What gamers want is innovation and overall fun gameplay, sequel or not. I’ve heard rather little coming from AAA studios of interest to me as of late 'cause they’ve all gone to creating endless battle royales, action RPGs or looter-shooters that all play near identically, all with the same military or techno jungle aesthetic that just doesn’t appeal to me. It’s all gunning for their game to get big on that e-sport sponsorship money or find some way to load their games with micro transaction pay to win gambling BS. For the most part, small and indie studios are doing as well as the AAA big boys because they are able to put more creativity into their games on smaller budgets. When a big AAA game such as BG3 does succeed, it’s because they put as much or more effort and care into innovative and entertaining gameplay as they do into fancy ray tracing graphics and cash grab mechanics. Games like BG3 are as praised as they are because they are complete games that work like they should out of the box, no day 1 patch/DLC or extra money required for the full intended experience. We get the quality we expect for our $60-$70. Whether that’s a brand new IP or a sequel doesn’t matter much.
My only quibble with this is that I’m not sure I’d classify larian as a AAA studio. Not when you’re comparing to Activision or Bethesda or something. The game is absolutely amazing, I’ve put over 700 hours in and am still playing it. I can’t think of any of the big AAA studios releasing a game that comes close anytime in the last decade.
It is always amusing to see the head of optional entertainment industries make statements like they are making a declaration on par with climate change, a economic depression, etc. As if they expect massive press coverage and endless crying by their would be customers.
When in reality the actual reaction by most is along the lines of “oh no, anyway” and move on to the next bit of optional entertainment media while they and their company are forgotten to the trash pile of failed companies.
My highest play time game is probably minecraft, and my recent go-to is slay the spire.
Sequels are seen as safer profits (there is an existing market) so they get more investment and more investment tends to make better games.
This doesn’t mean its what people want, it just means that name recognition means its cheaper to market a hit game with previous versions acting as a marketing boost. Its a feedback loop.
I actually have that in my library because I bought the Index but haven’t played it yet because I wanted to play the first 2 games first. I didn’t play the first game for very long tho because I got stuck at some point early into the game and haven’t felt like continuing yet. You can also really feel the age of that game, controls and that kinda stuff. Not sure if I should just punch through that game or just say fuck it and play Alyx.
Well you’re in luck because there are VR mods available free for the older Half Life games. Just get the Orange Box or something with all the half life backlog and VR mod them for free.
If by “first game” you mean HL1, you could try playing “Black Mesa” which is a fan remake of the game, in the same engine that powers HL2. It’s not a 1:1 recreation, but it’s close enough (and I feel it improves on some things).
HL2 is also 3 seperate games (HL2, HL2 Episode 1, HL2 Episode 2), so make sure you have all of those in your library.
At the very least, I’d suggest playing HL2/EP1/EP2 before Alyx, since those would provide the expected background for Alyx, despite it technically being a prequel-ish thing.
Half life 1 just got a new big update that makes it much better to play this day and age and fixed a bunch of bugs. Either way you could skip 1. As a kid I never played 1 and went straight into 2, then 2 episodes 1 and 2 with the orange box. I still haven’t finished 1 but with this new update I think I’ll go back to it some point soon now.
Am not sure there’s a way for them to release HL3 and don’t disappoint huge number of people. Not because they suck at making games but because expectations have grown so so so much they are downright unachievable now.
Eh, gaming journalism just wants clicks to get ad-revenue. They would write an article about anything. Gabe waking up in the morning is news worthy to them.
I’m looking forward to the ward between factions posting the two quotes in comments sections every time a game gets delayed for the next several decades
Why is the consumer just expected to roll over and take it when a game sucks instead of the responsibility being on the publisher to release updates until the game resembles what was originally advertised? Games aren’t on ROM cartridges anymore, you can still improve the game after it’s released.
Look, No Man’s Sky set the precedent for what you’re supposed to do when your game sucks at launch. And we should expect nothing less from game studios with ten times the person-power and money.
Obviously sucking at launch is bad. But it’s inevitable that some games will suffer that fate and as No Man’s Sky showed, that’s no excuse for the game continuing to suck after launch.
Yeah, if a product is sold, I expect it to work for the most part. Now, mistakes happen, and not much to do about very obscure things and it's great if thing can be added afterwards.
But what I want, and this is apparently wild, is a finished 1.0 product that works as expected.
I pre ordered no man’s sky, because the people who made fucking Joe Danger said “I’m going to procedurally generate a universe”
I played it a bit at launch, but the antihype, especially spoilers about the ending made me stop. It’s a bit dense to try to get back into at the moment, but I regret nothing. I paid a modicum so that the guys that made Joe Danger could make a universe, and because me and people like me didn’t demand a refund, they got to do it.
Agree. Also the same with CP77 - I don’t care how much they update and polish that game, I’m not touching it again. It was barely playable on XBOX1X on release. I luckily was able to sell my launch day copy with a small loss, but I’m not trusting them with my money again, after I (and many others) have been misled, and given an unplayable game on consoles.
I am not an investor to lend money to the company for development, I am a consumer, so I want a working game for my money on Day 1, otherwise I’m shopping elsewhere - as plenty of studios manage to great and polished games (e.g. most PS exclusives).
I always wait a few years before buying a game. It prevents situations like this and saves aot of money to boot. Not just the game price but also because I don't need the highest spec pc
I have no proof but in my eyes it all smells like Sony and other gaming news are to blame. They hyped up the game to unachievable levels and then held Hellogames to the previously set deadline. I am very happy they sat down and finished the game, although there is new content patch ever few months still. Gave them those 60$ happily even though it’s not my kind of game.
CP2077 had a bunch of issues on release as well. Much better now. I feel like they(developers) need to bring in different testers near release. If you have the same testers whom have been testing builds for years it can probably be hard to see the issues with the same clarity.
Also stop having release dates. Just use vague terms like 2nd half 2024. When you get the release build, anounce a date, like a month later, give your devs a couple weeks off as there will be missed bugs after release. Hard release dates aren’t helping these situations.
It’s not about unknown issues on the dev side, it’s about greed. CDPR wanted to release for Xmas when the large playerbase of the prev gen consoles was still relevant, so they happily pushed marketing and lied to take people’s money, hoping they can pay exec bonuses and fund future development from that.
Sony had to pull the game from the online store, as it was barely playable. One good question of course why Sony would let it even be there without testing, but of course major companies are trusted to QA themselves, and not release a broken game - luckily this seems to work most of the time.
Because people will pre-order games to the point that it’s made a healthy profit even before it’s even released. Consumers vote with their wallet and for some reason gamers just constantly choose to show publishers that shoddy, half-assed products are good enough for them.
Exactly, when you buy a shit product you should learn not to do the same thing. People are still out here buying crap and complaining on the internet where the money having developers couldn’t give less of a fuck.
Gabe was talking about the making of Half Life, back when you shipped your disc and that was that. And the game was, apparently, crapola.
There were patch and updates back in the day. The problem was that not everybody had a good internet connection or a connection at all, during the 90’s.
Games like Daikatana and SiN were flops due to bugs that required patches to fix.
It’s because that’s how capitalism works. If you keep buying stuff from the same source without due diligence, you can’t be surprised when you get stuck with another sucky game.
The only incentive to spend resources on fixing a game is to preserve reputation for future games.
pcgamer.com
Najstarsze