OT: Video Games/Computers/Gadgets/Gizmos

[MikeIsGood]

Read on Twitter

Absolutely incredible that this is the resolution they draw to after the insane Suicide Squad flop.

[tydett]

Read on Twitter

Truly depressing on how the game industry is taking all the wrong lessons from these massive IP flops.

Agree. But on the other hand, they see Genshin Impact, Candy Crush, and PUBG bringing in billions of dollars and realize that is the likely future of games because we have lost our appetite for good ones.

[MikeIsGood]

I think it's worth acknowledging that there are some successful live service games. I suppose I could be a little biased here because I play one, but Path of Exile qualifies and it's incredible. Outside of maybe $20 worth of stash tabs, it's also legitimately able to be played with no additional cost forever.

But because some succeed (whether "good" games or not), now everyone wants to do it. I think ultimately that the problem is that some studios are forcing it as opposed to letting it happen when it makes sense, and I think it's likely that people who don't know jack **** about video games are making directives to the people that do. And I think that's ultimately why some studios have been going back to the indie route in the past year (few months especially).

[FrieAaron]

They're honestly stupid not to. It's crazy to me with how frugal gamers are in some ways just how much money they'll spend on extras. I remember reading from a dev that a single mount in World of Warcraft made more money than Starcraft 2 did. As in the whole game.

Edit: of course the other side of this, from a game dev perspective is with this model there can be fewer "winners." Live service and battlepass models are designed to keep you sucked into that game exclusively.

[MikeIsGood]

They're honestly stupid not to. It's crazy to me with how frugal gamers are in some ways just how much money they'll spend on extras. I remember reading from a dev that a single mount in World of Warcraft made more money than Starcraft 2 did. As in the whole game.

Edit: of course the other side of this, from a game dev perspective is with this model there can be fewer "winners." Live service and battlepass models are designed to keep you sucked into that game exclusively.

This isn't considered enough, it seems. As a POE player, I have absolutely zero room to play another live service game - at least not to the extent that these companies want you to play them.

[ReasonablySober]

It isn't just Suicide Squad that bombed, though. It's Marvel's Avengers, Anthem, Evolve, Ghost Recon: Breakpoint, Babylon's Fall, Redfall, and probably a bunch I'm missing.

It seems like more often than not these games end up shutting down studios.

[MikeIsGood]

The only reason I called out Suicide Squad is because it's an actual Warner Brothers game.

[Ron Swanson]

Live-service games have been around since online gaming has. The problem is that all these studios are sinking massive budgets into these games that end up having, what, a 2-year shelf life if things go right? Like, it's not a sustainable investment model. Throw in the time constraints that all these devs are forced to endure, and it's no wonder that for every Helldivers 2 you're getting about 7-8 bloated loot shooters that just end up DOA. Anthem basically killed BioWare, and that was more than 5-years ago. That's why it's taken almost 8-years to get another Mass Effect game (and who knows if it'll actually be good).

[tydett]

Part of the blight is the Early Release cycle- it makes sense from a studio's standpoint: get an early investment from a community who then does quality control checks for you. For gamers, it's a chance to feel like part of a game development. But it also offers the chance for so much bloatware and trash and outright scams where stuff is promised, players buy in, and then stuff gets abandoned when the studio takes the money and runs.

[TroyD92]

The other thing about live service games is that they think they can makeup margins by removing the ability to pirate games. The issue there is that the people who pirate games were never going to pay for them in the first place (too expensive, no money, etc).

I liked the last Harry Potter game a lot and if they don't make a sequel because they want to transition to a live service one would be sad.

[GoldenAntlers]

Part of the blight is the Early Release cycle- it makes sense from a studio's standpoint: get an early investment from a community who then does quality control checks for you. For gamers, it's a chance to feel like part of a game development. But it also offers the chance for so much bloatware and trash and outright scams where stuff is promised, players buy in, and then stuff gets abandoned when the studio takes the money and runs.

I'm over early releases. I dislike how everyone is an expert on launch. How there are already guides and video walkthroughs on everything.

The sense of exploration is dying. And then, even if you start fresh and don't watch videos you fall so far behind so fast.

[MikeIsGood]

Part of the blight is the Early Release cycle- it makes sense from a studio's standpoint: get an early investment from a community who then does quality control checks for you. For gamers, it's a chance to feel like part of a game development. But it also offers the chance for so much bloatware and trash and outright scams where stuff is promised, players buy in, and then stuff gets abandoned when the studio takes the money and runs.

I'm over early releases. I dislike how everyone is an expert on launch. How there are already guides and video walkthroughs on everything.

The sense of exploration is dying. And then, even if you start fresh and don't watch videos you fall so far behind so fast.

I totally get your point and this is not a counter to it. All valid.

I like EA sometimes. I think it's ridiculous that SO many games do it now, but I think it can be really good for small studios. There's considerable risk with it flaming out and not being a good game, or the devs going dark, but it's also gone right many times too.

With all due respect to Larian, and even though I bought and enjoyed, and even appreciated how they got feedback from the community and made changes, a gigantic game like BG3 going EA feels a little less...palatable. But at least they kept it to only the first 1/5 of the game, basically.

[GoldenAntlers]

Part of the blight is the Early Release cycle- it makes sense from a studio's standpoint: get an early investment from a community who then does quality control checks for you. For gamers, it's a chance to feel like part of a game development. But it also offers the chance for so much bloatware and trash and outright scams where stuff is promised, players buy in, and then stuff gets abandoned when the studio takes the money and runs.

I'm over early releases. I dislike how everyone is an expert on launch. How there are already guides and video walkthroughs on everything.

The sense of exploration is dying. And then, even if you start fresh and don't watch videos you fall so far behind so fast.

I totally get your point and this is not a counter to it. All valid.

I like EA sometimes. I think it's ridiculous that SO many games do it now, but I think it can be really good for small studios. There's considerable risk with it flaming out and not being a good game, or the devs going dark, but it's also gone right many times too.

With all due respect to Larian, and even though I bought and enjoyed, and even appreciated how they got feedback from the community and made changes, a gigantic game like BG3 going EA feels a little less...palatable. But at least they kept it to only the first 1/5 of the game, basically.

I do like that they withheld content for release, but so much time had passed. Early release being a 3 year ordeal is a bit excessive.

I liked it with Valheim, I guess.

I love that players have a chance to give feedback and participate early.

[MikeIsGood]

Watch on YouTube

This is going to be the open world, high fantasy, carefully crafted RPG that isn't a soulslike that I have been waiting years for. I am so **** hyped.

[TroyD92]

Assuming Dragons Dogma II is single player only? Looks like it would be a ton of fun coop

[Siefer]

The economics of game dev are collapsing pretty visibly, and it's been going on for years now, just propped up by cheap money, and the recent pandemic boom. Costs have gotten out of control, with every game seeming to be do-or-die for studios, and we're seeing the breaking point hit with these massive layoffs. This didn't come from out of nowhere - every successive generation of console has ramped up the costs, and we've seen increasingly desperate strategies from breaking key pieces of games off for DLC, to predatory microtransactions, to live service models that compromise the games they're strapped to.

Some live service games work, and are very successful, but for every Genshin Impact, there are a half-dozen Suicide Squads. I don't know what the fix is, and I think many of these layoffs are short-sighted plays for shareholders that leave long-term damage, but when Sony starts sounding unsure about blockbuster hits like Spiderman and Horizon, something is very wrong.

[MikeIsGood]

I know it's always a weird elphedunk in the room, but games are really cheap. Like, really cheap. SNES games used to sell for $50 on release, and I also seem to recall there being some more frequent price variability where some games were more (and less) expensive.

But somewhere along the way, $50 became the expectation. And it was such a thing to move to $60, and then especially $70. I believe by inflation standards games today should run around $140 compared to 1994.

This isn't a call to make games $140, which would be absolutely wild. It's a complex problem. But there is something weird about, for example, paying $70 for FF7 Rebirth and playing it for, I dunno, I am going to project/guess about 120 hours? Ditto for Baldur's Gate 3. I'm ~$250 in lifetime on Path of Exile, and have played 3000 hours (over 7 years). $250 for 7 years of entertainment! It feels like we GROSSLY underpay for quality content and end up having to prop it up by paying too much for **** (F in the chat for anyone who shelled out money for Suicide Squad).

[Matches Malone]

I'm excited for this. I never got around to playing it on the PS5 when it came out for whatever reason. I bet it's going to look great on PC.

Read on Twitter

[tydett]

I know it's always a weird elphedunk in the room, but games are really cheap. Like, really cheap. SNES games used to sell for $50 on release, and I also seem to recall there being some more frequent price variability where some games were more (and less) expensive.

But somewhere along the way, $50 became the expectation. And it was such a thing to move to $60, and then especially $70. I believe by inflation standards games today should run around $140 compared to 1994.

This isn't a call to make games $140, which would be absolutely wild. It's a complex problem. But there is something weird about, for example, paying $70 for FF7 Rebirth and playing it for, I dunno, I am going to project/guess about 120 hours? Ditto for Baldur's Gate 3. I'm ~$250 in lifetime on Path of Exile, and have played 3000 hours (over 7 years). $250 for 7 years of entertainment! It feels like we GROSSLY underpay for quality content and end up having to prop it up by paying too much for **** (F in the chat for anyone who shelled out money for Suicide Squad).

I'm very interested in seeing what happens with Game Pass over the next few years. It seems almost impossible for them to be making money on it at $15 a month with even new releases hitting day-of.

Furthermore, I find myself waiting for certain games saying "Well, maybe it'll eventually come to Game Pass." Thank you, Tales of Arise!

[ReasonablySober]

The Xbox partner video was this afternoon. Didn't see much for me. Except The Last Bezerker: Khazan

Watch on YouTube

Looks amazing. No release date, though.