should have done ages ago.

 

 

Thanks for reading, and if you have any comments or want to share this with friends, please do so! Thanks for reading, and Happy Gaming!

Mega Man 11 Exists, and Why My Jaw Is On The Floor!

Sean Alexander

Where the actual hell did all that come from, Capcom?

 

Wow. So I’m in a moment of absolute shock. Given Capcom’s recent actions, I expected absolutely nothing from the Mega Man 30th Anniversary stream. Not one thing. After Legacy Collection 2 skipping Nintendo Switch, all the cancelled games, their other shenanigans with other franchises and attitudes towards platforms, I just figured it was merch.

 

My foot is firmly lodged in my mouth.

mlteb53sijgqlpwgsvum

So let’s start with this: The Mega Man X Collection, featuring X1-8, with the first ever re-releases of X7 and X8, and in the EU, the first ever re-releases of X4-6. I am overjoyed at finally being able to sink my teeth into the PS1 titles, since otherwise I’d need to seek original copies. This is a huge deal both for EU gamers, and gamers world-wide, and of course, it’s coming to all platforms.

Then we have Mega Man Legacy Collection 1 AND 2 coming to Nintendo Switch. After the sales success on 3DS one has to wonder why this didn’t happen sooner, but they have amiibo support, and the developers expressed regret at not being able to do this sooner.

 

But then, man, Mega Man 11. Who saw this 2.5D styled, really cool looking HD title coming, to be released late 2018? The entire project from the developer interviews reeks of passion, and they admitted they wanted to evolve and resurrect Mega Man, and Capcom has finally allowed them to. This entire endeavour looks like something passionate developers and veterans of both 2D gaming and Mega Man as a series have wanted to make for years.

yessss

Can I have this as a wallpaper please?

 

Capcom, I am very harsh on you. I still think a lot of your decisions on a corporate level have been restricting to developers regarding budgets and time limits, and shoving certain platforms (*cough* Switch) to one side even though it would benefit you is exceptionally stupid, but one thing is clear.

You have finally let the chains off of Mega Man, the developers can make the game they want to make, that we want to see, and I can’t thank you enough for giving them that freedom.

Now roll on 2018 baby!

Games and Accessibility: Don’t Leave Us Out

Sean Alexander

My past year in gaming has highlighted things that really should be addressed in games more often.

 

So fun fact: I have severe deuteranopia. This means some shades of red/green/brown (Anything in that range) can look identical. This means the colour spectrum I see is far more limited.

 

So on a 4K TV you have many more pixels, many more instances of colour, but with how little colour range I have, it can mean that a lot of those pixels look the same. The same is true for 1080p, or even 240p. But the more pixels there are, the more there is for my eyes to confuse.

In the image below, its actual the SDR image where I get better detail:

what-is-hdr-gaming-1-3.jpg

Add in HDR and well, we have a mess. The increased colour range of the display is nice, assuming you can distinguish them all. If you can’t, that’s just more shades of red and green to mix in with the others you can’t distinguish. And no, this isn’t me against the notion of 4K.

 

image8

I didn’t know I was colour vision deficient for 19 years of my life, but in 2016 I got my hands on DOOM. Great game, by the way. This was relatively smooth sailing, until the 4th stage, which was in Hell. A lot of red and brown. Red mists, rocks, particles, red enemies, brown objects, you guessed it, it was like looking at a blob on the screen.

Thankfully, there is a mode for each form of colour deficiency, so I got a lovely, what the press termed it before release, “Piss filter” instead. But everything is far more visible, and I am no longer walking off of ledges because I can’t see the end for the other objects in the distance. I am no longer missing my shots, or my jumps.

But if the game, like so many sadly, didn’t have this feature? I couldn’t beat it. I have tried, even with my memory of the game, I can’t do it. Some games I find impossible to play. If Overwatch didn’t have colour blind options, I couldn’t tell who was on what team unless they hit me.

cwheel-polar.png

But this higher resolution, wider colour range thing is what Microsoft, Sony and PC are pushing towards. Bigger screens, more colour…and not having the colour blind modes so people like me can play the game without either straining, or just having to give up. A lot of games simply don’t feature them, and there are games I want to try, but can’t.

Plus in marketing, taking DOOM again, I wanted to see how the Nintendo Switch version looked compared to my PS4 version. The catch was, no colour blind footage. So I had no way to tell how low the game looked to my eyes.

NintendoSwitch_12Switch_Presentation2017_scrn04_bmp_jpgcopy

And of course, this is not just to mention my article on the sheer importance of controls. Take 1-2 Switch, a game I will never talk about again most likely, that can be played by the hard of sight due to relying on sound and haptic feedback for a lot of games. That is a huge deal!

But a lot of games don’t account for the fact that this is a thing. Sure, you can’t make a controller that works in every situation, but occasionally you get a Rhythm Heaven or 1-2 Switch for the hard of sight, you get a colour blind mode for someone like me, you develop ways to make games more accessible, some far simpler than others.

 

Ultimately, I’d like to see even the basic modes be implemented into future games, since while the tech pushes on and on and creates more impressive visuals, with each passing year people like myself are left further and further behind, and some have been left already. In the world of gaming, that is just upsetting to see. We are all gamers, and we should all be able to play.

 

As always if you enjoyed this article give it a share and leave your thoughts below, and I will see you next time! Until then, Happy Gaming!

Game Reveals, and Why Timing Is Everything!

Sean Alexander

We all know this frustration. A game is announced, no release date attached, and then you think: It’s years away. Why is this such a bad idea?

 

Well truthfully, announcing something before it is ready, or even before active development, is a terrible idea for consumers and for developers.

For the gamers, you have to understand there is a “Hype cycle” announce a game a few months too early and people will be clamouring to just see it be released already, the “We get it please shut up” approach. This actually happened with Super Mario Odyssey if you can believe it.

mario_rabbids_2k

On the flip side for gamers, announcing it soon or close to release isn’t such a bad idea. It may be for their wallets but you get a good period of time to promote the game and out the door. Something like Wolfenstein II or Mario + Rabbids springs to mind, with a few months between reveal and launch.

This goes down incredibly well. A focused, brief campaign, not too stretching on the budget, and it keeps the game in the cycle for the duration with well-timed releases. This benefits the developer as well. Gamers want it now, so getting it as fast as possible in concise ways is great.

438666_2e005259fd994b1c9fda1730a28e66a3~mv2

Then we have what happens when you announce a game too far in advance. We all know the success or horror stories of games being announced close to launch, either with great campaigns or people forgetting said game was even coming out (Evil Within 2 anyone?) but the other end of the scale is far, far worse.

 

Who remembers Final Fantasy XV? Who remembers what it originally was? Final Fantasy Versus XIII, a spin-off to Final Fantasy XIII. This game was announced all the way back in 2006, final lands in 2016. It took over 10 years to finally arrive, going through development hell (Though reports suggest by 2012 it was barely in development anyway) and changes in staff.

The problem is, I can’t fathom why Square Enix felt the need to announce a spin-off to a game that wouldn’t even come out for another 3 years. Final Fantasy XIII didn’t land until 2009, so the timing of this reveal makes no sense. When you don’t know the first game will be a hit or not, why try to build a universe around it?

58427_31_kingdom-hearts-3-release-date-confirmed-2018-launch

To compound issues, let’s jump to 2013, with Kingdom Hearts 3, now saddled with a 2018 (Sure) release date. We haven’t seen much of the game, but apparently it’s coming in 2018. But now gamers are frustrated and just want a date and to finally play the thing.

Jump ahead to 2015, where Sony announced that the Last Guardian was coming to PS4, a game announced in 2009 I might add, Shenmue 3 via crowdfunding (Yes really) which has had spotty development updates and no gameplay shown, yet is due next year apparently, and Final Fantasy 7 Remake, of which we have seen some gameplay, it fell off the radar, and reports of development restructuring came to light. It’s also episodic, so expect to finish the remake in 2030.

ff7-1-3

All these games had the same problem. They showcased ideas. They didn’t sell us the game, they simply said it existed. Then radio silence, the gamers get nothing. Doing that, as shown with Final Fantasy XV, is incredibly damaging, as during development you don’t know how much it will change, if it will be cancelled, but having nothing to show instills no confidence in the consumer.

landscape-1498834656-god-of-war

But then there is the damage to the hype cycle. Take E3 2017 for Sony. It was a repeat of 2016, barring a sprinkling of new games, and this left people wondering, why was that stuff at E3 2016, when it could have been held over for this year, closer to release (We think), and some stuff from 2015 that still isn’t dated could be pushed into E3 2016. It creates a confusing message for the consumer, games appearing and disappearing at random with no clear timeline, just that they exist, and based on how things go you may or may not be shown new things next year. It’s damaging to the image of the games.

Plus, being honest and personal for a moment, announcing a game too early in development means if a snag does come up, and bam, one delay. This is very damaging to a hype cycle and while people say “It’ll be more time to make the game better”, sometimes you have to wonder if the perception of a delayed game would be different if we didn’t know how long it had been in development.

 

Will this impact sales? Probably not. Though FFXV has yet to hit budget apparently (Can’t think why), and the PlayStation titles will no doubt sell well, the gaming world is looking for faster, more rewarding turnarounds. As some developers know, letting it stew for too long builds some unrealistic expectations.

 

 

If you enjoyed this article then give it a like and a share, and I’ll see you all next time! Until then, Happy Gaming!

Physical Games Media: Time To Catch Up

Sean Alexander

Physical storage media for games that you buy from a brick and mortar store is under fire, mostly on Nintendo Switch due to downloading the remainder of big games that don’t fit, or cheaper developers skimping on costs, but this is the case on all systems.

 

So what spurred this? Well two things. One is Resident Evil Revelations Collection news a few days ago, where Capcom Europe announced that again, like usual, they won’t have a physical run of the game in the EU due to costs. These costs involve paying PEGI and other ratings boards, shipping, distribution, localisation, it’s a bit of a mess to be fair. But even in other regions (Except Japan allegedly), the two games come as such: 1 on a card (The smaller game I might add) and the 2nd game as a download code.

Nintendo-Switch-game-cards

This isn’t uncommon. The “Switch Tax” as it has become known is just a laundry list of third-party games that cost more on Nintendo Switch, attributed to cartridge costs. L.A. Noire, RiME, the list goes on. Is this entirely true? Not…really? Without official figures on costs we will likely never know, but one idea is that it is simply just price gauging a new market, which is normal. But the inclusion of goodies like OST keys and pins in physical editions shows developers and publishers (Indies, typically) want to sweeten the deal for physical buyers to offset that price.

The next issue with the game cards is actually publishers like Take Two, who have released LA Noire, NBA 2K18 and WWE 2K18 on the horizon. Each game is “Playable” without downloading the remainder, but there has been widespread panning of this move, instead with people preferring to pay a little premium and have the whole experience on a 32GB card, as opposed to what is right now, a 4GB or 8GB card, with the rest as a download.

la

In the case of something like DOOM, this is handled quite well. The game fits all single player and DLC content on the card (16GB) and offers all the multiplayer as a download. This way you don’t miss any of the “Main event”. With Take Two though, it’s been revealed that the backlash against the Switch copy being only “Partly physical” should also be levelled at the other editions.

6999689_R_Z001A.jpg

On PS4 and Xbox One you use Blu-Ray discs, that hold up to 50GB of data. Most games fit on this, and L.A. Noire most certainly would. However, interestingly enough that game actually only has a small amount on the disc, the rest as a download. This is a mirror of what happens on Switch. Why? Simple: It’s cheaper. While full capacity Blu-Ray discs are cheaper than the 32GB cards on Switch, publishers, as noted by Take Two saying the following, want “Maximum Profits”:

“We’ve said that we aim to have recurrent consumer spending opportunities for every title that we put out at this company. It may not always be an online model, it probably won’t always be a virtual currency model, but there will be some ability to engage in an ongoing basis with our titles after release across the board,”

Link

The truth is the digital storefronts of Xbox Live and PlayStation Network offer something physical games don’t: More money per sale. The prices are often the same regardless, but one of them won’t factor in costs of production, shipping, retailer cuts and so on. On PS4 and Xbox One this model of Digital Only is being pushed heavily, as both systems, even if using discs, just install them to the hard drive anyway, making the disc just a form of DRM and to save you downloading all of a game, instead (In this case anyway) most of it.

psn

So what does this mean? Well your internal storage is being eaten up anyway, why not just go digital and be more convenient on yourself (Until the game gets pulled from the store…) and you can even get those Digital Gold Editions publishers like so much. In the end, more money for them. Take Two is the most brazen with this, as their games come piece meal regardless of format.

e0066da4-f9b8-4c91-9b1a-0af03ad0943b

 

But sticking with Xbox One for a moment, let’s loop back to the complaint you have to download most of these third-party Switch games to get the full and best experience (OR complete experience) even when you buy physically.

The Xbox One X recently launched, and with it comes the ability to use actual UHD (4K) assets, which I assume (I haven’t got one of the boxes, I’m not rich!) look amazing. The problem with these are the file sizes are enormous, with HALO 5 and Forza Motorsport 7 passing 90GB to 100GBs each! Final Fantasy XV on PC is 170GBs, so that won’t fit on ANY current disc.

The catch here is to fully utilise your new shiny console, to get the best experience you can, you will have to download a good 50GB of game, or more heaven forbid. Why? The games have to come on standard Blu-Ray because they ALSO need to work on the basic Xbox One and One S. So what does this mean? These huge games require downloads, because the storage medium can’t hold them.

E7ZF35Kob1RUj7YkR49GtdioLmr6ltyzFmrj7UREf9Y-1

To confound this issue further, there IS a storage medium that COULD hold them. UHD Blu-ray. They go up to 100GBs. In fact, looking at how long regular Blu-Ray has been used for gaming (Since 2006 with the PS3), one would expect UHD Blu-Ray would be used by now, but an issue there would be cost. At which point no matter which option you take, you have the same issue as you do on Nintendo Switch: Games are too big for the medium flat-out, or the medium is too costly to use to store a full game. Sure it’s a little different, where the devices don’t even support UHD Blu-Ray (Well, the Xbox One S and X do for movies…) but the problem even then still persists when some games on the basic PS4 and Xbox One go over GB anyway!

 

The third-party publishers want a digital only future. Consumers are leaning to it from convenience. Console makers can’t keep up with the scope of games due to costs. A digital only future is most likely coming down the line. Physical media is already outdated on PS4 and Xbox One, skipped out on with all systems by publishers wanting to save costs, and too expensive on Switch and for UHD to hold the games being made in their entirety.

Let’s just hope they include bigger hard drives in the next ones right? 1TB in the Xbox One X…eesh.

 

As always if you enjoyed this give a like and share on social media, and I will see you next time! Happy Gaming!

Capcom May Be Short On Cash…

Sean Alexander 1 Comment

News today has confirmed my beliefs: Capcom is running low on money.

 

In a statement to NintendoLife, Capcom revealed that Resident Evil Revelations Collection will NOT be receiving a physical release in the EU.

Capcom has to take various factors into account when deciding what format to deliver our titles to our fans. These can include but are not limited to overall production costs, manufacturing times, distribution, and first party regulations. In the case of Resident Evil Revelations, we’ve found that unfortunately it’s not viable for Capcom Europe to create a physical version of the title on Nintendo Switch for our territories, however we will be making this available as a digital release.

Link

Honestly though, breaking this down it reveals there is no real reason for this.

 

Here in Europe, you can get physical releases of both Revelations titles, readily available on Amazon, for other systems. If it was truly a cost measure, then maybe I could buy it. Cartridges are expensive after all, but the Collection only has the smaller first title on cartridge. The second game is a download code. Capcom can’t even print a half-assed attempt at a physical collection here! By all logic…this would be cheaper than printing two separate discs for other systems, two unique SKUs, and having both rated separately by PEGI.

rerc.png

In fact, the cost issue is potentially true: PEGI costs a lot of money for submission and rating of physical games. Plus, the cost of printing Nintendo Switch games is also fairly steep, but then again, only one of the games is even physical anyway.

Plus, indie titles are going physical left and right. With the size of Capcom you would think their EU division could be better funded, but here we are. The truth is coming to light.

headersfv

I’ve noted this before, but Capcom, with the exception of Resident Evil 7, has had a rough time. Street Fighter V is being re-released. Marvel Vs. Capcom Infinite was a footnote in their financials and they even dodged questions about it. Their remasters and collections seem to be dodging more accepting platforms for those games (As historically noted with sales) in favour of keeping costs down. The leaked budget (If it can be called that…) for MVC:Infinite is laughable, and shows how tight the ship has become.

Monster-Hunter-World

I have said it before in another article but Capcom, I swear now more than ever, this better pay off. Monster Hunter World is throwing away your existing Japanese fanbase, and Western fanbase, in the hope you reach a bigger audience despite appealing to what will most likely be a smaller Japanese audience by sheer install base. To do this, you are spending more money developing the game. It better pay off Capcom, I sincerely hope so, because if it doesn’t, the writing is clear.

Personally, I’m also sick of Capcom giving Europe the shaft AGAIN regarding physical releases, like the Megaman Legacy Collections, almost every Mega Man Collection actually, and many, many more games we either didn’t get, or got digital only because “Cost”.

 

Tomorrow, there will be a bigger article about physical distribution across all platforms, because no system is sage anymore.

But until then, leave some comments, share with your friends, and I’ll see you all next time! Happy Gaming!

Lootboxes: Are They Really Gambling?

Sean Alexander 1 Comment

Lootboxes are a hot and noisy topic across the internet and now, even with governments and main stream media. But are they gambling?

 

So this discussion has multiple view points and honestly each has merit. I fall on one particular side of this fence that’s a little unique, but that’s for the end.

So PEGI and the ESRB don’t count lootboxes as gambling, as according to them, there is no specific legislation against the practice, and unlike actual gambling, you are guaranteed a reward. This is actually entirely true. Even if you don’t want what you get, investment is returned.

Free-Overwatch-Loot-Boxes

China is a little different, making Overwatch display odds of items, and classifying lootboxes as “Lottery tickets”. Here in the UK, lottery tickets are counted under gambling laws and age restrictions. So we already have overlap based on different countries.

Belgium is now investigating both Overwatch (The harbinger of the craze really) and Star Wars Battlefront 2, for child gambling. Namely, the idea of introducing monetary games of chance to minors. This I also agree with. The last thing you want is the seeds of gambling addiction from games.

This got so severe when the main stream media like BBC and CNN picked this up, that Disney called EA and soon after in app purchases were disabled, at least temporarily, in Star Wars Battlefront 2. Likely a way to save their brand image.

1.jpg

Now my stance actually comes from PEGI themselves. It actually stems from Pokémon.

Pokémon no longer has Game Corners, due to gambling laws here in the EU (We didn’t have them from Pokémon Platinum onwards) and in the re-releases of earlier games on the 3DS eShop, they carry a 12+ rating, solely for gambling. The trading of virtual currency you pay no money for in exchange for the chance of profit is labelled clearly on the box as gambling to the extent later games remove the feature entirely, but when using real world money for the privilege and a slight change in that you are guaranteed rewards even if you don’t want them, it’s not gambling.

 

To me personally, this makes no sense. You can’t hold both to different standards, but then the argument comes to something like Trading Card Games. Booster Packs are effectively lootboxes. So are Kinder Eggs. So are many things. What makes lootboxes in games different? Nothing.

 

I feel as though the argument has become skewed. From one side there is the fight whether these constitute gambling or not, or an entry to such addictions, and on the other, the argument they have no place in a full price retail game.

Either way, precedents are about to be set.

 

 

If you enjoyed this brief discussion (I’ve been in the hospital!), share with your friends and comment away, and until next time, Happy Gaming!

 

The Unfortunate Obsession with Metacritic

Sean Alexander

The industry has a bit of an obsession with Metacritic scores. Both consumers, and unfortunately publishers, look at the numbers in a way that has proven not only counterproductive, but dangerous in recent years.

 

Metacritic (And similar aggregators) have a simple job: Collect review scores and average them out. Now that’s all well and good and can be a useful source for a range of different reviews on a game, movie, music and so on.

Metacritic though has become a focal point. The vaunted goal, the barometer of what’s worth buying, and even what determines developers getting bonuses. Yes, Metacritic alone has become a huge part of the industry, and while it does a job that is needed, namely collecting reviews into one place for convenience, how it does it and the impact of that, is the problem.

Metacritic

First, the rise of competitors such as OpenCritic have raised awareness that Metacritic seemingly acts selectively with getting reviews from places, requiring verification. Further, it also reaches very slightly different averages, indicating that some reviews are weighted more than others. Weighting is in fact a key point that we will come back to later.

Another issue is review scores, because that’s what Metacritic uses for an average, will be based on different criteria. A 7 from one site is a different set of criteria from a 7 elsewhere. But for Metacritic, a 7 is a 7. The reasoning behind the number could be completely different, but the context behind that number is ultimately lost.

The idea that Metacritic and other aggregators can give a consensus is a bit foolish. ure, it will say “Generally Favourable” or “Mixed” or whatever other word of the times it chooses, but is that accurate, when the context behind those numbers is lost? The average number is just a basis from generalisation.  A game could come out with 80/100 and be “Generally Favourable” only for the reality underneath to be…well mixed. This is especially prevalent with mixed or divisive games, as outliers skew the data, and in statistics, significant outliers are anomalous. But Metacritic doesn’t care about anomalies and their context, just the number. More pull is assigned to the lower end of the scale, so even if a game has by all accounts more “Positive” reviews than “Mixed”, the “Mixed” weight it down. On top of THAT, not every game will have the same number of reviews, further skewing data.

original

 

I’m going to keep bringing up that number, because just like on this site and our refusal to score reviews (Again, context is key), that number in recent years has become the most contested aspect of any game.

The 4 point scale, admittedly nowadays more like 3 point scale, is a problem. Undoubtedly so in fact, to the point where now, a game below an 8/10 is considered bad. Yes, really, and I wish it wasn’t the case. A key factor in this is in fact aggregators have weighted (There is that word again) the averages.

Say you have a 10 point scale, in this case 1-100. If that was to represent a range of values from terrible, to bad, to average, to great, to excellent, why would 50% of that scale be assigned to “Negative” and below? Why is 50%-75% the range for “Average”? Why is the range for “Good to Excellent” only the upper 25%?

MTIyNDU3OTcxNzE1MzEwMTgy

This doesn’t make any sense. The cream of the crop would stand out regardless, so why is there a significantly larger range for games to be considered bad, than the other 2 general ratings? Why is the general bar for “Okay” around, of all things, 75-80%?

This extends to the issue regarding the 4 point scale. As the averages are locked to this upper half of the board, and most games fall in that range, it starts to push the minimum for what gamers call “Acceptable” up and up over time. Once, it was 7. It’s closer to 8 now and heaven forbid it hits 9/10.

These scores, and the uneven distribution and attribution of values given to the scores, is simply nothing more than fuel for a fire, of my game is better than yours, and so on so forth, amongst gamers, or even attacks on developers. It’s okay to have high standards, but average is not 7/10.

untitled5

Finally we are going to come to the other obsessed group: Publishers. Companies like EA and a handful of others, are known for tying bonuses for developers to a Metacritic score. Get a certain score, or no bonus. This is the dumbest, most disrespectful thing imaginable.

Sure, you should get a bonus for doing a good job or working extra hard. That is true of any industry. But developers go through crunch time, unpaid overtime, without union support. Worse to that, if the game has great visuals, and those artists, animators and modellers did the best they have ever done, but the programming leaves the game a mess with a low score, those visual development staff won’t get a bonus, even if it is their best work.

This is of course, assuming they still have the job afterwards, due to high turnover in the industry as well. Bonuses for a developer should be based on the work of the individual, and not held behind an arbitrary and without context number that a publisher wants to see, that can be broken down by a completely separate part of the development staff.

 

 

The industry has manifested a culture of abusing developers and not giving them their dues, based on what other people think. Not their work individually, not even what the publisher thinks, but what the rest of the world thinks, and the obsession with every increasing standards and a shrinking scale of what is acceptable means that this culture will only hurt developers in the end.

 

As always if you enjoyed this, give it a share and let me know what you think on social media. Until next time, Happy Gaming!