“The team is heads down,” Huckaby said. “We drew a line in the sand when we said 2026. I don’t know if we’re going to make it, I just know that we’re going to do every single thing possible to make it. And part of that is not taking time for the distraction of CitizenCon.”
That means they already know they are not going to make it. Otherwise why say this more than one year before?
Battlefield players don’t play battlefield though. CoD kids do.
They added class customization and crazy weapon unlocks. Optimized for “battlefield moments” instead of “using your brain.” They need the game to be adhd friendly which left no place for the Commander system. Reloading was changed to be magic per-bullet bullshit instead of based on magazines. They’ve cultivated a culture of “look at those buildings collapse, man I hope the next battlefield is like a Michael Bay movie, oh man it’s like battlefield 1 we’re so back”
If new battlefield games are fun for you then you are more like CoD kids than people who installed realism mods for 1942.
I go back and forth on this a lot. I’ve been gaming since the Atari 2600 and I agree this happens in games, but personally disagree that Veilguard was a clear example. I really enjoyed that title and platnum’ed it. I think it’s more likely, that just like music, movies and tv, expensive studios tend to use the most profit / least risk model. So if a game is appealing for age 1 to age 80 it gives them the least risk and the widest demographic. To further minimize that risk, every game has to have the same stupid Hollywood pitch lines of “Oh this game is <insert popular title here as X> but with a different Y and a new Z” in order to get traction from investors. Boring and dull are side effects of it. The fact it started to spread in the RPG genre is just another level of degradation.
“What you need to know about your audience here is that they will watch the show, perhaps on their mobile phone, or on a second or third screen while doing something else and talking to their friends, so you need to both show and tell, you need to say much more than you would normally say.”
This is so baffling to me. So you’ve discovered your audience has a limited attention span. I can see that. But for the love of all that is holy, if you know this, why even make a game with a story in the first place? The thing with videogames is that stories can be minimalistic as all hell, or even optional. Just let the gameplay speak for itself and have the story be “defeat the bad guy on the mountain” or something.
As a fan of story-driven games, I absolutely am NOT advocating for complete removal of stories in videogames. What I was trying to say is that if Bioware knows that their audience has an attention deficit and is developing the game around this fact, you’re going to get a crap story. And judging by the reviews for Veilguard, that seems to be the case.
If Bioware is dead set on developing games for a crowd that watches twenty-seven thing simultaneously, why develop the story at all?
I enjoyed playing this after it launched, great game with potential. My only complaint was the Ground Hog Day effect with monster spawns. You’d run into the same critters, in the same locations, over and over again. I figured the game was pretty new at the time, and hoped the devs would eventually randomize spawns to make it less monotonous. If they have, may need to start up a new game.
The last time I played, they had changed this: when you explore new areas, enemies from those areas will start spawning in old locations. I’d still like to see a randomizer option sometime in the future, but I like the new changes.
As a bad person, I will warn people about pirating softwares. There are really virus, malwares and many sophisticated malicious codes within those programmes.
pcgamer.com
Ważne