Key Sharkz

This is an issue I see all the time; people complaining that you can't live off of minimum wage and we should raise it to where people can realistically live off of. As I write this, the minimum wage in my home state is being raised to $9.00 an hour and the cost of living estimate is around $13 an hour or so. Now many people say this is a problem we should focus on and get minimum wage higher so people can actually live, well the problem though is it's not that simple. Now keep in mind, I went to school with a lot of business classes and I was forced to learn how economics and business work.
 
The big issue is actually not minimum wage not being high enough, it's that companies are very lightly regulated. Raising minimum wage just makes companies see that people have more money and thus charge more, which then brings the value of a dollar down. Raising minimum wage actually just gives people the illusion they are making more money to keep them quiet. And in turn, the more it happens, the lower the value of a dollar becomes, and thus actually brings America closer and closer to becoming a third world country. Within time, the US dollar will be one of the most worthless pieces of currency on the planet, considering it has already lost so much value as it is, this really shouldn't be an issue to anyone.
 
What needs to happen is something we all don't want to think about: the end of the free market as we know it. Now that is not to say we need to establish socialism or even completely abolish the free market, but we do need to put more regulations on it. We need to  make it so that businesses can not just all agree to charge X amount to force the value of products up so consumers have no choice but to pay that much. We need to end illegal business arrangements like this, because they are actually legal forms of trusts, loopholes in the system if you will. Most of us probably see this kind of thing with our internet service provider. I am sure many of you have had this happen:
 
You call up to get an ISP. You search the area, but you can only find one that services your area, despite seeing another is relatively close by. You ask yourself, why won't Verizon service my side of the street, but they will service the other? Why must I get Comcast instead? The answer is simple: the two business have an agreement to not step on each other's toes, and thus they can both get away with charging whatever they live because there really is no actual competition.
 
The issue is further hurt by people who work minimum wage jobs demanding more pay. While in its base idea it makes sense, the problem is their demands become too high. They make people lose interest in even taking the issue seriously because they are making outrageous demands (such as fast food workers demanding $18 an hour back in my home state). The truth is we need to give these people enough to live on, yes but we can't be charging more than skilled labor. People who go to college need to get paid enough to actually make going to college worth the investment. We have a lot of people who will not try to get into skilled labor positions because the cost of getting into them is far too high with low chance of payout. The issue stems from the fact that many of us are blind to what the real problem is, which is not that minimum wage is too low, but that companies are charging more and more for products that do not cost them that much to produce.

That's what I am suggesting, laws regulating businesses raising prices right after wage raises. Laws making it so businesses can only legally make a maximum percentage of profit off of a sale. For example, when they sell you say a soda, if they are making a 500% profit on it, then that is unfair to the consumer. We should cap profits that can legally be made off of certain products. Technology is where it gets exceptionally bad though. Apple can make an iPhone for $200 and then turn around and charge $650+.
 
As far as families though, that is why we should switch to COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) where people are paid based upon their needs. However if we ARE to implement that though, we need to be able to revoke COLA if we find out people are NOT spending their money on their families. If I am a business owner and I need to pay you $16 an hour because you have 2 kids, and I find out you are not paying child support, then I am not going to want to give you the extra money just to throw it in your pocket.
 
The other issue is we need a max cap. People on their taxes these days are claiming WAAAAAY more dependents than they should be to get more money. I'm sorry, but if you have 10 dependents someone needs to step in and say you're on your own because you keep taking people in or having children.
 
As much as we need to regulate businesses, we need to regulate average Joe too. Let's be honest: average Joe is far from innocent in gaming in the system. On top of this, more extreme regulations on government services need to happen. In my home state they FINALLY passed a law that you need to pass a drug test to apply for welfare and if you fail it, then you go to jail for trying to fraud the government. I think that isn't extreme enough though. We need to determine first if a person needs to be permanently supported by the government (such as permanent disability) or they just need assistance. Then if they have been deemed temporary we need to take some measures to ensure it's temporary:
 
1. They must be required to apply for jobs that they are ACTUALLY qualified for. This is a big one, many people end up staying on unemployment and welfare by purposely applying to jobs they know they will not get. Right now so long as you turn in one application within a certain time frame, you can keep collecting. We need to get to a point where it's like "Okay, after you've spent X amount of time looking for a job with no luck, we have a person that will find jobs and send them to you for you to fill out applications." A person who researches the person's background, skills, etc. to ensure they are applying for jobs only that they have a chance of getting.
 
2. Random drug tests. It's not enough to give them a drug test before applying. Many people know that if you stop doing drugs around a week or two before a urine test, you will pass it. Not to mention many of them can fool urine tests. It's not really that hard to sneak in a bag of urine. I remember being drug tested for jobs, and they don't exactly pat you down, they just tell you to empty your pockets. It's not exactly hard to say hide it in your underwear, or even for some people (who I still will not understand) stick it up their anus. A random drug test makes it harder and harder to fool. Not everyone is going to have fresh urine ready to utilize for fooling a test. They show up at your house and they follow you in, and you don't have time to go to the bedroom to find your stash. I know it sounds extreme, but we have a LOT of drug addicts who have no interest in finding a job living off of our tax money.
 
3. Stricter punishments for frauding the system. Jail time. Serious jail time.
 
4. Never ever ever let them use cash or obtain cash. All the money for any government service should be on a card, and furthermore that card should require a valid ID with it, and all stores by law should not be allowed to accept it without said ID. I can't tell you how many times people use food stamp cards at a store I worked at who not only didn't have an ID or match the person on the card, but that I KNEW were frauding the system, but we weren't allowed to say anything about it. I am proposing something even MORE extreme though: a database for said cards where any expense on them can be looked up, and more extreme still, by the public. I know some may think that is insane, but my logic is that these people are using the tax payers money. The tax payers should not only see where their money is going, but you will save a LOT of money in hiring people to check for fraud if you let the people who are actually paying check for you. Some may see it as an invasion of privacy, but really you're not spending your own money. You're spending someone else's money. You have no privacy with that money. Not having said privacy will discourage people from wanting to live off of benefits. We need to make it harder to fraud the system, much much harder. People are getting more and more clever on how to cheat the system, and we need to be ready to take the extremes necessary to combat that.
 
 
 
While I can not comment on the lazy factor, I can say that companies that are being "hurt" by the internet and new technology are trying to find ways to nickel and dime the consumer instead of adapting. That's the big issue, so many companies are refusing to adapt to the new world and because of it, they are trying to bleed everyone dry.

Necropost, sorry:
 
That is not necessarily true. The game is being made on DirectX 11 and on Unreal 4, both things that work quite well on the PC. It's not far fetched to say that they could squeeze in a PC port without having to delay the game too much. Plus at this point we have been given no release date despite how long it's been in production, I don't think delaying it silently will really harm it anymore.
 
We don't even have a release date after all this time, so getting your hopes up for any release anytime soon is kind of pointless.

Except money. Let's be blunt: In Japan the Xbox One's market is non-existent. That is a good portion of the people who are going to buy this game, and in the US it's barely doing that well. It's install base is almost half of the PS4's and Xbox loyalists (I.e. people who only play on Xbox) have never had a Kingdom Hearts Game, so it makes little point to port one of the later installments onto their system when they haven't had any of the previous games. From a marketing standpoint it makes no sense to release 2.8 on the Xbox One:
 
The system is not selling. It's loyalists have never played any of the previous games. It makes no sense to release the final chapter prologue and not the other 2 collections. I would say they have every reason not to do it. Money is the greatest motivator and the money isn't there.

I want Kairi to have a bigger role, not for the sake of equality, but because they have pointed out how important she is for so long and she has done little more than be the damsel in distress. She could be a badass party member or co-op character.

I want Kairi to have a bigger role, not for the sake of equality, but because they have pointed out how important she is for so long and she has done little more than be the damsel in distress. She could be a badass party member or co-op character.

My sincere opinion: I think they're doing great by letting go of the PS3/XB360 systems. Those times are gone, and it's time to move on.

If that's the case then it just confirms a smartphone with Nintendo capabilities. If I need a new phone at that point, sure, but if not it's a platform I'll pass on. The smartphone game market just... It's not "the future" like everyone thinks it is. It's just a market that is currently being exploited because casual gamers have a lot of access to it. It's never going to replace consoles or other dedicated gaming platforms.

If that's the case then it just confirms a smartphone with Nintendo capabilities. If I need a new phone at that point, sure, but if not it's a platform I'll pass on. The smartphone game market just... It's not "the future" like everyone thinks it is. It's just a market that is currently being exploited because casual gamers have a lot of access to it. It's never going to replace consoles or other dedicated gaming platforms.

If that's the case then it just confirms a smartphone with Nintendo capabilities. If I need a new phone at that point, sure, but if not it's a platform I'll pass on. The smartphone game market just... It's not "the future" like everyone thinks it is. It's just a market that is currently being exploited because casual gamers have a lot of access to it. It's never going to replace consoles or other dedicated gaming platforms.

In order to give people a visual idea of Konami's vision of the future, I have prepared this visual aid. Behold the future!
 

This is an issue I see all the time; people complaining that you can't live off of minimum wage and we should raise it to where people can realistically live off of. As I write this, the minimum wage in my home state is being raised to $9.00 an hour and the cost of living estimate is around $13 an hour or so. Now many people say this is a problem we should focus on and get minimum wage higher so people can actually live, well the problem though is it's not that simple. Now keep in mind, I went to school with a lot of business classes and I was forced to learn how economics and business work.
 
The big issue is actually not minimum wage not being high enough, it's that companies are very lightly regulated. Raising minimum wage just makes companies see that people have more money and thus charge more, which then brings the value of a dollar down. Raising minimum wage actually just gives people the illusion they are making more money to keep them quiet. And in turn, the more it happens, the lower the value of a dollar becomes, and thus actually brings America closer and closer to becoming a third world country. Within time, the US dollar will be one of the most worthless pieces of currency on the planet, considering it has already lost so much value as it is, this really shouldn't be an issue to anyone.
 
What needs to happen is something we all don't want to think about: the end of the free market as we know it. Now that is not to say we need to establish socialism or even completely abolish the free market, but we do need to put more regulations on it. We need to  make it so that businesses can not just all agree to charge X amount to force the value of products up so consumers have no choice but to pay that much. We need to end illegal business arrangements like this, because they are actually legal forms of trusts, loopholes in the system if you will. Most of us probably see this kind of thing with our internet service provider. I am sure many of you have had this happen:
 
You call up to get an ISP. You search the area, but you can only find one that services your area, despite seeing another is relatively close by. You ask yourself, why won't Verizon service my side of the street, but they will service the other? Why must I get Comcast instead? The answer is simple: the two business have an agreement to not step on each other's toes, and thus they can both get away with charging whatever they live because there really is no actual competition.
 
The issue is further hurt by people who work minimum wage jobs demanding more pay. While in its base idea it makes sense, the problem is their demands become too high. They make people lose interest in even taking the issue seriously because they are making outrageous demands (such as fast food workers demanding $18 an hour back in my home state). The truth is we need to give these people enough to live on, yes but we can't be charging more than skilled labor. People who go to college need to get paid enough to actually make going to college worth the investment. We have a lot of people who will not try to get into skilled labor positions because the cost of getting into them is far too high with low chance of payout. The issue stems from the fact that many of us are blind to what the real problem is, which is not that minimum wage is too low, but that companies are charging more and more for products that do not cost them that much to produce.

This is an issue I see all the time; people complaining that you can't live off of minimum wage and we should raise it to where people can realistically live off of. As I write this, the minimum wage in my home state is being raised to $9.00 an hour and the cost of living estimate is around $13 an hour or so. Now many people say this is a problem we should focus on and get minimum wage higher so people can actually live, well the problem though is it's not that simple. Now keep in mind, I went to school with a lot of business classes and I was forced to learn how economics and business work.
 
The big issue is actually not minimum wage not being high enough, it's that companies are very lightly regulated. Raising minimum wage just makes companies see that people have more money and thus charge more, which then brings the value of a dollar down. Raising minimum wage actually just gives people the illusion they are making more money to keep them quiet. And in turn, the more it happens, the lower the value of a dollar becomes, and thus actually brings America closer and closer to becoming a third world country. Within time, the US dollar will be one of the most worthless pieces of currency on the planet, considering it has already lost so much value as it is, this really shouldn't be an issue to anyone.
 
What needs to happen is something we all don't want to think about: the end of the free market as we know it. Now that is not to say we need to establish socialism or even completely abolish the free market, but we do need to put more regulations on it. We need to  make it so that businesses can not just all agree to charge X amount to force the value of products up so consumers have no choice but to pay that much. We need to end illegal business arrangements like this, because they are actually legal forms of trusts, loopholes in the system if you will. Most of us probably see this kind of thing with our internet service provider. I am sure many of you have had this happen:
 
You call up to get an ISP. You search the area, but you can only find one that services your area, despite seeing another is relatively close by. You ask yourself, why won't Verizon service my side of the street, but they will service the other? Why must I get Comcast instead? The answer is simple: the two business have an agreement to not step on each other's toes, and thus they can both get away with charging whatever they live because there really is no actual competition.
 
The issue is further hurt by people who work minimum wage jobs demanding more pay. While in its base idea it makes sense, the problem is their demands become too high. They make people lose interest in even taking the issue seriously because they are making outrageous demands (such as fast food workers demanding $18 an hour back in my home state). The truth is we need to give these people enough to live on, yes but we can't be charging more than skilled labor. People who go to college need to get paid enough to actually make going to college worth the investment. We have a lot of people who will not try to get into skilled labor positions because the cost of getting into them is far too high with low chance of payout. The issue stems from the fact that many of us are blind to what the real problem is, which is not that minimum wage is too low, but that companies are charging more and more for products that do not cost them that much to produce.

In order to give people a visual idea of Konami's vision of the future, I have prepared this visual aid. Behold the future!
 

In order to give people a visual idea of Konami's vision of the future, I have prepared this visual aid. Behold the future!
 

In order to give people a visual idea of Konami's vision of the future, I have prepared this visual aid. Behold the future!
 

In order to give people a visual idea of Konami's vision of the future, I have prepared this visual aid. Behold the future!
 

I feel like saying you're pursuing mobile games aggressively is kind of an oxymoron. That's basically like saying you are going for the hardcore casual market.

In order to give people a visual idea of Konami's vision of the future, I have prepared this visual aid. Behold the future!
 

Konami has seen the future of gaming! And the future is pointless time killer games that are specifically designed to be unfun and painful on your wallet to progress anywhere past the early stages in a timely fashion!
 
And God saw and it was good.

Not surprising to me, a lot of devs are starting to fear the risks of making AAA titles on major platforms because their attempts to profit off of crap tactics are starting to get caught onto by consumers. Instead of just developing great content to get sales, devs have moved to trying to figure out how to nickel and dime consumers by not including content so they can sell later in micro-transactions and DLC. Now that people are catching onto that, devs don't want to do the work of developing great games because it's too "risky". Too many companies are afraid to take chances now, and so a lot of them are seeking the easy way out.
 
I honestly feel no sympathy for Konami and hope this blows up in their face.  I hope when enough of these major companies belly up because they keep trying to play the "safe" game that it will tell others out there you NEED to take risks in the entertainment business and that you can't just keep a grip on your audience without delivering quality content. Stop trying to just rip your customers off with stupid crap and start giving them quality products to make them want to keep buying. Konami is far from innocent to the whole "let's make a quick buck" strategy with microtransaction Fatalities in Mortal Kombat X, and the $50 "demo" of MGS5 so I don't really feel sorry that they are starting to feel the heat. Make quality products and I will buy them. Make unfinished products that you expect me to pay to get the rest, and I won't buy them. I passed on Resident Evil Revelations 2 despite really loving the first game because of all the microtransactions. I am not about to give you another chunk of money to get a "completed" version of the game when I already bought the season pass to get the whole game. What's more irritating is that season passes don't mean anything anymore either, you don't even always get all the DLC, and the GotY editions are starting to do it too (hello, Borderlands 2).
 
Square I feel right now is one of the few companies who have learned from their mistakes. FFXV, they are switching to more action RPG mechanics after much fan demands. They are finally making KH3 and they are being smart about it and not just rushing it out. And their release of Life is Strange was a great idea of how to handle games these days. While I hate DLC, the idea of being able to try a little of the game (for a fraction of the price) to see if you like it before buying it is a great idea, and while they're not the first to do it, it's a smart business decision. On top of this, it gives them extra time to polish parts of the game.
 
Capcom and Konami however seem to constantly look their consumers in the face and say "yeah, we're just going to rip you off and not give a crap."

I also see the issue with mobile games in that they are INCREDIBLY temporary. In 5 years from now if the game is no longer on the app store it becomes harder and harder to get a hold of it, on top of the fact that they do not work properly on newer versions of mobile OSes. Basically in 5 years, if the game is not updated it's gone forever. It's not like with console games where I can get the hardware off of ebay, or I can just save my hardware from when I bought it and keep the game on my shelf. For a mobile game, unless I plan on keeping an ancient phone and keep it operational, I may lose access to that game.
 
Not to mention that mobile devices have a rather short life span and fairly poor durability.

Killing off their reputation as a AAA developer, obviously.

Killing off their reputation as a AAA developer, obviously.

In order to give people a visual idea of Konami's vision of the future, I have prepared this visual aid. Behold the future!