All that talk about how Xbox is investing in the Japanese market and then they close the one prominent Japanese studio that they own. The same one that, as the article points out, made Hi-Fi Rush which was “a break out hit”. What the hell, Microsoft.
They made Redfall, it doesn’t matter if their last game was Super Mario Galaxy. Releasing a single bad flop like that and all of a sudden you need to split the $127 profit with your 60 employees that just spent 5 years making a pile of micro-transactional shovelware.
Prey retroactively devaluaed Dishonored for me - as amazing as those were at their time, Prey showed what really could be obtained from the formula, and perfected every aspect of it.
It’s far more different than BioShock. BioShock is imo a linear shooter I never understood the “immersive sim” tag for BioShock. But Prey is non linear within a space station. You can break away from the main task whenever you want and investigate other things which all play into the main story. You can play Prey 10-20 times and have a different journey each time if you try. The Gloo Gun, Mimicry, etc are all things that allow you to play differently each time and find unique new paths. Talos 1 is chock full of details. The only similarity with BioShock is the reveal, the wrench, and some minor combat similarities. But it’s far more than that.
It’s for sure not the same as BioShock, with traversal and exploration the biggest difference, but it has similar vibes, at least as far as I have played. And at least in comparison with Dishonored.
You’re (mostly) alone in a giant, isolated station where a terrible disaster has happened, and must inject yourself with magic goo to be able to handle it’s warped former inhabitants. There’s definitely more of a stealth vibe than in Bioshock, but the feeling was similar for me.
In contrast, Dishonored takes place all over a crowded city with regular interactions between NPC’s which you can manipulate from the shadows. Most enemies can be killed or KO’d very straightforwardly, and there’s just much more of a revenge power fantasy about it.
But I digress. I can understand the comparisons to Dishonored, they just aren’t that similar in my mind.
Arkane games are always those games that require the “click” to enjoy.
I started every single Arkane title and stopped it for months before the world and what not pulled me back. That second time I finally get it and enjoy the hell out of the game more than before.
Should have called it Neuroshock as it would have been a great tie with the other “shock” immersive sims
We were still reeling the loss of Prey 2 and the political duplicity that may or may not have happened with Bethesda and Human Head which resulted in the cancellation.
Tango closed cause it was the one of the only studios under Zenimax that wasn’t currently making a game with “executive producer: Todd Howard” squirted all over it
That selling to the next buyer who throws money at you obviously leads to risks of getting shutdown. People don’t want or care about long term sustainability and cry when business daddy decides that record profits this year don’t match up with imaginary made up profit growth and hence declare this as a failure.
Edit: “Making good, profitable games ‘will no longer keep you safe’” But only if you sold your soul for a bunch of retirement money from Bethesda or whoever else. If you are so keen on that sweet retirement exit then your studio was doomed the moment somebody offered the founders to a buyout. I am baffled at how people are missing this obvious conclusion.
That selling to the next buyer who throws money at you obviously leads to risks of getting shutdown. People don’t want or care about long term sustainability and cry when business daddy decides that record profits this year don’t match up with imaginary made up profit growth and hence declare this as a failure.
Edit: “Making good, profitable games ‘will no longer keep you safe’” But only if you sold your soul for a bunch of retirement money from Bethesda or whoever else. If you are so keen on that sweet retirement exit then your studio was doomed the moment somebody offered the founders to a buyout. I am baffled at how people are missing this obvious conclusion.
I said what I said. That’s just the thing: I don’t want them dead anymore. I want them deprived of power, deprived of agency, and forced to watch the world they ruined actually repaired. Alive.
I just heard a podcast from ‘better offline’ titled ‘how managers are breaking the internet’ and he calls these kinds of things ‘the rot economy’, kind of like enshitification but it happens when some completely disconnected suit takes over projects from passionate developers and brings the whole thing to the ground with their ‘line must go up’ mentality.
Not even that, but usually this comes with the actual big target on your back: Being publicly traded.
Now of course, you can be publicly traded without being a big corp, and you can be a big corp that is held privately. But usually these big corpos are the ones that are on the stock market, and yes, the moment that happens everything becomes secondary to your actual responsibility: To the shareholders. Line must go up! And an easy one is to fire more workers.
Unless I’m not seeing something, game production is expensive. Most studios are 1-2 bad games away from closing their doors. Games are expensive as hell to produce and as much as it sucks the “going public” option is sometimes the only way to go.
It’s easy to forget but most small (1-3 people) team indie devs probably aren’t even working a salary. They split the earnings from the game and either live off of that or reinvest it into their company but the moment salaries need to get paid, or office space needs to be used (not really necessary for small teams) that’s when expenses get insanely high. I’m not a business person but I can understand why you’d want to “trim the fat” (I don’t support it at all but to play devil’s advocate, I can see the logic despite the flaws). Growth means structure, and structure means expense.
No. I mean someone with ethics and morals and just wants to sell something for a single price and be done.
There’s a reason Minecraft and Factorio get a lot of love. It’s because you pay once and you’re done. Yet they still make new things. Although Mojang is going that way.
It’s crazy though, they plopped HFH on the store the day it was announced with no marketing push, it became a critical and audience darling and execs said it was a breakout hit.
What else do you need to stay alive in this industry? Insomniac made one of the best selling games of the year and got rewarded by getting 10% of its workforce cut.
Lemmy was overall a very small part of it. It is a very small community compared to other social platforms. Even if every single Lemmy user owned Helldivers 2 AND left a review, it would still account for less than a quarter of the recent Steam reviews.
I mean, this game has a meta war that determines all available planets, mission types and rolls out content based on community involvement. It would be nice to have an offline mode, too, but this game is not completely decoupled from being online, unlike Hitman or something.
Its just an arbitrary mechanic added to justify an always online requirement. Helldivers had an offline option. There's still a game there without the need for "community involvement", the missions etc could be completely random or seeded for people who dont want to connect to a server.
Its always sad to see potential great games ruined by greed.
Did the first one really have offline? I played the shit out of it, but I was always connected. Sure, they should implement something similar here, too, but it is genuine work they need to put in to get it there, I'm sure they had to invest that for the first game especially since it was on the Vita.
It isn't arbitrary, though, go on any of the communities that care about the meta war and you'll see people really do keep up with it and enjoy it, they work with each other to focus on the major orders and do a bit of roleplaying at the same time.
I know that you're very anti always online, and I understand and agree that it should be optional, but to say that nothing comes out of it would also be disingenuous.
You are right, it does provide something. I just personally don't value it over a more typical online co-op setup. I just wish options weren't scary and implemented more.
Me too. I know it's a bit of work to set up an alternate mode and method to get to different planets and missions, and I'm sure ships are run really tightly on what gets worked on or not due to paying for whole teams to work, but I do wish they did what they could to future proof it.
A lot of always online games are awesome, have artistic merit, and can be looked back upon later as gaming history, and if they don't preserve these "art pieces" then a huge chunk of gaming history will likely disappear into the ether in 10 or 20 years. It seems a little silly to me that we can go back and play Mario 64, or even Helldivers 1 and see what that was like, but Helldivers 2 will become an inaccessible splash screen, it's a waste of all of the time and work, and even the money that went into making this happen in the first place.
pcgamer.com
Gorące