The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This is the thread for general chat.
Tell us how your day was, say hello or just introduce yourself if you're new to the site.
Post edited by Hmmm... on 29/12/2018 at 18:19.
Tell us how your day was, say hello or just introduce yourself if you're new to the site.
Post edited by Hmmm... on 29/12/2018 at 18:19.
Page:
Oh dear :¬(
Dr. Garin wrote:
Maybe moderators should have the powers to split discussions off into their own threads if needed.
How do you think it should be decided that a topic has overstepped the 'general' mark and deserves its very own thread? We could do as you suggest and end up with a load of different threads with 2/3 posts in each in them, that would make the forum seem rather cluttered IMO. Anyway, my point was that everyone appeared to be discussing the GAME group topic on here without any real problem (that I could see anyway) with the odd other point being chucked in for good measure (online banking security breach for example). Personally I would class these comments as perfectly acceptable for posting in a general chat forum.
Maybe moderators should have the powers to split discussions off into their own threads if needed.
How do you think it should be decided that a topic has overstepped the 'general' mark and deserves its very own thread? We could do as you suggest and end up with a load of different threads with 2/3 posts in each in them, that would make the forum seem rather cluttered IMO. Anyway, my point was that everyone appeared to be discussing the GAME group topic on here without any real problem (that I could see anyway) with the odd other point being chucked in for good measure (online banking security breach for example). Personally I would class these comments as perfectly acceptable for posting in a general chat forum.
pete_21 wrote:
Nin wrote:
[i]That's a general thread and it's in the gaming section. I'm starting to think this thread is to the detriment of the forum.
Does anyone else have a problem with this? It doesn't bother me at all, think it's good to see some active posting on here TBH.[/i]
What you have is a topical discussion thats being hidden in a generically named thread (I dont think the daily gaming chat thread was any better btw). Aside from the general confusion of a single thread trying to cope with extended discussions on different topics. It'll discourage posting as if somebody has nothing to say on the current topic(s) as you've hijacked the "general" posting thread. And look at it from an outside perspective, how are visitors meant to know there are topical discussions (things they might like to contribute to) if they are hidden. How will search engines index the forums "good content" properly if its hidden away in a generic thread.
Obviously nobody starts out intending to hijack threads, I'm sure this discussion started with an innocent comment. But its not healthy for a forum to have everything compressed into 1 or 2 threads. Maybe moderators should have the powers to split discussions off into their own threads if needed.
Nin wrote:
[i]That's a general thread and it's in the gaming section. I'm starting to think this thread is to the detriment of the forum.
Does anyone else have a problem with this? It doesn't bother me at all, think it's good to see some active posting on here TBH.[/i]
What you have is a topical discussion thats being hidden in a generically named thread (I dont think the daily gaming chat thread was any better btw). Aside from the general confusion of a single thread trying to cope with extended discussions on different topics. It'll discourage posting as if somebody has nothing to say on the current topic(s) as you've hijacked the "general" posting thread. And look at it from an outside perspective, how are visitors meant to know there are topical discussions (things they might like to contribute to) if they are hidden. How will search engines index the forums "good content" properly if its hidden away in a generic thread.
Obviously nobody starts out intending to hijack threads, I'm sure this discussion started with an innocent comment. But its not healthy for a forum to have everything compressed into 1 or 2 threads. Maybe moderators should have the powers to split discussions off into their own threads if needed.
Was about to say, it's good to see some actiity and debate on here for a change. Past week or two, the forum seems to have livened up.
Nin wrote:
That's a general thread and it's in the gaming section. I'm starting to think this thread is to the detriment of the forum.
Does anyone else have a problem with this? It doesn't bother me at all, think it's good to see some active posting on here TBH.
That's a general thread and it's in the gaming section. I'm starting to think this thread is to the detriment of the forum.
Does anyone else have a problem with this? It doesn't bother me at all, think it's good to see some active posting on here TBH.
Nin wrote:
chasfh wrote:
[i]Fact- EA and the like would rather the trade in market did not exist. Although it may be good for gamers, and could be argued that its "free promotion" and that some will only buy on the strength that they can at least get a small return when they trade it in, the game devs make no money directly from it. They would rather you bought a new copy, don't really care from where, but trade ins are nothing better than "tolerated". If the market shifts to online sales and purchasable downloads, it's actually more profitable for them.
It won't be. Killing the high-street off and taking the 2nd hand market with it will be a headshot to mass market gaming. The casuals that the mass market is based around won't follow into the download market, the older gamers will resent not being able to trade and will baulk at paying £30 for a game they can complete in a weekend but not get their money back on. No-one will like paying the costs and not have a physical copy.
I don't see why you guys are ignoring online outlets and reselling games online. the former provides videogames at a cheaper price to the consumer and the latter nets the seller a more favourable price.
If services like steam were the norm across all platforms, this wouldn't even be an issue. Have you ever actually seen a Steam sale before? They're ridiculous. The only games that stay at a high price are Cowaduty popular games with low price elasticity.
I'm one of many who will not follow gaming into that era if that's the way it's going. Take a look at the pc market and the effect of not being able to trade has had on it, even at a discount price.
The move to purely download will see gaming return to the dark ages as the market abandons it and online piracy of digital gaming soars.[/i]
You're just wrong. Look at the way Steam has flourished. Piracy has always been considered a problem for the PC platform. Also, your comment about short games is a bit one-dimensional. Sure a 4 hour game at 30 bucks is a bit sucky, but anyone with sense to check reviews beforehand wouldn't deem it worth the price. Don't even get me started on cheap four-six hours games, games ranging from Mirror's Edge to And Yet it Moves are heaven for me
chasfh wrote:
[i]Fact- EA and the like would rather the trade in market did not exist. Although it may be good for gamers, and could be argued that its "free promotion" and that some will only buy on the strength that they can at least get a small return when they trade it in, the game devs make no money directly from it. They would rather you bought a new copy, don't really care from where, but trade ins are nothing better than "tolerated". If the market shifts to online sales and purchasable downloads, it's actually more profitable for them.
It won't be. Killing the high-street off and taking the 2nd hand market with it will be a headshot to mass market gaming. The casuals that the mass market is based around won't follow into the download market, the older gamers will resent not being able to trade and will baulk at paying £30 for a game they can complete in a weekend but not get their money back on. No-one will like paying the costs and not have a physical copy.
I don't see why you guys are ignoring online outlets and reselling games online. the former provides videogames at a cheaper price to the consumer and the latter nets the seller a more favourable price.
If services like steam were the norm across all platforms, this wouldn't even be an issue. Have you ever actually seen a Steam sale before? They're ridiculous. The only games that stay at a high price are Cowaduty popular games with low price elasticity.
I'm one of many who will not follow gaming into that era if that's the way it's going. Take a look at the pc market and the effect of not being able to trade has had on it, even at a discount price.
The move to purely download will see gaming return to the dark ages as the market abandons it and online piracy of digital gaming soars.[/i]
You're just wrong. Look at the way Steam has flourished. Piracy has always been considered a problem for the PC platform. Also, your comment about short games is a bit one-dimensional. Sure a 4 hour game at 30 bucks is a bit sucky, but anyone with sense to check reviews beforehand wouldn't deem it worth the price. Don't even get me started on cheap four-six hours games, games ranging from Mirror's Edge to And Yet it Moves are heaven for me
Nin wrote:
chasfh wrote:
[i]Fact- EA and the like would rather the trade in market did not exist. Although it may be good for gamers, and could be argued that its "free promotion" and that some will only buy on the strength that they can at least get a small return when they trade it in, the game devs make no money directly from it. They would rather you bought a new copy, don't really care from where, but trade ins are nothing better than "tolerated". If the market shifts to online sales and purchasable downloads, it's actually more profitable for them.
It won't be. Killing the high-street off and taking the 2nd hand market with it will be a headshot to mass market gaming. The casuals that the mass market is based around won't follow into the download market, the older gamers will resent not being able to trade and will baulk at paying £30 for a game they can complete in a weekend but not get their money back on. No-one will like paying the costs and not have a physical copy.
I'm one of many who will not follow gaming into that era if that's the way it's going. Take a look at the pc market and the effect of not being able to trade has had on it, even at a discount price.
The move to purely download will see gaming return to the dark ages as the market abandons it and online piracy of digital gaming soars.[/i]
As I said, not my opinion, just what I gleaned from the gaming reps/ trade shows etc. over the course of eight years...
I actually don't like it any more than anyone else. It is, however, the way things are seen by big corporations that mass-produce the same game every year..
chasfh wrote:
[i]Fact- EA and the like would rather the trade in market did not exist. Although it may be good for gamers, and could be argued that its "free promotion" and that some will only buy on the strength that they can at least get a small return when they trade it in, the game devs make no money directly from it. They would rather you bought a new copy, don't really care from where, but trade ins are nothing better than "tolerated". If the market shifts to online sales and purchasable downloads, it's actually more profitable for them.
It won't be. Killing the high-street off and taking the 2nd hand market with it will be a headshot to mass market gaming. The casuals that the mass market is based around won't follow into the download market, the older gamers will resent not being able to trade and will baulk at paying £30 for a game they can complete in a weekend but not get their money back on. No-one will like paying the costs and not have a physical copy.
I'm one of many who will not follow gaming into that era if that's the way it's going. Take a look at the pc market and the effect of not being able to trade has had on it, even at a discount price.
The move to purely download will see gaming return to the dark ages as the market abandons it and online piracy of digital gaming soars.[/i]
As I said, not my opinion, just what I gleaned from the gaming reps/ trade shows etc. over the course of eight years...
I actually don't like it any more than anyone else. It is, however, the way things are seen by big corporations that mass-produce the same game every year..
Now as an alternative that might keep the older gamers, a licensing or rental system might be more attractive. For example
I download Broken Sword
Every day I play Broken Sword I'm charged £2
When I'm finished with it I can either delete it and not be charged anymore or make a final payment to keep it permanently. Obviously a cap being put in place as to how much I can ever be charged total.
I think this would actually help a lot and would finally kill off what I consider the bane of gaming, short games.
I download Broken Sword
Every day I play Broken Sword I'm charged £2
When I'm finished with it I can either delete it and not be charged anymore or make a final payment to keep it permanently. Obviously a cap being put in place as to how much I can ever be charged total.
I think this would actually help a lot and would finally kill off what I consider the bane of gaming, short games.
chasfh wrote:
Fact- EA and the like would rather the trade in market did not exist. Although it may be good for gamers, and could be argued that its "free promotion" and that some will only buy on the strength that they can at least get a small return when they trade it in, the game devs make no money directly from it. They would rather you bought a new copy, don't really care from where, but trade ins are nothing better than "tolerated". If the market shifts to online sales and purchasable downloads, it's actually more profitable for them.
It won't be. Killing the high-street off and taking the 2nd hand market with it will be a headshot to mass market gaming. The casuals that the mass market is based around won't follow into the download market, the older gamers will resent not being able to trade and will baulk at paying £30 for a game they can complete in a weekend but not get their money back on. No-one will like paying the costs and not have a physical copy.
I'm one of many who will not follow gaming into that era if that's the way it's going. Take a look at the pc market and the effect of not being able to trade has had on it, even at a discount price.
The move to purely download will see gaming return to the dark ages as the market abandons it and online piracy of digital gaming soars.
Fact- EA and the like would rather the trade in market did not exist. Although it may be good for gamers, and could be argued that its "free promotion" and that some will only buy on the strength that they can at least get a small return when they trade it in, the game devs make no money directly from it. They would rather you bought a new copy, don't really care from where, but trade ins are nothing better than "tolerated". If the market shifts to online sales and purchasable downloads, it's actually more profitable for them.
It won't be. Killing the high-street off and taking the 2nd hand market with it will be a headshot to mass market gaming. The casuals that the mass market is based around won't follow into the download market, the older gamers will resent not being able to trade and will baulk at paying £30 for a game they can complete in a weekend but not get their money back on. No-one will like paying the costs and not have a physical copy.
I'm one of many who will not follow gaming into that era if that's the way it's going. Take a look at the pc market and the effect of not being able to trade has had on it, even at a discount price.
The move to purely download will see gaming return to the dark ages as the market abandons it and online piracy of digital gaming soars.
@Chad - I guess I'm just one of those gamers who cares more about the industry than I do about other gamers, and I'll leave it at that
Had a great night last night anyway, masqueraded as a member of the rugby team to get with the captain of the netball team
Had a great night last night anyway, masqueraded as a member of the rugby team to get with the captain of the netball team
Page: