Gaming News

Benzino

Exclamation Marc wrote: »

So are 2k games essentially saying, hey Belgian gamers you're going to suck playing online because other gamers are going to have access to better teams by result of loot boxes?

It didn't say this in the article but seems this may be the inference, which is pretty f'n rich.

You could view it that way, but one thing for sure is that it leaves Belgian gamers at a disadvantage over their EU friends who they will be playing against online.

J. Marston

Kiith wrote: »

2K Games want the help of Belgian gamers to allow them to get loot boxes back in their games. Because we all love loot boxes so much, and will do anything to get them back in...

https://www.pcgamesn.com/nba-2k19/2k-asks-belgium-fans-for-loot-box-help?tw=PCGN2

This, Star Citizen and EA's general shìthousery. Big game companies take their customers for absolute mugs, because we are in the most part I suppose.

Kiith

Benzino wrote: »

You could view it that way, but one thing for sure is that it leaves Belgian gamers at a disadvantage over their EU friends who they will be playing against online.

It will leave them at a disadvantage to people who pay for these things. Simple way to stop that from happening is to remove them entirely.

Benzino

Kiith wrote: »

It will leave them at a disadvantage to people who pay for these things. Simple way to stop that from happening is to remove them entirely.

Or to allow everybody the option to pay.

Billy86

Benzino wrote: »

Or to allow everybody the option to pay push gambling on all children

If we're honest that is what this really is about, which is exactly why it was banned.

Benzino

Billy86 wrote: »

If we're honest that is what this really is about, which is exactly why it was banned.

Slap an 18's rating on it then.

Billy86

If anything 2K would be more strongly opposed to all of their games being unavailable to the under 18s market given that's likely where they do a huge chunk of said loot box business on.

johnny_ultimate

Benzino wrote: »

You could view it that way, but one thing for sure is that it leaves Belgian gamers at a disadvantage over their EU friends who they will be playing against online.

If they’ve commodified mechanics and balance to the point when players who can’t / don’t pay for extra digital nonsense are at a disadvantage, then the company and its game deserve no support whatsoever

Benzino

Billy86 wrote: »

If anything 2K would be lmore strongly opposed to all of thein games being unavailable to the under 18s market given that's likely where they do a huge chunk of said loot box business on.

No reason the option shouldn't be there.

Benzino

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

If they’ve commodified mechanics and balance to the point when players who can’t / don’t pay for extra digital nonsense are at a disadvantage, then the company and its game deserve no support whatsoever

That's your opinion, but somebody could see not been able to buy cosmetic loot boxes as been in a disadvantage. Loot boxes are not always pay to win.

gizmo

Billy86 wrote: »

If anything 2K would be more strongly opposed to all of their games being unavailable to the under 18s market given that's likely where they do a huge chunk of said loot box business on.

It'd be interesting to see a breakdown of those stats actually, I don't think I've seen any like it before?

On one hand, it could be the sheer volume of smaller transactions that's generating the revenue figures we're seeing. In this case the largest source could very well be the under 18s with the permission of the account holder who don't see anything wrong with a number of smaller totals. If, however, the majority of the revenue is coming from whales, like in the mobile industry, then it's more likely the over 18 age group since I find it hard to believe any parent would authorise those kinds of transactions on that scale.

On that note, PEGI have finally introduced the Micro-Transaction warning label that should be appearing on titles in the near future. The article also contains some higher level figures based on the above issue.

Exclamation Marc

Billy86 wrote: »

If anything 2K would be more strongly opposed to all of their games being unavailable to the under 18s market given that's likely where they do a huge chunk of said loot box business on.

Agreed and I would guess that the contracts relating to the relevant licences require the games to be rated 3 or 7 to use them as no professional association would want their products seen as 'mature' games.

Also, as we've seen with GTA and others, game ratings are not strictly enforced and parents generally don't give a monkeys of their kids are desperate to play it because their friends have it. Fortnite is 12 and it's been well reported that many under that age play it and have access to it.

Billy86

Benzino wrote: »

No reason the option shouldn't be there.

The option for lootboxes, but all of their games only being available to both? Like I said, I really, really doubt 2K would want to go for that option.

Robert ninja

The only real problem I have with lootboxes is that their odds/droprates are often not exposed. There's not much oversight to these things like there are with casinos. Even online gambling have their source code reviewed by gambling commission or similar agency. If it lists the item's droprate as x/100 then you can at least make an informed purchase. Sometimes they just have 'common/rare' kind of scale which is useless.

Benzino

Billy86 wrote: »

The option for lootboxes, but all of their games only being available to both? Like I said, I really, really doubt 2K would want to go for that option.

There are more games with loot boxes than just 2K games. If GTA wanted loot boxes, why shouldn't they be allowed. Their players will be 18+, devs should have the option at least.

SomeSayKos

Benzino wrote: »

Loot boxes are not always pay to win.

No, but they are always gross

EoinHef

Benzino wrote: »

There are more games with loot boxes than just 2K games. If GTA wanted loot boxes, why shouldn't they be allowed. Their players will be 18+, devs should have the option at least.

As much as i detest the economy in GTA Online they at least do it a better way than lootboxes imo.

You buy shark cards and buy exactly what you want,not buy something that gives you a chance to get what you want.

To me thats what they decided to do over loot boxes and personally id rather see that than random loot box stuff even if i disagree with the balance of the economy in GTA.

Xenji

THQ Nordic has bought the rights to the Kingdoms of Amalur IP, I would love to see a sequel as it seemed to very underappreciated when it came out back in 2012.

ERG89

Xenji wrote: »

THQ Nordic has bought the rights to the Kingdoms of Amalur IP, I would love to see a sequel as it seemed to very underappreciated when it came out back in 2012.

I never played it, always wanted to try it as it seemed like a decent Fable style game. Which was a favourite of mine last gen, well Fable 2 not 3.
Not sure I get what THQ Nordic are up to, they are specialists in buying up mid tier IP's that I can't see ever becoming huge. Saints Row is about as close as they have and with no GTA the last 5 years it's baffling they haven't made one in that time.

Jerichoholic

Xenji wrote: »

THQ Nordic has bought the rights to the Kingdoms of Amalur IP, I would love to see a sequel as it seemed to very underappreciated when it came out back in 2012.

It's a great game. I hope they make a new one and not ANOTHER remake in HD.

Really enjoyed Kingdoms of Amalur picked it up on a whim to fill the gap before one of the mass effect games came out.

Robert ninja

Valve's update on their content monitoring: https://steamcommunity.com/games/593110/announcements/detail/1708442022337025126

Not impressed. They clarified what "troll games" meant and it's fair to want to prevent games made solely to abuse trading card system. But then they ruined it by adding another vague AF condition: "Others are just trying to incite and sow discord". Sow discord... what game would that be? Anything that has a message or theme that's controversial?

Also guilt by association for developers. Dear lord It's always 1 step forward, 2 steps back with Valve.

Inviere

Robert ninja wrote: »

1 step forward, 2 steps back with Valve.

Halve Life 3 confirmed?

Kiith

Inviere wrote: »

Halve Life 3 confirmed?

Mention Half Life 3?



That's a paddlin.

kunst nugget

An article on how Brexit will affect the British Gaming Industry:

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2018/09/10/brexit-is-sabotaging-the-british-video-games-industry

The British video games industry is a national success story. Over the past thirty years, game development in the UK has evolved from a niche hobbyist pursuit into a thriving sector.

It employs over 12,000 full time workers in more than 2,000 businesses, providing an annual gross value-add in excess of £1.5bn. Games made in the UK are played around the world, whether its major triple A franchises like the Grand Theft Auto series or beautifully crafted independent titles such as Monument Valley...

Ending free movement will make it harder for British businesses to recruit EU talent. It'll impose additional administrative and financial costs for British businesses looking to attend major European trade shows like Gamescom – reducing their access to international publishers and investors and damaging their businesses as a result.

It is already causing international talent to think twice about the UK.

Companies like Sports Interactive have reported that EU nationals are either turning roles down in Britain or relocated to avoid getting caught up in a Brexit backlash. British video games companies are missing out on the best international talent. This will force them to scale down the aspirations for their games and – ultimately – their businesses.

The core economic effects of a chaotic Brexit are also troubling industry insiders. They're worried about increased hardware costs because of a rise in tariffs or non-tariff barriers, or that there may be weaker domestic demand because of an economic squeeze.

There is also an emergency scenario which the industry needs to grapple with: no-deal. In this nightmare scenario, the immigration status of a full third of the sector becomes uncertain overnight. As well as the human cost of such legal devastation, businesses will be faced with the reality of paying thousands of pounds per EU employee to bring their immigration status in line with those from the rest of the world.

No deal also means that we're out of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), an EU law on data protection and privacy. Without a data adequacy agreement we'll undermine the entire digital infrastructure of the video game economy.

Companies will scramble to separate EU players from UK players in multiplayer lobbies to prevent GDPR breaches. Stores like Steam will be unsure about VAT collection processes. Companies won't know if commercial deals that cover the EU stand. There is a real risk of the British video game economy being brought to a stand still by a no-deal Brexit.

K.O.Kiki

It beggars belief that they're still trying to go ahead with Brexit.
Every sign is pointing towards it being an absolute disaster.

On the plus side, no one will ever call us a "f*cking Paddy" in chat again! :pac:

gizmo

News? Humour? Who the **** knows at this stage. Hopefully worth a watch at least.

pleasant Co.

gizmo wrote: »

Hopefully worth a watch at least.

Of course it won’t be

gimli2112

Saw that article about Brexit earlier. The comment about GDPR Regs and concerns over data protection for gamers in online lobbies seems off. Where's the risk? Your biggest concern in an online lobby is some git blaring music or being obnoxious, not your privacy rights.

SolvableKnave

gimli2112 wrote: »

Saw that article about Brexit earlier. The comment about GDPR Regs and concerns over data protection for gamers in online lobbies seems off. Where's the risk? Your biggest concern in an online lobby is some git blaring music or being obnoxious, not your privacy rights.

I think it's more to do with Server and Service Locations. So if any of the servers are housed in the UK, and they're outside of Europe and GDPR, they will have no right to access your data and info, so they'll have to refuse you access to the servers.

And it's the same the other way round. Take WoW for example. I think they have some of their servers in Donegal, others in Frankfurt. Not sure if there are any in UK, but any UK based player would not be allowed access those servers due to the GDPR implications. Hell, businesses in the US have to abide by GDPR if they wan't to sell online to EU.