From what I’ve read about their Daily Active Users they’re going to be overstaffed soon. No hate but they exploded and when things settle they might not need as much staff. Thoughts?
You’re good. I’d have thought the same thing had I not been following the development story.
Their game pass numbers also seem to be going up, which is harder to dev for as well. I know my steam friends got sick of it after putting in 100 hours in three weeks though
I too have sunk more then 100 hours into the game. It was worth its purchase already. Yet in a year or however long it takes to be complete… i and many others will jump right back on to see how everything has progressed. Plus they’ll release on play station and that alone will be millions more copies sold.
This is how it happens. If they dont staff to meet the demand the game suffers and dies out, if they do in a few years when the player base falls off and they announce layoffs everyone makes the shocked Pikachu face.
Live service games really did a number on people. Why does it matter if people stop playing Palworld between now and when those new people they hire can produce the things they're hired for?
Yeah I keep thinking this too, it’s a buy once game, they still have the money they made. They’re trying to push more content as quick as possible to get more waves of players, new and old. I’m positive their accountants know the player base isn’t rebuying the game.
There's something called "Brook's Law" that basically observes that a software project which onboards more developers in order to catch up will fall further behind. I hope they're careful about how they allocate new developers or they'll end up doing a year of onboarding, rewriting core code, and have no meaningful updates for 6-12 months. I know they have the resources to spare, and that scenario worked out okay for Valheim, but I hope the game doesn't lose momentum because they overhire or don't allocate enough senior devs to continue feature development while they catch the new devs up to speed.
Edit to add: I don't think it actually matters in this instance if they don't have a large player base by the time the game is feature complete. They don't have continuous revenue streams like a live service game, so hiring more devs is ultimately just about making sure they have enough talent to make good on their early access promises. The company could probably dissolve tomorrow and all the staff could live the rest of their lives in luxury never working again. It'd be a dick move, but they already sold an insane number of copies.
They don’t have continuous revenue streams like a live service
Yet. The game seems extremely easy to monetize, up to them how evil they go. To be successful longterm (if thats something they even want) they will need to add more content first but they could cash in in so many ways. Dlc, selling servers, cosmetics or more nefarious stuff lkke boosters to speed up mechanics, pals that take huge grinds without payments. It would be very easy to do.
Oof. You’d think if they wanted to surprise people with twists and turns they’d just make a new game instead of altering the plot of a remake (unless I’m misunderstanding).
There is this exercise you can do for Agile/Lean estimation where you run a multi stage beer store by passing only order quantity notes up and down a chain.
The intent is to trick the participants into a whiplash effect where the retail store has a one off jump and so orders bigger than normal, and the whole supply chain then gets excited and thinks this is the new normal rather than an anomaly.
The exercise ends and the excess beer in the chain is counted.
You are not wrong, but remember that they only employ like 40-50 people. Even if the playerbase goes down to 10% of what it is that’s still not a lot of people.
That was me! I figured that I succeeded by getting to 3bc. I played 3bc for a long time and realized that after a while that I was at my level. I guess I didn’t have the will to grind the skills needed to go further. Many great memories and I’m so glad I played it. Been seriously the best game I played in years.
6 months from now: “We didn’t sell it, we granted them a non revocable permanent license to be the exclusive producers of D&D content, but we still receive a royalty fee and have no control over it”
Can’t vouch for performance or technical stuff on PC, but I was checking out Lost Judgment on PS+ after hearing a lot about the Yakuza series and I’m loving it. It’s kinda like Shenmue, but with real, good combat and not QTEs. Or a Japanese GTA with all the extra side stuff you can do as you wander around the neighborhoods the game takes place in. I definitely want to check out the others in the series now.
Infinite looks just as good, but I am probably going to go backwards because I am not sure if I would like the new turn based combat system. I like the more Sifu-ish combat.
It should be minimal. I think it’s more about the broad appeal, focused marketing, and the good quality of the releases. You got Persona on Xbox, that’s brings people in.
I’m eager to check the calendar of Japanese games for this year.i don’t know if they blow up all cartridges in January or there is more to come.
I think it helps that theyre finally bringing high profile games to PC while the tide is still high, as opposed to trickling out a single game here and there.
Hasbro owns wotc, wotc owns dnd. Hasbro can’t sell dnd, they would need to sell wotc and that’s not a good move because MTG is a money making machine afaik. If anything Hasbro could order wotc to sell dnd, but it would be wotc selling it.
Whether you take the stick out of your dog’s mouth or you tell the dog to give it to you, you’re the taking the stick. Breaking up and selling off IP is exceedingly commonplace.
We’ve already established they are whores, Tencent has simply been unsuccessful, so far, in negotiating their price.
Cool. I was explaining that hasbro and wotc are the same thing for this matter. They were apparently confused. Idk why you are making this point when I was clarifying them their confusion.
I don't think it matters nearly as much as the article makes it sound. Especially since multiclassing is super viable in 5E and BG3 removed all kinds of requirements for multiclassing and even allows you to respec. Meaning even multiclass combos that struggle if played out at level 1 can just be recreated later. And that means you can recreate the toolkit of a Bard fairly easily and focus more on the aspect you actually enjoy.
I think any class with ritual casting is going to feel very rewarding in your first playthrough, assuming you don't forget to utilize it. So you have Bard, Cleric, Druid, and Wizard, and Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight. But even any class with just cantrips are already going to give you a lot you might not be used to from other RPGs.
The only class I wouldn't recommend for the first playthrough might be Paladin. The oath just limits your choices in certain situations. And while you could break your oath and become an "Oathbreaker", I personally don't feel this is the best for the first time playing. I think being able to explore all options available without having to consider your oaths makes for a better first-time-playing experience. But Paladin is on the list for my second round.
Edit: I forgot that BG3 made changes to Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight, they can both also ritual cast. In general, there are a lot of changes made that make the game way more open and allows you things to make it fun.
Does breaking your oath make you an Oathbreaker in BG3? Because that’s not how Oathbreaker works in 5e.
A Paladin who forsakes their oath would just be a fighter. Oathbreakers are specifically Paladins who call upon the forces of evil for their strength rather than the divine. They don’t just break their oath, but twist and pervert it for some dark power.
I haven't played a Paladin yet, so I am not sure how the mechanic is implemented. But the oathbreaker subclass exist in BG3 and you can't choose it on character creation. So there is some way of becoming one.
I’m unironically disappointed. I’d take any new direction at the moment, I’ve already been pushed past the point where it wouldn’t make a meaningful difference to me if it got worse. Even a change with a low chance of getting better is worth it over a guarantee of remaining shit.
pcgamer.com
Aktywne