top 97 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 175 points 6 months ago (22 children)

Same thing happened with music.

It doesn't mean AAA will go away, just like big stadium packing artists like Taylor Swift never went away. They just accounted for less of the industry's total profits than they used to.

More of people's disposable money is spent on a wider variety of music and games, often opting for more "indie" and cheaper versions of both. It's a good thing, honestly, for people's tastes to be more diversified and unique.

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 6 months ago (21 children)

    Except almost no one can live with music now, with the spotify model.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 6 months ago (15 children)

    I pirate my music and keep it in my local storage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 6 months ago (13 children)

    I mean, it's ok I guess, but as a musician myself that's not helping much either. Buy some stuff on bandcamp (85% goes to the artists, cheap and often pay what you want) or if you need streaming get Tidal, they give 3x than spotify and didn't give 100 millions to joe rogan.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

    Also bandcamp gives you high quality DRM FLAC files (or really whatever audio filetype you want) and those files are yours to keep, forever. You can also stream stuff you've bought through the bandcamp website. They also still do bandcamp fridays where 100% of the sale goes to the artist. Next bandcamp friday is May 1st.

    Another option is direct-from-artist sales if they have their own website and store. Do vinyls still come with codes for an mp3 copy? I remember my vinyl for The Mean Jeans - Are You Serious? had a code and a link to download an mp3 copy of the album.

    I got into music piracy back in the day because it used to be that record companies paid artists badly so I spent money on concerts and merch, now Spotify pays artists badly for the record companies. Anyway, if used at all piracy is best used to find artists you really love and then spend your money on legitimately purchasing their music.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago

    I love Bandcamp. It does not have much of a filter so I get to find small and under the radar artists.

    Personally I buy 90% of my music either on Bandcamp or as a CD in my local store.. rip it.. throw it on Jellyfin for easy streamikg

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    Huh. Just found out that Bandcamp isn't owned by Epic Games anymore. It was sold off to someone else back in 2023. Guess I don't have a reason to boycott it now

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    There wasn't really a reason to boycott it anyway. Epic just wanted "free" access to a massive library for their games, like how EA Trax used to be a thing. Nothing changed about bandcamp in the meantime.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    I'm not gonna get started on this, but Epic or not, this is and was one of the only way to give money directly to artists. If you boycott Epic I really hope you boycott steam also cause they're no better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    Fuck off with your false equivalence bullshit.

    EGS has used anticompetitive and anti consumer practices from day one, all because Tim Swiney is a petty asshole that wants to be at the top of the pile.

    Meanwhile Valve has generally been pro-consumer and built a relatively good service

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Lol, another steam sucker ready to die for billionaire Gabe. They basically invented gambling for chlidren, they actually are the one that have anticompetitive practice lmfao, they dont let you own your games, they take a huge cut of 30% (epic take 12%, but you dont care about game devs right), they make billions in profit but employ less than 300 people.

    But I've met enough of your kind to know your cognitive dissonance to know that no amount of proofs that steam suck would make you stop kissing their ass. You guys are the maga of gaming lol. So yeah, the hard truth is you don't like games you like steam, and you dont like music, you like yourself. Now fuck off yourself, you are the problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    They basically invented gambling for chlidren

    The gambling sites aren't owned by Valve

    they actually are the one that have anticompetitive practice

    Citation desperately needed, and not just the one internal email from 10 years ago that reads like a misunderstanding.

    they take a huge cut of 30%

    30% is standard across the industry, including itch.io and GOG. And given that EGS just laid off 1000 employees, it's looking like 12% isn't a sustainable business model.

    Don't forget that EGS has been using anti-consumer policies like paid exclusives from the start. Meanwhile Steam, GOG, and itch.io don't force exclusivity, allowing an open ecosystem. Tim Swiney isn't against monopolies, he's just mad that he doesn't habe one.

    And let's not forget that Steam has been investing in open source and Linux gaming for years. PC gaming are getting close to a point where making walled off gardens becomes impossible.

    Do I think billionaires should exist? No. But when there's one that's actively building systems to keep digital ecosystems open permanently, I'm willing to make an exception.

    But you're clearly just some gullible jackass that fell for Tim Swiney's propaganda hook line and sinker. You speak of cognitive dissonance despite being fully immersed in it yourself. Go touch grass; you desperately need it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago

    Blablabla "good billionaire's ass tasten good" blabla epic bad blalabla lol.

    You have 0 clue what you're talking about if you don't even know about the gambling scheme valve invented. They are currently being sued for it by the state of New-York, on top of all the other lawsuits. If you had any small amount of critical thinking you would watch the Coffeezilla video about steam but I'm willing to bet my life you wont do it because you have a condition called COGNITIVE DISSONANCE that make keep on sucking a billionaire's ass, exactly like maga will always kiss trump's ass, you're equally stupid.

    I don't give a fuck about Epic and I don"t know who Tim whatever is, all I know is steam is predatory dirty capitalist business that steal billions from kids and games dev, and still gets their ass kissed by stupid braindead morons like you incapable of basic critical thinking, you are the problem. You can go back to pretending you like videogames while sucking some billionaire's cock lol. BTW steam never ever had had more than 300 employees because they dont even need to create jobs for idiots like you to say shit like "I'm against pedo but I'm willling yo make an exception" lmfao

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Musicians aren't making much on any streaming platform. I wish I could afford to purchase more music on bandcamp but it's been years since I've been able to.

    If you don't care too much how the music is used, music licensing can bring in money, it doesn't necessarily have to be used in Ads.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Live shows and merch have been the way artists make money since before streaming was a thing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah, except now we would have the capacity to give money directly to artists. Platforms like shittyfy have shown people are willing to pay a couple of bucks a months to get access to music, we need to redirect the money to the artists and not some greedy ceo. Bandcamp is a start, we can do better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Sounds like you're someone who thought a little about pricing.

    Why should anyone get a royalty for a listen?

    There's a club in my town with a dj who plays each week. Club gets paid, dj gets paid. His sets are like ads for his work in the club. Why would I have to pay for each listen? Why would he has to earn for each listen?

    Especially if that DJ is residing somewhere else and won't ever come to my town because it's too small for him.

    Why do we create superstars? Why does "superstar S" have to be paid millions because millions come to their show. Even though I stand 500 m away, I can't see them, I can't hear them properly. Why can't it be that there is a cover band covering those songs. Maybe even doing a better job. On a loval concert, with great sound, a good stage, less crowd, less people, more fun.

    Why do we cheer a dj with electronic music, who just plays one song after the other, with a little bit of mixing now and then and choosing the next track based on the crowd? Why aren't people in the center of the music (anymore)?

    Why is our system so fucked up?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 55 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Good! Fuck that generic sludge being pushed out by shit companies ran by sociopaths.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 41 points 6 months ago

    I bought like 4 games last week for under $20.

    AAA Gaming needs to get with the socioeconomic times.

  • source
  • [–] 39 points 6 months ago

    Like when BG3 came out and other devs whined about being unable to deliver such a game? Maybe they shouldn’t be considered AAA studios if all they do is waste their budget.

  • source
  • [–] 38 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    What's driving this trend? The enshitification of triple AAA titles fucking slapping surcharges on EVERYTHING; day one dlc, microtransactions, always online DRM, the ability to revoke access to the shit we pay for, it's death by 1000 cuts. EVERY anti-consumer action, every attempt to squeeze more of us while delivering the same rehashed shit over and over just drives me further into the arms of indie developers. The intent of us withholding our money and refusing to purchase your shit is to provide publishers with a sense of pride and accomplishment for retaining their customer base.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 6 months ago (7 children)

    You know what this is called? A healthy and competitive market.

    Yeah, I get there's layoffs, but that's mainly at AAA studios and is a symptom of a previously unhealthy, highly consolidated market. The job losses suck, but now diversity and competition is coming back, and that's generally a good thing for consumers.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] 28 points 6 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago* (3 children)

    It’s this.

    and it’s always worth distinguishing between executives and investors.

    Executives are going to push the problem, but the core issue is shareholders. In the US, where most of these companies are based, a publicly traded company is expected to make money for its shareholders. Shareholders have subplanted customers in the companies ethical obligagions. The law has been used to make this national policy. Controlling shareholders can (and do) vote to remove company leadership that won't act how they want. It is not just that they have to generate revenue, they have to generate as much revenue as possible as determined by shareholders. It's corporate cartel tatics. Fail us and die. Do well and you'll get rewarded with some of the take.

    If a company goes public, It's only a matter of time until it's product goes to shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    It was my understanding that it was a misconception that companies are legally bound to have an ROI or whatever. Not an economist so IDK. I just remember hearing that from several places. Regardless, the buyer-seller relationship is “I give you money, and you give me a product or service”. The investor-seller relationship is “We give you money, and you give us more money, and we don’t care how you do it.”

    Only very technically. Dodge v. Ford Motor Co. still made the shareholder a priority over the product or the customer (technically it only set the precedent). It’s a misconception that actual profit is the legal requirement. I suppose I’m guilty of furthering it, but it’s easier to keep the oversimplification than to explain the nuances when the outcome is the same. The controlling shareholders are the ones that create this issue because their votes affect company policy, and if they don’t like the way the company operates, they have more direct legal avenues to change and challenge it than you or I would.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

    Well then they are simply stupid. Because if they did care that the product makes money, they would care about what the buyer wants to buy, because thats how you make the money.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 68 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (35 children)
    Rank Title Release Year Country of Origin Free-to-Play
    1 Roblox 2006 US Yes
    2 Counter-Strike 2 2023 US Yes
    3 League of Legends 2009 US Yes
    4 Minecraft 2011 Sweden In China
    5 Fortnite 2017 US For modes other than Save the World
    6 Dota 2 2013 US Yes
    7 Valorant 2020 US Yes
    8 World of Warcraft 2004 US No
    9 The Sims 4 2014 US No
    10 Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 2025 US No
    11 Escape from Tarkov 2025 Russia No
    12 Overwatch 2 2023 US Yes
    13 Marvel Rivals 2024 China Yes
    14 PUBG: Battlegrounds 2017 South Korea Yes
    15 World of Warcraft Classic 2019 US No
    16 Grand Theft Auto V 2013 UK No
    17 Diablo IV 2023 US No
    18 Wuthering Waves 2024 China Yes
    19 Genshin Impact 2020 China Yes
    20 Apex Legends 2019 US Yes

    I think that a bigger story there is the dominance of F2P games.

    EDIT: Added release year after @Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world mentioned age.

    EDIT2: And country of origin, while I'm at it.

    EDIT3: Note that the release dates on some of these are a bit apples-to-oranges. For example, Escape From Tarkov only had its 1.0 release in 2025, but had been widely-played well before that, so maybe "availability" would be more interesting than "release". World of Warcraft Classic only split from World of Warcraft in 2019, but both games have an origin in World of Warcraft, which was released in 2004.

  • source
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • [–] 44 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (11 children)

    Nearly every title on that list is also a live service game that has been released for years. It's almost like supporting your product post-launch builds a dedicated userbase or something.

    (And yeah, I know it's actually because of the profitability of addictive design patterns combined with microtransactions. Let me dream, please.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 44 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    This is also survivorship bias. Plenty of companies would love to support their game post launch and make this much money, but they go under trying to follow the same playbook; even the ones that were successful doing so before.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)

    True. I know Dean Hall (DayZ, Stationeers, Kitten Space Agency) destroyed any hope of his survival game Icarus becoming a major success by releasing hundreds of dollars of expensive DLC during Early Access, then later admitted it was because the money from his previous projects had slowed to a trickle and splitting his current project into a bunch of paid packs was the only way he could stay solvent. Even the megahits of the past all die out at some point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago

    Doesn't help that Icarus is such a technical mess. Certainly limits the player base when you shoot for a graphically demanding game and then don't bother with working on performance.

    Maybe I'm just grumpy that I can't play it anymore since switching to Linux despite upgrading my gpu.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (7 children)

    I should totally put release date on there too. Just a sec, will add on a column with that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago* (6 children)

    Wow, most of them were even older than I'd thought. And even some of the new ones like Tarkov were in Early Access for years before their official release date.

    (You flipped the date and country for 16 and 17, btw) Already fixed, never mind!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    Yeah, but thanks for the heads-up!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    One minor correction, I believe The Sims 4 went F2P at some point. They're funded entirely by expansion packs now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago* (3 children)

    Yeah, I thought about changing it, but...the problem is that while the base game is playable now for $0, the overwhelming bulk of the game's content is in expansion packs. Like, I don't think that people really buy and play just the base game; it'd be more like a demo.

    EDIT: A similar game might be DCS. I mean, yes, technically the base game is free, and you get (checks) a WW2 fighter and a Soviet ground-attack jet. But...basically that acts as a demo, and everyone is going to go out and get at least their favorite aircraft, and most of those aircraft cost about as much as a full-priced video game does. Hell, a couple of them are $80 each.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    That's fair. Though, by that logic would you consider something like that one Final Fantasy MMO F2P or not? I believe it lets you play all the old content for free and only charges for the last (few?) expansions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (18 children)

    Or effectively F2P/MTX based ones, even if they have an upfront cost.

    And it's not even counting mobile.

    I hear a lot about the resurgance of honest, pay-upfront games, but revenue sure isn't supporting that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 6 months ago (17 children)

    F2P games are subsidized by a small minority who will throw a hundred dollars a month into the game to obtain and max out whatever FOMO event or item/character is on rotation, and by an even smaller group of obscenely wealthy (or mentally ill) players who will spend tens of thousands of dollars just to say they own everything.

    I'd honestly be fine with this model if the ones funding it were treated like patrons of the arts or something, but instead the industry hired a bunch of psychologists to run incredibly unethical experiments to create literally addictive design patterns encouraging the weak-willed or mentally ill to spend more.

    Modern F2P game design is predatory and downright evil in the way it's carefully cultivated to be just fun enough to continue playing, while constantly dangling the promise of more enjoyment if you'd only spend a tiny bit more (with that 'bit more' often only granting a small chance at getting what you want, with 'pity' systems only guaranteeing the desired drop if you spend the equivalent of around a hundred bucks in premium currency). But since it's obscenely profitable, I don't foresee it going away without legislation banning those practices.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    And Roblox does it by exploiting kids.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Roblox screws over both the players and the creators who attract and keep them there, both of which as you said are mostly children. It's actually kind of impressive how scummy the devs are. They're the poster child for rent-seeking parasites.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (11 children)

    It depends, it's certainly inaccurate to describe all F2P games as doing this. Runescape, at least back in the 2000s, was F2P or a monthly sub. That was it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (10 children)

    Runescape also was a free game at a time when those weren't really common. I honestly can't think of any others with the scope of RS.

    Not only was it free, it ran entirely in a browser window.

    That's how it managed to build its player base, and it coasts on that nostalgia to this day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (9 children)

    There were loads of free browser games back then

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    Miniclip, Newgrounds, and similar felt more like mini games.

    For free and in browser with some actual progression, I can think of RuneScape and those Artix Adventure Quest series games. I played both, but Runescape definitely felt like more of a complete game with 3D models and all.

    God, I had forgotten how bad those Artix games were til I remembered them just now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (7 children)

    I played the bejeezus out of Runescape until I picked up Minecraft as a teenager. The free to play section certainly had its limits (only like 30 quests, about a dozen skills and only like 1/4 of the map) but you could absolutely access many, many hours of content purely in free to play. Compare that to another title from around the same era, Disney's Pirates Online, which gave you an initial 3 days of free premium membership on account creation, you'd largely run out of free content and find everything gated to membership within a couple of days so it was hard to enjoy past those first 3 days unless you could convince your parents to buy you membership.

    Of course, both have extremely healthy community-run revival projects in 2009Scape and The Legend of Pirates Online respectively.

    There's also other projects like 2004scape, 2007scape, Darkan, Open RSC etc. depending on your preferred era of Runescape to relive, but ORSC and 2009scape seem to both have the most active development and most active communities by far (and ORSC is early enough to be hard to enjoy if you aren't deep into vintage gaming)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Man, you mentioning pirates online had a reboot was news to me. I played it for like an hour as a kid and always wondered how good it was. Long story short I mastered fishing yesterday and am enjoying the experience even if it did derail my entire day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Dude it has no business being anywhere near as fun of a game it is. Personally I find the ship to ship combat unmatched in any other game. Super satisfying, and nicely scales if you have more than one person on the ship!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    Vintage gaming?? Runescape??

    I played during the height of it's Runescape 2 popularity in middle school and I don't think I'm that antique yet. 😭 Minecraft released while I was a high schooler playing alpha and the kids still like it!! I'm not old!

    RuneScape's age shows more I think because it was entirely playable in a browser window (which came with its limitations). Aside from having a hefty chunk of free content, this is what I credit its success to.

    My poor self was happy to be playing anything on the, even at the time, old family PC. A choppy fps low polygon RPG on a java game, because that's all I could afford, was quite swell after school with my friends online. Anyone could just pull it up on theirs, no DL.

    It was accessible and didn't require a lot of machine power. It's got a player base today not because it's a fantastic game, but because there's a lot of people who are nostalgic for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    I said vintage in reference to Runescape Classic, so the version of Runescape that was live from 2001-2004. When I played RSC (back when Jagex stood up an RSC server around the early 2010s) it really reminded me of trying to play DOS games in terms of the lousy UI, lack of QOL fixes, general jankiness and unforgiving gameplay. It felt like a game that was about a decade older than it actually is because of that.

    Personally as much as I enjoy playing various older games, I've found there's absolutely limits to what's still enjoyable and for me it's around the mid-90s where before that point the gameplay is too unforgiving for my taste, and the controls and UI tend to be way too janky

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 33 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    PC players are always going to lead the trend because we have the most options. Microsoft and Sony are in a race to enshitify their ecosystems, while Nintendo is actively hostile towards it's customers and fans.

    Meanwhile I'm playing through what was originally a Playstation exclusive title that I got on sale on Steam, and run on Linux.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    I've always thought sony was fine. Good exclusives, not a terrible experience, is fine with you buying your games. A bit expensive, but otherwise better than xbox and nintendo. Nintendo is good if you want nintendo but otherwise kinda shit

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 91 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (12 children)

    I find this a bit entertaining especially hearing advertisers and executives occasionally vent on stuff like this. A huge portion of modern people especially the younger they are:

    • Don't go outside
    • Don't read billboards, bus wrap advertisements, bus stop advertisements, ignore advertisements in sporting arenas and uniforms, etc
    • Use adblockers online/ignore online advertisements
    • Mute the television when ads are on
    • Don't have television subscriptions
    • Pay for streaming services at a level that removes ads
    • Watch like no advertising shows like award shows or late night/daytime talking head interview shows
    • only watches TV for the finals of a sporting league championship and when advertisements comes on mutes the TV or focuses on their friends or phones
    • Don't discuss advertisements with friends like people did in the past
    • Show up to the movies late to avoid advertisements
    • Generally have an anti-consumption/anti-advertisement attitude even if they are consumerist. Being advertised to is an annoyance enough to buy something else
    • Throw away mailers immediately without reading
    • Ignore people trying to advertise on the street/passing out flyers
    • Don't answer the door
    • Don't answer the phone
    • Generally has no idea when anything new is coming out and mostly exists in a social bubble
    • Practically no monoculture
    • Doesn't read emails unless they specifically searched/expected it
    • Etc

    Besides the not going outside and problems that can arise from being in a social bubble, it's all good stuff to me. For decades advertisers and businesses have optimized everything for selling products and now people are so desensitized to it to not care. Like no one actually cares about times square takeover advertisements anymore. It's not a big deal.

    "OMG it was advertised all over time square." Responded with: "I live in Wichita." "I live in India." "I'm from NYC and tourist just look at them, they don't read them. Fuck no I don't read them. I don't fuck with times square."

    It's actually incredibly hard to advertise media now. Advertisements have to manage to seem organic or come off as predatory. So in comes the influencers but no influencer is as influential and trusted as a prime time advertisement before social media/YouTube went mainstream with people children to elderly. The vein to sell souless AAA/blockbuster media is busted

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 6 months ago
    • Don't discuss advertisements with friends like people did in the past

    This one is big and I never noticed it until a few years ago. My wife and I never got cable when we moved into our own place. One time my mother in law was talking to my wife about some commercial and my wife just said she hadn't seen it. My mother in law got really weirdly upset or something, like my wife was trying to be condescending or something. But she was talking about it the same way people might talk about a funny skit from a show. It wasn't until being away from it for years that I realized how odd it is.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 36 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    You forgot

    • pirates a lot of media
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    When you're not allowed to own anything, piracy isn't theft.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Yould think the ad companies would get the message...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago*

    Still feels crazy though how aware you're forced to be about ads lurking in every corner. I check many of these boxes plus some others, use independent OSs, 3rd party apps etc. And still, although I hardly see any ads, they are so present just lurking under the surface.

    Good example are sponsor comments in yt videos/podcasts. Some I can filter out with Sponsorblock, but the little video glitch reminds you every time that you have to stay safe. Podcast ads can easily be slipped with the fast forward button, but if you're washing the dishes etc., sometimes you can't react directly.

    It's really insane how ads are just everywhere these days.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    I feel like this doesn't account for people who play older games. Like I'm currently playing the God of War reboot. That would count as playing something that's outside the current top 20, but still very-much AAA.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

    Well duh. Most of those AAA’s launch in broken states with lots of bugs and performance issues. And a lot of titles don’t even run well on the best hardware you can buy. Borderlands 4 ran atrocious on even the absolute best GPU you could buy.

    And with the whole season pass, day one DLC, preorder bullshit, shit is more expensive than ever.

    The industry only has themselves to blame for this.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    11 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post