So I’m assuming quadruple A is going to be a game from a large study thats recently been bought by a giant corporation and fucked with everything despite not knowing video games.
So yeah, that’s pretty much what AAAA means, although some end up decent
At the end of the day, I see cheats as essentially just mods for games. A cheat enables you to do something with the software that you couldn’t before. If everyone has equal access to the mods and agrees at the outset, then who cares? But if you’re the only one in the lobby cheating then you’re probably a jerk who puts their enjoyment ahead of others’.
If you’re playing by yourself, hack away. Enjoy yourself. You should be allowed to have the maximum amount of fun with your toy.
If you’re playing with other people, especially against other people, it’s super unsporting. Everyone should have a level playing field.
Gamers with disabilities opens up sort of a morally gray area. Like, if you only have one hand you’ll have a hard time aiming and shooting at the same time. I could see why someone would be tempted to use an aimbot.
As far as why cheating seems so prevalent, I place the blame largely with the F2P model. Now, I’m not saying that people aren’t cheating in other games. But if the consequences of getting banned for cheating is that you just have to make a new free account, then you could argue that there aren’t really significant consequences to getting caught. There’s money to be made by cheat vendors on massively popular games, so the free ones make sense to target because the costs are low.
Worth mentioning: just because you think someone is cheating doesn’t necessarily mean they are. I’ve never cheated in a competitive game but I’ve been called a hacker by poor losers. If you’re looking for a cheater, you’ll likely confirm your biases and find one - whether or not someone was actually cheating.
I would say I really enjoyed Sony’s games the last few years but they also don’t seem to be able to tell their non-creatives to STFU and are damaging their games recently so I’m inclined to agree.
Oh sweet summer child. Capcom is on a very sharp edge imo.
Their games are solid, but everything around it is utter god damn dogshit.
Sf5? Beta was very solid, was fucked up before release. Also had a terrible microtransactions system.
Sf6? Very very solid base game, but to get all character and stages since last year + the game you have to pay +160 euro.
Re4? Very solid remake, but prepare to loose performance on pc due to dunovo despite it being a single player game.
Re: the village? Very solid game, but better pay shit up and also loose performance despite ALSO being a single player game.
Megaman: mega who?
Monster hunter : safe, for now. Monster hunter wilds looks amazing and loads of fun, but watch them fuck it up somehow…
I like capcom a lot, have always supported them despite shit decisions and a few near bankruptcies but its the microtransactions/usage of dunovo and other weird ass decisions is making me hold back on buying their stuff atm…
I seem to remember MS claiming they were opening the “first AAAA dev studio” (The Initiative). Since then, the studio has been radio silent, lost a bunch of talent, and needed help from Crystal Dynamics to work on their first game (Perfect Dark reboot).
It originated as a marketing term for Skull and Bones, right?
Realistically, its a corporate buzzword that is supposed to mean that the game delivers an exceptionally high quality experience, graphically, narratively, gameplay wise…
…but what it seems to actually mean is that the budget and manhour count and development calendar time ballooned to far greater than the original plan/estimates due to incompetent management.
At this point, I propose that ‘AAAA’ applies to basically any extremely costly game backed by a huge publisher that owns many development studios, that has been in development for over 4 years before any kind of release, ie, stuck in development hell, execs convinced its going to be a massive hit such that they sunken cost fallacy other games or even other studios out of existence so they can keep funding their uber project.
With a definition like this, Skull and Bones qualifies, so does Concord and Suicide Squad.
Basically… it doesn’t have to be from a grandiose marketing campaign attached to a AAA game, its more about being stuck in development hell and continuously funded to the point of destroying other parts of the business making it, like a financial cancer.
Well you won’t believe what I did then: I’m also trans and am too versatile with my typing to get any use off of any autocorrect (that is what you meant, right?)
Yes, yes it is. The term coined by the Ubishit CEO trying to cover his own ass by claiming that Skull and Bones took so much time and money to make, and was being sold for higher than $60 (while still being a pile of shit) by saying it was a “AAAA game” and the term stuck. I mean, it’s own very first use was to describe a terrible AAA game. It’s only natural.
Oh hey, I forgot about that game’s existence until now. It’s name is so generic I used to accidentally call it Sea of Thieves, cause that’s a more memorable name. Also a more memorable game.
I think it’s likely a combination of bots made to generate “engagement” and bots trying to establish themselves as actual users so it becomes harder to spot them pushing a scam later. Content creators may pay for bots to comment to help their videos get promoted, or an enterprising individual may make a bot army to comment on a specific video and try to then sell their engagement services when that video does better. YouTube also has an algorithm for banning/shadow banning accounts pushing scams, leaving “normal” comments may make it harder for YouTube’s algorithm to spot these people.
kbin.life
Oldest