Comics Creators

Video Game News


This doesn’t really fit into the ‘what are you playing’ thread, but isn’t news per se.

It is something that seems to have come into mainstream gaming this year in a big way. I remain baffled by the success of the loot crate concept, it just screams at me that it’s for suckers. (Buy this box for £5. What’s in it? Buy it and find out. Sod off.)

So, Pretty Good Gaming gave it both barrels today:

To me, this whole thing just doesn’t feel right. Sure, it all comes down to personalities, but it’s known some will be more susceptible to these tactics than others. At a time when the gambling industry is at least making a token effort with the signs of ‘when the fun stops, stop’, this only stands out more as really dodgy.


New Sonic Forces level reveal:


New trailer for Red Dead Redemption II, which looks predictably good.


Interesting that you seem to be playing as a full on outlaw this time.


The slightest mention of Red Dead 2? Where did I put that “sploosh” Archer gif?


Embeddable version:


The Wii Shop Channel is being shut down in 2019.



Seen in neogaf:


In short: there’s a new version of SFV coming out that will include a full Arcade Mode, as well as a new Battle Mode and all DLC characters available so far.

Players of the existing version of SFV will get the Arcade Mode and Battle Mode as free DLC. But - if they want the DLC characters then they still have to earn them in the usual way (i.e. by using points/money to unlock them).

I’m happy to finally see an Arcade Mode added, which was a glaring omission from the original game. But given that Capcom had previously said the original version of the game was going to be the only one released (with updates only added by DLC), it’s a bit irritating to see a new version come out that gives new buyers all the DLC characters for nothing, while early-adopters still have to earn them all by grinding out fights in the game.


It’s pretty clear that Capcom made a hash of SFV, so they’re damned if they do, damned if they don’t. The need the new retail version to people who were put off by the initial release and stopped paying attention to it.


I think you’re right.

I wouldn’t mind if they just gave the longtime players the free DLC characters too.

But then why would anyone pay for the new version of the game when they could just buy the old version on the cheap and get all the DLC for free? :slight_smile:


Eh fuck capcom and their greedy asses… all those games are actually more expensive in Mexico than in the US or Euope (whereas most games are cheaper, and rightly so).


Having endured multiple self-inflicted PR crapstorms, Shadow of War clearly couldn’t help itself:

The point both reviews make is that, where the endgame is concerned, it ends up being practically locked behind a wall of lootboxes! Now, you can grind your way to the end without them, if you’re willing to spend hours and hours doing so - or - make with the cash.

I can’t see this game failing to make loads of money, but with that final structure in place I could see it sufficiently souring players on future purchases.


I’m not arguing for this game specifically, but people get way too bent out of shape over micro transactions. The fact of the matter is that the price of a new game hasn’t increased since the 90s:

but the cost of making new games has increased substantially. Unfortunately there’s a culture paired with gaming that makes people refuse to pay more for a larger, more complete game. So they have to break pieces off, and sell them separate, or offer “limited editions”.

Some companies and games take it way farther than they should, like “pay to win” type games, but I seriously can’t knock a complete game for allowing optional purchases for aesthetic purposes, or to expand gameplay beyond the complete game.


N64 games aren’t a good point of comparison. Each one’s cartridge cost about $30 to produce, whereas modern games are on discs that cost less than a tenth of that, or are downloads, which have no manufacturing costs.


I was unaware of that. It looks like game prices have gone up a bit in that respect then:

But they have hit a hard cap for some time now, while they are getting more expensive to produce. I don’t have issues with microtransactions as long as I get a complete game and can choose to pay more to expand that experience.


I actually feel like I see more of a range in game pricing today than there used to be - big-budget high-profile games tend to be around the £40 mark, but I see a lot of budget-level games for around half that (like Micro Machines or the new Uncharted that I’ve bought this year for just under £20 each) as well as stuff that’s somewhere in-between (Sonic Forces is currently available on pre-order for about £25-30).

I think it’s always a sliding scale. I agree that paying to add on little cosmetic extras seems relatively innocuous, but with something like what Ben’s describing (where you could technically beat the game if you grind away endlessly to unlock items/abilities, but realistically you need to shell out extra cash to do so) I think it’s a bit more cynical.


It’s way cheaper to be honest. I remember excitement at old games on Playstation going down to twenty quid, now I pick ones up at the same age for peanuts, maybe £2-3. Yes a lot of those are digital downloads but I also know the production cost of a CD in a case was well under a pound, just a few pence. That’s without inflation taken into account.

Hell in the early 80s we used to pay £8-10 for a cassette. For comparison that’s at a time a bag of chips was 16p. It’s now at the very cheapest 10 times that much.

My issue with what Ben said and showed in the video is the gambling element of booster packs and the like. If someone is asking an extra few dollars for extra levels then fair enough, you can choose to buy or not. Paying for the chance to get certain extras and features should be regulated or banned in my opinion.


Just too muddy the waters a bit. Ducked into Game to shelter from the rain while waiting for my bus and saw this…

This is labelled as £90 for the gold edition but does it really mean £90 for the full game?


Atari games used to cost around $50 too so they’ve barely gone up in almost 40 years.