I’ll go counter-current here and say that it was a fun game. IGN review sells it really well, and I had fun while playing it. I’d say the main problem of the game was releasing in a year already full of big-name releases, and a marketing campaign that was too quiet - I’m honestly surprised it cost $40 million, because I only heard of the game by pure chance.
Yeah I will say, it’s painfully generic and I hate the MCU-style humor, but it’s not a bad game per se. It’s just in no way shape or form triple-A, except for looking rather snazzy.
The worst offense to me though is how there’s no magic in the game. Just guns with weird graphics. They managed to not make the magic feel like, well, magic. That’s the big flaw of it to me. Everything else is minor by comparison. Still, not a bad game, just not a good one either. At least for me.
The terms have changed a bit over time, but generally “AAA” now means (in the industry) a large studio makes a game with a large marketing budget. If you think of those games that are published by EA, but made by one of their smaller studios and has a smaller marketing budget, that’s “AA”.
Much like “alpha” and “beta”, the meanings are changing so quickly it’s hard to keep up with what the industry means and what players mean.
I’m so old when I started in games “alpha” meant a feature complete game with a few crash bugs, and beta meant no (25% repro, or whatever the studio chose) crash bugs and all assets added and working.
Now it’s basically “alpha” means a demo, and “beta” means they’re buying time for GM release.
Regarding the alpha/beta point, increase in internet availability and rolling updates probably made all the work in that shift. In the old days if you published a raw product it would take a hell of an effort to amend it. Now it’s just a matter of a user not plugging the internet off for some time ¯_(ツ)_/¯
This started happening when studios got bigger and marketing controlled release dates. By the 2010s or so, the actual devs had zero say. So some idiot owner would promise a game in 18 months, half the ideas would be removed due to time, and a rushed product went out.
“Games as a service” was just corporate speak for how to streamline putting out a game with less components and then adding them over time.
Coming from bg3, I had the opposite opinion. BG3 loading screens take a while but it doesnt load very much unless your loading saves a lot. With Starfield you get hit with a small loading screen constantly like when transitioning in/out of ships, buildings, planets, etc.
For me it’s not the speed, but the quantity. Docking? Loading screen. Launching off planet? Loading screen. Changing planet? Loading screen. Landing on the same planet? Loading screen. The only solution is to fast travel everywhere in an “immersive” space sim RPG. NMS and Elite:Dangerous have solved this issue. Bethesda needs to get with the times already.
I haven’t bought full price games in ages. Games are always released half finished now. Wait six months to a year until it goes on sale and they actually finish the game.
I honestly can’t remember the last time I paid full price for a game. Between free amazon prime games, epic games, gog, and steam demos/freebies: I hardly have time to invest in new games.
I used to buy Madden/NBA2k every year up until 2008 or so, now I grab one every five years at $10. Includes all the bugs from the previous version.
I have 1000s of games now and don’t have any time to play them. BG3 is the only game I’m considering spending $40 for.
I’ll gladly buy indies, breakout titles with huge reception (BG3, E33 etc), or games from well renowned studios that have yet to let me down. Anything else I’m fine waiting for a sale. With these $80 price tags I don’t see myself buying a AAA title again for a LONG time.
CDPR hadn’t let me down. Yet. Ultimately, they redeemed themselves, sure, but at launch… whew, there were issues.
Game companies CAN redeem themselves. Business wise though? Its hard to recoup that kind of shaken faith in investors, board members, etc; let alone the people you’re actually trying to sell to.
There are so MANY fucking games out there these days, that I’ll look at something new, and decide I don’t like certain elements of the gameplay, and just move on.
If a feature looks more frustrating than fun? I’m good, thanks.
I’ve played hard games on the hardest setting for the challenge. I’ve also played “easy” just to get drunk and enjoy a story.
If it isn’t fun though? Then what am I doing here?
I already spend 8+ hours a day on the computer and hate it, but at least they pay me.
yea, but BG3 didn’t release in a complete state. With that said, Larian has delivered on their promise and that’s really a good example of how a AA/AAA title can do early access in a good and healthy way.
servers ain’t free. I know ubisofts are a bunch of pricks but if you run servers indefinitely without generating income you’ll eventually run out of money.
Not every game is an MMO requiring vast server farms. A game like the crew 1 that is past it’s prime is not expensive to keep a few servers running for. It’s a negligible cost.
They could also put in the time to give players the tools to host their own servers, or simply allow offline play. This used to be standard for all PC games. They chose to do neither of these things in an obvious effort to force players towards the sequel or their other games. They should not be permitted to do anti-consumer things like this.
Depends on the game for what point scaling further gets difficult. I think Factorio can do near infinite with the clusterio mod and from a server host perspective it’s very easy to setup. You just need enough servers, the mod allows cross server interaction.
that’s a good point too. however it’s very possible they’re using proprietary code that’s used in other IP. Especially the core game engine, which you’d have to open source too.
It could be but it wouldn’t take long before it’s replicated in a way thats not propriety or just stolen by devs in countries where that means nothing.
They are a giant shitty conglomerate they will find 10,000 reasons
I agree with this, however, I also don’t think they should be allowed to call it purchasing. If you don’t own something, then you didn’t purchase it. The button for games like these should be “long-term rental” or something to that effect.
I’m okay with servers being shut down eventually, my issue is we don’t know when. If they want to call it a license and that it will be revoked later, well fucking plan it out and tell people. Did the game get cheaper as the clock ran down? Did the people buying 10 years of access pay more than people that only got to play it once? I’m pissed for the people like me that sometimes take a few years to get to playing their games only to find the servers are gone and they thought they were buying something (or at least licensing something) they would get to use.
Of course they would probably find that if they told people how long they could use it, a lot of people wouldn’t pay them for it (i.e. their business would fail without intentionally deceiving their customers).
Although ubisoft is a shit company, don’t think it’s the only one. Every game you bought on Steam, Origin and Epic aren’t your property either. You just bought the right to play their game for as long as they allow you to.
If you truly want to own your products, buy on GoG (you will get the offline installer as a download) or pirate. Because when you pirate, you have more rights and benifits than a paying customer.
Companies don’t even care anymore, it’s just a money grab with the newest bug simulator. As soon as the first purchase bubble ended, the project is abandoned and people are stuck with a piece of junk they do not even own.
In the exceptional case a dev truly delivers, like indie studios or Larian studio, the game dev world goes mental as it shows how corrupt and fucked up they are.
Support the few proper devs, pirate the rest. I pirate everything these days and when the game is good I’ll buy it.
I have over 500 games on steam. If the platform dies, that would be a major loss for me.
Honestly, platforms like steam and Netflix made me stop pirating. But with the increasing amount of streaming services, with increasing prices and more and more limitations and loss of rights, loads money grab junk content, I dusted off me old pirate hat. I am a paying usenet user, I automated all my movie and TV show downloads, I pirate games first and only buy them when they are worth it. I use Grayjay to view YouTube, because it has more freedom than a premium user.
I’m happy to pay for stuff which is good, I refuse to pay for junk, limitations and loss of my rights.
DRG Survivors is innovative enough for what it is. More importantly it’s well-made and a fun addition to the world of DRG. Does it reinvent the genre? No, but it does some interesting things with its different challenges so it stays fresh for longer than most bullet heavens.
I’d say it’s time to push the argument that the Library of Congress needs to be piercing games as part of the cultural history of the USA. If the legislative branch won’t abide private efforts then it’s time to make the government do it.
One of the definitions of scoundrel is “A wicked or evil person; someone who dies evil deliberately.” Bounty hunters can be scoundrels too.
If Key was an actual scoundrel it would’ve made the game much more entertaining. The unconfident scrawny teenager Kay is now doesn’t fit in with the outlaw world at all.
I doesn’t really, I know they explained why they made the choice. Dunno if I %100 agree with it but playing the game it doesn’t feel like that big of an issue, for me at least.
My point was more to say that she wasn’t a bounty hunter. A BH might be more aggressive and lean into combat more, where a Scoundrel is going to try to use tricks, smooth talking etc.
I think I had it on my wish list because I was never going to pay full price and then when it came down in price I looked again at it and I just thought nah, I actually don’t care. So I never bought it.
They’re not exactly starting from a solid foundation.
If any game was going to get away with being $80 it’d be something like grand theft auto or one of the next call of duties, not this one. But maybe they’re trailing it on a game that they know will only be moderately successful at best anyway, that way they don’t lose huge amounts of money if it fails to win over players.
I was just flabbergasted that they decided to make all of their perk trees boring and lame. I genuinely don’t remember anything about the characters other than disappointment.
Roland, Mordecai, Brick, Lilith: character design masterpieces. Distinct styles and strengths but not overly limited. Zer0, Salvador, Gage, Axton, Magic Chick 2: great, less type specialized but that’s not a bad thing.
Everyone else? Just walking gun stats. And not particularly fun ones.
Borderlands 3 had some of the best gameplay in any shooter I’ve played, story and difficulty be damned. Tiny Tina’s Wonderlands was back to form, despite its disappointing post-game and 3-room DLCs. The only reason I’m excited for 4 is because the gameplay looks solid and they’ve yet to tell a single joke.
gamesradar.com
Ważne