bigsocrates

@retris: I'm sorry but I can't agree. Copeland was jumping off a 15-foot cage on to a man wrapped in barbed wire (and some people think the barbed wire was what made him hesitate.) That's not a "regular spot" and his getting injured is by no means a "freak accident." Randy Savage got seriously injured doing something very similar. You can say it's a spot that can be done safely, unlike the Kingston spot, but it's an incredibly high-risk spot, especially for a 50-year-old with a history of injury. The fact that you can call it a "regular spot" just shows the depth of the problem, because it's the kind of thing that used to draw gasps from the crowd and that was used sparingly because it is so dangerous, and now it has become routine.

If we're channeling Jim Cornette (but not the horrible parts) I'd also say it was totally unnecessary here. This wasn't a super hot angle between two guys who'd been fighting for months or years building to this. It was a hastily built angle between a star and a guy who's been very underused and is likely on his way out of the company, and it was on a card where they were already going to have an anarchy in the arena match complete with car crash and flamethrower (I don't even want to get into that; it's clearly for somebody but it's not for me.)

What would have been wrong with them just wrestling? Just having a normal wrestling match? Maybe throw in some spooky stuff or something else, but you don't need all these matches with people doing crazy stuff because it exponentially increases the chances someone will get hurt. Maybe Copeland's spot could have been done safely, but if you do it often enough someone's going to get hurt eventually. And yeah you can say the same for a suplex, but the number of times you can do one of those before someone gets hurt is much higher. You can build to the big barbed wire cage match if it's warranted on a show where it's the main event and after you've wrung everything else out of the feud. Instead AEW has tended to just jump right there, have the big match with not enough build, and move on.

To move away from Cornette and quote the less controversial Lance Storm "We used to pretend to hurt each other and everyone thought it was real, now we really hurt each other and everyone thinks it's fake."

There's a lot to criticize WWE for even with Vince gone, but look at the mileage they get out of things like The Rock beating Cody with a strap (painful but safe) or Logan Paul's drone shot when he frog splashed Cody (higher risk than a suplex but much safer than a cage jump.) AEW used to do that stuff more effectively too. They had a big strap angle with Cody long before the Rock did and it was safe and kept the audience rapt.

I just think that smarter storytelling and more restraint could lead to just as much attention as these dangerous stunts with a lot fewer injuries.

Most of us at this point are familiar with Dead Internet theory; the quasi-conspiracy theory that most of the Internet now consists of AI powered bots talking to one another with little direct human involvement. I say quasi-conspiracy theory because while I think it's nowhere near the majority of Internet traffic (at least as measured by traffic if not raw content produced) it's clear that we're seeing more and more bot an AI powered content all over the place.

If you try to Google or especially Bing information on a game, especially something specific like how to unlock a trophy, the vast majority of results will clearly be AI written and may or may not have any accuracy or validity. A lot of the news stories that get served up via random links are clearly at least partially AI written. And now AI has started making serious inroads into places like Reddit, posting uncanny valley posts that can sometimes fool you at first readthrough but mostly come off as unsettling; using human language to express non-human ways of "thinking" (often lacking in the personality and specificity that characterize most human expression of any length.)

Now of course you can just ignore obvious AI posts and not engage, but there's something dispiriting to reading what starts out seeming like a real question and starting to formulate an answer only to realize that this is just some bot prompt trying to gather more data for its LLM model, or being tested and fine tuned. It's like going to a bar to watch the big game and looking around for someone to chat with, only to realize that many of the other patrons are just dummies, dressed and posed like people but not actually alive.

I confess that of all the dystopian cyberpunk stuff that's been happening recently this is among the most jarring for me. So much language being generated for purposes other than expression or actually imparting information, just muddying the waters.

That's not even getting into how the bots have no morality or lines they won't cross because they're literally just code running in a data center. There are reports of bots joining Facebook groups for grieving parents who lost their kids and inventing entirely false stories about children who never existed to farm engagement. It's the kind of ghoulish thing that we'd label sociopathic if a human did it, but all these bots have sociopathy baked into their very design.

That has made me appreciate the Giant Bomb forums even more. Yes they're dying like all forums are, but there's some degree of security by obscurity, and the mods work hard to try to keep the conversations mostly bot free (though some have definitely slipped in.) The level of discourse is also higher than it is in most places like Reddit these days, which makes it harder for bots to hide among the low effort human posts. It feels like a bit of a shelter in an increasingly hostile virtual world.

I mean could a bot generate @imunbeatable80's idiosyncratic ranking of games? No. They couldn't. There's no data source you could draw on that would result in that order.

What I'm saying is thanks to the humans who populate this place, and the hard working mods and team that keep it running, and that horrible takes on Super Mario 3D World are the realest Turing Test of all.

I don't really think this will work to move Xboxes. People aren't going to spend $500 (or $400 or whatever) to buy new hardware just to get a subscription to play a game when they can already just buy the game for a lot less money. I'm also not sure how many Game Pass subscriptions it will move since many COD players don't play that much more than COD.

I don't really agree with @cikame that there's a conflict between COD and Gamepass because Gamepass has a lot of all consuming games already and a lot of people DO get subscriptions and only play a couple things when it would be cheaper to buy those things. Some people just do the "$20 now is cheaper than $70" math and don't really think about the recurrence. It's dumb but common.

I also think that COD makes a lot of its money on microtransactions so if they can bring more people into the COD ecosystem they might ameliorate some of the "full price" downloads they don't get. Gamepass and PS+ launches are just begging for micros because they transform games into sort of an FTP model. The games aren't actually free to play but if you already have the subscription they FEEL free to play.

But to me this just feels like flailing. I don't think any one game can keep Game Pass growing. I'm not sure anything can. It's not just Game Pass that's struggling. The console business has stopped growing overall for the most part. There are much larger structural issues around how people play and consume games and other media at work.

@sparky_buzzsaw: I don't think it will change at all. So far the PS1 and PSP games have trickled out. PS2 will do the same, I'd wager. But we might at least see some good titles, as we have with PS1/PSP.

Suikoden 5 seems unlikely because there are Suikoden remasters coming. I think they know they can charge more than $10-15 or whatever for those games, old as they are.

Hello and thanks for your interest in the Unsanctioned Unofficial Game Pass Game Club. If you don't know what it is you can see more about the Game Club here. There is also where you can suggest games for future cycles, though this current vote will stay with the games listed below.

To vote in this thread simply list your top two choices with one labeled choice 1 and the other labeled choice 2. Choice 1 gets 3 points and choice 2 gets 1 point. The game with the highest point count wins. If there is a tie then I will break it, but I will not be voting otherwise.

You can vote even if you have not participated in the Game Club (and voting does not obligate you to participate but we ask that you not vote if you have no interest in participating) and you do not need to vote to participate in this or future cycles. You are also free to vote for games you are interested in and not participate if that game does not win, though it's more fun if people are willing to try games they may not be initially interested in.

Voting will close on June 3, when the results will be announced. I will tabulate the votes then so you may change your vote at any time prior by editing your post. Please do not make multiple voting posts in this thread, though discussion is encouraged. You can feel free to campaign for the game you want to win and make arguments why it is the best choice.

Games for which there appears to be interest will remain on the list in subsequent weeks but may be cycled out if we reach a point where there are too many nominated game for orderly voting. Games removed from the list will remain eligible to be nominated for future cycles at which point they will be put back on the list.

NOMINATED GAMES:

You Suck at Parking Vehicle obstacle racing game where the goal is to park. (Approximately 9 hours long.)

Amnesia: The Bunker: The latest in the Amnesia series of games where you hide from things that go bump or sploosh in the night and try to escape with your life and your sanity (Approximately 5 hours long)

The Big Con: An adventure game where you scam and steal your way across the American landscape of the 1990s. Will there be Zima? Probably not. (Approximately 4 hours long.)

Broforce: Action platformer with destructible levels starring parodies of famous action heroes. (approximately 7 hours long.)

Serious Sam Siberian Mayhem: Throwback FPS featuring tons of enemies and creative weapons. (approximately 4.5 hours long.)

Close to the Sun: First person horror adventure game about a journalist trying to find her sister in an alternate history steampunk world. (Approximately 4 hours long.)

Figment: An isometric action-adventure game with puzzles and combat set in a surreal world based around music. (Approximately 5 hours long.)

Spirit of the North: An adventure game about a fox based on Icelandic lore. (Approximately 5 hours long.)

Tin Hearts: A story focused puzzle game where you move the environment to help a tin soldier cross environments and guide him to his goal. (Approximately 12-15 hours long.)

Bramble: The Mountain King: Adventure game about two young Scandinavian siblings exploring a dark and spooky mountainside at night. (Approximately 4.5 hours long.)

Botany Manor: A puzzle exploration adventure game where you explore your manor and experiment and learn about the plants within (Approximately 3 hours)

No More Heroes III: Travis Touchdown returns to take on more assassins in Santa Destroy in another zany action game (Approximately 12 hours.)

Bluey: The Videogame: Platforming, adventure, and minigames in the magical world of Bluey. Spend time with your favorite characters from everyone's favorite epic TV masterpiece. (approximately 1 hour long.)

Chants of Sennaar: A critically acclaimed adventure game about language and communication (Approximately 9 hours long.)

Haunti: A stylish adventure game about searching for your lost love in the afterlife. (Approximately 6 hours long.)

@apewins: It shouldn't require PS5 Pro AI upscaling to get games running at 4K, considering that 360 games can do that on the One X, but maybe it can further improve image quality, though I wouldn't want it to mess with the display of the underlying assets.

I agree that large chunks of the library are no-gos for various reasons, but while you're right that the most value games will get saved for remasters and re-releases, if you look at the PS1 and PSP catalog released so far there have been some big third parties and even big franchises involved. Namco has released Tekken and Ridge Racer games. Capcom has released Resident Evil (though not for ownership.) Disney seems super happy to release Star Wars and Pixar games. Alone in the Dark The New Nightmare, Grandia, Harvest Moon: Back to Nature...there have been some decent games. And if you go back to games licensed during the PS3 era the catalog is even better with stuff like Street Fighter Alpha 3.

I don't know how deep they'll go with this program but non-Sony stuff is definitely possible if there's not a strong reason NOT to put it out. While we haven't seen anything from Activision yet I wouldn't be shocked if some of that stuff shows up, given Microsoft's new PlayStation friendly stance.

Sony owns the Spider-Man license so could we see PS2 era Activision Spider-Man games show up? Probably not. But umm Pitfall: The Lost Expedition is possible. And there was a Wolfenstein game.

I just looked at the list and basically every Activision game from the PS2 era is either licensed or full of licensed music or both (Tony Hawk.) We make fun of Activision for being the COD company now, but it's not like they were putting out a lot of original bangers prior to the COD era. What a horrible era for Activision the PS2 was (though things are slightly better if you include PC.)

@judaspete: Do I remember the Eliza Dushku game in the style of Tarantino? HELL YEAH I DO. Never played it but I remember it well!

I really don't know how to deal with the whole "what Max Payne should have been" thing, though. I mean...Max Payne was amazing for a 6th gen game, at least IMO. Way over a 6/10.

@brian_: Good to see the horny card guys club has each others' backs! I have no idea how anyone could actively dislike Super Mario World. And 3 has cards in it! Multiple cards! Your favorite things! Is there a particular reason? I'd ask if you are just an RPG guy but you seem to have liked the non-RPG and cardless Wet...

@chamurai: The library will at best be a smattering. They add like 3 games per month across 3 platforms with enormous libraries so while you may occasionally see something cool pop up it's not going to cover much of the PS2 library. And that's without even getting into how many games have licensing issues that make their reissue economically impossible.

@av_gamer: The PS2 library is incredible. There's a TON of trash too, of course, but so many classics.

@csl316: I think the biggest reason there wasn't full backwards compatibility, besides Sony wanting to resell you the same games over and over (though it DOES have PS4 backwards compatibility and they're still reselling those) is the PS3. The Cell processor was very powerful but it's proved very difficult to emulate well enough to release official emulation. But yes PlayStation has arguably the best back catalog in gaming history, though Nintendo's highs are arguably better.

I hope the new PS2 emulator can smooth out frame rates. Xbox did it with their 360 emulator on Xbox One so you'd think that a PS2 emulator on PS5 could handle it! But yeah some of the frame rates can be a bit rough. We will get a resolution buff at least!

@ben_h: I do disagree with your overarching point but for different reasons than you've articulated (most of what you articulated in the body of your message I agree with to some degree or another, though not fully.)

Part of my disagreement is based on anecdotal experiences and part on data/logic.

Anecdotally, the kid I probably have the most contact with right now (that sounds bad; he's just my friend's kid so I see/talk to him when I'm around my friend) is obsessed with Mario. His parents don't know exactly how this happened but they think it was the Youtube algorithm. It definitely happened well before he got a Switch. Mario also led him down a path to Sonic and then, when he got a Switch, to Animal Crossing. He talks about these games with his friends at school etc... So I think most kids ARE aware that other games exist.

Other kids I'm familiar with have parents who are gamers (much more common now than when we were sprogs) or have seen the Mario movie or whatever. Gaming is mainstream and the idea that kids don't know it exists outside of what Youtube serves them is wrong. Hell even Fortnite itself has gaming crossovers. There isn't this huge discoverability problem. I can't think of a single kid/parent I know where the kid isn't aware of other games even if s/he doesn't play them.

There are lots of stories of dads and uncles trying to get kids to try other games and being rebuffed because the kids don't want to play other stuff. When my Madden loving buddy says he can't get his kids to play with him because they want to play Roblox it's not because they don't know that Madden exists. It may be because they think Madden is an uncool dad thing, but that's a different issue.

Now to get into more data/logic. Most kids who are playing these games are doing so on platforms that are invested in getting them to play numerous games. The Switch/PS5/whatever. Even if you're on PC the Epic launcher is constantly trying to get you to download and play more than JUST Fortnite. If you're playing these games you're exposed to advertising and media about other games on the dashboard of the device you're playing on and being given opportunities to play them in the form of trials or demos at the very least.

These companies also have invested a LOT of money in trying to get kids into their ecosystems. Youtube's whole purpose is to get people to watch ads and these game companies buy ads on Youtube. There are all kinds of avenues where these companies are trying to get attention.

I'd also add that as I said a lot of the players of Fortnite etc... AREN'T kids. They are people in their 20s or even 30s who grew up in a more diverse gaming environment and know about all kinds of games. They've chosen Fortnite etc... and there are reasons for it. Even games reviewers admit they love it.

Now do I think this is because Fortnite is the best game? No. I don't play it. But rather than other games not being put in front of kids I think what we're seeing here is more of a network effect. The same way that when we were kids there tended to be system clusters in schools and neighborhoods (one group was a Nintendo group one was a Sega group) because you played what the people around you played, and we saw the same in genres too. If you were in a school where everyone played fighting games you were much more likely to get into them than if you weren't. Same with Pokemon.

I think that kids are playing what their friends and the people around them are playing and Fortnite is just easy. It's also free for parents, at least outside of skins. There are lots of things pushing kids towards these games. But at the heart of them there's the fact that they're very good games (even Roblox on some level.) That's why they won the live service wars and pulled a bunch of adult gamers in.

With two AEW stars doing incredibly stupid spots that were very likely to cause injury (one not even on an AEW show) and subsequently breaking their legs doing those idiotic spots maybe someone should tell them to stop doing incredibly stupid stuff.

It's one thing when a wrestler gets injured because of terrible luck or a botch or whatever. That's part of the business. But at a certain point it stops being wrestling as an art form and you're just watching people take risks in an Evel Knievel type way, with similar results.