Yeah that’s a bit confusing, too. And sure, Endwalker brought a Healer and Shadowbringers brought a Tank, but they both also brought DPS, and now it’s a DPS only expansion making queues worse again. They need to do 1-2 expansions of only adding a tank and a healer.
If you’re looking for the real logic behind it, its because the majority of the player base is dps. Every expac has to have a dps as a new class. Otherwise the majority of the player base wont have a new class to play for an expac.
Last expac was healer/dps, one before that tank/dps, and before that dps x2. Its cyclical. So we were “due” for another double dps expac. Obviously the devs and director are free to make whatever decision they want, but this is the logic yoshi/the devs have talked about on their quarterly chats. (To my understanding)
Edit: If you’re looking for sympathy though, yeah i feel it. I always want more tanks. Warrior has always been my favorite and none of the other tanks have tickled my fancy since.
I just want classes with big two handers. All of them being tanks sucks. Sam/drg are just a skinny 2h with big muscles. Drk dps rotation lets me sort of live my fantasy though i suppose
Hardly surprising and it fits the scenario: a relatively small indie dev studio with only small-mid sized games under their belt with leadership deciding to buy into one of the most expensive IP available. Now, not only do they have a publisher looming over their work but are also under serious financial pressure to perform as well as expectation of a huge fan base plus promising a AAA sized game.
The leadership simply bit off far more than they could chew and panic set in, resulting in cut corners everywhere.
End result was a predictable disaster. Could have been avoided with smarter/better leadership. Clearly they didn’t think much of their dev team.
They could give away the game for free for a short boost in players, but they need to do something about the endgame first. Or else they end up in the same position they are in now.
Yet another reason to avoid Activision Blizzard. It’s amazing to me how their corrupt and broken internal culture is apparently widespread throughout the company and their subsidiarys, and no one stopped to be like, “hol’ up, we can’t act like this” while the culture was taking form. So now you end up with people like the article trying to fight against it and getting doors shut in their face.
Also, it should be pretty easy to prove whether or not she resigned voluntarily. The resignation form would either be missing her signature or have a forged signature. Dunno what Activision Blizzard is doing trying to claim she resigned voluntarily.
Edit: I thought Bungie was still owned by Activision.
I had an employer try this on me too. I beat the claim in court by pointing out that people who quit don’t tend to bother showing up on time and ready to work at their next shift. Judge agreed with me. Shortly after I was offered about 80% of my claim as a settlement with the understanding that the taxes on the settlement would be paid by the company. Pretty good deal when I didn’t even have a lawyer ngl
I mean yeah ABK has toxic culture, but Bungie has been with Sony for over a year now (Aug 2022), and Alm was hired just few 2 months before Sony acquisition and the issues followed up until September with false termination.
What’s wrong with what I wrote? A football simulation that’s trying to accurately reflect players’ skills for men, gives an unrealistically boosted skills to women players. Why?
Because what does it even matter? We should be encouraging women’s football to continue to grow, part of that is making sure it’s fun to play in games as well as competitive on the pitch.
It’s come so far in recent years, and when we’re talking about a game which is designed primarily for fun, being unhappy that women’s stats aren’t an apples and apples comparison to the men’s stats is just silly.
It says that you have an issue with the women’s game being treated in the same way as the men’s game. Video games are designed for fun, not for simulation, and there are plenty of good reasons to have women be comparable with men in a computer game.
You’d have been upset when Tony hawk games had women skaters that could ollie as high as the men too huh? Or got upset when Chun Li won in street fighter games?
You’re stating your subjective opinions about topics unrelated to the game and comparing a simulation game to some unrelated arcade games.
It says that you have an issue with the women’s game being treated in the same way as the men’s game.
This is the exact opposite of what I’m saying. Men’s stats have been reflected with due diligence while women’s stats have been artificially upscaled - how is that being treated the same way?
If a core system of the game “doesn’t matter” to you then why do you even play the game?
I don’t think he’s wrong. AAA game prices have been basically the same for 20+ years, while the cost of making games has only gone up. I think this is why a lot of publishers push for progressively more aggressive microtransactions, which can often hide the actual price of the game’s content. And greed but that’s kind of their job.
The idea that BG3 and Overwatch 2 released at the same price point is actually ludicrous. With AAA games, the price is standard and if you don’t like the game, oh well fuck you. And I would absolutely pay extra for games from developers which invested more, and had a higher standard of quality. Larian could charge $100 for their next CRPG and I’d be all in. Similarly, I don’t think minimally viable cash grab titles or smaller, maybe more experimental titles should release for more than like $30.
I think the indie scene does this pretty well but it’s a challenge for AAA, and consumers are somewhat to blame. I think people would balk more at an $80 standard price than a $60 half-complete game with $4k of microtransactions. So of course, studios are going to go with the latter strategy, even though plenty of people hate it.
AAA wouldn't remove macrotransactions to counter the higher price, they would just charge more for the game and keep everything the same. The current generation has been conditioned by mtx, it's no longer a whale problem. it's a norm that the average consumer accepts and buys into, which has fucked the industry.
Overwatch was priced at $40 on launch, it was just multiplayer after all. They priced it brilliantly and the mtx they had were pointless and non-invasive, a far cry to what that game has devolved into these days. Overwatch '2' was a forced patch which turned the game free-to-play and added all the aforementioned cancer mtx.
BG3 is $60, without any mtx. So I don't really understand the point you are making at all, it is just false that they were priced the same, BG3 didn't need to cost more, if it's cheaper it's more accessible to more people and the volume of sales makes up for the lower price, don't forget (like they want you to) there are a LOT more people playing and buying games now than 5, 10, 20 years ago.
Games are half-baked because people's standards have dropped and they will just buy half-baked shit, people still pre-order digital games... or they buy special editions to let them play the game 3 days early or whatever, the situation we are in is the fault of mindless consumption, not the fact game prices haven't significantly increased.
Until AAA games can remove the predatory monetisation, and gain our trust back, we should not be agreeing to be charged more. These companies aren't struggling, they are turning over record profits. Support indie developers, fuck AAA.
What this CEO and you conveniently forget is the fact, that there are more Games sold every year. Since those are digital goods and copy costs are near zero, those companies are making more money each year already. They also pretty much killed the ability to sell used Games, except for Console Games with a physical medium.
Also: why should the consumers have to pay for the ballooning Overhead that those companies have? Don’t tell me you need a hundred million dollars in your marketing department to sell a GOOD/GREAT game. That is Bullshit.
Paying customers are footing the bill for that anti-theft
The guy is making over $500k off someone else’s product with a couple days’ work. I’m no Tankie, but you don’t have to be a high schooler or a pothead to have a problem with capitalism’s more toxic extremes. People have been conditioned to forget this, but piracy is a counter-leverage to prevent product pricing from going out of control. Just look at the average prices of Switch games vs PC games. The harder it is to pirate a product, the further the price of that product is from a value consensus.
These types of anti-thefts tend to false-fire for the paying customers (who footed the bill). This is especially true because he builds his mods against a closed-source product that behaves in ways he cannot always predict. Published modding interfaces are never perfect.
The real value of the “product” was done by (m/b)illion dollar investments by Nvidia and game companies facilitating support for FSR or alternate upscalers. His “product” takes a few days to implement and others are able to offer the same “product” for free.
He is making a ridiculous amount of money considering the amount of work required and feels like an insult to modders who actually spend hundreds of hours tinkering and publishing their work for free. He already makes more than he deserves on patreon, why is he so sensitive about others pirating it.
Let’s say I’ve got a friend who bought a PS5 back in March, and this friend decided that she wanted to take part in this giveaway.
What are the pros and cons of this friend purchasing a new PS5, getting her free game (possibly Ghosts of Tsushima), and then returning the PS5 afterward? Because this sounds like a savings of $70 or so once it’s all done…for my friend.
ign.com
Ważne