This is fine, no issues really, but if you’re offended by something in a video game fictional story that was made over 20 years ago you should go touch grass.
eh. i get the ‘need’ for these companies to have the disclaimers and i honestly appreciate that they are not changing anything here. but the mob is fickle and seemingly can’t distinguish real life from the online life where being offended somehow gives them clout.
Yeah the Japan level made my jaw drop… the early 2000’s really were the last time you could be this blatantly racist against the Asian Community in popular media… But I’d rather go “Oooof” than pretend the game was never like this.
Do you see any merit to the pushback against such media?
You sound like you favor rationalism, and I agree with dismissing people who are crazy, but setting crazy people aside, do you see potential harm in promoting negative racial and ethnic stereotypes?
Stereotypes exist for a reason. They aren’t made up, non-existent characteristics. 90% of people that are getting offended by such things are not even part of the group that’s being stereotyped. It’s usually white liberals that are “offended” by any of this. Are they beneficial? probably not, but they sure are not nearly as harmful as people like you make them out to be. As a straight white man, I’m vilified by the mob regardless of my positions on anything, and that in itself is a stereotype. So I don’t put any stock into hypocritical perceived slights against humanity.
sorry my life doesn’t revolve around your internet drama. got real shit to deal with. like work. and life. idgaf what you think about me of what point you think you’re making. have fun with what little “power” you think you have here. i couldn’t care less about this.
how is it hypocritical? idgaf what you think, just like you likely don’t gaf what I think. you’re just out to call people names behind the safety of a keyboard and screen.
Even if I agree some games have gone too far on censorship, I don’t like having this totalitarian attitude to any kind of “offense”.
There are certain weird themes I really like in niche games, but I acknowledge if they were “thrown in” to a game about shooting or adventure, would sour the experience for a lot of common players. I’d point to perverted character designs as a common one - sexualized character designs are obviously appealing to some players, but to others they can actually make it hard to get absorbed in the story of a game like Xenoblade Chronicles 2 or Nier Automata. Even for a series like Persona, there have been players that decided “What weeb shit” and abandon the game because of the way female characters get harassed at times.
It’s easy to call it “political”, but politics comes from personal opinions - and it can genuinely affect how people view the media. These days I have a much more vehement reaction to stereotyped Native-American depictions (“Indians”) over when I was a kid. I doubt it’d make me hate Tomb Raider, but I can see why they’d have a warning.
This wasn’t even the company, they let random people on the internet submit videos. Something nobody with two brain cells to knock together would think was a good idea.
When asked who his target audience for his games was, Takahashi answered that he was. “I make games that I feel satisfied with, so I’d like people to play them if they want to,” he replied. “I guess I probably should make games while thinking about the target audience, but I’ll work on that in my next life.”
I absolutely adore this game, but imo it’s a terrible candidate for a remaster. The graphics were already stylized so I doubt a graphics update would make much difference. It’s a puzzle game so the replayability is already low. And I can’t imagine that developer commentary get people excited about buying the game again.
I wish this was successful, but I can see why this went sideways.
Hopefully game developers stick to their guns and start migrating future projects and training to other engines like Godot. They played their hand once I wouldnt trust them to not screw you in the future
Re-Logic (Terraria’s developers) have already gone on record saying, "even if Unity were to recant their policy and statements, the destruction of trust is not so easily repaired.” That’s the stance I think every developer should be taking. Unless you have a Unity game that can be released by the end of the year, all devs need to seriously consider switching engines.
And when the code starts open source if they do a move like that (see Elasticsearch vs Opensearch, or Terraform vs OpenTF) then the community can fork it!
I love the idea of an open source engine becoming the industry standard, even if just for indie titles. Blender is a great success story and shows that FOSS can compete with industry standard creative software.
IIRC Godot’s reduzio mentioned at GDC there was considerable interest from various publishers and developers in building their own engines ontop of Godot.
One factor they don’t seem to consider is that they are competing for a finite resource: consumer attention.
There has never been so much content to consume: not only games, movies, series, music, books, podcasts, and even old games.
New games have to compete with and stand above all that content to justify the price.
As others have said, purchase power is down, people subscribe to more services (net, mobile, streaming music and video), all that bites into the available budget to buy games.
Bottom line: it’s getting hard to justify spending that amount on a game you don’t have time to play.
Yeah it’s hilarious to me they wanna charge more and don’t expect to sell less. Ppl would go from being iffy about indie games to checking them out more if 4 at base price cost what a AAA one does
Gamers, be it on console or PC, are dumb. Time has shown this over and over again. Horse armour, overpriced micro transactions, golden cage launchers, games as a service, the list goes on.
There will always be people who buy overpriced stuff or don’t think about what will be in ten years.
Yeah, just prepare for 100 dollar games across the board WITH all of the shitty monetization at this point, gamers are going to buy their circus, consequences be damned.
I doubt it. Maybe Grand Theft Auto and Mario Kart can get away with charging more, but a lot of games asking $70 aren’t finding many customers willing to pay that price right now.
Psychonauts 2 happened because Microsoft bought Double Fine and said, “How much time/money do you need to finish your game?” And basically gave it to them.
Hell yeah, I’m happy they did! That game was an absolute delight to play, just like the first one. The people at Double Fine really knock it out of the park!
Literally watched an interview with Tim Schafer, they ran out of Kickstarter money and Microsofr saved the day. Look it up before calling me out please.
No one saved the day, they fund raised before, everyone does, many people found publishers if needed after running out of croudfunded money. There is no saviour here.
Was Kickstarted for all consoles, they ran out of money, Microsoft bought them and left everything as-is, just gave more money. Go watch the interview about it.
There’s a common thread between a lot of the missteps listed here and Embeacer group’s recent troubles. The idea that you could fund 230 Spiderman 2’s for the same price as buying 1 Activision-Blizzard-King really drove the point home to me.
The problem (in my obviously uneducated opinion) is that when you spend so much money in acquisition, especially of established companies, you’re neither funding nor rewarding innovation. You spend $70B on ABK and some randos in suits get a huge payout that they invest in oil or crypto or whatever. Spend $70B on talent and early career devs and you could unleash a tidal wave of creativity and experimentation.
True. These mega-deals are rarely about games, it's more in the realm of finance. In fact it doesn't really matter if it's games, films, cars, saucepans, it's all about the financial side. And as a consequence in order to make good on that investment these companies end up producing the blandest, widest-appealing pap, the complete opposite of innovation. However, the breathless way these stories are reported by a media, both specialist and mainstream, which is more concerned with business "success", means we're told it's a very good thing, when it clearly isn't.
There were more sports cars in the parking lot in the PS1 era than there were in the PS4 era
What a struggle. Should we then have tripled the prices so the poor publishers could afford 2 sports cars instead? Or, hear me out, just play indie games that’s higher quality and doesn’t have a useless middle man.
You can‘t deny it did boost Jennifer English‘s career to a high degree. You could say it‘s not all about her role as Shadowheart alone but it definitely helped kickstart her online presence. She went from voicing children side characters to being one of the most prolific and recognizable voices in gaming within two years and I doubt her role in Expedition 33 where she was heavily featured in promotional material was the last we‘ve heard of her.
This isn’t about me or my perception. I am saying this because she said so herself and the Imdb Page you linked tells the same story. She broke her mold with Shadowheart and now she is getting much bigger and more diverse roles. But feel free to tell me about a game prior to BG3 where she took center stage for marketing like she did for Expedition 33.
What story do you think her imdb page tells? Because she has consistently done 2-3 roles per year since 2022. And a lot of those are games that have been in dev a long time. Like, that covid stretch is likely what led to consistently getting 2-3 releases each year since '22.
Also… is she major marketing for E33? I don’t watch a lot of commercials these days but mostly if ANY VA is involved it is Cox or Starr. Like, I think Alice Duport-Percier (the singer of Alicia) has gotten more face time across the various youtube ads and what not than anyone else (and rightfully so. That song contributes so much to the Vibes of such a Vibes based game).
But either way: That doesn’t actually change the point. The BG3 VAs pretty much all knocked it out of the park. And that isn’t translating to meaningful increase in roles.
Which has come up a lot over the years. Very few VAs see major success even after bringing EVERYONE to tears with how good of a performance they gave. And the Troy Bakers (and Laura Baileys) of the world are a whole different argument.
Just to add on. A twitch streamer I semi-regularly watch is also a pretty successful VA and she has talked about this in the past. People might say that she MADE a game with her performance but that doesn’t translate to future castings. So she can be in mobile trash one year and a GOTY contender the next and still get roughly the same bookings and checks per year.
Which is probably why so much of the BG3 cast were super eager to work with Digital Extremes. Partially because DE and Reb are awesome. But mostly because live service games area potentially a great source of stable income since they’ll need a few lines every year for N years.
Hard to talk about it without getting into spoilers, but Gustave (Cox’s role) was very much a leading face of the game in marketing, and I strongly suspect that was solely because they thought the game would sell better with a male lead.
Those roles are tiny. Like I don‘t even know why you‘re so strongly against the idea that she wasn‘t that big before. You literally just have to look up her actual roles.
And yes she was a major factor of the marketing campaign. Again, you just have to look up the trailers.
She literally talks all the time about how she doesn’t get any offers all of the sudden. She probably did at least once in one of her last four streams. She just has become pickier with what she auditions for. But she still has to audition like everyone else.
She just has become pickier with what she auditions for.
Most actors in gaming are certainly not becoming pickier with AI looming at the horizon so this is a strong sign that she is in fact doing very good. Certainly better than voicing Child #5 in Original Sin 2. And that’s literally the entire point I’m trying to get across here.
I’ve no doubt she’ll continue to do well, but I’m not sure BG3 directly helped her get the role, other than making her voice recognizable to people. I read an article that said that Sandfall did blind voice auditions for E33. They didn’t even know they’d chosen Charlie Cox until after the fact.
Yeah, apparently the director and writer of E33 were actually playing BG3 at the time of the casting. But they didn’t recognise her voice at all. They just knew that they had found the right one for the role.
It’s also saying something that they cast Andy Serkis and didn’t use him for performance capture. That was all done before the voice recordings. Recording over already finished performance was an entirely new experience for him.
She probably did more work on BG3 alone than all previous works combined though. The experience alone boosted their performance immensely. Neil Newbon compared his 4 years at the studio with 4 seasons of shooting a TV show and his role was about the same size as Jennifer‘s. BG3 wasn‘t just any job. Especially not for her. Anyone who actually follows her can attest to that. To say it didn‘t change the trajectory of her life and career takes some serious ignorance.
I suspect that Nintendo is offering them more than enough money for exclusivity to make it no longer ‘questionable’ for Supergiant, at least from a financial perspective.
It’s no different from Hades 1. It was exclusive to PC and Switch at launch, then released for other consoles 11 months later. If it worked out for that game, I don’t see why it wouldn’t for this one.
Hardly inevitable. I'm broke af, the economy is collapsing, so not spending money on Nintendo is the easiest possible choice.
Literally not buying something you don't need is the easiest form of protest.
videogameschronicle.com
Ważne