5 ms·

It's mostly that the loudest, angriest voices tend to drown out everyone else.

by Reedx 6y ago

enraged_camel 6y ago
Yep, gamers especially are a particularly tough crowd, and quite a few of them have large audiences.
- ceilingcorner 6y ago
  I considered going into the gaming industry years ago, but the audience is such a turnoff. It really holds the medium back as an art form.
  - throw_m239339 6y ago
    > I considered going into the gaming industry years ago, but the audience is such a turnoff. I think that the issue isn't so much 'the audience' but the terrible work conditions associated with the gaming industry. > It really holds the medium back as an art form How? games are probably the most diverse art form in existence today, there is literally no rules to what a game can be.
    - ceilingcorner 6y ago
      The audience of gamers strikes me as perhaps the most immature, needlessly difficult group of art consumers in the world today. Even movies don’t get the same kind of petulant obsession and hostility that games do. I’m not sure if it’s just a consequence of gamers being younger or what, but it’s a major turnoff to me. The fact that CDPR devs got death threats because of game delays just says it all. Can you imagine something similar happening to a filmmaker?
      - throw_m239339 6y ago
        > The audience of gamers strikes me as perhaps the most immature, needlessly difficult group of art consumers in the world today. Even movies don’t get the same kind of petulant obsession and hostility that games do. I’m not sure if it’s just a consequence of gamers being younger or what, but it’s a major turnoff to me. It's like saying the people who play Call Of Duty online and Visual Novel X or Z are necessarily the same audience, no matter what game is produced, it's purely a stereotype, and it's not true.
        ceilingcorner 6y ago
        Virtually all of the jobs in gaming will be for bigger budget games at large companies. The amount of revenue that COD or CDPR makes is vastly greater than any indie games.
    - vlunkr 6y ago
      > How? games are probably the most diverse art form in existence today, there is literally no rules to what a game can be. Really? Compared to film, music, visual arts? I would say it's the least diverse of them. It's starting to branch out, especially in the indie scene, but it's still in it's infancy.
      - throw_m239339 6y ago
        > Really? Compared to film, music, visual arts? I would say it's the least diverse of them. It's starting to branch out, especially in the indie scene, but it's still in it's infancy. Yes because gaming actually unify all other art medium without being burdened by their 'rules'. Movies today have clearly defined cinematographic rules, very little professional produced movies can be deemed experimental. Games do not suffer from these kind of 'academic' considerations.
        ceilingcorner 6y ago
        I don’t think you have much knowledge of film if you say “professional produced movies are not experimental.”
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
        vlunkr 6y ago
        This doesn't make sense. What are the rules of music? Sure if you want something on the radio it's wise to follow some guidelines, but obviously that's not where the diversity is. You can make a song with no defined key or time signature, it can be hours long or seconds long, it can have no vocals, only vocals, or controversially, no sound at all. You could go on and on. Video games have not pushed the limits in this way.
        slfnflctd 6y ago
        I have to strongly disagree with this. What we call "video games" now encompasses pretty much all other art forms except cooking. Whatever you can do with one form, you can do the same thing plus more in a game. There is much greater artistic potential in this kind of software than anywhere else that doesn't require physical presence (and even that can be simulated). It also requires massive engineering skill, itself an art. That being said, the medium has a very long way to go yet and there are still many areas it has yet to explore. I'm very glad there's a thriving indie scene where developers are continually experimenting with fresh, crazy new ideas.
- throw_m239339 6y ago
  Sony itself removed that game from the playstation store and still has not put it back yet, because it doesn't meet Sony's playstation certification requirements. I don't think 'gamers' are the issue here.
  - wavefunction 6y ago
    They offered it in their store so it obviously met their certification requirements at one point in the past. Perhaps they don't really have certification requirements...
    - throw_m239339 6y ago
      > They offered it in their store so it obviously met their certification requirements at one point in the past. Perhaps they don't really have certification requirements... Because CDPR promised to Sony they'd fix it at launch, it was Sony being lenient, obviously that was a mistake from Sony.
hcnews 6y ago
Active steam users for this game dropped much faster than that of Witcher 3 (which was similarly/less flawed at launch) based on public steam data. So, there's lot of evidence behind the message. Anecdotally, the players I knew have stopped playing it altogether due to a variety of issues.
- jjoonathan 6y ago
  W3 was released in May of a non-pandemic year. CP2077 was released in December in a pandemic year. The game-hours-to-calendar-days translation won't be 1:1.
- krzyk 6y ago
  Well, it was quite obvious becasue of two reasons: 1. W3 players count was in few thousands (maybe 10 thousands) - so it had mostly hard core fans of the franchise 2. W3 main campain is ~51 hours, and CP2077 has campaing for 25 hours. And also note, the massive amount of players of CP2077, 3x less is still few orders of magnitude more than W3 had.
- mywittyname 6y ago
  Probably because most of the pre-orders had enough time to beat the game. The main story lines are not crazy long, maybe 30hrs or so. The side quests aren't nearly the quality of Witcher 3. Most are just, "run into this building and kill this guy / steal data from the terminal, then run out." They only serve as something to do while you're exploring the city. With no multiplayer or generated content, I can't imagine why anyone would spend more than 60-80 hours playing the game. It makes sense that fewer people would be playing it by now.

It's mostly that the loudest, angriest voices tend to drown out everyone else.

by Reedx 6y ago

It's mostly that the loudest, angriest voices tend to drown out everyone else.

enraged_camel 6y ago

Yep, gamers especially are a particularly tough crowd, and quite a few of them have large audiences.

ceilingcorner 6y ago
I considered going into the gaming industry years ago, but the audience is such a turnoff. It really holds the medium back as an art form.
- throw_m239339 6y ago
  > I considered going into the gaming industry years ago, but the audience is such a turnoff. I think that the issue isn't so much 'the audience' but the terrible work conditions associated with the gaming industry. > It really holds the medium back as an art form How? games are probably the most diverse art form in existence today, there is literally no rules to what a game can be.
  - ceilingcorner 6y ago
    The audience of gamers strikes me as perhaps the most immature, needlessly difficult group of art consumers in the world today. Even movies don’t get the same kind of petulant obsession and hostility that games do. I’m not sure if it’s just a consequence of gamers being younger or what, but it’s a major turnoff to me. The fact that CDPR devs got death threats because of game delays just says it all. Can you imagine something similar happening to a filmmaker?
    - throw_m239339 6y ago
      > The audience of gamers strikes me as perhaps the most immature, needlessly difficult group of art consumers in the world today. Even movies don’t get the same kind of petulant obsession and hostility that games do. I’m not sure if it’s just a consequence of gamers being younger or what, but it’s a major turnoff to me. It's like saying the people who play Call Of Duty online and Visual Novel X or Z are necessarily the same audience, no matter what game is produced, it's purely a stereotype, and it's not true.
      - ceilingcorner 6y ago
        Virtually all of the jobs in gaming will be for bigger budget games at large companies. The amount of revenue that COD or CDPR makes is vastly greater than any indie games.
  - vlunkr 6y ago
    > How? games are probably the most diverse art form in existence today, there is literally no rules to what a game can be. Really? Compared to film, music, visual arts? I would say it's the least diverse of them. It's starting to branch out, especially in the indie scene, but it's still in it's infancy.
    - throw_m239339 6y ago
      > Really? Compared to film, music, visual arts? I would say it's the least diverse of them. It's starting to branch out, especially in the indie scene, but it's still in it's infancy. Yes because gaming actually unify all other art medium without being burdened by their 'rules'. Movies today have clearly defined cinematographic rules, very little professional produced movies can be deemed experimental. Games do not suffer from these kind of 'academic' considerations.
      - ceilingcorner 6y ago
        I don’t think you have much knowledge of film if you say “professional produced movies are not experimental.”
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - vlunkr 6y ago
        This doesn't make sense. What are the rules of music? Sure if you want something on the radio it's wise to follow some guidelines, but obviously that's not where the diversity is. You can make a song with no defined key or time signature, it can be hours long or seconds long, it can have no vocals, only vocals, or controversially, no sound at all. You could go on and on. Video games have not pushed the limits in this way.
        slfnflctd 6y ago
        I have to strongly disagree with this. What we call "video games" now encompasses pretty much all other art forms except cooking. Whatever you can do with one form, you can do the same thing plus more in a game. There is much greater artistic potential in this kind of software than anywhere else that doesn't require physical presence (and even that can be simulated). It also requires massive engineering skill, itself an art. That being said, the medium has a very long way to go yet and there are still many areas it has yet to explore. I'm very glad there's a thriving indie scene where developers are continually experimenting with fresh, crazy new ideas.
throw_m239339 6y ago
Sony itself removed that game from the playstation store and still has not put it back yet, because it doesn't meet Sony's playstation certification requirements. I don't think 'gamers' are the issue here.
- wavefunction 6y ago
  They offered it in their store so it obviously met their certification requirements at one point in the past. Perhaps they don't really have certification requirements...
  - throw_m239339 6y ago
    > They offered it in their store so it obviously met their certification requirements at one point in the past. Perhaps they don't really have certification requirements... Because CDPR promised to Sony they'd fix it at launch, it was Sony being lenient, obviously that was a mistake from Sony.

hcnews 6y ago

Active steam users for this game dropped much faster than that of Witcher 3 (which was similarly/less flawed at launch) based on public steam data. So, there's lot of evidence behind the message. Anecdotally, the players I knew have stopped playing it altogether due to a variety of issues.

jjoonathan 6y ago
W3 was released in May of a non-pandemic year. CP2077 was released in December in a pandemic year. The game-hours-to-calendar-days translation won't be 1:1.
krzyk 6y ago
Well, it was quite obvious becasue of two reasons: 1. W3 players count was in few thousands (maybe 10 thousands) - so it had mostly hard core fans of the franchise 2. W3 main campain is ~51 hours, and CP2077 has campaing for 25 hours. And also note, the massive amount of players of CP2077, 3x less is still few orders of magnitude more than W3 had.
mywittyname 6y ago
Probably because most of the pre-orders had enough time to beat the game. The main story lines are not crazy long, maybe 30hrs or so. The side quests aren't nearly the quality of Witcher 3. Most are just, "run into this building and kill this guy / steal data from the terminal, then run out." They only serve as something to do while you're exploring the city. With no multiplayer or generated content, I can't imagine why anyone would spend more than 60-80 hours playing the game. It makes sense that fewer people would be playing it by now.