Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 25% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY25". ×

Comment Re:George Lucas did not create Star Wars (Score 1) 424

From a certain point of view.

The greatest liability of Star Wars from Lucas' point of view is the hypercritical fanbase.

The problem here is that the fans feel like they are entitled to having things their way and having it be what they want. If someone were to tell Lucas "no", would it automatically have been better or worse?

It's easy to come to the lazy come to "Lucas did it wrong and Lucas is a crappy hack." Maybe. But the sense of entitlement i get from the fans just stinks. It's as if they can't let go of their anger and their feelings are driving them to be destructive. :) They don't seem to understand that projecting their opinion as fact is just incorrect. It's factual that a lot of star wars fans hate 1-3 and the special editions of 4-6, but it's not factual that these are bad. That's an opinion.

Right now there's a generation of kids with fond memories of the original trilogy. Are they wrong factually? How do you prove that?

In the end it all comes down to taste and vision, and even though George Lucas might have questionable taste, he had a vision. It was ambitious. It might be rubbish, but there's a ton of cinema out there that has neither taste nor vision. Stuff that is so bland it makes plain tofu seem exciting.

Comment Re:About 5.5 million people in Finland (Score 2) 674

So? The GDP of Finland is .3 trillion dollars. The GDP of the USA is 16.77 trillion.

It is redistribution of wealth. When people hear that they freak the fuck out. It's an uneven distribution of wealth. Your six or seven or however large income isn't going to be split evenly.

In America wages have stagnated and productivity has skyrocketed.

Quite frankly as long as being poor doesn't suck and isn't humiliating, I don't care how bad the gap between the wealthy and poor gets. If the economy grows, everyone wins in that model. Granted, if the economy shrinks, everyone loses but people hit the ground in less critical ways.

Comment Re:For what? (Score 1) 309

You mention building engines. Ok, we've got unreal, frostbite and maybe a few others. No one builds engines, they LICENSE them.

Konami built the Fox Engine, Treyarch built the Frostbite engine, CryEngine... etc.

Why are these reduced costs not being passed to the customer?

3 bucks sounds about right when you take manufacturing out of the picture. It doesn't cost more than a few dollars to put a disk into a box and send the box to the store.

Like complaining about paying full price for broken games IS an issue I'm on board with. Because fuck that. That's a huge problem in the industry.

But when PC gamers complain that their games are crippled for consoles, then balk at paying full price, then I have zero sympathy for PC gamers. I don't care about someone's system specs, they are aware that it takes more time and money to make a texture that looks nice at 4k versus one that looks nice at 1080p right?

Maybe I'm just playing the right games, the last few games I've bought have been Metal Gear Solid 5(aside from that whackass save bug with Quiet), Splatoon, and Smash Bros. So, maybe I'm just not that hardcore of a gamer anymore? I don't know.

Comment Re:For what? (Score 1) 309

Big Hollywood movies tend to have a theatrical run which is the bulk of the returns on investment.

When that BluRay is in your hand, most of the money for the film has been made back when it was running in the theaters.

Games priced at $50 bucks need to sell more copies than a Blu Ray of a Hollywood blockbuster.

Not only that, but there's different support costs for a Blu Ray than there are for games. Game has an online component? That costs a ton of money to upkeep.

So, either games are going to have to be not as pretty as console versions, or PC gamers are going to have to put their money where their mouths are with regards to paying for prettier content.

Comment Re:For what? (Score 1) 309

Right, my point is that people bragging about buying PC games when they're cheap, bragging about how nice they look and wondering why anyone would pay retail fail to realize that those games cost money.

Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft are all making profit right now.

All the GPU and CPU power in the world is nothing with out assets and engines to actually use all of that power. Building those engines and assets cost time and money in the form of human effort(procedural generation won't save the industry here; they still have to look nice and fit well into the environment).

So, tell me exactly how paying way less for games that require way more work is sustainable?

Like, League, and WoW and so on are an easy answer because it's basically SaaS, but more like GaaS. But what about anything else?

I just don't understand it.

Comment Re:For what? (Score 1) 309

Instant gratification.

I don't understand how the PC gaming market works. You release a game that cost some $millions to produce, and you can't even get full price out of some customers.

I wonder how many problems, like day one DLC, micro transactions, etc, would go away if we were willing to pay the true cost of games development.

As gaming hardware improves, how can games dev be sustainable? We demand more graphical fidelity, richer, prettier assets, etc. Yet, sales numbers need to be ridiculously high to just break even. More than just PCs mind you, there's going to be at least one or two more console generation. Not mention mobile, which will never go away.

Either we need to pay more for games up front or there's going to be an economic calamity in games.

Which, fine by me. My favorite game series is done(not unless Kojima and Konami make up). I don't have a major desire for AAA games.

"Today's robots are very primitive, capable of understanding only a few simple instructions such as 'go left', 'go right', and 'build car'." --John Sladek