Hi-Fi rush comes out of nowhere to massive critical acclaim just to be shut down anyway because Starfield sucked ass. Why people ever do business with these shitass publishers I'll never understand
Because the indie space is also a graveyard. Investors are increasingly wary of funding anything but a "guarantee" and plenty of studios have had to shutter because the funding they were promised was rescinded.
The major publishers are at least a paycheck that can keep a studio going for another year or two.
Because the indie space is also a graveyard. Investors are increasingly wary of funding anything but a “guarantee” and plenty of studios have had to shutter because the funding they were promised was rescinded.
Maybe gaming has become too bloated as a concept if no company can ever produce a product with their own money any more, instead always listening entirely to investor cash.
So... only independently wealthy people should make games?
Game dev takes time. The way you shrink that time is to do it full time instead of working on it in your spare time for a decade or so. Because of increased cost of living, the ability to just take a few months off and burn your savings is increasingly not viable.
That is where investors come in. Whether it is a kickstarter campaign (NEVER PRE-ORDER!! RAWR!!!!), a venture capitalist, or a major publisher. And all of those have consequences.
But, increasingly, it is only the major publishers who are even trying. And they are increasingly selective of who they try it with. NoClip have been making an indie game as a way to better understand the market and they have a SPECTACULAR video where Danny O'Dwyer talks about his experience pitching the game to publishers and what kinds of responses they get. And it is really telling that he gushes over how nice one publisher (I think it was Humble?) were in that they actually responded and said they couldn't move forward rather than just ghosting him.
Sure but that's only a piece of the puzzle. Housing, food, and general living costs are so insane now that any decent savings would be obliterated much more quickly. UBI would be a better solution here, but that's almost a pipedream at this point.
Um I disagree. The biggest barrier is having the capital to do the thing. I think a number of states have a reduced/free option if your income is below the poverty line (calculated as having low or negative income in the startup phase, not necessarily based on assets), or being lucky enough to have a spouse with healthcare. That said, it's entirely doable to go without healthcare, albeit risky. I started a contracting company 3 years ago with almost no money and the tools I had from my apprentice/jman years, and still don't have health insurance, though I'm hoping to get some later this year.
Taking a look at big-cash high profile releases like Redfall and Starfield…is “guaranteed failure” what they’re going for? Because those indie games were pretty much the main reason I kept subscribing to game pass.
Yeah the studio put out nothing but nice games. Sure, Ghostwire in particular wasn't stellar, but it was also enjoyable and pretty well done. Evil Within was dorky, but in just the right way. Hi-Fi was phenomenal, and that alone should have seen them physically behead every single higher manager at Bethesda before they tough anyone at Tango.
But alas, apparently if it ain't Fallout: Ghostwire or Fallout: Hi-Fi, then it doesn't matter. Manager bonuses ain't going to pay themselves (hrm... come to think of it, they do?), line has to go up!
The company said it wants to be “more selective and focused in the allocation of development resources”, and as a result of the “close examination”
Hate company gibberish like this. We plan to spend money differently... Somehow, but were planning!
Additionally Square needs to stop releasing games exclusively to a single platform, no wonder Rebirth sales haven't been released as many (including myself) are waiting for the PC release.
Mainly waiting for PC release so I can use mods to shut Chadley up, and turn off all the anime grunting.
Very few third-party games remain exclusive to one platform forever, so in those cases I'm usually content to just wait it out until the exclusivity deal is over then pick the game up on a platform I own. Sometimes the wait can be pretty long but I really don't have much of a sense of FOMO most of the time.
So basically they shut down their games actively being developed or games like NieR Reincarnation (I am legitimately upset they did not patch it to work offline, that was a great game that died yesterday) just so they could claim a loss. This is likely for tax reasons, if I had to guess.
You could buy it early access to give them the support (and get it cheaper) but wait for 1.0 to play it? Supposing you have the willpower I wouldn't that is 😅
I'm definitely going to wait. I looked at the gameplay and while it does look exciting I think I'll get turned off when it abruptly ends and have to wait another few months.
Do they offer steep discount to early buyers?
I mean if I get the game at like 20% discount or something in early buy, then i would consider getting it.
The next-gen update includes native applications for the consoles, Performance mode and Quality mode settings, as well as stability improvements and fixes. This means the game will be playable up to 60 frames per second and with an increased resolution.
Really stretching the definition of "next-gen" there. I'm pretty sure those have been standard for years now. But then it is Bethesda we're talking about, still using the same hacked-up engine from Morrowind.
'member when we were able to self host servers of our games? I member. CoD4 was awesome because of that, later the pirated version of MW2 too. These games (the first MW and MW2) are still alive because of that.
Not quite as important as the right to repair, but close in spirit: I would love to see a legal requirement for shut-down online games to release the server specs needed for the community to replace/maintain them.
Edit: And data export for existing players, so our game progress can be reconstructed on community servers, of course.
shutting down most central servers is a death sentence anyway. I'm not putting another decade of grinding into a private server when my Diablo 3 characters are gone.
Agreed. But not impossible. Insignia got original Halo 2 Xbox Live servers back online. Most nights you can find a game easily with 20-40 people online during peak hours. It requires a soft mod and maybe 1-2 hours of set up to get online. If anyone could just turn on their old Xbox and play, I'm confident those numbers would be in the hundreds at least.
Allowing people to run private servers is an easy way to allow those that want to play to keep playing in an era where most games have some level of online functionality.
It's a 5 dollar game (being generous) that was already overpriced at $6. I get wanting more money, but your product isn't worth the price increase to begin with.
It's a 5 dollar game (being generous) that was already overpriced at $6.
Facts and opinions are different things.
If you don't like the game, or think it's overpriced, don't buy it. The dev should continue to price it as they see fit.
When AAA publishers price games at $70, the solution is not to buy it. It's not different here, except that $6 > $8 is not a difference most people (except the dev, due to volume) will care about.
Well. Thankfully he never said that his statement was an objective fact.
Seriously, what’s up with you people? Do you need every single statement prefaced with “this is only my subjective opinion and not concrete fact but-!” Or you’ll take it like they’re trying to preach the word of god?
You’re not a computer. Why are you acting like one?
Well, one, Jesus Christ, it’s not even my statement. Two, the guy saying “this game isn’t worth $8” is obviously a subjective statement because it literally cannot ever be an objective statement.
Like. By definition.
When you see a movie rating and someone rates it four out of five stars, you understand that’s not them declaring a universal constant, correct?
You can just say you goofed up and said something silly lmao. It’s more embarrassing to suddenly go “uhm, actually…. Have you considered I suddenly don’t want to talk about this anymore?” When confronted with an error on your part.
Okay, no, that’s fine. You can double down and say that you firmly believe someone saying “I don’t think this video game is worth $8” is an objective statement. Not exactly the move I would make but yunno you’ve got an uhh… interesting noggin on ya (don’t get too mad, that’s a subjective statement).
If I can set aside the zingers for a second: kind of.
But this only works because we know there can't be objectivity here. Minotaur even says that in one of his arguments.
The problem---and this is a huge pet peeve of mine, it's kind of the reason these conversations always turn into pissing matches---is that this is an opinion disguised as a fact statement. Probably, to appear more important than it is.
If they had said "I wouldn't pay $8 for this." Well, that's fine. They can do whatever they want. They're dismissable.
But who wants to be dismissed, right? Is it fine if they're the only person in a room of 100 who wouldn't pay $8 for this thing?
It's not fine because they're not actually arguing about the game at all. They're arguing about what has consensus.
"This game isn't worth $8," countered by "Yes, it is." It should have had more content; the content it has is fine. The graphics should be better; the graphics are tastefully retro. This doesn't lead anywhere. It can't.
You can't argue about what the game is or isn't because it isn't either one. So, what people end up arguing about is which opinion is more popular. The "correct" opinion is the one that has the larger army. This ends up being exclusively about social power. And, this is the reason why these conversations get so heated. Both sides, both incorrect, are fighting for the right to be correct.
So, can "this game isn't worth $8" be interpreted as an opinion? I mean, sure. I do that all the time. It has to be said in good faith, though. If you start implying people are wrong to think it's worth more, then you're betraying your real purpose here a bit.
Yes they literally did. “This is not an $8 game” means “I don’t think this game is worth $8” when talking about a game that is in the real world price at $8.
No offense, but if English isn’t your second or third language or something you might genuinely have a reading/cognition problem. This is not like a strange use of language, this is just basic sentence structure that should be easily understood by middle school. It’s like the easiest question on the SAT
Because there are multiple ways to say a particular sentence and some people opt to not use the most passive voice possible when speaking (taking an active voice).
I mean yeah sure man if you want to make utilizing basic phrases and concepts into a “normal people vs pussies” type of dynamic where you are putting yourself in the latter camp sure dude, go ahead.
Well. Thankfully he never said that his statement was an objective fact.
They did. Just because you don't explicitly say "this is a fact", doesn't mean you're not making a statement of fact. "This is a $5 game" is a statement of fact. "I wouldn't pay more than $5 for this game" is a statement of opinion. That's the difference between humans reading a passage and computers doing the same. Humans take context and past experience into account, all of which say that the phrasing they originally used implies an objective fact.
No he didn’t. He said “this isn’t a $6 game, let alone an $8 game”. Both of those are subjective opinion statements. He is referring to the perceived value of the game being lower to the actual costs of the game ($6 and $8 respectively)
This is really not a difficult thing. I’m not sure why so many Lemmy users are struggling with it
In the only perfectly logical interpretation of the comment, you would be correct. Unfortunately, humans are not always perfectly logical and will often say things that are illogical. The most common meaning intended by the phrase "this is a $5 game" is the illogical one of presenting it as an objective fact.
I refuse to believe that this is the first time you've encountered an illogical statement.
It's fine (and expected in most human interactions) to default to assuming that the most commonly intended meaning is what's intended. And no, that doesn't mean you should respond like an asshole. Respond to the intended meaning of the original statement instead of commenting on how your use of the English language is superior to theirs.
This is how human interactions work in general. It's worth learning if you want to fit into society.
Anyways I agree with howrar, and all the downvotes on your thread show how many people also do. Language isn't something that College Board can really regulate. They can punish you for not following their rules, sure, but the thing about language is that it changes.
It does change. But it doesn’t change when a subjective statement is a subjective statement. “This movie is 4 out of 5 stars” “this game isn’t worth $6 or $8” are never ever going to be objective statements regardless of if it’s 1150 or 2991
I see that you have been inspired to downvote. Interesting.
This is a pretty silly-cal conversation. "Facts and opinions are different things." was only a minor facet in circuitfarmer's reply anyways. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjectification_(linguistics) literally turned many sentences into opinions. If we're really gonna look at these from a lingusitics standpoint, there's nothing that indicates if it's an opinion from just syntax analysis. It's only because we often associate "5 stars" and "worth" with opinions that it looks like an opinion.
Yes. And the original commenter was giving his opinion. This is really not a deep or complex conversation and it’s profound that so many nerds are intending on making it one, presumably just because they at their core disagree with the guys opinion.
I'm not going to repeat what I've already said. If you choose to ignore it, then so be it. There isn't really anything I can say to convince you that this is true. You just have to go out in the world and experience it for yourself.
That subreddit was simultaneously the funniest and creepiest subreddit I've ever visited. It's hilarious how sure they are that they will all be billionaires but I always got the creeps when thinking about how I was reading the comments from a bunch of people just throwing their life savings down the toilet.
ign.com
Hot