There’s no point in asking that question because companies aren’t going to go “well, we no longer have to sell physical so we can reduce the price to make less money”. I’m well aware games don’t have to cost $70 (which is why I almost never buy games at $70) but it doesn’t change the fact that AAA games do cost $70. It also doesn’t change the fact that digital sales surpassed physical sales 6 years ago and have now completely taken over physical media. The profit margin of digital sales at the $70 price point is the norm for AAA. It’s why companies like Capcom are a-okay with consoles going fully digital because if the consoles can force even half of the physical media consumers into digital they’re probably going to make more money than if they kept selling physical alongside digital.
If there’s a market for AAA to sell physical media it will come with the same strategy that LRG is using where you’re paying extra $20 to get a physical version of the game.
My bad, I guess I was more tired than I thought. That said, the $17 is production costs because the cost of the digital version already contains a developer/publisher cut and the digital storefront cut (which in this case would subsidize LRG cut). Which means those cuts are already covered by the original $13.
While I messed up the numbers the point more or less stands, would people pay $90 for a physical version of a $70 game? Most people already consider $70 to be too high and wait for discounts.
You do realize that same game costs $13 as a digital version? I can guarantee people are not going to buy a physical version of a game if it cost between $140 and $160 (assuming the same overhead as your example).
Then they’re being deliberately obtuse to make a point. Valve treats downloading and installing as the same thing so needing a connection to “install” a steam game is functionally no different than needing a connection to “download” the installer from GOG and then installing the game. Once Steam has installed the game and it has no actual DRM you can just copy it wherever you like. GOG gives a much better package for storing your games but that doesn’t mean what Steam does is DRM.
As I understand business judgement rule makes the assumption that the company did its decisions in good faith. It doesn’t mean a shareholder derivative lawsuit can’t happen. The shareholders can still sue, and there have been instances where it has been done, but in addition to suing the shareholders would then have to prove loss of profits alongside negligence or bad faith or whatever led to the loss of profits.
Realistically this shouldn’t happen as it probably costs more to prove the company didn’t make every penny of profit it could, but we live in weird times where things that shouldn’t happen do happen so let’s not count out the improbable.
Yeah, came to say more or less the same thing. I genuinely believe we’re big enough where we don’t need to tell people we exist. We can spend our time making the fediverse a better place so that anyone coming to look for an alternative to Reddit can look at the fediverse and think “that looks like a cool place”.
If peace of mind is the only reason you’re buying a console just buy another PC. If you current PC is already pretty beefy you can buy a cheaper “work” PC. Move all your personal information there, wipe your gaming PC and use it exclusively for gaming. It’ll effectively be as “safe” as a console except you still get all the benefits of having PC.
But there are way more customers than there are corporations. What you’re saying it true only if the corporation is selling something no customers wants to buy. The existence of gaming whales more or less proves that is not the case. 90% of the customers can choose not to buy but as long as that last 10% covers the rest of 90% it doesn’t matter that the majority of the customers refuse to buy what is being sold.
It upfront investment cost is simply too much to just start manufacturing your own chips. Just the fab alone would take around 20-30 billion and 4-6 years to build. Then add another couple of billions and 3-4 years to design a DDR5 chip that would give comparable performance to what the big 3 manufacture.
Why do people think Valve has some godlike influence over everything? Sony has sold over 90 million PS5-s, Sony reduced its Playstation 5 manufacturing in part because they struggled to buy RAM. Valve has sold less than 5 million Steam Decks. If a hardware powerhouse like Sony can’t get all the RAM they want what makes you think Valve, who barely has presence in the global hardware market, has any sway in the global ram production?
By they I meant the publisher. The studio is shut down but the rights are owned by the publisher and considering the article mentions the studio coming to an agreement with the publisher it’s very likely the publisher is footing some (if not all) of the bill.
I don’t mind getting remasters. If it’s an older game that’s a pain in the ass to get running on modern hardware I’d buy a remaster if it means getting modern QoL (like ultrawide support). But what I’d really like are proper remakes, especially of games like New Vegas that were held back by hardware limitations and/or time crunch. There’s so much unrealized content in New Vegas that you could remake it and have it feel like a new game.
I’m less concerned about getting new games because those are coming in faster than I can play them.
They’re spending a lot of resources to get the game to a state where they wouldn’t need to spend money on it. I’d be surprised if they recouped those costs.
Well you don’t have to build them right now. You’ve got time. As I understand Sony is pushing PS6 release into 2028 due to all the hardware shortage. Either the bubble pops and hardware prices drop (or maybe China gets its production high enough to bring the prices down) or prices will still be so incredibly expensive that the next gen consoles will also be pushed back. Use the hardware you have right now and let us all cling to the hope that maybe in the future things will be better.
Do they? Maybe for minor releases but I’m pretty sure Firefox is currently doing major releases every 4 weeks and starting from September they’re going to do it byweekly. Personally I don’t see what the big deal is but I can absolutely see someone on the fediverse being outraged by the idea of a more frequent release schedule.
Lutris does the same. I don’t know if it has Amazon integration but it has itch integration which is more relevant to me. It also used to have pretty good gog integration where you just log in with your gog account, pick a game, click install and play. It would even find all the DLCs you have for the game and offer easy installation of those as well.
But recently gog has started changing the names of their install executables so the installation scripts lutris autogenerates fail due to not finding the correct installer. It’s not every game as some games still use the old naming convention but some games require manual installation and if those games have DLCs then those become an extra annoyance due to how gog handles the installation of DLC.
That’s why I’m interested in Heroic because if it’s still as convenient as Lutris used to be then I’m willing to sacrifice itch for better integration with gog because my gog library is much bigger than my itch library. But if it’s having the same issues as Lutris I don’t see a reason to pick Heroic over Lutris because Lutris has more relevant (to me) integrations and I’m pretty familiar with how to use it as a tool to get troublesome games running. I just don’t the benefit of learning a different software if it’s not going to give me any benefits over what I already use.
I guess I have to give Heroic a try. I’ve been using lutris but the auto-generated install scripts are kind of a hit and miss due to gog changing their naming convention on some games.
Valve corporation is an American company. America has used visa and mastercard to target ICC judges who also live outside the US. If the government wants they can try and strongarm Valve to do their bidding
You don’t need a lot of people. I don’t remember the exact percentage but it’s something like if 10% of the population is willing to show support your cause it’s enough to get a law passed. Just look at SKG initiative. It took a million Europeans to get the political ball rolling not just in the EU but also in California. What we need is a continuation of SKG where digital purchases of products actually gives us ownership over said product and not just a use license where companies like Sony can do whatever they want with your purchase.
There’s no point in asking that question because companies aren’t going to go “well, we no longer have to sell physical so we can reduce the price to make less money”. I’m well aware games don’t have to cost $70 (which is why I almost never buy games at $70) but it doesn’t change the fact that AAA games do cost $70. It also doesn’t change the fact that digital sales surpassed physical sales 6 years ago and have now completely taken over physical media. The profit margin of digital sales at the $70 price point is the norm for AAA. It’s why companies like Capcom are a-okay with consoles going fully digital because if the consoles can force even half of the physical media consumers into digital they’re probably going to make more money than if they kept selling physical alongside digital.
If there’s a market for AAA to sell physical media it will come with the same strategy that LRG is using where you’re paying extra $20 to get a physical version of the game.