It does have split screen, and getting that mode in particular to run well is why the Xbox Series S version had problems coming to market. I can’t speak for how well it runs on PS5, but it had no problems getting certified by Sony.
There were several deviations from System Shock 2 along the way. And even if this one plays like that, I hope they nail the story stuff they’re going for. Previews have seemed impressed.
How about 2026? If you played Alyx, you’d know why it’s rational to expect HL3. And according to some datamining, they’re staffing up specifically for HL3. Granted, that could also make it a 2027 game, with how AAA games are developed these days.
I have. It does have base building, but it doesn’t really have choke points the way that StarCraft does. That doesn’t make it a deal-breaker, as I do enjoy that game. In fact, the way it has a controllable character that puts a controller-friendly speed limit on APM is something it has in common with Cannon Brawl.
I’d be happy if they pandered more to controller players without removing the decision making in base building, like Halo Wars did. I always look to Cannon Brawl as an indication of what RTS can still be (by which I mean, not exactly like Cannon Brawl).
Is this a modern/old dichotomy? Playing through Metaphor right now, I agree that they go with the old-school dungeon crawler approach, but Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy VII are definitely not modern, and I don’t think they’d fall into the same bucket.
I’d make that trade, easily. More often I find games these days are too long to their own detriment than that they felt like they ought to be that long. Your mileage may vary on a game by game basis, but in general, that’s how it’s been lately.
It’s true, and I’d certainly like to see some of these studios try to target making many games at that budget than a single game at ten times that every 7 or 8 years, but even these “cheaper” games you listed still take a long time to make, and I think that’s the problem to be solved. Games came out at a really rapid clip 20-25 years ago, where you’d often get 3 games in a series 3 years in a row. We can argue about the relative quality of those games compared to what people make now and how much crunch was involved, but if the typical game is taking more than 3 years to make, that still says to me that maybe their ambitions got out of hand. The time involved in making a game is what balloons a lot of these budgets, and whereas you could sell 3 full-priced games 3 years in a row back in the day, now you’re selling 1 every 6 years, and you need to sell way, way more of them to make the math work out.
Alright, not like for like exactly, and at 34M, we’re stretching the definition of shoestring. I’ll bet KC:D’s sequel spent far more, for one. I’m with you that more of these studios ought to be aiming for reasonable fidelity in a game that can be made cheaply, but when each of those studios took more than 5 years to build their sequels, that becomes more and more unlikely.
Baldur’s Gate 3 showed studios that gamers are looking for an actual complete game for their $60
This language always misses me. Every game I buy is complete. Adding an expansion to it later doesn’t make it less complete, and it’s not like BG3 wasn’t without major bugs.