Jim Sterling / James "Stephanie" Sterling / James Stanton/Sexton & in memoriam TotalBiscuit (John Bain) - One Gaming Lolcow Thread

Id reply/quote Oliver, but either he has me blocked or somethings twitchy
Long messages can't be quoted in full.

On topic: I'm genuinely stunned Jim didn't sperg about Trump in his latest video. Every other Nintendo slop consoomer has either been defending the price hike or blaming drumpf and his evil regime.
 
It happened again. But with a caveat. He's now a C+ YouTuber instead of B+
1000011435.png
 
Id reply/quote Oliver, but either he has me blocked or somethings twitchy.
Not blocked, like @Dumpster dived waifu said my post is too long to quote in full. In future if this happens you can highlight a portion of my post and a little + Quote option will appear, or you can just @ me like I did to DDW (sometimes that's a bit fucky and you need to start typing the name before it appears).
He's now a C+ YouTuber instead of B+
Excellent catch, I'll try to remember to include this in the next Channel Review.
 
He's now a C+ YouTuber instead of B+
Just about managing to claw in 10% of your subs in views is a C+? How the fuck are they working that out? Even if you ignore the whole Jim part, the channel has lost subscribers every single month for literal years and struggles to get the same amount of views as a channel a fraction of it's size. How is that anything other than an F?
 
How is that anything other than an F?

It's graded on a curve and there are a lot of channels that might only get a thousand views per video and some that struggle to get triple digits. Those are the D and F channels. It might take a while, but Jim will get there in time. Even his latest video on Nintendo's game pricing which is both timely and a hot topic hasn't cracked 100k views after nearly a week. We may be getting close to the point where a regular Jimquisition video never gets above 100k views again.
 

Well, here we go.

"EDIT" WOW, he dosent blame the orange man for this one. Jim becomes a bit sane for a bit and just blames the gaining industry being greedy and dumb fans still buying it.
Yeah idk why trump's tariffs are getting the blame for rising costs when its very clearly corporate greed that has no bearing on which color is currently in office. Even just during covid prices almost doubled across the board, and somehow without covid they still havent gone back down what so ever. Mcdonalds, which has had its own shipping industry just for them for YEARS is now outstripping actual small time restaurants in terms of price. Its fucking insane, and its funny that even a complete wackjob troon can see it better than 99% of nintendo retards.
 
It's going to be an unpopular opinion, but I think with people demanding ever grander and realistic games with massive worlds and high customizability, games need to get more expensive. They've been the same price forever, while almost everything else in the world is 4-5 times as expensive as it was then. People pay almost as much for one-time experiences in other forms of entertainment.

I remember a point in time PC games were always cheaper than any console. That didn't last long, either. More than double now, and we can't use the excuse of the cost of physical media because that never changed.
They used to cost more if inflation is taken into account. I paid 80 dollars for Phantasy Star 4 in the 90s which is like 120 in today's money.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: dead76
They used to cost more if inflation is taken into account. I paid 80 dollars for Phantasy Star 4 in the 90s which is like 120 in today's money.
The difficult part of inflation is that not everything inflates equally. So for example, $80 was more expensive when you look at inflation, but money also had more buying power back then. If $100 could buy 2-3 weeks worth of groceries, you can more easily save up for that kind of purchase. But $80 games when $100 in some places won't even cover a week? Tough sell.
 
The difficult part of inflation is that not everything inflates equally. So for example, $80 was more expensive when you look at inflation, but money also had more buying power back then. If $100 could buy 2-3 weeks worth of groceries, you can more easily save up for that kind of purchase. But $80 games when $100 in some places won't even cover a week? Tough sell.
Tougher sell given what games are coming out lately. It's been a solid while since I got any game I'd consider worth 80$.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CheesyBoy
It's going to be an unpopular opinion, but I think with people demanding ever grander and realistic games with massive worlds and high customizability, games need to get more expensive. They've been the same price forever, while almost everything else in the world is 4-5 times as expensive as it was then. People pay almost as much for one-time experiences in other forms of entertainment.

I remember a point in time PC games were always cheaper than any console. That didn't last long, either. More than double now, and we can't use the excuse of the cost of physical media because that never changed.
ok not you in particular but this more and more common take really starts to grind my gears. shit becoming more expensive is not my/the consumer's problem. minimum wage is not increasing. some people are lucky to get 15/hr. the biggest audience for games is children (parents). do you think middle class parents are just going to go "well jimmy really needs a bigger, more detailed world to kill whores in and be told fascism and whi pepole and orange man bad so i understand it going from 50-60-110 (last of us remasters lmfao)"? the price can't be accepted as "well people want """"better"""". if it's too expensive, then make it cheaper. stardew valley was not a megahit due to cutting edge ray tracing bullshit. the average consumer is not going to be able to just go "well meh, i mean i make 15/hr, have to buy food and taxes and bills and stuff, but you know what, i think not only do games need to be made shittier and shittier and entire ips ruined, i think they also need to increase 10 dollars a year across the board because they add nose hair physics and more random light bullshit nobody would notice if was gone and would probably get another 20 fps."

every game does not need to be a tech demo. if you follow that logic, then it creates an infinite cycle that doesn't end. "well games are getting more expensive it's still a good deal at 120 each." and pc games being cheaper than console is concrete fact, you will *not* get games on sale on console like steam, or amazon prime monthly grabs, epic game stores free games etc. majority digital games on consoles are treated like how cods are on steam, full/nearly full friggin price 10+ years later until very specific times. plus full emulation and piracy capability which is free, depending on your moral opinions of that, if you think it's evil then i guess you better really be able to accept them fucking you instead and able to replay something.

personally i'd pick intravenous for 15 bucks over an ac shadows for 70 any day of the week, or atomicrops over south of midnight. i don't expect everyone to be ok with pixel/"old" games, and there's way too many "nah fam bruh cuh that shit too old not look betterer", but if the alternative is infinite pricing over time, then the reality should be locking games down design wise. if every game had to look no greater than skyrim but remained at no more than 60, is that the more sane option or is heading towards 200 per copy?
 
Back