I’ve played ESO for a long time now. It was a great game but it’s likely that Microsoft just killed it and it will slowly die or at best they severely crippled it and it will regain its team and continue on. Either way the way MS handled everything was very poorly done and have lost the trust of their employees and consumers. Trust is hard to gain but easy to lose. Personally, I am not willing to invest time or money into a game that will not be able to update or take care of their servers.
My point is that saying games that have been going strong for over a decade “always ends up being a rugpull” is… it doesn’t make it look like you understand what a “rugpull” is.
I suppose, sorry. I meant your progress that was meant to last forever being dragged out from under you (server shutdown). I guess rugpull might be more for something like scams.
Online/live games having minimal support for EOL is very much a problem that most developers will agree with.
Accusing any online game of being a scam is an inherently combative stance that paints the developers/publisher as the enemy and means no discussion can happen.
That’s why you need public funding to support and nourish the industry. We’ve got that in our state where we can get grants to start up studios. This allowed for studios such as Massive Monster to be created.
VC funding isn’t great because they can pull out if the project or investment doesn’t suit them. See League of Geeks.
This take sucks. There's a clear cap on what indies can do because they have a limited budget. Whatever their output is, it's not comparable to big studios output.
What the market lacks is quirky games on a medium budget, which's not what indie scenes provide.
For me, what I like to see in an RPG, is the ability to play a game multiple times and have notably different experiences, both in terms of play-style and narrative. It should make me want to go back and play again to see what I missed or how else I could do it.
The idea of having multiple ways to deal with a quest, and having that impact further story beats in meaningful ways is what I want to see. What i don’t want to see is meaningless scale full of nothing but filler.
I don’t think dagger fall is the best example because much of its size was just procedurally generated landscapes. The ability to actually specialize and complete quests in unique ways, as well as a branching story, is great. Mindlessly massive map, not so much.
I think JRPGs do focus on choice, but usually more in terms of the gameplay and deep combat systems with weird synergies to discover. Story-wise… yeah definitely more linear.
Personally I’ve never been a huge fan of JRPGs, Some I’ve enjoyed, but rarely will I ever play them twice.
Also I think there’s a fair argument to be made that if you cannot play a role, if there are no choices to be made on how you play it, it’s not really a role playing game. It’s action adventure if it’s a linear story with only one way to play it.
I hope we will se more non-micro RTS games. More like HOI4, but that takes less than 1 hour to finish a game. Dune and Line Wars are on the right track.
Some of them already evolved into a tounerous new goblin of a subspecies (MOBAs) to fill a different niche, the rest stayed the same because they were already good as is. That’s literally how evolution works. You don’t improve RTS by drastically changing the formula, you improve then with graphics, lore, and interesting mechanics within the existing framework. If you evolve the formula then it’s not an RTS anymore.
videogamer.com
Ważne