To be fair Suicide Squad is something he did and passed up Independence Day 2 for believing if he was in one of these “Super Hero Movies that are doing so well” it would revive his career
And he likely would have been right… If he went with Marvel instead of the DCEU
I say big budget games are too large in scope. Too much going on, too ambitious, too much emphasis on certain aspects that I feel developers value more than consumers. Not every game needs to be the biggest baddest game of the year blah blah blah.
For real, I think it’s rather telling that there are people who exclusively play some triple a games for the mini games.
It’s also interesting seeing indie take larger and larger chunks from the triple a market. Remember when harvest moon and simcity were big corporate endeavors, now it’s indie titles like city skylines and stardew Valley.
I would like to see some smaller projects from triple a studios targeting genres other than open world action-rpg.
studios targeting genres other than open world action-rpg.
With the corporate culture that’s developed in the industry I don’t think anyone should want that. Indie has the small project space covered & they make far better games than EA or Activision ever could in those genres. Corporate sellouts cannot beat passion, but they can make games so large in scope that small studios just cannot compete with that.
Yeah. Every time someone comes up with “games are too cheap” I always point to the fact that the vast majority of AAA games have insane amount of bloat. If AAA devs were struggling to make a profit then a clear way to cut costs would be to streamline the product. If leveling is not vital, cut it. If randomized loot is not necessary, cut it. If horse balls shrinking/expanding with the weather is not necessary, cut it.
There are always ways to cut corners in a AAA games and if the cost was an issue they’d do it. But the fact that they don’t shows how little the actually struggle. So far Bethesda is the only company that is clearly cutting the corners of their AAA products.
So far Bethesda is the only company that is clearly cutting the corners of their AAA products.
Starfield is the sloppiest Bethasda game ever, cutting corners to save cost is not how I would describe its development at all.
I agree with what you are saying though. Spending 40% of the budget on voice acting and cinematographic dialog is extremely wasteful. As long as the gameplay is good and graphics are pretty gamers will like the product.
I’d say its about on par with their past games. It’s clearly their game engine, modified to do space stuff.
If you come at it with the mindset that not every game has to get bigger and more expansive and have more and more realism/mechanics that don’t serve the core gameplay, it achieves it’s goal.
Not saying its game of the year material or anything, but if I was doing an employee review, I’d give it a meets expectations grade.
Starfield is by far their cleanest release. It’s honestly the first game I have played from them that hasn’t crashed in 100+ hours.
There are aspects I wish had received a bit more attention, sure. But to date, Skyrim and Fallout 4 both have stability mods that are basically requirements to reduce crashing.
And I’m saying this as somebody with near 2k hours in Skyrim. So I definitely enjoy that game.
I played Morrowind, Oblivion & Skyrim at release. Compared to Starfield they were far more polished to me. Yes crashes & the odd broken quest happened, but overall they were playable, people without an internet connection could buy the games in a shop & then finish them. Also Oblivion had the best graphics for an open world rpg when it came out, while also running pretty well on the shit tier GPUs of the time. In my mind, Starfield is not pretty on ultra, runs like shit on decent hardware even at relatively low settings and the list of broken things is endless.
I’m honestly not experiencing the same. I’m running on ultra with an RTX 3080 and rarely even see a stutter and the only consistent bug I see is just comical. When I sprint for a bit and enter a door, my companion will be sprinting into a wall for a bit.
I actually do find Starfield to be a pretty game, as well. They have learned better lighting strategies from previous games and the trees look much much better. I wish the facial and running animations were better, but that’s not so bad as to be too skewer the game.
As far as Oblivion having the best graphics of it’s time, sure. But 2006 basically every game that was going for good graphics achieved the best at release. That was a pivotal period for graphics in games.
Honestly, I’d rather have stellar voice acting and okay graphics (not good, just not bad enough to turn it off after it makes me dizzy) than the other way around. Graphics lose their appeal after a short while in-game.
Imagine if people could buy a background music only -subtitle dialog- edition of Baldur’s Gate 3 for €40. How would the sale distribution go? I think this is a rather interesting thought experiment, I would personally opt to buy the cheaper version for sure, even though I do know the voice acting in BG3 is a landmark in gaming.
I would definitely buy that. I usually keep my game volumes on low and click through the dialogue because I already read the subtitle, why wait around to finish having the line delivered verbally? (Interestingly enough I’ve never ever thought “hurry up, speak faster” in an in real life conversation, this impatience only exists in video games.) Because of the value of voice acting, but for me personally voice acting is just not a priority.
Either a shit article or shit website. The article gives a summary of the game then says the developers don’t trust their customers. That’s it. No reasons given. Am I missing something?
There’s a section under the “read more” split where it complains about over-tutorialization. The game hits you over the head with puzzle solutions and intended routes and leaves nothing for the player to figure out.
Why would you choose now of all times to double down on Bethesda??
Why not do something useful with Starcraft, Warcraft, or an Activision property like Guitar Hero or Tony Hawk? Bethesda has been proving for the last 8 years that they can’t keep up.
Look, it all looked great on paper years ago when Zenimax Media gave them an evaluation report on the company that was so overvalued it was lawsuit-worthy.
TL;DR: Devs asked their Twitter if they wanted to see 150% breast jiggle physics, deleting the tweet and apologizing after some backlash, which in turn got them more backlash from the other side for caving in.
It was rather obviously meant as a joke, so I’m confused about what people were mad at. Did they think they actually intended it to be included in the game? I would’ve just liked to see that gif, sounds funny af.
It seems pretty clear to me that they definitely intended to include breast jiggle physics at some level, and they decided that that was something that should be decided by the community. That would indicate to most casual readers that it’s a priority for the devs. If they didn’t realize that would strike a chord with both the pro-sexualization and anti-sexualization people, they weren’t thinking at all.
This looks like a cutesy, cozy game that probably shouldn’t even have jiggle physics. If they really wanted it in there, they should have just done it and said nothing. The “nasty people” they don’t want to “attract” would have appreciated the jiggle, and everyone else would have just ignored it.
The devs brought it into the spotlight and it got talked about. I’m not surprised at that outcome at all.
Probably wasn’t clear on that. I meant the 150% thing being a joke, not the jiggle physics. People having a problem with the inclusion of realistic jiggle physics is something that I didn’t even consider tbh…
Yeah, I got that the 150% was a joke. But I think the meat of the uproar wasn’t the joke, but the whole situation of posting this for the community as if it’s an important thing to decide. The joke didn’t help, either, as it shows they weren’t taking this seriously, further enraging people.
Sweeping it under the rug then rubbed everyone the wrong way.
Done well, I think “jiggle-physics” actually call less attention the chest, as it doesn’t look unnatural. The games that get noticed aren’t implementing it that way, though, so it gets a bad rap.
Anytime I see unrealistic boob physics I just point out that they need a sports bra, because that usually fixes the issue in real life. It is distracting but I don’t care.
The amount of fucking hate and vitriol that appearance and shit like this gets from everyone involved on social media is the literal definition of “pointless squabble” and people can act like, well, people are passionate about games like any other media. No they aren’t. Gamers are dumbasses, and they’re being played like fiddles by someone. If you don’t like it, you can play so many other games.
I think you’re on to something actually. Back when Saints Row 3 came out I read an article explaining how it’s childish irreverence toward gender was actually sort of progressive. In character creation there is a boob slider and a dick slider (with insane proportions for both), character voice doesn’t have to match the body type, there are no gender restrictions on clothing, characters are available to romance no matter your gender, etc.
Basically the game was so unrestrained and goofy that it subverted some uncomfortable gaming tropes like boob sliders by just letting players do whatever they wanted and not taking it too seriously.
The fact that they keep improving this game is just gold. And here i was, thinking of doing a full evil durge playthrough on honour mode. This update will add a new motivation to do so, if i don’t spoil myself by watching the new endings of course.
I played once as a goody-two-shoes, trying to keep all my followers in check (even the vampire). Are there any companions that stick with you on evil playthroughs?
kotaku.com
Ważne