Readers Feature

[one-armed dwarf]

I'll try to stay out of this one cause I dunno if my perspective is that valuable, but I find that last statement pretty interesting to think about. It definitely feels like we are more reactionary, less patient, less capable of critical thinking, more polarised and less empathetic and it's a question of how we got to that point. I don't necessarily think it's gaming that caused it, or is the sole reason or anything, but something's done it to us.

[mfnick]

I don’t have kids so it’s easy for me to say but fuck that stance. Stopping me and millions of other adults from playing a game because little Timmy might play it at some point can fuck all the way off. I know he says he wouldn’t actually lobby for that himself anyway but the fact he’d be happy about it is enough.

Spend the time with your child, be a good parent and talk to them about this stuff rather than banning it. When there’re older, even play it with them & discuss it during. 

 

I also just hate censorship of any kind in art too to be honest. Put warnings at the beginning or whatever but don’t change or censor stuff.

 

[one-armed dwarf]

I mean I will also add I hate censorship, don't wanna be like the USSR. Tons of its artists had to emigrate or suffer recrimination for their work

[mfnick]

1 minute ago, one-armed dwarf said:

but something's done it to us.

 
90% is probably just how online we all are now. & social media. Crazy Fred down the pub can now find all his crazy mates and spread misinformation. 
 

Hiding behind fake names and having no repurcussions for being a horrible piece of shit online like you would in real life doesn’t help either.

 

Thats another conversation though. 

[shinymcshine]

I wondered if it was some bizarre parody letter - yep let's ban xyz because I can't be bothered to parent and follow the clear age guidelines or say no to him (or the parents of kids he hangs out with.....)

[Nag]

Sometimes I don't even read these things before posting them... crazy, I know...🤣... but yeah that last statement is kind've out there.

 

I mean I can see why you wouldn't want eight year old Timmy playing certain stuff but a blanket ban certainly isn't a viable answer. I also kind've hate where the world is at now too in any case... trying to rewrite novels and movies to be more palatable to this day and age just seems wrong to me.

[Maryokutai]

You have to wonder what banning in the digital age even accomplishes. I've seen quite a few bans in Germany throughout the years and even then you could just import them, because the legislation, oddly, was that selling banned games was forbidden but not owning them. But nowadays all these hoops are gone anyway, just change the region of your platform, worst case scenario run it through a VPN and voilà. 

 

I think it's an ineffective way of taking control of an issue that should realistically be handled by the parents. There's certainly more to this issue and a discussion to be had, but the act of banning content is the wrong way to go about in IMO. Plus it'll always feel arbitrary. Again, Germany as an example, but a hypothetical, very mature and thought-provoking game about WWII without any explicit visual violence would immediately be banned there if only one texture showed the Hakenkreuz, which kind of defeats the purpose of such a system.

[DANGERMAN]

I can understand not wanting your kids playing/watching something, and I can understand that despite your best efforts fearing it'll happen anyway. However, the world doesn't revolve around your child, something I think parents should be told more often if I'm being honest, and nor should it revolve around children. Do your best, that's all you can do, no matter what age they are when they get in to violent games, films and tv, smoking, drinking, sex, whatever, you're always going to think it's too young because they're your kid.

 

Banning something like GTA is just stupid, even if I do think there's a conversation to be had about society's glamourisation of violence

 

also, as an aside, that's a terrible fucking letter. It starts with "IGTA has been banned, I haven't looked in to why but here's why I agree with it", then ends with "I'm not for a ban". It's not a good letter, Metro should have just replied back to him saying that

[HandsomeDead]

I mean I can't speak as a parent but I can speak as someone who has open access to things I was much younger than the rating, but not in an engaged thoughtful parent way just a case of thinking it'll be fine.  In my case I guess they weren't wrong.  It's probably a case by case basis but I was never a kid who'd copy the things I'd seen in a film.  And I know I didn't get everything in these films (far from it sometimes) but I got more than expected, usually enough to piece things together.

 

But I feel like a lot of people at school were seeing similar things so I'm surprised this still comes up.  I dunno if this letter was written by someone who didn't grow up with this stuff so that's why they're so nervous about it, they don't mention their own upbringing.

 

I don't think we at all should be throwing all the degeneracy of the world in kids faces but it doesn't have to be the end of the world if they do see some of it.  And if I was a parent I think it'd just be social media I'd try to keep my kid away from as long as possible, it worries me a lot more than GTA6.

[Maf]

Imagine worrying about GTA when Twitter exists 

[Pikman]

Weird they have a 7 year old who already played GTA... We have a 10 year old and he hasn't... 
Sounds to me like they can't parent well and are looking at others to help them do better rather than look at themselves 😅

Our son chooses not to engage with things rated higher than a 12 (we watch some 12 films together). As an example, he wants to watch My Hero Academy but it's a 15 and he's waiting for me to check it out for him beforehand, even though he's actually free to choose...

I hate to say it but... I blame the parent(s) 😅

I am also FAR more worried about social media. This is designed to be influential and dangerous.

[Nag]

 

Quote

A reader explains how and why he’s never paid full price for a video game in over a decade and why he never gets a new title on day one.

 

There was some talk recently about what the term hardcore gamer really means but I think it’s clear that, like most things, it’s all a matter of perspective. I’m sure there’s lots of Call Of Duty and EA Sports FC fans that play the games non-stop and consider themselves hardcore, but to many other people they’d be considered casual gamers, since they only play the most mainstream of games.

 

I’ve been gaming for over 30 years and have a collection of literally hundreds of games from across those years, from the Amiga all the way up to the PlayStation 5. I know who Hidetaka Miyazaki is and I was downloading what would now be called mods for Doom off a BBS in the early 90s. I’m pretty sure most people would call me a hardcore gamer (if they didn’t just opt for nerd or something even less pleasant).

 

And yet I haven’t bought a brand new game, on day one, for over 10 years. Everything I’ve purchased has either been in a sale or second-hand, and where possible physical. This includes digital-only indie games, which I find are discounted just as often as anything else. The idea of spending over £100 on digital deluxe versions of games seems crazy to many people but to me the idea of paying £60 or £70 is just as mad. I doubt I’ve paid more than £50 for anything in over a decade.

 

I imagine I don’t need to spell out my main reasons for doing this, but I feel the ever increasing prices of games makes the savings I enjoy all the more important. Despite the maximum price of games constantly rising I find the minimum is exactly where it always was and even if a game is sold for £70 at the start it can quickly drop to £20 or less in a few months, or at most a year. I just checked Suicide Squad: Kill The Justice League and it was £23 on Amazon earlier in the month and is now £18 in their Black Friday sale.

 

I’m not sure Ubisoft fully realise this, but the moment Star Wars Outlaws got an August release date its fate was sealed. Every sensible person knew it would end up in the Black Friday sales and lo and behold it’s currently the headliner for most stores, at around £40 depending on the format. I’ve already picked it up.

 

Actually, I say Ubisoft don’t realise it but I don’t think it’s any coincidence that the game’s big new patch and the Lando Calrissian DLC came out this week. I don’t think they realised the game was doomed when they first planned its release date, but they clearly know now that everyone’s waiting to get it cheap during Black Friday.

 

I’m not going to insist everyone do what I do or suggest anyone’s wrong for buying day one or soon after, but for me it makes no sense. Maybe if I was into multiplayer games I could see some exceptions, since nobody wants to start the latest Call Of Duty after everyone else has had six months of practice, but that’s not my thing so it doesn’t affect me.

 

I will say though that buying late not only saves money, but it means that the game itself is almost certain to be working properly, no matter what it was like at launch, and often it has some substantial DLC ready as well, that I don’t have to wait a year or more for.

 

The only downside is potential spoilers for story-based games, but I can’t say I’ve ever had any real problems with that, since it’s fairly easy to avoid the places that would obviously give things away.

 

It’s a great way to buy and enjoy games and allows me the freedom to take risks with what I buy, in case I don’t like it, since I know I can easily just resell the game on eBay if I don’t like it. There really is no need to buy games the way publishers want you too and I feel I’ve both saved money and kept my hardcore credentials.

 

By reader Tacle

 

[shinymcshine]

Definitely elements of that which I relate to - I think the last Day One game I bought was Dark Souls 3 (2016) albeit I did buy Zelda:TotK a couple of months after it was released for 'full price' as those Nintendo games hardly ever drop (and the Mrs wanted it - I still haven't played it).

 

Otherwise I sit just picking things up here & there in the various sales, and living without particular notice of released schedules and full price games.

[Maryokutai]

I've been fortunate enough to not have to pay attention to a game's price, so I usually pick them up whenever I want to play them or, in some rare cases, if it's a new title from a studio I really like and want to do my tiny part to support them. Last year's Atlas Fallen for example was a title that fulfilled both criteria, even though I was fully aware I would have been able to get it for 20 bucks a few months later. I do become a bit stingy when games are older and still are priced rather highly, which I why I often buy Nintendo games either when they come out or not at all. Will be making significantly less money at some point next year though, so I'm going to have to pivot a bit on how I approach the medium going forward. Though looking at it objectively, outside of FOMO and the risk of spoilers you're not going to miss much when picking up games significantly later. In lots of cases you might even end up having a more polished experience as a result.

 

The term hardcore gamer always rubbed me the wrong way though, I wish we could get rid of that and move on. It was basically just the label of edgy teens and tweens during the 360 era playing CoD and not wanting to be mistaken for someone who could enjoy Wii Sports.

[shinymcshine]

I just fell into the apathy of not being bothered about playing things until they've been reasonably patched, or for other games, until a GotY/Complete version, with all the DLC was released.

 

So I've remained a consistent gamer, since way back from the C64 days, just not too fussed about getting new things immediately.

[one-armed dwarf]

I think the prevalence of stuff like UE5 makes this probably a very pragmatic approach on PC. Games like Star Wars just seem way too rough to jump in day 1. I don't think that's on UE5 but that engine seems to just be linked to a ton of problematic releases, excepting Tekken 8

 

That's on the quality side, not so much the cost. But also of course Ubisoft has deflated the sense of value in their products with the reputation they have of being checklist games (which they're trying to fix, but too late probably) and their ridiculously priced special editions. 

 

Mostly tho I find I don't have enough interest in playing lots of games on release. Not got Astro Bot yet, not sure it's my thing or not but might as well keep waiting and see.

[DANGERMAN]

Good for them. I still buy stuff at launch, I suspect I always will just because, to the surprise of some, there are things I look forward to. I can't think of many times I've paid the rrp for something, but their reasoning is why I don't tend to buy digital on consoles, there's more options on pc (cdkeys especially) for launch discounts 

 

It is tough sometimes to feel like you can wait, if you're excited for the new Resident Evil or whatever, I don't think I'd be waiting 6 months to play it just to save £20, but yeah, buying stuff at launch to not get around to it is daft, even if I definitely do it 

[Nag]

+1 from me to @DANGERMAN... hit the nail on the head for me, I pretty much pre-order everything I know I want so by default I buy day one, if I'm looking forward to something why would I wait to play it? There's also the thing that I don't buy enough games to have to penny pinch which is nice.

 

Buying from a sale (digitally) is very rare for me truth be told.

[HandsomeDead]

If I really want to play something and I can afford it I'll get it at launch because, yes, I do like to save money where I can but sometimes it's okay to live a little.

 

I find the attitude of this person thinking they're craftily getting away with something funny, because I'm pretty sure companies watch how their games are sold very diligently and the whole picking up sales of expensive collector editions early from enthusiasts and getting the rest with budgeted sales is their whole strategy.  It's just a more nuanced version of the idea that this was £100 but get it now for £50, when it was never £100.

[mfnick]

Very rarely buy day 1. Most being broken at release and the price usually stops me. However I’ll make exceptions. The traditional Sony 1st party game I’ll take a chance on day 1 - although physically so I can sell it when done because fuck that £60-70 price point. 
 

Some of the genres I like tend to be cheaper too. Recent JRPGs I bought - Metaphor and DQ3 for £40-45 each. Again physically. But at £70 I may have held off. These are games which aren’t usually broken at release too. 
 

Indies I’m really interested in I’ll buy day 1 where I can to support them more. 
 

But big, buggy AAA games at £70 will usually get fucked off until they get a hefty discount. Not like I haven’t already got enough to play.