I’m gonna post the whole article because it’s garbage, has no substance and I don’t believe people should click on the link. Do better, GameSpot.
“Bethesda is about to launch Starfield, but what’s coming next? Bethesda Game Studios is making The Elder Scrolls VI and then Fallout 5, so the studio is staying quite busy. In a new interview with GQ, Bethesda’s Todd Howard shared a few new morsels about The Elder Scrolls 6 and discussed when he might retire from making games.
Starting off with the game’s announcement in June 2018, Howard said he often wonders if it was the right thing to announce it so early. “I have asked myself that a lot,” he said. “I don’t know. I probably would’ve announced it more casually.”
Howard also confirmed that The Elder Scrolls 6, or whatever it’s called, does already have a codename but he would not reveal it. As for what he could say, Howard said the game aims to “fill that role of the ultimate fantasy-world simulator.”
“And there are different ways to accomplish that given the time that has passed,” he said.
Howard is 53 now and said it’s “weird for me” to think about retirement, something he believes is a “long, long way off.”
“I want to do it forever,” he said. “I think the way I work will probably evolve, but… look at [71-year-old Mario creator and Nintendo legend Shigeru Miyamoto]. He’s still doing it,” Howard said.
In addition to his duties on Starfield and The Elder Scrolls 6, Howard is an executive producer on the new Indiana Jones game in the works at Machine Games”
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Roblox Corporation, accusing the developer of facilitating "an illegal gambling ecosystem" and violating a federal law.
The complaint was signed by Chief Inspector Slowpoke
Major quality of life feature. People make mistakes, sometimes the character lighting in the gen screen is completely different from in-game and now your character is stuck with purple eyes.
What I’d like to see afterwards is player PC slot kicking / clearing. Far too many people have started a game with some friends only for a person to quit/leave after dropping by to realize to their horror that character is permanently locked to that save and can’t be replaced with an NPC.
Lol. Goodbye BlazeIt! Go out in a...YourName of glory!
But I think people want those characters to show up when the player does and disappear the rest of the time. Otherwise your CoOp saves pretty much need to be 100% co-op. Can't really drop in and out with your friends.
sometimes the character lighting in the gen screen is completely different from in-game
I’ve seen this in a lot of games recently and it annoys me a bit. Diablo 4 for example the character creation hair color looks sometimes okay, but then in-game horrible.
Same reaction, once Baldur’s Gate 3 was out I haven’t touched this game, and probably I’ll wait for a couple of months until they fix the mess they have
Nah, the next CoD is most definitely coming to Steam. Blizzard had to know that these reviews were coming from the discourse online alone. Plus, pretty sure that it’s Microsoft’s decision to do so now anyways and there’s no way their going to limit their potential profits by locking out a platform like that just over some bad reviews.
How is everybody just now finding out how capitalism works? Any public company is LEGALLY REQUIRED to care only about shareholder profits. It is literally illegal for them to do anything else.
Fiduciary duty is a real thing. Agent/principal relationships require the agent to try and get the maximum return for the level of risk.
Even if a CEO doesn’t have a written fiduciary duty in their contract do, the company as a whole usually does.
The CEO of a public corporation reports to the board who report to index fund managers who have a agent/principal relationships with all of their investors.
The comment was basically shorthand for “a fiduciary duty exists between corporate leadership and shareholders, creating a legally-enforceable requirement that the only consideration be maximum potential return on investment for existing shareholders and risk.”
It’s absolutely true in practice. CEOs have gotten sued for not acting in the shareholders best interests.
And in relation to the original comment I replied to, are you truly saying that companies, esp. public companies, are not, FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, beholden to making money for the shareholders? Any “nice” company will make less money, will not compete well, will then fail or be bought out by the less nice, more profitable company.
Im not a lawyer, but I’ve looked into this misunderstanding before and it stems from what constitutes "breaking one’s fiduciary duty to investors. While deliberately acting against the interests of investors is illegal, ive yet to hear of a lawsuit, let alone a successful one, brought by an investor for not making all of the money. Id be interested in hearing an investment oriented lawyers perspective since from what i understand, the full extent of fiduciary duty has not been tested that way in court
Board of directors and company officers have a fiduciary duty to the stockholders and the corporate entity.
Acts done outside their authority as stated in the articles of corporations are said to be ultra vires. They are absolutely actionable.
When the directors or officers breach the fiduciary duty to shareholders, they are liable under what’s called a derivative action, because it is derivative of the contract represented by the stock certificate.
Many of the issues involved in the union’s 11-week film and TV strike are common to those in the video game contract, including wages and artificial intelligence.
The 10 companies facing a possible strike are:
Activision Productions Inc., Blindlight LLC, Disney Character Voices Inc., Electronic Arts Productions Inc., Epic Games, Inc., Formosa Interactive LLC, Insomniac Games Inc., Take 2 Productions Inc., VoiceWorks Productions Inc., and WB Games Inc.
For every success, there's 100s and more failures, scams, and unfulfilled promises. Developers should seek traditional funding if they're so confident in their idea. If I'm taking a financial risk on a developer, I should get a financial return if it succeeds. "Kickstarting" is a fancy way of saying "lets socialize losses and privatize profits".
I’ve only crowdfunded a handful of gsmes, mostly vr. Because they can’t get traditional funding. Despite this I want to support projects that could be interesting. Without Kickstarter these projects would not exist, rather than switch to traditional funding.
I know there’s risk, i know they may never get finished. But its worth the risk in case a true gaming gem comes out.
that's part of every subscription business plan, sadly. The rotation helps keep subscriptions up longer as people have to wait for things to cycle back around.
Are people really going to wait? I thought the whole point was that either the service has to pay for the on-loan games, or if it’s their own product it encourages you to just go buy it if you liked it so much.
Yeah, people definitely wait. Don't have any stats, but I hear people talking about it all the time with regards to streaming services.
THe service does pay for on-loan games, but that's not a reason to rotate. They're paying regardless. THey rotate to try and keep things fresh so people don't cancel.
Oh, as far as video, absolutely. If it leaves one you wait for it to come back on another. But for video games, I just assume once it’s gone, it won’t come back again any time soon. I think there’s kind of different expectations.
Oh yeah, they're probably not waiting months for something to come back. Companies know what's popular, so they tend to stagger those. So people will not cancel if they know next month or the month after is going to be something they want to play.
If you're only interested in one or two games, you'll just buy those (until they stop letting us buy games and force us to rent them).
games
Ważne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.