damn, I knew that Sega had had a few big blunders lately, but having to straight up sell Relic is pretty huge... Wonder how their output will look from now on, it's no secret that some of their output under Sega was questionable (primarily Dawn of War 3) and one has to wonder how much of their failings were due to Sega's directive.
Yeah, and they had so much DLC that was not even always bad value for money… but you need to have a hell of a proposition for people to leave that investment behind.
It’s going to be more convenient and economical just streaming games and renting them forever and then upping the subscription rates and making them exclusive to game stream platforms.
In cost of the game itself for sure, but then you’d have costlier price in the disc too.
With the discs the scratches and storage were a bitch of a problem and later games even needed internet connection to activate games running on disc. It had pros but wasn’t all rosy either.
Part of why Sony nowadays is a game company with a movie hobby is that discs were dirrrt cheap compared to cartridges. They’d fund any stupid bullshit people wanted to make, get finished cases on shelves, and know whether consumers loved it, before N64 developers had finished negotiating a production run. Their cost per disc was measured in cents and their manufacturing turnaround was measured in days. One of the slowest and riskiest aspects of game publishing suddenly cost next to nothing.
Digital distribution isn’t necessarily cheaper per-gigabyte… but there’s no mastering. There’s no lead time. There’s not even the concept of a production run, anymore. Developers can ship whatever they want, whenever they want, to whoever they want, essentially for free.
Or, you know, Unreal if you are after making a 3D game. Between that and Godot, I wonder if Unity is just slowly strangling themselves to death? They don’t have much to offer. Perhaps most of what they have is existing tutorials, community and general knowledge of the engine, but if you piss off those people and/or they have to learn something else because you make it harder for them to profit, that could disappear fast.
I thought the standards people were talking about were the exceptional treatment the players received (Larian provided a full game experience. This is no abusive DLC scheme, no predatory microtransactions and way more polished than the average AAA game experience)
It turns out all the fuss was about the game size?
I think it was about all of the above. The actual quote is about the game size, but not all the way. He says that smaller studios may not have the resources to do what they did by having a multi-year early access period. Remember, they have to pay people that whole time without getting much money from the product. Also, he points out that larger studios such as the one making Starfield should have the resources to do what they did and more.
The size of Baldur's Gate 3 isn't the standard I want it to set anyway. I just want RPGs to be that deep with that level of production value. I finished Act 1 in the time it took me to finish all of Mass Effect 1, and I can't believe I've still got two thirds of the game left. This game is the entire Mass Effect trilogy in one game, but Mass Effect didn't give me a ton of ideas for different ways to play the game I just finished. You can play a Shepard who kills more with powers than with guns or more with guns than with powers, but it's nothing like this.
Also, here's the other standard. The game has multiplayer, but it's not a horde mode. It's not a live service hero shooter. It's just co-op; the video game version of playing tabletop with your friends. It's got LAN mode and direct IP connection. It's available DRM-free. It supports controllers and mouse/keyboard really well. Other than that weird Larian launcher that you can disable easily enough, this game is doing everything I need it to do from a software perspective and to stand the test of time in a world where live services inevitably keep dying.
gamedeveloper.com
Ważne