The weird people are still there, but development teams are much larger now, so their input is not as prominent. Plus the budgets are so large that a flop can heavily damage a company or even ruin it, so they’re very risk-averse. We need more AA or A games instead of relying so much on heavy-hitters.

Not sure, but they anticipate a lot of children having this device in their hands, so they’re going to design it for that, perhaps even over-design it, just in case.

I didn’t want borderlands even when it was cheaper.

Seems some are confusing the third party estimator with the official page. This is the official page: https://help.steampowered.com/en/accountdata/AccountSpend

I was surprised to see that both left and right joycons have the mouse functionality. Was cool to see it in action with the wheelchair basketball game.

Awesome! Now all I need to do is to stop being lazy and actually make a new game. Challenge level: impossible.

2004 was also great! Too bad that’s not available for free as well.

You’re making a false equivalence, but regardless, I am fine with any of that, even though I hate Nazis and the IDF, because it’s a video game. It’s virtual.

Wouldn’t they want to roll this out to all users as soon as possible to save on bandwidth? They have an “are you still watching?” prompt to save on bandwidth as well, right?

The end of my post is where I address this. Publishers have the option to use their bigger cut to reduce prices, but even if they don’t, money is moving closer to the people actually making the games possible instead of a platform provider. There are also a lot of indie developers. It’s not just all greedy publishers.

I was thinking the other day about how Spore would benefit from modern hardware. Spore came out when multicore processing for gaming was still relatively new and memory amounts were a handful of gigabytes at most.

Momentum. Steam was among the first on the scene and provided the best experience. Thankfully Steam has kept the momentum going instead of enshittification (thanks to being a privately held company), but almost a third of the price of the game is still ridiculous if you consider the effort that goes into making a game vs maintaining a mature platform.

I won’t say no to cheaper games. The 30% cut was settled upon in the days where physical copies were the norm and Steam was still under heavy development. Given how established Steam and digital distribution in general is, it’s not really fair to developers to dedicate almost a third of the price of the game to a hosting platform. Yes, exposure is important, but that’s a service provided passively due to the fact of being the largest platform. Reducing Steam’s cut hurts no one except maybe Gabe’s ability to buy another yacht (and even then, not likely). Even if customers don’t see lower prices if Steam were to reduce their cut, it’d be great to see the actual developers getting more money from the games they put all the effort into making.

Perception plays a huge role, that’s true, but I guess we’re just going to have to agree to disagree since it’s ultimately subjective.

The arcade experience is fundamentally different from the console experience. Arcade games are generally crafted to eat quarters and kick players off as soon as possible without making them feel ripped off. Jumping in and out of games is common at arcades. While it’s nice to save that couple of seconds on a console game, it’s not something that adds up a lot unless you’re jumping between games a few minutes at a time, which again, is more like an arcade and doesn’t make as much sense in a console gaming context because you generally have a better idea of what games you own and want to play.

As for the second issue, if it was a feature that wasn’t worthwhile and that nobody cared about, then why was he considering it in the first place? There are many technical details in games that exist that casual players don’t pay attention to, but subconsciously would enjoy. Surround sound adds quite a bit to a racing game, considering that the entire game is about racing against other characters that are positioned all around you.

The title states “Masahiro Sakurai refused to add Dolby Surround to a Kirby game because players had to sit through the logo” presumably because you actually cannot have Dolby sound without the logo. Yes, technically you could, but it’s likely part of the license agreement and so him refusing to display the logo as outlined by the license means he couldn’t use Dolby sound in the game (or would get sued if he went ahead and did it anyway).

Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. This is a significant enough feature that a couple seconds is really not a big deal. There are likely time-wasters just as long, if not longer, elsewhere in the game and they do not contribute a much richer audio experience. While I’d love to minimize time wasting as much as possible, this is something that appears once on boot-up while I’m sure there are other time-wasters that appear multiple times while you’re playing the game. If they’re even a fraction of a second, they will quickly add up more than this logo’s time.

Donald Knuth has a great quote on this: “The real problem is that programmers have spent far too much time worrying about efficiency in the wrong places and at the wrong times; premature optimization is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming.”

That’s nice, but I’m more interested in prices coming back down. The manufacturers have been pumping up storage prices even though demand has gone down by artificially constricting supply.