this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2024
64 points (98.5% liked)

Games

16645 readers
591 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NewPerspective@lemmy.world 35 points 8 months ago (4 children)

As a community, gamers have made a lot of stink about this in the past. Nothing has changed. I'm confused about how they ever thought we didn't care about always-on connections.

[–] imapuppetlookaway@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago

Testing what they can get away with is my guess.

[–] Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago

You have to translate from CEO double-speak first. What he meant was "Gamers are masochistic morons, so we thought we'd make more sales by making piracy harder than by making the game better. Our launch flopped, so we're going to try it the other way around."

[–] ahal@lemmy.ca 4 points 8 months ago

They probably judged how many people care accurately, but misjudged how deeply those that do care. And how much more likely those people are to leave a review.

[–] ampersandrew@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Helldivers 2 is still selling tons of copies even though everyone is saying that the servers can't handle the capacity. No one seems to care over there, so I can see why the Nightingale devs thought no one would care with their game either. I thought we were recovering from live service, but Helldivers shows we haven't.

[–] dfc09@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I agree that live games are a problem, and helldivers 1 had an offline option, but Helldiver's 2 being always online is better executed than any other live games I've seen. And, their servers have been needed up significantly since Friday.

[–] ampersandrew@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago

This is the kind of exceptionalism that bums me out. It's still a server that no one in the community can control, which means it will still have downtime while the game's making money and will disappear entirely when it isn't making money. It still means you arbitrarily can't play if you're in a situation where you have no internet, like on a train or in a cabin in the woods, and it means that your session will get interrupted with no workaround if something happens like Steam's matchmaking servers go down for maintenance for 15 minutes on a Tuesday; or when PSN gets hacked again. It means this game won't even be playable in 10 or 15 years for as excited as people are about it right now, and that's why I'm disappointed to see people making an exception for it that they didn't for all sorts of other live service games, because if Helldivers 2 shows that this stupid business model still works, companies will continue throwing money at it and making more of them.