This was a super weak article. Examples of direction from Miyamoto came in the form of two dialogue lines in the beginning of the game. I don’t even remember them.
I’m not surprised. The beginning of the interview started with a question about a statement made in 2015 that P4 was almost complete. The answer to why that was said at the time was completely lacking. A boring article for sure.
The great thing about the Yakuza/LAD games is that they could put almost any kind of mini-game in them and it just works, even if it shouldn't. Like I'm not even sure if this is the weirdest mini-game that has been in one of these.
Starfield only getting one nomination–and in a category it has no chance of winning–is not at all what I would have expected going into this year.
I don’t know if that speaks to how nuts this year has been for new releases or to how much Starfield fell short, in light of the fact that its player counts on Steam are starting to fall below Skyrim.
To be perfectly fair, Skyrim has a decade of sales and mods in its favor when it comes to Steam numbers, and whether or not Starfield has fallen short by any metric, the things that it does were more novel when Skyrim did a lot of the same stuff 12 years ago.
Starfield player counts will go way up once the modkit is released. Every single one of those people playing Skyrim on Steam have modded it out the wazoo.
They might go up but I’d be surprised it will rival Skyrim. I’m a Skyrim fan, yet I’m not enticed to play Starfield for reasons beyond me. It feels like it’s lacking something and I can’t put my finger on it. I don’t believe mods would make much of a difference, but who knows, maybe I’m wrong.
I modded Skyrim (and Oblivion) because the vanilla game was exciting already, in spite of its flaws. I couldn’t be bothered otherwise.
Depth is what Starfield is lacking, imo. It fixes a lot of what both skyrim and f4 did wrong (there’re backgrounds, they affect your skills, and they come up from time to time, to mention one), but they regressed so hard on other things. They tried new stuff but the delivery was so limp dicked that everything landed awkwardly, or not at all. Think the game suffered because of scope creep, honestly, if they had limited the game to just a handful of planets, they could’ve tailored the experience and they wouldn’t feel so empty.
And as always, their obsession to let you do everything in one playthrough hurt the game hard. There’s very little reason to go for a second playthrough.
Like, they did a good job with most of the game’s mechanics, but everything else is mid as hell. Very forgettable.
For me, it’s the vast expanses of procedurally generated nothingness in Starfield that turns me off the most, especially combined with the menu-based fast travel heavy way you get around.
The magic of Bethesda games comes from their handcrafted open worlds, always full of things to see and explore and get sidetracked by. Its the feeling that kicks in when the horizon first opens up after you exit the sewer/vault/customs office and you realize that you can just pick a direction and start walking and you’ll come across something interesting.
Starfield doesn’t do that. You can’t just pick a direction and go, it’s all fast travel. And if you’re down on a planet you can, but there is no magic to be found because it’s all procedurally generated emptiness between copy-pasted points of interest.
In their ambitions to have a bigger scope than ever they sacrificed the very thing that made their games so compelling to begin with.
And if you’re down on a planet you can, but there is no magic to be found because it’s all procedurally generated emptiness between copy-pasted points of interest.
I think the perfect example of this are the caves that show up sometimes.
First time I found one, I thought “neat, I wonder what’s in there.” So I go exploring and find out that… nothing. Nothing is in there. It’s just an empty cave. So I find a second one, hoping that was a fluke and again… nothing.
The procedurally generated content is severely lacking in a reason for even existing.Nothing is worth exploring in Starfield because there’s just nothing there.
This is exactly my thought. In Skyrim, every tree stump looked like it had the benefit of a beauty pass by an artist. In Starfield, it’s very clear that most of the ground was never looked at before I got there, and there’s no reason for me to look at it now
I don’t think starfield does anything worth giving it an award for. You should give awards to things that do something unique or took a risk. Starfield is a very safe game that didn’t really do anything unique or risky. They just made Skyrim in space.
The space elements were a big part of the marketing. I knew better than to expect atmospheric flight or anything but simple space combat, but intra-system travel being only done in menus and the space sections being put in small lightboxes with planet renderings was rather shocking. That’s 20th-century stuff. It’s especially bizarre given how much of the Bethesda magic has leaned on roads in the past, and there aren’t any roads outside of cities. Even the cargo runs are 100% in menus, without talking to a single person.
Frankly Starfield didn’t even deserve the nomination. It didn’t do anything unique or deserving of merit beyond just existing. I tried it, and while it has some interesting parts it’s just shallow and bland. The lore had huge potential but got Swiss-cheesed by the game mechanics and wasn’t developed at all - in what was supposed to be a Bethesda RPG. They need to yeet Todd and bring back the Obsidian folks.
I only played totk and wonder at the moment but I think every entry on the list would be justified to win it. With the amount of great games we had this year, it’s already impressive to be on the list.
I’m shocked that RE4 got a GotY nomination. I thought there were rules against remakes or remasters getting Game Awards nominations; am I wrong, or did that change at some point?
Honestly, I had forgotten that some of these games had come out this year. It just feels like there's been so many in 2023. Also pleasantly surprised to see People Make Games get nominated for Content Creator of the Year. I don't think they'll win but it is nice to see their documentaries/ deep dive investigations receive some recognition.
Dave the Diver shouldn’t be categorized as an indie game
Dave the Diver is developed by Mintrocket. Mintrocket is not an indie company, it is not acquired by Nexon, it’s actually a sub-brand / division by Nexon. It is a sub-division of a giant company.
There are many indie devs that rely on being nominated to Indie category awards, for exposure, for the ability to stay afloat in business. What Dave the Diver is doing, is to take over a slot that might be the make / break event for smaller indie companies.
Think about the reason why there are specialized bundles for indie games, why people retweet / share info for indie exposure.
If Ubisoft were to spin-off a sub division to make Child of Light, would we have labeled Child of Light as indie (not some weird AAA indie game)?
If ALDI came into United States and spun off smaller mom-and-pop / bodega looking shops to compete with local mom-and-pop stores, do you still consider this spinoff as a local shop that need local support?
If your government creates a grant to fund small local companies, and a giant MNC spun off its brand to compete for the grant, are we even still in this discussion?
Dave the Diver should be competing in other categories, just not in indies.
Also Nexon is scummy kinda like EA of Korea, shutting down games abruptly, fined for loot box exploitations, they have market cap of $17B.
Q. '데이브 더 다이버’가 순수하게 개발로만 흥행한 것인지에 대해 의문이 있다. 한 인디 개발자들은 넥슨이 인디 시장까지 침범하는 것이 맞는가? 하는 목소리도 있다. 그에 대한 짧은 소감을 부탁한다.
Q. There are questions as to whether ‘Dave the Diver’ was a success purely due to development. One indie developer said, “Is it true that Nexon is invading the indie market?” There are also voices saying: Please give your brief thoughts about it.
황재호: 딱 잘라 말하면 우리 게임은 인디 게임이 아니다. 인디는 우리보다 더 적은 리소스에서 더 힘들게 개발하는 개발자들을 존경한다. 해외에서 GJA 인디게임 후보에 올라간 것이 있다. 해외에서 보는 정의가 조금 다른 것 같다. 넥슨의 압도적인 지원을 받는 것과는 다르게, 우리에게 자율권을 준 것이다.
Jaeho Hwang: To put it simply, our game is not an indie game. Indie respects developers who work harder and with fewer resources than we do. There is a GJA indie game candidate from overseas. It seems that the definition seen overseas is a little different. Unlike receiving overwhelming support from Nexon, they gave us autonomy.
While I agree at heart, the term indie sucks for this reason exactly. It fits the definition and most indie games you’d find wouldn’t actually fit the definition.
Honestly, there should be weight classes for awards like this. Best game under $20 full price or over $50 for each category. Sure, BG3 is a masterpiece, but it also had $100 million investor cash up front. Comparing the score from BG3 to whatever Danny B is working on right now isn’t a fair comparison, and my dude deserves more awards
While I have loved the innovation of Sony over the years, this one is a little odd. If Sony had thought about this, they would have realised that most people these days already have a viable handheld device, a smartphone. Microsoft got that one right by making remote play work so well on most mobile devices with connection to a pad. I just feel Sony should have done the same.
That said, I get there are some benefits if you have a shared screen and cannot always get on your PS5 but is that worth the money? I am not too sure.
Still, this is the early days and Sony will likely have a bigger vision for it. I mean, being able to connect to any network and play games remotely would be a huge step.
I got mine today, and whilst the layout takes a small amount of time to get used to, I find it pretty intuitive and easy to use. Obviously it’s not for everyone, but as someone who regularly loses the battle for the TV, this is hands-down a great purchase for me. Otherwise I’d have to use my phone, which is annoying as I have to disconnect my controller and connect it to my phone, and the screen is too small, or my laptop which is a bit too cumbersome. The Portal hits the sweet spot for me, it may not be for everyone, but I’m part of that niche that will use it regularly.
EDIT: My other gripe is the lack of being able to play through the cloud - I hope this is something to be added in the future as it’s literally just a WiFi controller with a screen.
The problem with the Wii U wasn’t the concept. It was the execution. The idea of a portable handheld console is a sound one, it’s just not a universal need. Making your console dependent on a niche feature and only having like 2 exclusive launch titles and bunch of third party ports is not going to compel people to buy a whole new console, especially when everyone and their grandma already owns your previous console that had hundreds of games available on it. I bought one with my brother mostly so I could play Breath of the Wild when it was impossible to buy a market price Switch. It’s perfectly fine as a console and I used the portable mode on occasion. It just doesn’t have a lot of other reasons to exist.
I recently got the G Cloud for the same reason. I’m sitting in the same room as my playstation, not allowed to exist in the other room all night or my wife feels like I’m mad at her, and don’t always want to sit and binge tv with her. Now I can us PSPlay and Steam Link to play games from my PS5 and gaming PC while sitting on the living room with her. It’s not as nice an experience as playing on a full sized screen with a lighter controller and no occasional connectivity issues, but it beats not being able to play at all. Been using it all the time.
gameinformer.com
Najstarsze