I was an original backer, I’ve played various iterations over the years and it really takes a lot of rose tint to find the game as it is enjoyable. The core loop isn’t even in place yet. The systems that do exist and work are interesting, the graphics and aesthetics are top notch, in parts, and at times it feels like we’re going to get something revolutionary. But then you play for a while and the unfinished jank gets to you, it’s not very fun. It’s cool, it’s impressive, the scope is insane and you can get lost in the vastness of space in ways that other games just can’t even approach. But it’s not fun. You can make it fun with friends or by setting up your own goals disjoined from the gameplay loop. Like try and jump a vehicle into the cargo bay mid flight or see how tightly you can race around asteroids. But if you just play the existing little loops it sucks. This is of course my subjective opinion. You might love the bounty system and the combat. You might love the salvage runs and transport missions but to me it’s like Euro Truck Simulator which is about the most boring shit I can imagine. And both the space and ground combat just isn’t even remotely as good as other games that just focus on that, which is understandable but I’m always left with this feeling of “will I really enjoy the finished product?” And I’m not sure. The game they said they were going to make in the Kickstarter, that game I would’ve enjoyed. I loved Chris Roberts games as a kid, but this monstrosity it has become? I just don’t know.
That said I really do believe they’re trying to make the best game ever. They just don’t fundamentally understand why we need deadlines and a fixed scope to get things out the door.
I don't think they were chasing newer tech, so much as the development was taking so incredibly long that their current tech had literally aged out of the common gamer's expectations and they HAD to do it over to seem current.
That may be. I do remember somewhere in a documentary that they kept re-developing stuff for different libraries/technologies. I think at least one was voluntary. I can't recall which doc this was, though.
I feel the same way. For the 30 or so dollars I spent as an early backer I’ve actually had some fun times in the game, and I don’t actually think it’s quite the total loss that people make it out to be, but it certainly should be far, far better than it is after a decade and 600m dollars invested in it.
It’s just a clunky reskin of fo4 with no depth. I’ve put about 50 hrs in at this point & will probably continue for a bit because it’s a comforting loot cycle that pleases my lizard brain. It really lacks the feeling exploration possibilities that Skyrim & fallout worlds have. The bugs, UI, bland emptiness, and shit tier maps are why I wouldn’t recommend…but is a decent time kill if you’ve enjoyed their previous games
Same, I pirated it to give it a try, put in a few dozen hours to make sure I'm not missing anything but left pretty disappointed tbh. It has a strong interesting opening but the more you try to get into the nitty gritty details, the more shallow and flawed the game becomes until you're just doing chores for the sake of it. Some people find enjoyment in these chores but it ain't me, maybe in a few years it becomes better. I got phantom liberty instead and am having a blast there instead
When I say opening / beginning I don't mean the 20 minutes of prologue, I mean the first ~5 hours of game showing new mechanics and worlds to you, making the illusion that there's lot of unique fun content to do. Eventually it all started to look like same formulaic shallow crap to me and the game didn't live up to that initial impression of freedom, exploration and progression, it's half baked in everything.
The game didn't open up for me until about 8-10 hours in and felt really weird and restricted during that time. No idea what impression of freedom, exploration and progression you're talking about here because the beginning does not give you anything like that at all with how it makes you follow the very boring main quest.
Same happened to me, I pirated it to try it out and after an hour or two I got bored and called it quits. I returned to it once more but after maybe 5 hours I just uninstalled it.
I’m non-binary and I’m afraid to express my gender in public. It’s good to know I should also be afraid to express my gender in a VIDEO GAME (points for realism I guess).
This mod “impinge” on NexusMod’s rights, it’s their private service and they have the right to set conditions on it. One of which, mods cannot remove diversity.
It’s as simple as that. The people can go elsewhere to find the same mod or share it among themselves.
As for Iran statement, are you serious? There are people getting murdered in USA for even being non-binary. Even “binary” people are getting shot for being inclusive. Like this one www.cnn.com/2023/08/21/us/…/index.html
Let me guess, you don’t have any trans friends. Probably don’t have any gay friends, either.
I know no fewer than 5 people who have been physically assaulted over their sexuality or their gender identity. My local pro-LGBTQ church was vandalized by people who left messages about how god hates them.
You deserve all those downvotes you’re complaining about if you really believe that non-binary people in the Western world aren’t reasonably afraid to express their gender.
And as for “how it relates to…a game”. Can you imagine being Jewish and a bunch of pro-nazi mods made it to the frontpage of your favorite game? Can you imagine if then everyone started bitching because the site took those hateful mods down?
Games, as online communities, are used to “innocently” draw people towards extreme beliefs.
It shines in 2D where Unity falters, yes. But it’s perfectly capable of doing 3D competently. It’s shaders and lightning pipelines that are a bit rough on the edges, but that can be overcome with time with more brainpower coming in to contribute. The scripting is also far more robust than the hodgepodge that Unity tries to pass off as C#. The great advantage is that Godot is a non-profit foundation with a transparent governance model. Not a predatory venture capitalist behemoth like Unity.
Godot is a passable engine. It doesn't have a massive pile of money behind it, but it'll generally do most things adequately.
Honestly - and I may be biased as I'm a AAA dev who works with the engine - Unreal is really the way to go. Reasonable pricing on a powerful engine. The main issue is that it's bloated as hell and there's a learning curve... but if you're an indie, it's just as usable as Unity. Plus if you wanted to get into AAA development someday, Unreal is super popular and used everywhere.
It’s been really great for 2d, 4.0 made it really good for 3d, and it’s even decent for general GUI applications, as an engine it feels ready for wider adoption to me.
I think it’s not up to Unreal quality, but for the vast majority of indie games I believe it’s enough.
Curious if some of the many internal AAA engines out there might start to get shopped around as a new alternate to UE. Sony, Ubisoft, and Microsoft all have a few in house engines that at least on paper seem viable for branching out — the biggest obstacle would be support, I suspect. Which isn’t a trivial obstacle, to be clear.
idTech is due for a resurgence. Maybe Valve could even get a revival in usage of Source.
Have you played Baldur’s Gate 1 recently? 2E is a nightmare of THACO and instant death waiting around every corner. Weapons break constantly, mages inevitably hold your entire party, it’s very easy to wander off in the wrong direction and die, NPCs have wonky stats that cannot be respecced. Save scumming is mandatory unless you really, really know your stuff.
The lethality of the world in 1&2 contributed to so many memorable moments in them, for me at least.
There’s something different about figuring out step by step how it is even possible to beat the enemy that wrecked your shit as soon as you walked into the room, versus grinding out a more typical battle. I’m not saying it’s better, or that BG3 has to be that way, but it is definitely a big part of this particular series for me.
For example, I have vivid memories of running into mind flayers, and fights with certain dragons, and the demogorgon, and Kangaxx, and even the first time getting to the gnoll stronghold.
How else are you meant to interpret this other than it being a bad sign for the studio? Laying off staff in the “home stretch” of a project? I’m sure getting an end game credit will be sufficient consolation for getting ditched at the last stages of a multi year development.
Also no leadership changes either? Not even after andromeda? Sure it’ll be super humbling to sack workers for what seem like incompetent leadership in BioWare since ME3.
Frankly I’m surprised it’s taken this long for BioWare to begin the traditional EA pipeline of being “taken out back” after being squeezed for every bit of profit.
Are we really pretending EA doesn’t do this to every studio that shows a hint of profit decrease? It’s been a major part of their business model for a decade or more.
omg. I’m just 15 hours in, haven’t discovered temples yet, but that seems unconscionable. Like, MMO levels of grind. I mean, I’ve happily put hundreds of hours into each TES-offline, FO-offline, Deus Ex, CP2077, BG3. I don’t mind repetitive if the mechanic is fun.
MMO grind is for when you expect your customers to spend hundreds of hours just hanging out with their friends and you need to find something for them to do. It doesn’t have to be fun or rewarding, just distracting. Maybe TESO and FO76 have distorted their priorities.
The “puzzle” is that when you enter the temple, it goes zero-g and a spinny thing in the middle pops up. You have to float to a thing that looks like a spinning top, and once you float through it, another one appears. You float through a dozen of them or so and then you get a space power. Such a colossal failure of game design that this was acceptable to have as any puzzle, but the audacity to make it literally the same puzzle at every other temple completely boggles my mind.
240 times. Sometimes a dude appears when you leave the temple, and he’ll shoot at you. There are better puzzles on the kids menu at Denny’s.
The number isn’t really the issue. The issue is that every single one is exactly the same. Skyrim had like 80? words of power but they were fun because you had to beat a boss or clear a dungeon or do a quest. In Skyrim you got at least some personal touch to getting those words.
In Starfield it’s always the same 1-2 minute walk from ship to temple and then float around in a small room until the central thing opens and then you get teleported outside the temple where you kill 1 guy that 90% of the time spawns directly in front of you. If it was as many times as in Skyrim it would still be mind numbingly boring, because there’s nothing interesting about them.
To 100% it, yes. It has to be done ever several new game cycles so you’ll also have to go through the other shit multiple times too. I don’t think anyone is expected to do that though. The new game plus stuff undermines the outpost system though. It’ll be gone your next cycle, so just don’t bother I guess? The ideal meta progression would be to rush through the main story and complete all the temples on your cycle then move on.
I’ve only ever really watched this unfold with a causal interest, so whilst I’d like to know more, that article really said very little aside from a few dates and numbers.
More so, and the reason I’m making this comment, is the whole thing felt 100% like the second output of a GPT print. That format of “why is this the way it is? There at several reasons…” followed by a bunch of points that barely address the question, let alone answer it. That and the random bolder phrases.
Still, maybe is had more work put into it than Star Citizen?
Quite a lot of work has gone into sc (more work then exists in the game, thanks Chris Roberts), the problem is, and I’m saying this as someone who has played it with friends, there isn’t a lot of gameplay loop to play. There are gameplay loops, but imo they are kinda… meh?
Which makes me sad. I really want sc to be more than it is.
Roberts is the king of focusing on the wrong shit. Build out the gameplay loops before tacking on dumb shit? Nah let’s put milk and cookies in this bitch.
As long as there’s sufficiently few regulations to stop it being profitable for companies to market and sell vapourware then people will keep assuming they’re not buying into a scam
Tbf, a lot of people misjudged it, including Larian. I don't think a lot of people really believed the "choices and decisions matter" would work as well as it did. Prior to release, I read an article that talked about how it was gonna be neat that the in-game news would update based on your actions. Like, that was the noteworthy function to discuss about the game. "NPCs might talk about your actions in passing to each other".
Did Microsoft underestimate it more than others? Sure. But pretending like every corporation, including Larian, didn't underestimate it a whole lot is a bit crazy.
Edit: and isn't the game Divinity: Original Sin II? Did it have other names in other international markets?
Edit: this was submitted as a response to https://lemmy.world/comment/3615435 but Kbin didn't seem to actually tie them together. It shows me that it was written as a reply on Kbin, but seems to have lost connection to the comment hierarchy.
The degree of success couldn’t be predicted, sure. But larian is not a new studio, BG is a big ip, DOS2 was a big success, the witcher 3 was a tremendous success, and the game was in early access for 3 years so you could very easily gauge how it was going.
If a decider can’t see that coming at least as a significant possibility, they’re all clowns who don’t deserve more than the lowest wages.
Except virtually everyone got it wrong still. Even the head of Larian thought it'd top out at 100k max. That's currently it's average now with it's max being more than 800% higher.
BG is a big IP, but it's never had this level of success. Look at Diablo III's release (similar IP with a long break between games). It had better advertising campaign and still kind of became noise fairly quickly. Game news sites barely covered BG3 until it hit it big.
Microsoft definitely undershot, but it was likely basing it on a lot of the aggregated news as well. It had barely any coverage prior to its official release. This is usually a sign that the game will be mediocre.
Larian is a big studio but its last expected game from its really only known IP was cancelled after being put on hold for four years (granted BG3 was also being developed during this time). It's biggest games prior to this got at least partially funded on Kickstarter (not a knock against KS, but it's not generally seen as the sign of a strong studio to exec-types).
I don't blame an executive for not seeing this coming.
Executives obviously didn't see this coming. But neither did game journalists or even gamers.
Its a mistake in hindsight, but with what everyone generally knew at the time, it was the expectation of most.
There is a difference between misjudging the success and betting on the failure.
Did you read the paper? BG3 was assessed far below just dance or let’s sing ABBA! It was at the very bottom of the list!
I bought the game blind a year before release. Not to test it but because I knew were I was going. Of course I had big fears about it because many games pretended to be BG successors and I didn’t want to get my expectations too high. But I didn’t know anything about it because I didn’t want to spoil the surprise.
The information was there. I don’t know why journalists to whatever didn’t saw it coming but I was prepared for it being a big thing for me. It is litteraly their job to assess whether a game will work or not. They bet on failure. They couldn’t be more wrong, and I don’t think there was any sign of failure.
It was expected to be a second release after being a Stadia exclusive. This isn't judging quality, just impact.
Edit: and let's not pretend by adding "far below" when it was in the same group. And the ranking isn't even totally based on expected sales. The asking prices and the levels aren't in order. You're misinterpreting one quote entirely incorrectly and trying assuming too much from a chart.
I think it’s just an interesting story since we have actual internal emails from Microsoft that we wouldn’t have if it weren’t for the justice department’s lawsuit to stop the Activision buyout.
I'm well aware of that. That's why I named it. They said "Divinity of Sin 2". I was asking if they meant Divinity: Original Sin 2 and if it went by a different name in other markets. I thought that was clear. I'm not sure how you got to think I was asking what it is.
I honestly don't know how that interpretation was possible in the given context. It was mentioned in direct response to someone saying "Divinity of sin 2" and I corrected it.
games
Ważne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.