Still trying to shoehorn in a "runtime fee". That's not going to work and with this model it's pointless anyway. Just make it a 4% revenue for sales after $1 million. Same end results (actually potentially more in fees) without all the runtime issues. Make it apply only to a specific version and later and after a certain date and then you also don't have the retroactive problem and the massive blowback.
It works for that market too even without install fees, you just make it a percentage of revenue generated from microtransactions. It's still tied to the game.
Quick math shows that's irrelevant with a 4% revenue cap, as I pointed out in my original comment, and at best they will be paid the same as just doing a 4% revenue fee. More likely they will get some amount less than 4% from most devs.
The only reason I see for them going this route instead is to claim they are still royalty free, install fees aren't royalties. Which is BS anyway.
The games making over a million are the ones who can afford the new rates. This is so regressive. It should get more expensive as your sales go up, not down. Small devs should be charged less than big studios
Blarg, I kinda hate articles like this. They talk about the leak but don’t seem to link to it anywhere. So now you have to go off and search for it yourself 🙄
Yea I have a hard time articulating why, but I preferred 2016 to Eternal.
Also, I think Mick Gordon and id Software aren’t likely to work together anymore, which to me is kinda the nail in the coffin of these reboots.
I don’t think Doom can be Doom without its music composer.
While I don’t mind that Rebirth will be more open world, perhaps like fifteen, I never considered Intergrades linear design an “issue” that needed “solving”.
There’s nothing wrong with linear game design, quite the opposite. It lends itself to a more focused experience. Games often have so much “stuff” to do, half of it ends up irrelevant.
I really enjoyed the tightly paced experience that was Intergrade.
Hopefully development studios can hold strong and continue their boycott anyway. Backing down now basically means Unity got away with it, in a sense. Plus, companies are learning from each other’s shitty tactics lately ala Twitter, Reddit, and Recently Facebook coming out with payment schemes on things that used to be free.
So if Unity does this, other software companies will probably try some similar stuff.
It’s a shame we have only gotten 1 game on id Tech 7 (Doom Eternal). I know it’s a highly specialized engine, but I’d love to see more FPS titles using it or this new version (Wolfenstein 3 please)
Wasn’t Cyberpunk 2077 released like, a decade after its original teaser trailer?
Anyways, Skyrim hasn’t aged gracefully, Fallout 4 sucked ass, Fallout 76 was less ass than Fallout 4 but still pretty ass, and from the sounds of it, Starfield was a resounding mediocrity. I’m really not in any rush to play another new Bethesda game given their recent track record lol.
Bethesda hasn’t made a great game since Skyrim. And tbh, I probably look back on Skyrim more fondly than it deserves because I was in highschool when it came out.
I’ve played 30 hours of Starfield and feel like I didn’t really have fun the whole time. It just felt like a 6/10 game. Very pretty, 10 miles wide, and an inch deep. And there’s too much of it that is actually downright bad.
It’s sad because Bethesda used to be the gold standard for RPGs, but their ambition is getting the best of them. It’s very apparent in Starfield with all the empty space, the same 5 repeated planetary buildings, only like 3 types of enemies, and a severe lack of planet flora/fauna. And the missions are mostly really boring and not challenging.
I’m not hopeful that Elder Scrolls 6 is going to be anything better than mid-tier.
Since Morrowind. Skyrim wasn’t bad, don’t get me wrong, but it can’t hold a candle to its granddaddy in terms of world-building and stat-based character advancement, which was sacrificed for the sake of action combat that is not even close to good enough to carry the game.
But here’s the thing… Bethesda hadn’t made a great game before Morrowind either. That was their big breakout hit, and ever since then they’ve just been remaking that same game with slightly different coats of paint hoping to catch lightning in a bottle for a second time. They used to make more varied and innovative games before that, but none of them was really all that good. Terminator: Future Shock had fully 3D environments and enemies and a mouselook control scheme a year before Quake, but there’s a good reason why the latter game is remembered as one of the foundational pillars of the genre and the Bethesda offering lies forgotten.
So I agree with you that expecting TES6 to be amazing is naive, but I don’t think it’s because Bethesda has gotten worse. It has simply regressed to the mean.
their ambition is getting the best of them
Always has been. I haven’t played Starfield yet, but from what I’ve read about it online, including your description, it sounds a hell of a lot like a sci-fi version of Daggerfall, which was insanely overambitious for its time. It’s a shame they seem to have focused on making the graphics prettier rather than the procedural generation more complex and interesting.
I’ve already set starfield aside lol. Glad for the people who are enjoying it but meh. Maybe it’ll be better in a year or after the modding community finishes it
You’re getting downvoted but you’re right. People who buy starfield need to accept to themselves that they enjoy bad games and rewarding the companies that make them.
I imagine you must have a pretty sad life if you find yourself spending free time insulting people who enjoy something you don't like.
There must be some serious mental illness going on to spend time in threads about products you don't like. I don't like Ford vehicles, but I don't spend my time on Ford forums insulting them and their owners because I'm not a miserable loser with nothing to fill my time.
Go find something you enjoy. Nobody is interested in your pathetic trolling.
The only thing worse than corporate cock sucking is this constant insistence that only positive opinions should be shared. If I wrote a dystopic novel about that I’d be criticized for being too heavy handed. And since enshittification is directly the fault of people like you, I’ll piss on you all I’d like thanks.
Lol? Armchair psychology much? I’m talking the shit with my friends and you’re occasionally begging for my attention like I’m your alcoholic father. Stop projecting your shit onto me.
It has nothing to do with agreement. It's the premise of spending time in a forum for a product you don't like, and insulting everyone else. That screams mental illness and a miserable life.
Todd Howard has said ES 6 will be his last Elder Scrolls. That makes me really sad. I was hoping Starfield would be his last game.
I honestly think the only way ES6 could be good would be if the writers and environmental artists of Elder Scrolls Online are a huge part of it. The core Bethesda team has shown they can’t write for shit anymore. And please please can the animators.
I wonder if the utterly generic and inoffensive stories are intentional. People LOVE to be outraged today. They tried to boycott the latest Harry Potter game because they hate J. K. Rowling. Maybe Bethesda is just trying to stay as far away from the outrage as possible, and the result is… this. Maybe all the interesting stories get canned or neutered and turned into side quests.
Wat. No.
Bethesda has had a policy of streamlining thier games and making sure the player can win everything since Oblivion. They only “play it safe” to make sure the player never loses. That’s all it is.
On the one hand I fully agree. They have plenty of resources to be working on multiple projects at once.
On the other, it’s very easy for studios to lose their way when spread too thin. There is value in staying focused.
On the third hand, it’s taking an absurdly long time to build their games now. It’s clear the Gamebryo/Creation Engine is no longer fit for purpose. I don’t give a fuck about object permanence for 10,000 cheese wheels. I want fewer loading screens, much better facial animations, much better lighting, much better performance, and MUCH better collision handling. Unreal proved YEARS ago that functionally unlimited polygon assets were achievable with good performance with dynamic mesh loading. Gamebryo is absolutely shitting the bed with the assets in Starfield. Maybe it wouldn’t take 5+ years to build these games if they weren’t shackled to Gamebryo.
It’s weird, because they absolutely need to switch things up… but also they have a winning formula and so long as the games sell they will never adapt.
For me, the biggest fault isn’t the tech itself (at least not directly), but the game design. Every time they strap another system to that Frankenstein’s monster of an engine, those systems need to be justified in gameplay, which is harder to do the more there are. As everything grows in scale and scope, each component, whether locations or mechanics, feels less individually compelling. Then they hide mechanics behind the tech tree, which solves one issue by focusing the player experience, but now the quests feel even more bland because they need to appeal to every possible build.
Except you’re looking at Unreal from a purely graphical perspective and as if Bethesda’s slowest process was making the engine work. If either of those two points were the issue, we’d have a whole bunch of Bethesda-style games on Unreal already, but we don’t.
wccftech.com
Aktywne