Watching an ad would earn players another block of ad-free play time, called a “credit”
Bethesda really missed the memo with Starfield. All those wasted loading screens…
ES6 loading screens will have Fan Duel and GLP-1 ads
Maybe Microsoft is patenting it so nobody will do this in the future. They have the best for the gamers in mind. /s
Truth be told, that actually might be a neat thing to do. Imagine trying to think up really scummy ways to inject advertising into games, create new forms of mtx, etc. just to patent them and sit on those patents.
I feel like it would do a bit of the Streisand effect since by patenting them you’re making them known, but that could be a bit better than letting someone else figure it out and get exclusive use of that patent for years. Either way anyone checking gaming patents can learn about it, but in one situation it’s used for the duration of the patent and in the other its not.
Wait, someone should make a gaming organization that just thinks of the most outlandish and ghoulish things to patent them so the big corpos can’t.
Wait, that’s a cool idea
You think Microsoft has consumers best interests in mind? Are you serious? Like are you genuinely caping for Microsoft or am I missing something here?
My comment is sarcartic.
Yeah you are missing the /s at the end
Putting aside that it’s idiotic anticonsumer patent. May I just ask here. How tf this even gets patented? Should I patent the act of showing the advertisement sign to my neighbors every time they open their door, so I can get exclusivity rights ownership on doing such an idiotic thing? Like why it gets accepted? It doesn’t sound even remotely technologically meaningful, neither it needs to withstand concurrency. It’s just a waste of tax money.
Loading screen games was patented, this doesn’t seem much different.
How tf this even gets patented?
It hasn’t, yet, afaict. Applying for a patent != it being granted.
As to the latent question of why Microsoft seems confident enough to try:
Because the times of a patent requiring to clear a reasonable inventive threshold (to actually be a motor for innovation) are far behind us. These days, patents’ principal (not exclusive) purpose imho is so big corporations can sue each other to grab some of the others’ earnings.
It’s just as shitty and funny as the one where Sony had a similar-looking mechanism where the viewer of their TVs is disrupted by an ad, then has to shout the name of the product to banish it away.
Watching an ad would earn players another block of ad-free play time, called a “credit”
As a millennial, I’ve watched the rise and fall of many things. Never thought I’d see the entire fall of gaming and so soon following its rise.
Indie games are booming lately, if you think you’re witnessing the fall of gaming you’re simply looking in the wrong place.
and those indie companies will get bigger, become corporatized, and continue the cycle.
Just like the ones before them did, just like the ones after them will.
See Dave the Diver for a corporate game people assume is indie because of its style
Bury your hobby with that attitude. There are and there always has been studios that decide intentionally to keep their projects small in scope.
Both can be true
Wealth doesn’t trickle down, but losses do. Sadly, AAA studios collapsing will affect indies’ abilities to get funding , so expect to feel some pain there too.
This is already being felt these last few years as many gaming publishers shifted to funding AI.
I think it’s just the fall of the industry as we know it. I don’t think gaming is going away anytime soon. But I do think we are about to see a very different industry in a few years. It probably won’t look like it ever really has before. A massive indie space, with sparse few AAA titles.
Capitalism knows no sentimentality.
DRINK VERIFICATION CAN!
FAFO, stapitalism stans
Imagine coming up with this idea and presenting it to your superiors instead of being so disgusted with yourself that you immediately splatter your brains all over the ceiling.
they need to make money, i don’t feel it wrong to try to milk every possible angle
Your mother’s corpse had teeth, right?
Some teeth have fillings… some fillings are made of valuable metals.
The Disney corporation should exhume the corpse of your loved ones and sell their teeth on eBay - they need to make money… right?
It’s the only way to be sure every POSSIBLE angle has been milked.
You’re comparing a non-consensual crime to a voluntary consumer product. Unlawfully exhuming a corpse leaves the victim and family with zero say in the matter.
A video game gives you complete choice, if a developer milks a game with ads, you can choose to uninstall it and give them zero dollars. Try making an analogy that actually deals with voluntary choice, because grave robbery isn’t it.
Why not use a realistic analogy? Like how some car companies tried charging monthly subscriptions to activate built-in features like heated seats or remote start. BMW eventually killed that feature specifically because subscription sales were so extremely low. That’s a real example of consumer choice driving corporate decisions, not grave robbery.
I might agree that it’s not morally wrong for them to add advertisements to milk more money out of people, but it’s definitely artistically wrong in that they are hugely compromising the thing they are making just for extra money.
And one might further argue that it’s morally wrong in that adding the advertisements is going to make the world a more frustrating, enshittified, dumbed-down place, just by a little bit.
Maybe a more apt comparison than “what if a Nazi killed you” or “what if somebody stole your mother’s teeth” would be what if you owned a food company and filled your food with sticks and rocks to save money. People would not be obligated to buy it, but it’s definitely wrong and doesn’t do anybody any good.
Didn’t you just prove my point? If nobody buys food because I put rocks and sticks in it, I go out of business. That’s exactly how consumer choice forces bad ideas to fail
Laws (and crimes) and consumer behaviors are governed by popular concensus of what we, the body politic, are willing to tolerate - neither are absolutes, and both are subject to change.
A realistic analogy would make my point less clearly than an exaggerated cartoon.
If the consumer market, or the corporations that govern it, decide that grave robbery is to be tolerated as a for-profit adventure…
well, we’ve very few tools with with to oppose them.
(See also: the collapse of the biosphere)
Fortunately, in America at least, It’s likely your loved ones lacked the medical insurance necessary to cover the cost of dental fillings.
Laws (and crimes) and consumer behaviors are governed by popular concensus of what we, the body politic, are willing to tolerate - neither are absolutes, and both are subject to change.
You’re right that social norms shift, but fundamental legal protections don’t evaporate overnight, especially in democratic nations with institutional checks. Suggesting that society will casually normalize grave robbery for profit within our lifetimes isn’t realistic.
A realistic analogy would make my point less clearly than an exaggerated cartoon.
Admitting that your argument relies on an “exaggerated cartoon” proves that your logic isn’t realistic. Video game ads are a voluntary consumer choice, but grave robbery is a non-consensual crime.
If you want a realistic corporate greed analogy, look at a company intentionally polluting the air and then selling clean air filters to profit off the damage. At least that deals with actual market behavior instead of shock value crime scenarios.
People like you are the reason everything is getting worse all the time. Keep your worthless opinions to yourself.
Why? Because I accept that businesses exist to make money, not out of the goodness of their hearts?
If you think a system or game is predatory, the solution is simple: stop supporting it. If enough people actually vote with their wallets, companies are forced to change because it hurts their bottom line. Throwing tantrums online doesn’t change basic economic incentives, consumer behavior does
“If you hate the US you should move”-ass take.
i think its more like “if you hate the hotel service you should move”
Why? Because I accept that businesses exist to make money, not out of the goodness of their hearts?
Yes, there’s no reason you need to carry water for them. These dipshits shouldn’t be able to find a single comment online supporting their behavior. They should feel shitty and worthless about what they’re doing every second of their miserable existence. Companies can make plenty of money without enshittifying every single aspect of our lives.
If you think a system or game is predatory, the solution is simple: stop supporting it. If enough people actually vote with their wallets, companies are forced to change because it hurts their bottom line. Throwing tantrums online doesn’t change basic economic incentives, consumer behavior does
Sure, and I have a lower threshold for it than most but these companies will keep tightening the screws forever because there will always be new people coming in where the current level of bullshit is normal and they can push those people even further. My resistance to it alone accomplishes nothing.
Oh, I just realized you’re the original commenter XD
Why didn’t you lead with a reasonable argument in the first place, rather than suggesting self-harm or dismissing other points of view? I actually agree with you on the domino effect, even though it doesn’t really change my core view that businesses naturally try to milk it
Because I want them to kill themselves.
People like you are the reason everything is getting worse all the time. Keep your worthless opinions to yourself.
Maybe you should apply your advice to yourself on this one.
Your point about normalization and the domino effect actually makes sense, and i agree with you on this
My main reason for leaning so heavily against that original post was that they were telling people to off themselves just for wanting to make money. Corporate monetization might be annoying, but suggesting suicide over it is way out of line.
Many are tired of being milked at every possible angle.
That’s the problem. The milking.
but its their job, they will stop doing it if everyone stop playing the game
u can’t blame them for doing their job, when people still playing the game
“Just doing my job”
-Some random Nazi soldier
why people keep making stupid comparison? why? just an effort to make my stand is morally wrong?
those people that got kill by the nazi have no choice, they cant simply refuse to get kill or got drag to the camp
do the game developer forces you to play their game? its your choice whether to play it or not
I was not weighing in on whether or not adding advertisements is a bad thing. I was pointing out how flawed your logic is. “Just doing their job” is not a good defense for the job being done.
What do you mean? You were the one who brought morality into this by comparing game developers to Nazi soldiers.
You claim that ‘just doing their job’ isn’t a valid defense, but how else am I supposed to look at it? It is literally their job to find new ways to monetize a product. If a company pushes a bad strategy, consumers can just stop playing and paying, like when BMW tried subscription heated seats and failed because of low sales. Blaming employees for doing what they are hired to do, while people keep playing the game, makes no sense. Trying new ways to make money isn’t a moral crime; it’s just business.
Because you’re going to great lengths to defend a form of enshitification.
It sounds like you don’t know what you’re talking about. Bad thing is bad thing is bad. Period.
But what actually makes it bad? Is making a game and wanting to get a financial benefit out of it inherently wrong?
Why doesn’t that same logic apply to celebrities doing brand endorsements, shoving products down our throats that they probably don’t even use just because they are famous? And don’t forget product placement in movies.
Also, developing a modern video game can cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and if it flops, it’s just a dead loss. Unlike movies, which can recoup losses through streaming deals or cable rights, a bad video game usually means nobody plays it and the studio loses everything. That is a massive financial risk.
Where do you draw the line?
Is it hard to type, or to see the screen, with all those corporate dicks in your mouth?
Just don’t play those games.
i suggesting the same stuff as you, but i got bomb with downvote XD
Found the G.O.G. user
“Looks like you’re about to kill the dragon. How about killing a sixpack of Miller Light?”
I generally don’t think F2P games are a very good deal for the player, regardless of the form that the monetization takes.
I’d just rather just pay up front and then have a good experience.
It really depends. There are great examples like DOTA2 and Path of Exile, and miserable examples, like every crappy gacha game.
Riot is kinda in the middle for me. Shame they nuked 2XKO after not telling anyone about it or catering to the people they neglected to tell about it.
What grinds my gears is when a game ends up not what you expected. One of the only games I returned was Doom Eternal, I bought it and hated it and this is from someone who’s played all the doom games and even made maps for fun. I got it again for a dollar off of humble bundle and I will probably never play it.
Same goes for The Outer Worlds. I was excited about it. The whole epic launcher thing saved me the full price. Got it years later with all the dlc for $1. Played it and found it to not be as fun as I thought it was going to be.
What didn’t you like about Doom Eternal? That one was widely praised.
I think part of the reason it was highly praised was because I imagine it was a lot of peoples first Doom game. Like Doom 2016 and Doom 3, it was also something a bit different.
I didn’t like the scarcity of ammo and constantly have to see and hear the stupid chainsaw. And the cinematic
killseverything got really annoying as well. The level design was okay, but felt very restricted compared to Doom 2016, also invisible walls. It felt slow and I didn’t care for the jumping mechanics, what is this Super Mario? I didn’t make it to playing it two hours since I returned it, I’m sure it probably got better but I didn’t feel like playing it.I didn’t like the mandatory finishing moves either, and to be honest, I didn’t finish the game, but I got a lot further than DOOM 2016 and I thought the gunplay felt really snappy and satisfying in the way the OG games did. The levels were diverse and I actually liked the platforming puzzles, but I’m also the kind of guy who played surf maps in CounterStrike and strafejump races in Quake, so I’m predisposed to that sort of thing.
Oh well. They made a thing and it’s not for everyone. I wonder if you’d like The Dark Age. I haven’t played it yet.
Hah in CS I played a lot of the Jailbreak mod. Actually played a bit in CSGO but it wasn’t the same. I actually didn’t look into Dark Age until you brought it up but it does look like they got the message that the finishing moves and walking through a map weren’t exactly everyone’s favorite concepts. I’ll probably get it when it’s on sale, it looks a lot more fast paced. I might be a minority on this but I miss the faster paced games like Painkiller and well UT2003 on double speed and double damage.
Me too, but clearly there’s a huge part of the market that would rather put up with ads than go with an alternative
because that f2p game, would cost u more money than buying the game upfront
i spend like 80-90 dollar on dota2 cosmetic, plus 2 battlepasses and its levels
This is to refine existing F2P advert inserts so the timing is less abrupt. It is also for an ad-supported game-pass tier so they can inject ads into any game in the library.
Will it mean more developers/publishers choose to inject ads into games? Maybe. But plenty of games already have convenient spots for ads that don’t require this kind of tech, like match queuing, etc. and they don’t run ads.
Pretty sure that in a decade, the norm will be that ads are absolutely everywhere. Only holdouts (think Kojima etc) and tiny indie setups will be able to avoid it. Every AA+ title will be riddled with it, and just like you can’t imagine people just “accepting” that today, we couldn’t imagine people “just accepting” microtransactions fifteen years ago. Yet here we are.
Kojima put monster energy ads into death stranding
Ads are already everywhere, nobody said anything about it being unimaginable. You have product placement (especially IP crossovers) in lots of live service games. That doesn’t mean you won’t be able to pay for an ad free experience. You can watch a movie on cable TV with ads every 15min, or buy the movie, or rent it, or stream it ad-supported/ad-free or go to the movie-theater with front-end ads. If you don’t want to watch Dune with a commercial break interrupting the middle, there’s an option for that.
Or the ads are incidental to the aesthetics of the activity, like sponsor ads on sports jerseys, in the stadium, and TV/stream. So what if the car chasing James Bond is an Audi because they paid for that.
I’m not pro-advertising, I do think “all major gaming experiences will be ruined with advertising” is a bit overblown.
Sounds like a whole lotta words to say the future of non shit entertainment flies a black flag
There’s always a black flag.
most patents never see implementation
The shareholder will love that
Literally everyone else, though…With some of the shit people put up with nowadays in games, they would probably swallow this up too, in some capacity.
