this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
112 points (98.3% liked)

Games

16742 readers
1008 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] tal@lemmy.today 5 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

I haven't been playing competitive FPS games for a long time, but they used to be a dime a dozen. There must be some kind of alternative multiplayer FPS that you could just play instead if you're not happy with Call of Duty.

[–] grahamja@reddthat.com 2 points 3 hours ago

I am hoping modern games get so bad people finally start having halo 2 lan parties again.

[–] Zahille7@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago

I know some people kinda liked that XDefiant game, or The Finals

[–] dan1101@lemm.ee 7 points 7 hours ago

Seeing all the stupid skins running around is part of what soured me on PlanetSide 2.

[–] Tarogar@feddit.org 91 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (4 children)

The crazy part isn't that people want to be able to disable that. The crazy part is that they want to pay to disable them...

No you guys, that should just be an option, no questions asked. Included in the options menu for... Well, whatever the asking price of the base game is. Also known as included in the base game.

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

People are offering to pay as a hyperbole to try to tell Activision how much they want to disable the skins. Nobody actually is willing to pay extra for that. Its like dangling a carrot in front of a corporations face.

"We want to do X so badly, we are willing to pay for it," which translates to " We want to do X so badly, we are willing to do the last possible option that we want in order to be able to do X."

[–] riodoro1@lemmy.world 34 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Today’s consumers for ya.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 8 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (2 children)

The word consumer is so demeaning... But yes.

Humans are actually the only real producers in the world if you think about it. Everything around you is built by other humans.

We rarely think about that.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

The word consumer is so demeaning

It should be, and it is accurate in this case.

[–] MolochAlter@lemmy.world 6 points 11 hours ago

The word consumer is so demeaning...

I doubt they were trying to be complimentary.

[–] eighty@aussie.zone 13 points 14 hours ago

I really dislike being reductive so take what I say with a grain of salt:

I am not surprised that the people who regularly buy the COD series with all of it's monetary practices for the past decade are asking to buy a feature. They'd be more shocked if you could features/updates/qol without buying it. Habituation, de-sensitisation, whatever - they're the whales that fuel the decline in AAA games.

[–] UnbrokenTaco@lemm.ee -4 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

People are offering to pay for it because they understand that providing that feature would potentially cause lost revenue for Call of Duty, since (theoretically) players are buying skins so other players can see them.

I imagine there are a lot of potential solutions (I can think of a few at least) but Activision probably think the lowest risk is to do nothing.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 18 points 14 hours ago

Next year: pay to cut an opponent's frame rate in half, as a bidding system. Whoever is offering the least premium coin gets the debuff.

[–] MrFappy@lemmy.world 19 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Then don’t play the game. Cosmetics like that are essentially CoD’s bread and butter, and have been for decades. I don’t disagree that it’s gotten WAY out of hand, but that’s also why I don’t play COD anymore.

[–] afk@lemmy.world 25 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think you know what "decades" means.

[–] grahamja@reddthat.com 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

50,000 people used to live here, now it's a ghost town...

5 Nov 2007

Didn't have skins except for on the weapons, and you had to earn those. One of the first games ever with selectable perks. It was such a breath of fresh air after years of World War 2 games. World at War afterwards was the first one with zombies though, and it had tanks in the big multi player maps. It was only 17 years ago... video games were amazing. I stopped playing after the first black ops. It is just like any other EA sports franchise.

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

World at War was the best one, what do you mean?

Though I stopped at WaW, then played Advanced Warfare (which was cool I guess), Infinite (which I actually really liked), and WW2 (which was honestly pretty bad especially by comparison to WaW).

[–] ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.place 11 points 15 hours ago

You're asking the average cod player to stop playing? They are unable to. It's the reason why the series is where it is, its playerbase is... not the smartest.