And Embracer claims another victim. It feels like they aren't going to have many studios left when they finish their "restructuring" process. At least Wingefors was nice enough to acknowledge that the employees, who might be about to lose their jobs, are going through a slightly more challenging time than the executives who are deciding which studio is next on the chopping block.
It’ll be interesting to see how a linear shooter from back then would translate to today’s time. Would it be more like Last of Us where each encounter is thrilling and tense, or would it be like Max Payne 3/Uncharted 4 where you move from one level to another with a moving plot line?
It’s hard to imagine “tense” action with how goofy the enemies act, so I guess the second option sounds better? I’ve never played Max Payne 3 or Uncharted 4, so I don’t really know exactly what you mean.
Me too. Max Payne 3 is like the previous entries, just a bit more focus on close range corridor shooting with cover mechanics. Similar to previous entries but with a very stylized story telling.
I am curious how they’d translate it myself, I recall the first game vividly as new and thinking it was awesome. Though I assume the next game wouldn’t be marketed for me either. An updated drug scene would be interesting, haven’t had a good one since one of the Batman games. I probably missed some drug sequences but Max Payne’s was pretty effed up at the time.
DOOM and DOOM Eternal both did pretty well. And, truth be told, the pacing is not too dissimilar from a Call of Duty where it is a constant intensity with a few spikes for set pieces. Max Payne has a few “walk and talks” but mostly it is just about clearing rooms.
Yeah you’re right. Doom Eternal is great. I’m playing Metro series and even that’s pretty good in terms of balancing story and gameplay.
It’s just that coming from Remedy, Max Payne’s basic formula of corridor shooter probably doesn’t match their other games anymore, so I’m curious to see how they’re going to remake it.
Porting to PC isn’t minimal effort. It takes a lot of dev time to optimize and make it run well on the wide variety of PC hardware, not to mention the additional PC specific technologies like DLSS that often get implemented. First game had quite a few performance issues at launch that were ironed out over the span of several months.
The point isn’t that it’s quite literally free. It’s a figure of speech.
Between taking a game you’ve already completed and is already popular and reworking it to sell to a brand new audience… versus creating a new AAA title, which one is more expensive?
that were ironed out over the span of several months
It still runs like garbage on my 13700K and 3060Ti, depending on the area. Sometimes, High settings are fine, but way too often I have to drop down to “Original” to get somewhat acceptable FPS (>40) at 1440p with Balanced DLSS. Am I doing something wrong, or was it just even worse at launch?
The appeal of Nintendo console is first party exclusives and whatever the new gimmick may be (I don’t mean that word as a bad thing, I have loved most of their gimmicks). Powerful hardware just means that it can potentially have a good third party support, so that you’re not left playing just the first party games.
Specifically, they’re cutting off purchases of new games - but people can still download games they own.
The PS3, I believe, did this a while back. Up to a point, patching the device’s internet security so that the credit card info isn’t stolen in transit takes more effort than it’s worth. But, letting people still download their games has no real internet security risk.
One question that lingers in my mind though, is whether you can still buy new games using a desktop browser. I think that was something PS3 allowed for for some time.
I think it’s opposite with the PS3. They kept the option to buy PS3 games because of reactions. But it’s only possible through the PS3, so the PS3 games won’t clutter PSN.
Purchases of new games on the Xbox 360 console itself. You will still be able to purchase Xbox 360 games on a newer console or their website then download them to your 360 console.
Call it the SuperSwitch to mimic the nes -> supernes era. No new gimmick, just double the specs and ride the wave of portable consoles being “good enough”. Rival the steam deck and all the clones coming, with Nintendo’s amazing first party titles and milk the next 5-7 years
You can price your game however you want. But it doesn’t mean I need to buy it. I still have a choice.
Not sure about the future where we will work for corporations for free and they will pay us with products we don’t want, because we’re heading this road pretty fast.
Video game budgets are still lower than film budgets and ticket prices for movies haven’t steadily climbed, arent anywhere near $60 a pop, nor have there been all these freaks coming out of the woodworks to say movie tickets should cost more.
That’s the thing, a lot of investors almost don’t like the idea that video games are low budget. They want to be able to double their funding and quadruple their success, like with a lot of growth properties.
At the time, 12 years ago, maybe that was the most expensive video game ever made. Like Avatar, it too has been eclipsed by so many others. A Call of Duty game now costs about $700M to make. A Sony blockbuster costs $200M-$300M; Concord may have been $400M.
I don’t know how universal it is, but movie tickets here have at least tripled since I was a kid, 20 odd years ago.
Meanwhile, me and 4 friends pooled our pocket money together to buy a video game that we could barely afford. Brand new video games are the same price now.
I’m not saying “they should increase their price”, but it is wild how somehow they haven’t in decades
they haven’t increased because the cost of production has drastically dropped. cartridges were expensive as hell to make; the hardware was like half to cost of the game. disks were cheaper but you still had all the extras like bespoke formats, copy protection and manuals. with digital distribution, the production cost is zero. even when you buy a physical release, you get an empty box with an off-the-shelf bluray.
Must be nice living somewhere where cinema prices did not climb. I can assure you its been different where I live.
You got to look at it relatively, a movie never cost even close to $60, so why would it end up there. It cost something like less than $10 but now the average is around $16. Games were maybe $60 and now could be $80, so it is actually a very comparable increase.
Edit: to be fully clear, I don’t think there should be a comparable increase between those two things. Buying a video game and going to watch a movie are two very different things to do. Just pointing out that movie tickets did in fact get more expensive. There’s also the “creative accounting” often being done in the film industry, I don’t think that’s a thing in the gaming industry. So many differences.
videogameschronicle.com
Ważne