Poopfeast420 @ Poopfeast420 @discuss.tchncs.de

https://kbin.social/u/Poopfeast420

---

Read more

Posts

2

Comments

280

Joined

2 yr. ago

I watched the trailer and the evolution they're going with is apparently not making an RTS anymore, but an Action Roguelike. If that's the kind of evolution we're talking about, I feel we've already stuff in a similar vein (dunno specifically about roguelike though).

Eh, I don't really care about that stuff, it's all subjective. If they liked it that much, who am I to judge

I haven't paid attention to a lot of lists, but Veilguard might be the outlier here. The game seems to be really divisive. Yesterday I was in a thread on how for someone Veilguard was the last straw, and they're giving up on Bioware completely, and here the game is the fifth best of the year.

1. Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth
2. Astro Bot
3. Black Myth: Wukong
4. Metaphor: ReFantazio
5. Dragon Age: The Veilguard
6. Silent Hill 2
7. Balatro
8. Like a Dragon: Infinite Wealth
9. Helldivers 2
10. The Legend of Zelda: Echoes of Wisdom

Sometimes a tree is just a tree, man.

Maybe Bioware just wasn't happy with the game, it happens all the time. Bioware also cancelled two games in 2013, looks like they were just doing a lot. So, possibly they were just stretched too thin with all those different projects. The founders also left Bioware shortly after Mass Effect 3. Who knows if they were the driving force behind the game, and after they left it didn't really go anywhere.

There are tons of different explanations, but of course it's all EAs fault. From what I've read, working for EA is actually really great, and people seem to love it. That doesn't really gel with the soul-sucking image you try to paint. In the early 2000s they were actually garbage, with the whole EA spouse thing, but they have apparently massively improved since then.

Also, while this isn't really evidence for anything, we've had actual stories that some publishers forced some type of game on a developer, like Redfall or possibly Fallout 76. Personally, I just think stories like these can't stay hidden forever and will eventually make it out into the open, like the Anthem flying stuff.

Finished Disco Elysium. I think I made pretty much the same choices as my first time years ago. I'm still not a huge fan of the ending, but now that knew what to expect, it wasn't as jarring. When I do another playthrough in a couple of years, I might have to be a stealing racist or something, but I like Lieutenant Kim too much and probably won't go through with that.

Then more Windblown. I beat the game on the first three difficulties (of five) now and unlocked almost everything for now. I'll definitely try to get through everything, it doesn't seem too hard.

Finally, I started Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire. I'm still very early on, but I hope I'm finished by the time FF7 Rebirth is out. This game has proper turn-based combat, not just RTwP like the first game, which I like a lot more, even if it's much slower.

What are you even talking about? Why is Epic "extracting money" but GOG is not? Do you mean if you lose your games on Epic you will buy them again on Epic? Nobody does that, and it doesn't happen in the first place.

You commented on a post about a dude who never bought from Epic but still has 200 games there, that Epic is shady for doing this.

I said by that logic, GOG is shady as well, because they also give away tons of games.

Just saying that labeling them as untrustworthy, just because they give away games, doesn't make sense. Steam was never mentioned, or the business practices of different storefronts.

You are pretty much just rambling, so I don't really know what you want to say sometimes.

I never said EA was good, I only ever doubted how EA supposedly just kills their game studios. From all the evidence I've seen, they are pretty hands-off with studios like Bioware or DICE, so a lot falls on the devs themselves, if the games are subpar.

You mentioned Anthem, like if that was the game Bioware wanted. No it wasn't, because apparently the most fun part of the game, the flying, was a suggestion from an EA exec.

Then for Mass Effect Andromeda, EA offered to delay the game again, before it's release, but Bioware didn't want to. Why? Must have been EAs big stick. That game also doesn't have MTX

How is EA chasing money with Mirrors Edge, if they make a sequel, when it took years to barely make money? I'd say that's the exact opposite. The game also has no MTX.

The point of the video I linked is that the people from Bioware actually say EA doesn't dictate what kind of games they have to make. Bioware makes what they want. Even if this video is already 10 years old or if the people don't work there anymore, why would this change? The only reason I could see this change, if the games just continue to underperform constantly, like what's happening with Bungie at the moment.

Why do you think EA was the reason for cancelling Shadow Realms, pretty far into development? Do you know something others don't? Don't just say it's obvious, because it's EA.

You also mention how EA destroys or all the passion or creativity from their dev studios, but how are they doing that? You never explain that part, although you make it seem very obvious.

I think the reason why a bunch of these studios that were bought either go under or release sub-par games is much more simple, and it's not directly EAs fault. After they are bought, management leaves, because they just got tons of money, or they might have a contract, which says they must stay for a few years, but after that they'll leave anyway. Now there's nobody left who made the original games, so the studio declines. It's not like EA can do something against this, unless they make the devs sign some kind of slave contract, where they can never leave the game studio.

the absolute shitshow every Battlefield has been since they were purchased by EA

That would mean basically no good games for almost 20 years, which I can't believe. Even Bad Company 2, BF3 and 4, apparently beloved games in the franchise, are terrible?

Look, I barely play EA games, I just think that they aren't the sole or even major reason a bunch of their dev teams have turned to shit.

I guess if a game is bad, it's EA's fault, but if it's good, it's all because of the dev.

What about Mass Effect 1 and 2, EA had already bought Bioware at that point. What about other Battlefield games? People always rave about Bad Company 2 or maybe 3 and 4, but how come EA only chose to interfere after 20 years?

when you have spent years playing games with a distinct style you can very easily see this shift once EA acquires a studio

Like I said, what does EA do exactly in these cases? People from Bioware themselves said that EA doesn't interfere with them, and they're making their own choices:

https://youtu.be/K9Z-nCv7XsI?t=2885

execs didn’t think much about it one way or the other, until it became a huge hit and then they started getting involved with the seque

I highly doubt that, since Catalyst came out eight years after the first one. If EA was just chasing the money, why wait so long.

That makes GOG untrustworthy as well, I guess, since I have 300 games on there, but never bought one.

Did they? Mass Effect and Dragon Age began under EA, which a lot of people would argue are pretty good.

Also, what does EA do, that's so bad? As far as I know, they're really hands-off, so they don't really meddle in the development, like what we've heard from Bobby Kotick.

The ones I mentioned directly afterward, Vampire Survivors DLC, Bloodshed, AK-xolotl.

Some friends and I gift each other some games each year, and I got Cyberpunk. I'll wait for the new GPU releases before I play it though, since I want to check it out with path tracing.

Also, some Rogue-likes. The latest Vampire Survivors DLC, Bloodshed, and AK-xolotl.

So consoles don't exist?

Also, what exactly is the problem with Steam in your opinion, apart from "monopoly bad."

World of Warcraft by a huge margin. A couple of years ago, I went through all my characters, and added the /played time up. I think it was already over 10k back then, and I've played a bunch since then. Also, I often delete characters, so I can't count those. My sub runs for another 10 days, so I might take the time to check again.

Next is probably Diablo 2, but that was 20 years ago, when this stuff wasn't really automatically tracked.

On Steam I have two idle games at 800 hours, FF14 650h, both Nioh games 600h each.

In a perfect world, sure, but in our reality you'd just get tons of people saying they want Elden Ring for a dollar or something.

But even if it worked, it's just games getting on sale faster. Right now, you can either pay a higher price today or wait until the game gets as cheap as you want, but it might take months or years.

As for just the information, how much people would pay for a game, that's what market research if for I guess.

If it's not just run speed, but reactions in general, it makes sense, because in previous games, your character moves like they're in molasses.