All the article is trying to say is Cyberpunk took development expenses to another level.
He may have been jesting with the interviewer, but it’s not far from being the truth. It was revealed that year that Cyberpunk 2077 was a drastically expensive game to both develop and fix. It cost CD Projekt a whopping $125 million to fix the game and pump it with new content after it was released – the firm spent $21 million alone in marketing for the Phantom Liberty expansion. That’s more than some developers spend on an entire game.
By the time CD Projekt was ready to move away from Cyberpunk 2077, almost half a billion dollars had been invested in the game. If budget alone is enough to make a game ‘AAAAA’, CDP came close to that designation with Cyberpunk 2077.
The year is 2051. The Witcher 9 live service game is coming out this year, and it’s supposed to be the industry’s first A x 10^14 game, but Ubisoft has shattered expectations by announcing that their next Assassins Creed will be A x 10^16, skipping an entire generation of A’s.
Reminds me of the '90s when pizza places started putting an ever increasing number of 'A’s in front of their names just so that they’d be first in the phone book. So you had pages of things like “AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Plus Pizza”. I used to just skip those pages.
The only reason why EA Play is interesting to me is, because its offered on Steam and Game Pass is not. EA Play is even part of Game Pass, if I am not mistaken. But I don’t now the details, so anyone who wants to clue me in, is welcome.
Is part of Game Pass Ultimate. I don’t know which tier, if any, but it is.
There is little reason for subscribing when Xbox Game Pass Ultimate is closer in price. There are EA games for free but once you played all relevant games, you’re done. There are discount on the Xbox Store for some EA games.
If you subscribe to play video games, you’re an idiot. Musicians want to exit streaming now, while game publishers sees prime real estate for exploitation.
It’s taking away right of ownership. A direct license of ownership, a copy or copies, defines the parameters of which the user is allowed to operate.
Running locally with access to installer that can be archived allows for more individualistic control. Having access to a Steam library is one thing, but having a local Steam backup is also possible.
However, if a game relies on online functionality it could be frustratingly because it was a “live service”, “online only” or subscription based. In either of these cases, you’re being deprived of value, of control. It vests all the power in the distributor over the contents value at any given point and time, with control over scarcity and accessibility.
As such live services and subscriptions should be disparaged, because it only makes you subservient. Laws should be put in place to guarantee access to games executable and for them to be stored and run locally.
I say this because I think people at large are getting swindled right now and it’s so saddening.
gamepass and other subscription services wouldn’t exist in the first place if steam had some trial gameplay, i know you can buy something and refund it in the first two hours but average gamer doesn’t know this
What specifically didn’t you like about 3? I haven’t played any of them, but we’ve had a drought of crime stories in games lately, so I’m looking forward to seeing another one come out (that isn’t Yakuza).
Personally I feel like the game doesn’t respect my time as a gamer. There are too many time-constrained mini games and mechanics. Having to wait for the things to overlap so you can break open an electrical box? Why can’t I just rip it open immediately? He takes too long to get in and out of vehicles. All the collectibles were weirdly spaced so they were a little far to get to on foot, but way too short to just drive around collecting them (read again about how he takes too long to get in and out of cars). Too many oodjob missions as well imo.
The first two had a slow burn story where the semi open world progresses through time so it was a character in itself. Cars felt like cars of the era esp 1 there’s like one mission you get to rip around town. 3 squandered an interesting time and setting for saints row like open world full of nonsense
On the one hand, it kinda devolved into a generic open-world time-waster, where I and II were mostly story-based action-adventure games. Car handling, as someone else said also made the game what it is for a large part, driving a Model T felt like it was from that era. The low acceleration especially made car chases high impact, which I haven’t seen done in any other games. The story was actually about the Mafia, as in Italian-American organized crime, and I felt it got diluted by the change of atmosphere in III.
I don’t think III is a bad game, it’s just not a Mafia game. They could have sold it under a different name, and made a proper Mafia III.
You have to conquer areas of the city to proceed with the story. You go to some place like a factory, kill everyone, leave, a boss of the factory becomes alerted, comes to the factory, you go back and kill everyone again to get to the boss, kill or hire the boss. And that’s like 80% of the game. I think there were 20-30 repetitive missions like that with 0 substance. But Mafia I and Mafia II are fully focused on the story.
insider-gaming.com
Najstarsze