Not to mention, publishers pushed *lies* to gamers to get them on board. "What if you could take your items to every game you buy? TRUE ownership! Earned a legendary weapon skin in Gears of War? Take it with you to Halo! Or Street Fighter! Or Cooking Mama!! BECAUSE YOU OWN IT!" - ThreadSky

dragonnexus.bsky.social • 3 days ago

Not to mention, publishers pushed *lies* to gamers to get them on board.

"What if you could take your items to every game you buy? TRUE ownership! Earned a legendary weapon skin in Gears of War? Take it with you to Halo! Or Street Fighter! Or Cooking Mama!! BECAUSE YOU OWN IT!"

Reposted from Casey Explosion

It's willingly ignorant to assign blame for AAA games studios being shuttered at anything other than corporate mismanagement and incompetence from an avaricious executive class.

This is an industry where corporate suits saw monkey jpegs and thought "Yes, this is the future of gaming!"

Comments

dragonnexus.bsky.social•3 days ago

Just that on its face was absolute nonsense. The licensing, the coding, the artistiic burden on developers would be *immense*. Let's play this scenario out. Halo and CoD feel similar, but use different engines. The games scale differently. Weapons function differently. Damage ratios are different.

dragonnexus.bsky.social•3 days ago

You can't just move a model from one game, put it in another game, and have it just work. So you need to put work in to *make it* work. Now imagine every game dev has to accommodate this gun into their game. Now imagine every CoD gun doing that. Now imagine Halo's guns. Forza's cars. So on and so on

dragonnexus.bsky.social•3 days ago

And then you get to the real issue of the lie.

Since when did publishers want you to truly own *anything* you buy off them? CoD resets your progress yearly to insentivise you spending to get back on track. If you could just take all your stuff from one CoD to another, that's pay to win.

dragonnexus.bsky.social•3 days ago

The longer you've played, the more legacy stuff you own, the larger your arsenal (so imagine today's CoD having to bring in guns from CoD4: Modern Warfare, unchanged).

Immensely bloated games would result. And again, how does Activision make money outside of you selling your gun NFT?

dragonnexus.bsky.social•3 days ago

And there's the rub. It's not about ownership. It's about creating an art marketplace/auction house where gamers play just enough of the game to get an NFT they want, sell it, and Activision takes a cut as the middle man. Digital items, infinitely reproducable, making money out of thin air.

dragonnexus.bsky.social•3 days ago

That was what enticed them. Loot boxes were dying, microtransactions weren't creating the same growth...onto the next get-rich-quick scheme. Make as much money with as little effort. Logic and reality be damned.

It was *never* going to work.

But they had to try. Because...*maybe*

mastersthepen.bsky.social•3 days ago

“I CANT WAIT TO PUT MY SPARTAN LASER IN GRAN TOURISMO 9!”

metboy.bsky.social•2 days ago

AND EVEN THEN!

Even if it worked, it wouldn't be good for players. Taking a skin from one game to another? That means the art style will clash. Taking special resources from one game to another? That just means the best way to play one game becomes playing another game.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply