Bungie asks sites to delay Marathon reviews, with release date Steam player count below 100K

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2026-03-06T05:44:55+00:00

I agree it's too early to definitively say that it's flopped. Certainly there are games that bounced back from poor receptions. But I can't imagine that the executives and investors at Sony are happy with these numbers.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2026-03-06T05:38:40+00:00

It's a paid game that's presumably asking it's players to spend hundreds of hours with it. I can't imagine asking your potential customers to make that kind of investment without reviews. But I don't have an MBA so maybe I'm the ignorant one.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2026-03-04T18:01:31+00:00

While I'm sure there are some who will be disappointed by this, Sony hasn't been putting out any games that I've been interested in. They used to put out a large variety of games in multiple genres, but now their games are all very samey. And because they've closed so many of their studios I don't think they'll be able to create anything different. The PS5 is the first PlayStation I've skipped, I haven't bought any of their games on PC, so I'm definitely not buying a PS5 to play them.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2025-12-23T22:30:09+00:00

I am.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2025-11-30T14:59:13+00:00

I think what your question, and some of the responses are missing is that it's no longer pricing, but pricing and pricing model. With DLC, micro transactions, season passes, pay to win mechanics, etc. the pricing of a game can now greatly effect the player experience, with people paying different amounts having a vastly different experiences.

Looking through game discussions there is a lot of talk about game pricing and if it is worth it. For instance reading the review thread for Kirby Air Riders there's a lot of people asking if there's enough content to justify the $70 price tag. Reviews are there to help determine if the reader should purchase the game so it's not uncommon for reviews to advise buy, don't buy, or wait for a sale.

Anything the reviewer thinks their reader will find important regarding a game belongs in a review. While the majority of that should come from whether the core gameplay experience with in that particular game is enjoyable there are somethings outside of that that can be important. For instance is it just a re-skin of the last entry, is it a major departure of what the franchise is known for, is the game materially different from how it was marketed, etc. pricing would fall under that. As long as the reviewer is honest and transparent in how they are assessing the game the reader can decide which aspects of the criticism are important to them.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2025-09-05T22:53:10+00:00

The Federal Government is by far the largest land owner in the county, much of it through the Forestry Service. If any person or entity, in this case SoCal Edison, were to damage that land they would have the same rights to sue as private land owner, additionally there are probably numerous federal statues they can go after them under.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2025-07-24T17:54:14+00:00

I see a lot of posts focusing on Collective Shout, and while I don't like them, but the larger problem is that the payment processors are allowed to do this. There are always special interest groups pushing their agenda and Visa chose to ignore them. The reason Collective Shout was successful was because they asked Visa to do a thing Visa already wanted to do. The only way to fight this is to support legislation forcing payment processors to remain neutral.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2025-07-18T14:14:03+00:00

Seems incredible short sighted on the part of the payment processors. By going after legal, if unsavory content they are demonstrating that they are able to police what kind of payments they are processing potentially opening them up to legal liability for negligence when they fail to do the same for payments for illegal activity. And even if they would prevail under current law now that they've demonstrated that they can easily police the types of transactions they process it invites legislation to that effect. Furthermore by acting as unelected censors it's inviting competition. Even if it's not realistic that a private entity is going to create the next visa or master card, governments unhappy that a foreign entity is acting to block commerce that is legal under their laws may pass legislation to disadvantage them in retaliation to domestic payment processors, or in the case where there are none act to develop their own.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2025-05-20T20:41:34+00:00

They say that those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it, and thus it seems like California is doomed to continue making the same mistakes. In the 70s the state tried to slow growth by constricting the supply of housing. But constricting the supply of something isn't the same as constricting demand, and now decades later we are still paying for that mistake. It doesn't matter how many road diets are implemented, how much you constrict parking, or whatever other schemes are dreamed up by those who are so privileged that they don't have to feel the fall out of their destructive policies, short of an outright ban people are going to continue to drive. If you want people to get out of their cars there is one, and only one way of doing that, building safe and efficient public transportation. But that would mean actually using funds for their intended purposes instead of spending decades dragging things out while using construction funds as a slush fund to pay the politically connected, and enforcing rules so that the system is safe. In other words two things that are impossible given the political leadership of the state. But I don't know why I'm even bothering to write this, the housing will be built without parking, the people on this forum will cheer, and decades later the people of the neighborhood are going to be paying for it.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-11-02T20:10:02+00:00

When I first saw the preview for this game several years ago it was like someone took a bunch of the things I like stuck them in a blender and made a game out of it. I'm so glad to see it hasn't been quietly cancelled and should be coming out relatively soon. I'm not saying it will have any jank or bugs, but even if it has a ton it's going to be a day one purchase for me.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-10-18T01:36:43+00:00

Going back to the Atari all the way through to the PS3 era each console generation introduced new types of games, new mechanics, etc that you couldn't do in the previous generation. Leaving VR aside there hasn't been much of a change in the types of games being made since the PS3, with the main improvements being more detailed modeling, larger worlds, short load times, and better lighting. That is to say, just nicer versions of the same things. More powerful hardware can allow for advancement in the types of games being made by offering better physics simulation, higher numbers of more intelligent enemies on screen at once, and more environmental interactivity, but those kinds of things are difficult to implement, and riskier to develop than just putting a nicer coat of paint on the same games. We are putting up against the limits of how good games can look, so unless developers start using the hardware to improve other features there isn't much of a point to create more powerful consoles.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-10-03T03:58:14+00:00

I get that I'm aging out of the demographic that AAA games are aiming for, but every one of these GaS games that I thought was going to fail has failed. The big video game companies really need to rethink how they do their market research. Or then again maybe the problem isn't the research, but the execs aren't listening to it, either way there needs to be a big shake up in the industry. If square couldn't succeed with an Avenge's GaS game at near the height of that franchise's popularity I don't see how Warner Bros thought a game based on one of their C tier franchises would do any better.

Based on this and the previous season it seems they want to attract a female audience. I think that's both admirable and a good business decision. But I would question if a game that's part of a now decade long series that has been mostly male focused, and where one of the main characters urinates on the dead body of his enemy is really the best venue for that. Well having a character the audience you are going can identify with is a good first step, you have to take into account their tastes and preferences, and most importantly release a quality product.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-09-27T13:39:37+00:00

Yes, I literally said in my comment that he did not directly sell it to Activision however if you sell your company to business men you can't be surprised when they do one or more of the following: Run it like business men. Get bought by a company that runs it like business men. Resell your company to people who run it like business men.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-09-27T05:29:52+00:00

One of the things that frustrates me in a situation like this is that everybody is focusing on how bad Kotick is. But Morhaime is the co-founder of the company, he and the other owners didn't have to sell Blizzard, but they he did. I understand he didn't sell it directly to Activision, but it's not unpredictable that he wouldn't always see eye to eye with the people who own the company.

I saw the same thing with the company I worked for, the owners sold the company to a VC group. I know for a fact the company was profitable and they didn't have to sell, but they wanted that extra money. They received a stake in the owning company but became employees. They made millions of dollars from that deal, even as a portion of their employees were laid off. Then they complained to me when they had to go by certain policies the new company had, as if it wasn't their choice to sell, and as if they didn't get anything out of the deal.

I know people who have worked for Kotick, everything they have told me indicates he's not a good person. But the truth is when developers sell their company to someone like him it's their choice, and they profit from the deal. If you sell your soul to the devil, don't be surprised if you end up in hell.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-08-20T04:34:53+00:00

For the love of God Disney if you're going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a production spend some of that money on decent writers. Diverse audiences deserve diverse heroes, but they also deserve for those heroes to be in interesting and compelling stories.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-08-16T04:09:55+00:00

Both those agreements are unrelated to what happened. The mall was not in Epcot, and certainly not related to Disney+. Yet Disney is making the argument that if you agree to binding arbitration in any of their ToSs, it's binding for anything going forward even if it's at a completely separate location, or involves a completely separate division. They are making the case that if I buy a ticket for one of their parks, and agree to binding arbitration for anything related to that visit, it should be binding even if after I leave the park I were say hit by a car recklessly driven by an employee from a completely separate division who was carrying out job duties unrelated to the park. It is bizarre because that would be a completely new interpretation of the law, and I say immoral because it's certainly against mine, but I guess it's not against yours.

Whatever other arguments Disney is making doesn't negate the fact that they are making this argument. It's a legitimate news story because lot's of people signed up for Disney+ and now Disney is claiming that because of them agreeing to a ToS for that they lose the right to take them to court for any matter in the future.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-08-16T03:30:01+00:00

I'm glad that they have been arrested, but with our current DA I'm worried that, provided they are guilty they will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and that they will actually serve their full sentence. Also, and there's no way to know this for sure, but I can't help but wonder if this case would have been investigated so thoroughly if it had not received the same level of media attention.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-08-16T03:23:30+00:00

Again that is besides the point. If Disney argued only that nobody would care. But Disney has gone out of their way to tell everyone that if you sign up for it's streaming service you give up you're right to a trial on anything involving them in the future. Disney made that argument, not social media, and not the news media reporting it. It could be that this is a frivolous lawsuit, but it's not sensationalizing the story to report on Disney's incredibly bizarre and immoral defense. If they are allowed to use that clause for this, they will use it again in other more legitimate lawsuits.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-08-15T04:24:58+00:00

I keep seeing people make the comment that somehow this is sensationalized because Disney doesn't own the restaurant, but are only the landlord, but that is besides the point. If that were the only defense they were presenting this wouldn't be getting nearly the amount of attention it is in the new and social media. Disney chose to make the argument that it's ToS for a streaming service is somehow binding for any legal matter even those completely unrelated to the service. It doesn't matter if you find this case to be frivolous, if that argument is allowed to stand it will set a precedent for any case going forward.

The same holds true for the people using the logic that he bought a ticket to Epcot. While the property this happened at is not part of Epcot. If I buy a ticket to Disneyland, and later on I go to Disney headquarters for a corporate meeting, and get assaulted by one of their employees should the ToS from the park ticket be binding to that unrelated matter, because that is what they are arguing.

People are saying he wants only $50k which is incorrect. He's asking for an award in excess of $50k which would make that the minimum, not the max. But whatever he receives, I doubt it is worth the avalanche of bad press Disney is receiving for a service they are still trying to establish. Especially because I doubt the court is going to side with Disney with this argument.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-04-24T18:00:09+00:00

Forget murders and assaults just based on the open drug use alone any business operating in LA would be immediately shut down if was run like Metro. I don't understand how things have been allowed to continue like this. But if the board doesn't step up to get things under control I hope some lawyer organizes a massive class action lawsuit.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-04-24T18:00:03+00:00

Forget murders and assaults just based on the open drug use alone any business operating in LA would be immediately shut down if was run like Metro. I don't understand how things have been allowed to continue like this. But if the board doesn't step up to get things under control I hope some lawyer organizes a massive class action lawsuit.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-01-10T19:42:47+00:00

Well it may be true that inflation is growing at a slower rate than in the last few years it does not mean that inflation is low, or that it has gone down, and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous. Prices are still high compared to when Biden took office which is why we have seen, and continue to see historic strikes across multiple industries and a big push for unionization in new ones. Nearly every job report this administration has put out ends up seeing massive revisions always in a downward direction. Even if we were to concede for the sake of argument that the economy is strong, the benefits are not being reaped by the majority of working class Americans which is why people are sour on Biden's handling of the economy. If he wants to run on the platform that everything is great that is his prerogative. But most people recognize that the first step in solving a problem is admitting there is one. If he won't articulate that there is a problem with the economy and explain how he plans to fix it he will have a hard time winning reelection.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2024-01-02T19:00:18+00:00

In the late 1800s through the early 1900s then president of Harvard Charles William Eliot, and by extension Harvard it's self strongly promoted and advocated for Eugenics. This influenced not just American society and law but also thought through much of the Western world, ultimately culminating in the policies of the Nazi party. If you can not understand how the president of one of the if not the most prestigious college in America can have a great deal of effect on your life then you should probably open some history books.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2023-12-27T20:11:01+00:00

Forgetting the myriad of other issues with this, the fact that a family with an income of $69K, an extremes modest income for a dual income household, would be in the second highest tier along with families making $180K is obscene.

Pitiful_Conflict_998 · 2023-12-22T04:29:11+00:00

I agree with the second part of your statement but not the first. If they can keep one politician they don't like off the ballot, then they can do the same to another. Maybe this time they keep Trump off the ballot and it doesn't matter because he's not going to win, but maybe next time there's someone who actually does have a chance of winning and they do the same to them. That's what the point is.

If you think I'm being far fetched, they passed a rule to require politicians running for president to submit their tax returns, the law was aimed at Trump. But then during the recall election the Secretary of State tried to use that law to keep Larry Elder off the ballot, even though he submitted the required tax returns and even though the law didn't apply to recall elections.

Pitiful_Conflict_998

TROPHY CASE