ampersandrew @ ampersandrew @lemmy.world

Posts

105

Comments

2,425

Joined

1 yr. ago

The sale is also hours old, and the new owners are all out of town.

Grubb's got an excellent morning news show that he'll be back to doing this coming week if you wanted to poke your head in and check it out. They've also got a number of shows that are a good laugh, like Blight Club, where they take turns playing awful video games all the way to credits.

A boss several steps up the chain decided to make changes to how the site operates that were incompatible with what Giant Bomb is, namely that they wanted an advertiser-friendly, "brand-safe" image with less swearing and streaming. This led to a number of key people leaving, at which point, the name Giant Bomb isn't really worth anything to anyone. It's been covered in tons of gaming circles this week alongside the similar destruction of Polygon, so I didn't think it needed to be stated yet again as I was summarizing bullet points from a live stream.

Which Jeff? Jeff, Jeff, or Jeff? Jeff and Jeff are now co-owners, and Jeff has his own solo thing, being a family man, which seems to be how he wants to live his life these days.

Kinda Funny did exactly that, and IGN still stands taller. But I think that just speaks to how many competitors can possibly follow that same model, because they're driven by ad revenue and SEO.

For IGN, probably indefinitely. They do real journalism and real criticism over there, but their site is also a horrendous challenge to navigate due to ads, and there's more Star Wars and Marvel on the front page than there are video games. Gamespot follows a similar model, and they're still under Fandom, and that will probably work out...fine...ish...compared to trying to make Giant Bomb work under that banner.

And GamesBeat, and Aftermath, and NextLander. I think this is the only way game media survives. The corporate ownership doesn't appear to work for anything other than the IGNs of the world.

It can be both. It was impressive when Oblivion had 7 different interlocking systems but none of them were particularly good, but these days, I think we expect at least one or two of them to be significantly better.

The problems with Starfield aren't so much the bugs as they are fundamental, often dated, design issues. Here's a sort of Let's Play from a podcast I follow with one guy who loves trying to bend sandbox simulations to the point of breaking and a gal who writes comedy. Around the 10m mark, you can start to see where this sandbox should have accounted for this kind of play. If you can't simultaneously do that while making a galaxy with 1000 planets, then you should probably scope down until you can. Starfield is not a terrible game, but Bethesda needs to evolve.

I wish we lived in a world close to that one, and maybe someday we'll get there. Guilty Gear Strive's source code just got leaked in its entirety, so complete that it can just be loaded as is into the Unreal editor, and a lot of people see this as a bad thing rather than the game ascending to immortality.

I once paid $140 (just pre-pandemic inflation) for a meal with two drinks at a fancy restaurant for a friend's bachelor party. It was delicious. At the same time, I realized that no one meal, no matter how good, was worth that price. I don't know what the threshold is for how much I'll pay for a single video game, but $80 is more palatable to me when the game asking for it isn't Mario Kart.

They've been putting out annual releases for a long time, and Call of Duty used to still have LAN. It doesn't look like Madden ever had LAN, from a quick search of the old covers, which would list the features the game supported, but it was pretty common even in console games back then.

Yes, precisely. These days, when I consider buying a game, if it doesn't have LAN, private servers, or direct connections, I treat the multiplayer as though it doesn't exist, because one day it won't.

I'm struggling with this too, about 1/3 of the way through the main quest. They tutorialize you on feints and defensive mechanics, but you can't really punish aggression like you can in a fighting game, and the NPC never falls for my feints, basically ever. Getting through a melee fight feels like luck. The last one I got through was because I managed to impale him with three arrows before the sword fight actually started.

I'm disagreeing with the idea that Hi-Fi Rush and the one branch of the Marvel Rivals team being let go are a regular occurrence. In general, teams are being let go because their games aren't making money. Their games aren't making money because there are too many games out there that are also spending too much money on their production, and they're being subsidized by a consumer base that's stretched too thin to make it all work for everyone that was in the industry as little as 3 years ago.

A small portion of the Rivals team was laid off for similar reasons to Hi-Fi Rush in that the CEO changed the direction of the company. This would still be an outlier compared to the rest of the industry. Respawn got hit with layoffs because their live service isn't making anywhere near as much money as it used to, and live services need to keep making tons of money to justify new content for them; yes, this is wholly unsustainable. A live service team getting laid off has nothing to do with whether or not it was a hit and everything to do with whether or not it's still a hit.

Maybe it is a lack of imagination on my part, but that mechanic seems to rely heavily on characters that can be killed and come back to life with a vengeance on a regular basis, which I don't think makes sense in any of the settings you listed except for Borderlands, with its New-U stations, funny enough. You could adapt it into something where both you and an enemy are defeated non-lethally, I suppose, but that's a concept that strangely doesn't have a common template in video games.

That boom also just led to a market with way more games in it every year. With more supply and less demand, you can't spend as much making the game and expect to be a success unless you've got a sure thing. So the higher prices will only be afforded by the games that would have been a success charging less than $70.

I'm unconvinced that the Nemesis system would have worked well in too many other settings, but one game patent that had a tangible effect on the industry was Bandai-Namco's patent on loading screen mini games. Remember how you could make the Soul Calibur II characters yell stuff while the match loaded? Funny that we didn't see it again until Street Fighter 6, isn't it? Conveniently after a patent would have expired. We went through an entire era of games with load times that could have benefited from mini games, and by the time the patent expired, we had largely come up with ways to get rid of load screens altogether.

I just need to be able to buy and download DRM-free movies. Outside of that, I don't care what it looks like. Movie studios put so much DRM on my Blu Rays that they're a pain to rip (but notably, not impossible to rip), and "digital copies" of movies are just long term rentals. Meanwhile the movie industry is on fire while their old revenue streams dry up, and they're scratching their heads as to where they went wrong.