The Ultimate Superheroines Forum

I still have a soft spot for this game. It let's you be Batgirl. To a certain degree, so far as I'm concerned, 'nuff said'
The boys all have the Arkham games, Spider-man games, and a myriad of other stuff that pretty much rolls off the assembly board. I've been waiting for the WW game for what feels like a billion years now... but for all it's 'issues' Gotham Knights runs well, breaks rarely, and you can be Batgirl. Is it a Game of the Year? F'k no. Is it changing the paradigm? Of course not.

But as a game that works and is fun enough, that lets you be batgirl, it's good enough. Some of the Story is even pretty decent, the whole Court of Owls segment of the game has some actual weight to it. Does it get stale outside of the story? Sure... but few games don't get stale outside of the story IMO. I've never been someone who can play the MMO's and spend fifteen hours pressing 1-9 to grind for rat teeth and find that fun.

Gamers these days are gradually loosing their minds as they grow up and can't accept that as adults, they simply don't enjoy the things they used to as much. They fool themselves with nostalgic blindness (such as the aforementioned on this thread 'championing' of Arkham City which launched as disastrously as humanly possible vs Gotham Knights basically just 'so so' launch pretending like the current state of AK was how it has always been) and anti-woke mass hysteria flipping off the handle about every little 'possibly woke' thing in a trailer that it's literally ravaging the gaming industries ability to market anything. Practically every game being made right now is subject to SO MUCH hatred before it even has a chance to present itself for real, that nobody can approach the games for what they are anymore, only some impossible standard they've built up in their minds. Everybody wants every game now to cater specifically to their EVERY specific neurotic quirk or its the WORST GAME EVER!!!! and can't seem to recognize that no game they've ever played before EVER catered solely to their tastes. Gotham Knights would have been received better a decade earlier I think before the gamers grew into late stage adulthood and could no longer keep their neurosis in check. This is fast infecting the entire entertainment spectrum of course and is in no way 'specific' solely to gaming, but gaming is one of the major vectors of the anti-woke grift infection.

Right now, being a gamer that wants to be excited about games is IMPOSSIBLE because so many fuckwits have so many hypocritical and insane opinions about every game coming out unless it's a f'kn dark souls like Malice said, in which case they'll ignore all its flaws and claim its perfect and that the reason other games are all failing is cause they aren't ALL Dark Souls.

*Sigh* Being a gamer right now is EXHAUSTING.

I've been waiting for the WW game for what feels like a billion years now...

Many of us have.... They made some reassuring announcements this year about the developers’ intentions, so it’s a matter of wait and see. Not for long, I’d wager.

Some of the Story is even pretty decent, the whole Court of Owls segment of the game has some actual weight to it.

+9999

The game really shines when it’s focused on the scenario segments. The narrative gets the job done, even if a few twists might feel a bit predictable at times. That said, the story is worth experiencing, it does NOT betray the characters, and offers an actual welcome change of pace and faces. The issues are elsewhere...

Everybody wants every game now to cater specifically to their EVERY specific neurotic quirk or its the WORST GAME EVER!!!! and can't seem to recognize that no game they've ever played before EVER catered solely to their tastes. Gotham Knights would have been received better a decade earlier I think before the gamers grew into late stage adulthood and could no longer keep their neurosis in check. This is fast infecting the entire entertainment spectrum of course and is in no way 'specific' solely to gaming, but gaming is one of the major vectors of the anti-woke grift infection.

Right now, being a gamer that wants to be excited about games is IMPOSSIBLE because so many fuckwits have so many hypocritical and insane opinions about every game coming out unless it's a f'kn dark souls like Malice said, in which case they'll ignore all its flaws and claim its perfect and that the reason other games are all failing is cause they aren't ALL Dark Souls.

*Sigh* Being a gamer right now is EXHAUSTING.

What’s even more exhausting is the constant karma policing from both sides. Inclusion should be for everyone, it’s fantastic to see more of it, but we need to start living by our own gospels.

Generalities can be dangerous. Just because you can explain why you didn’t engage with a video game as much as another based on firsthand feedback doesn’t make you a grifter.

Just because you enjoy Dark Souls doesn’t mean you’re one of those fool who’ll lecture you about your taste for not rocking a greatsword build based on a manga they never read...

It’s like many issues: just because one egg is rotten doesn’t mean you need to toss out the whole basket.

How many times have a friend or someone you met randomly has offer a new perspective on things? Discourse offers opportunities to grow, so long as we don't insult each other.

Both the gatekeepers and guardians of the temple are just insufferable. It's in part what's ruining everything.

We all have our own gaming and movie-watching histories. Our ways to enjoy games, and nitpick at certain things. It’s all good, I know Mr. X is always going to be on the prowl to champion beauty, and that’s sound.

Elimew has his own preference and that's sound too.

Look, there are even folks who fancy cream pies in their superheroine flicks, so...



As for those who can’t articulate their thoughts without seeking approval from an echo chamber, they’re already wanderin’ the vast lonely space between their ears... Why bother?

My point is, there’s really no need to resort to swear words, especially when you’ve got a decent way with words otherwise.

I think gatekeeping is necessary because there are people directly intending to burn the game industry down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmoeSI0HUm8
Yes gate keeping is necessary. Yes there are people who will get in your life boat then suicide bomb themselves and claim they are making the world better.

Mr. X wrote: ↑

1 year ago

I think gatekeeping is necessary because there are people directly intending to burn the game industry down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmoeSI0HUm8
Yes gate keeping is necessary. Yes there are people who will get in your life boat then suicide bomb themselves and claim they are making the world better.

You're idea of gatekeeping and mine are probably excruciatingly different from one another. The sweatbaby thing is basically on over bloated conspiracy theory with only enough crumbs of truth to sensationalize. The people sensationalizing it, are EXACTLY the people 'burning down' the game industry. The 45 year old doomsday shitposter grifters who won't shut up about every miniscule thing they don't like in a game they WANT to hate while ignoring the same miniscule faults in the games they love. The grift is really rubbed into that algorithm deep though... they did a good job filing themselves in there... but the cancer in gaming is them, and they are the cancer.

Malice wrote: ↑

1 year ago

What’s even more exhausting is the constant karma policing from both sides. Inclusion should be for everyone, it’s fantastic to see more of it, but we need to start living by our own gospels.

Generalities can be dangerous. Just because you can explain why you didn’t engage with a video game as much as another based on firsthand feedback doesn’t make you a grifter.

Just because you enjoy Dark Souls doesn’t mean you’re one of those fool who’ll lecture you about your taste for not rocking a greatsword build based on a manga they never read...

It’s like many issues: just because one egg is rotten doesn’t mean you need to toss out the whole basket.

How many times have a friend or someone you met randomly has offer a new perspective on things? Discourse offers opportunities to grow, so long as we don't insult each other.

Both the gatekeepers and guardians of the temple are just insufferable. It's in part what's ruining everything.

We all have our own gaming and movie-watching histories. Our ways to enjoy games, and nitpick at certain things. It’s all good, I know Mr. X is always going to be on the prowl to champion beauty, and that’s sound.

Elimew has his own preference and that's sound too.

Look, there are even folks who fancy cream pies in their superheroine flicks, so...



As for those who can’t articulate their thoughts without seeking approval from an echo chamber, they’re already wanderin’ the vast lonely space between their ears... Why bother?

My point is, there’s really no need to resort to swear words, especially when you’ve got a decent way with words otherwise.

I think this is my problem. There is effectively NO PROBLEM AT ALL in gaming right now from a technical or production level, but the grifters harp on long into the night that there is... and because the algorithm REALLY likes complaining they've carved themselves a sizable portion of even most fairly moderate lefter gamer's Youtube homepages and social media hubs. You effectively CAN'T ignore them, cause the same group of like... ten shitheads whining that Assassins Creed: Shadows is even worse today because in the trailer the villain samurai threw some food on the floor and 'A samurai would never do that!!!!!'. The grift is that there's a problem at all, the 'guardians' are befuddled that all of this noise is SUDDENLY a problem after everyone's effectively been happy enough with the games coming out up to now. We're fast approaching that 'Every game is a f'kn souls game' that people BELIEVE they want post Elden Ring... but they're all gonna find out quick once that happens that just as they got sick of Ubisoft holding their hands and telling them where to go to resolve the quest. Once EVERY game is an obtuse quest management simulator where you have to meticulously hunt down the quest or you could MISS IT ENTIRELY on pure accident and every other weird Fromsoft staple, that suddenly Dark Souls isn't very special anymore.

There's no place for only ONE kind of game to be the only one people will play. VERY QUICKLY past that point, people are gonna suddenly start missing when there were at least 'some' video games that would throw you a damn bone. There's always been plenty of room for EVERY kind of game, with every sort of protagonist, from every sort of point of view. There's more games being made every year now than in the past decade. There is no lack of representation, and that INCLUDES for your straight whight super soldier hunk of man, We've had in the space of a year Stellar Blade serving the weebs, Space Marine serving the superbros!, Baldur's Gate 3 serving the nerds.... and yet SOMEHOW these f'king grifter assholes are convincing people that games are dying.

It's pathetic, and worse, it's having tangible consequences.

There is effectively NO PROBLEM AT ALL in gaming right now from a technical or production level

I was a developer in the game industry since 1991. I think I know it a tad bit better. Yes production is horrible. No way a game needs to cost north of $400 mil to make. There is a huge money laundering issue going on.

Mr. X wrote: ↑

1 year ago

There is effectively NO PROBLEM AT ALL in gaming right now from a technical or production level

I was a developer in the game industry since 1991. I think I know it a tad bit better. Yes production is horrible. No way a game needs to cost north of $400 mil to make. There is a huge money laundering issue going on.

That's just an issue of corporatism. I mean I agree that IS a problem... but that's not a problem fundamental to game development and design. The ballooning of 100 million to 400 million is all the laundering going on over the top of the 100 million of game development which continues to produce games that function more or less without catastrophic technical implosions (save of course the games released too soon which wind up patched into completion latter... but that's a whole different can of worms, these games still wind up ending in a more or less completed state 'eventually' to the point people consider Cyberpunk a GREAT game today regardless of its catastrophic launch... which is just more evidence that there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the games that are being produced right now that requires a stupid crusade to fix.

Regardless, the 'problem' the grifters are whining is ruining gaming has nothing to do with corporate money laundering in the slightest. That is only a problem for gaming in the same sense that it's a problem in the entire entertainment medium, food production, pharmaceuticals, education, the judicial system, uh.... the senate, etc. etc. etc. in every profit making industry across the board. AKA Late stage capitalism... anyway this is veering indirectly political now so I'm gonna leave the woes of capitalism aside.

This stupid gamergate 2.0 nonsense though, is entirely unnecessary for everyone but them what want more 'clicks' on their videos, and by George they're getting them.

Grifters aren't ruining gaming. Game dev is ruining gaming.

Mr. X wrote: ↑

1 year ago

Grifters aren't ruining gaming. Game dev is ruining gaming.

Right, you and the grifters 'said' it. So it must be true.

Femina wrote: ↑

1 year ago

Mr. X wrote: ↑

1 year ago

Grifters aren't ruining gaming. Game dev is ruining gaming.

Right, you and the grifters 'said' it. So it must be true.

No I'm a 30 year game dev vet with at least 5 AAA titles under my belt and shipped close to 30 games.

Mr. X wrote: ↑

1 year ago

Femina wrote: ↑

1 year ago

Mr. X wrote: ↑

1 year ago

Grifters aren't ruining gaming. Game dev is ruining gaming.

Right, you and the grifters 'said' it. So it must be true.

No I'm a 30 year game dev vet with at least 5 AAA titles under my belt and shipped close to 30 games.

If you say so.

Doesn't change the state of things. Doesn't change what we're seeing with so many doofuses with their selective nitpicks. Doesn't change the hypocrisy of the grift. You pointed out an element of this that IS game dev relevant earlier... and it's irrelevant to the actual phenomena occurring at present with gamergate 2.0. Don't pretend like the issues the grifters are bringing up have anything to do with corporate money laundering, that's senseless obfuscation. They aren't quiet about what the grift is at present, they continue to CHAMPION the large amount of games currently releasing every yeasr that don't offend the griftter's sensibilities and pretend not to notice that these releases are NUMEROUS. I do not begrudge this, I am perfectly happy for people to have Stellar Blades and Space Marines and Elden Rings, Not every game needs to be made for me personally, I'm a grown ass woman who understands there are different strokes for different folks, what I DO find frustrating however is these grifter's obtuse insistence that these are the only games worth producing AT ALL, and loudly whining whenever a game comes out they don't want as if it's the end of the world in the face of all these games coming out that are perfectly in line with what they DO want. It's the worst sort of 'everything should be mine, and mine should be everything' winging and moaning that they claim to find offensive of everything they supposedly hate.

Problems in game publishing industry is entirely greed motivated, but the grift just pathetic.

It has been an ABSOLUTE banger of a year for game releases. There have been dozens of AMAZING games made this year. SO WHAT if Assassins Creed Shadows isn't EXACTLY the game you want? (The royale you), who CARES if Concord fuckin sucked? Don't play them, move on. It's fair to make your complaints of the games themselves known so future developers have a focus grouping of issues to avoid going forward, but don't PRETEND like we need to wage a war on videogames just because a few games we don't like came out this year. If's f'kn ludicrous.

Love this game.
I also did a MV from it.
https://youtu.be/xYJ9M9PJI9c?si=jxcGB__WcoN07Q0f

Most of those "grifters" are game veterans and people who are long time players. Your argument just sounds like someone post rationalizing your position.

Mr. X wrote: ↑

1 year ago

Most of those "grifters" are game veterans and people who are long time players. Your argument just sounds like someone post rationalizing your position.

Hello, Nice to meet you. Long time player here. I was doot doot dooting pong on my dad's Atari since I was practically in diapers. I was beating Metroid on the NES when it was brand new. I beat Halo 2 on Legendary. I liked Demon Souls BEFORE it was cool. I've grown up with and observed the gaming environment the entire way, and while I absolutely agree with you that corporate buggery can fuck right off out of the industry at any time and I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, there's no real observable fault in the DNA of the totality of quality games coming out today that demands another Gamergate. There ARE more stinkers... agreed, but that's as result of there being VASTLY more games PERIOD coming out than ever before. There are just as many fantastic games coming out every year now as have ever been, I've pointed this out already. I've listed many of them out, this is indisputable. The existence of crappy games has never been a source of self congratulatory gamers crusading against the industry ever before in the past in times FAR more dire, because there was no GOOD reason for it then, just as there's no GOOD reason for it now. I wouldn't mind at all if they DID turn their efforts towards attacking the obsessive corporatization and money laundering, that would be GREAT if that's what they were doing, but that's NOT what they're doing.

They're just bitching about the lack of historical accuracy in Assassins Creed (a series about ancient alien god relics) and how some games have ugly women in them sometimes or some games have bad art design, and that somehow a low rent consultant group is actually some sort of all powerful shadow cabal with absolute authority over what games get made, and that since Concord exists and is bad that means the industry is corrupt and dying, all while pretending that this very year games like Elden Ring, Baldur's Gate 3, Black Myth Wukong, Tekken 8, Stellar Blade, Hellblade 2, Helldivers 2, Granblue Fantasy: Relink, Alan Wake 2, Rise of the Ronin, Space Marine 2 and a myriad of other games of quality somehow DON'T COUNT just cause a couple of games sucked and a few more got made that they don't like the politics of. If you can look at all of these great games made for the huge population of variably inclined gamer's all across the globe that came out this year and still think there's something terminally cancerous in the industry eating it from the inside out (in the game design department, again, I'm not going to disagree with you on corporate bullshit but that's a separate problem to attack from another angle), than all I can say is you've been handed the wrong X-ray or the X-ray's were smudged on purpose.

That's all I have left to say do you on this topic. The games speak for themselves AS DO the Grifters every time they open their mouths and cry doomsday because a villainous Samurai spilled food in the latest Assassins Creed trailer. They don't care about the industry, they care about clicks and are growing actively more annoying and cancerous themselves every single day.

hagarb wrote: ↑

1 year ago

Love this game.
I also did a MV from it.
https://youtu.be/xYJ9M9PJI9c?si=jxcGB__WcoN07Q0f

Dang, It's not available in my country :(

They're just bitching about the lack of historical accuracy in Assassins Creed

I think what’s really offending most people in Japan is how Ubisoft, a company that often positions itself as a paragon of virtue, seemed to disregard the culture they were building a product around.

I liked your take on the monetary aspect, which often ruins a lot of productions. For me, this is where the real issue lies. Sure, the political context makes things harder to enjoy, but I believe the blame falls on the investors and shareholders who are clueless about the industry they're investing in.

A good example, in my opinion, would be Final Fantasy XVI. A game with a lot of heart and qualities, but one that fell short due to being bloated by a "too big to fail" budget. Its direction played it safe, borrowing from FFXIV in some aspects of quest and level design.

The result felt inconsistent and somewhat muzzled, as if the game's true potential was never allowed to fully shine...If the game had a more realistic economic approach, I believe we would’ve ended up with a better product.

Most of those "grifters" are game veterans and people who are long time players.

To Mr. X’s credit, even the Dragon Quest creator addressed this issue. Is he also a grifter, or just a representative of the silent majority who really wonders who's behind these pushes?

https://x.com/i/status/1840243748007219257

I’m not denying that the portrayal of women for instance has been problematic at times in the past, but censorship and these “compliance requests” aren’t exactly better.

I think gamers simply want to experience games without being forced into political narratives. It’s great to have games like "Chia" coming out or "Life is Strange", but the issue is that neo-puritans are now trying to push their views into every game.

I don’t want every game to become Dark Souls, and let’s be real, that’s not going to happen. But the political agenda creeping into most release is obvious, and millions of players have already abandoned Western studio productions for this reason.

Back to the topic at hand, I don’t think this game is guilty of that. Gotham Knights, as I’ve said before, fell victim to poor production choices, which you can still see in the equipment system that reeks of GAAS from a mile away...

And to hopefully put an end to that... Grifters bash these games because it works. It works because the sentiment resonates with the masses. If it didn’t, they’d just be praising the release, like they do when a good one drops (just look at what everyone’s saying about The Penguin, it's almost laughable as you can sense some of the good reviews aren’t genuine, but rather part of a common agreement based on audience feedback).

I agree with you though: it's becoming increasingly frustrating to watch content on YouTube that doesn't feel like someone’s trying to Trojan horse me into voting for someone or subscribing to an ideology.

But I’m not sure the answer is to be as vindictive or ill-advised as the grifters are, Mr X has the right to defend his viewpoint.

I’ve never developed games myself, but I appreciate dev diaries and any nuggets of info I can find on games I love to try and understand the process. That’s why I think it could be valuable to ask Mr. X to expand on the matter, rather than shutting down his contribution by accusing him of using an argument from authority.

I understand your animosity toward negativity, especially from someone like Critical Drinker (as you recently called him out in another thread). But just know that your scorn comes off with a similar negative flavor. It’s a bit disappointing, especially since you shine when you express thoughts like this:

I still have a soft spot for this game. It let's you be Batgirl. To a certain degree, so far as I'm concerned, 'nuff said'
The boys all have the Arkham games, Spider-man games, and a myriad of other stuff that pretty much rolls off the assembly board. I've been waiting for the WW game for what feels like a billion years now... but for all it's 'issues' Gotham Knights runs well, breaks rarely, and you can be Batgirl. Is it a Game of the Year? F'k no. Is it changing the paradigm? Of course not.

And yes, despite all my criticisms of the game, I feel they come from the same place as yours. I love Batgirl and was disappointed by the cancellation of the movie. ( Yet, I also acknowledge that it probably happened for a reason, though I guess we’ll never know, unfortunately).

I wish we could get our hands on an 8 out of 10 game featuring Barbara Gordon that has a strong backbone and a genuine love for the character. I didn’t feel this game achieved that. It’s not that I’m happy to criticize it. On the contrary, I would love to engage in a dithyrambic praise of the game. I just want to stay true to my feelings.

The money men aren't clueless about the industry. They're getting paid. They don't give a fuck if the games are broken, aggressively manipulative of their customers and bland. It's the same mindset that gets people sucked out through the poorly-made doors of a modern Boeing.

When you get shareholders your industry position becomes exclusively the pursuit of profit. You don't need a long term plan. You don't need a product. Drain the business, dump it, buy a new one.

Malice wrote: ↑

1 year ago

They're just bitching about the lack of historical accuracy in Assassins Creed

I think what’s really offending most people in Japan is how Ubisoft, a company that often positions itself as a paragon of virtue, seemed to disregard the culture they were building a product around.

Japan isn't upset about this. That's part of the grift. There's dozens and dozens of videos of people (including from some of the more honest grifters) interviewing folks in Japan and coming up realizing that the average citizen don't find a problem with the way the game's trailer's are presenting ancient Japan.

The Japanese aren't infantile chiltren who can't handle when a foreign company doesn't succeed at representing their culture 100% flawlessly 100% of the time, in the same way that Americans don't lose their shit when an Anime set in America has some elements that are a bit off culture. MOST human beings cut artists some slack when adapting their culture so long as the overall effort is an honest enough attempt, which Shadows appears to be despite some of it's inevitable missteps. The game could still suck... but I personally doubt it just judging by the slick ninja assassin shit from the trailers. The game looks for once like it's FINALLY evolving the actual 'assassin' element by implementing cool ninja stealth maneuvers. I think Yasuke is a misstep, primarily just because I don't think that AC needs a SAMURAI... You wanna live out your Samurai fantasy play the Ghost series right? I honestly think the only reason he's playable and not one of the 'historical character' inserts at all is BECAUSE of the Ghost series popularity. I've noticed a sincere amount of jank in his combat animations in the trailers that doesn't exist in the ninja ladies animations that make me think he's been cooking in the oven for a lot less time. From what I understand he can't even free run... which is basically the most important gameplay mechanic of the whole series... so as soon as people try him out and realize they can't really DO assassin's creed with him, they'll probably just revert to the character that does Assassins' Creed.

Japan isn't upset about this.

The Japanese aren't infantile chiltren who can't handle when a foreign company doesn't succeed at representing their culture 100% flawlessly 100% of the time,

Then how did this happen, friend?

https://x.com/assassinscreed/status/181 ... sKihA&s=19

It’s such a thing that even Ubi actually responded.

A portion of the Japanese community took issue with the game for missing key traditional symbols and cultural or geographical details; etc...

I think Yasuke is a misstep, primarily just because I don't think that AC needs a SAMURAI..

I think Yasuke as a samurai and not an assassin is an issue and a missed opportunity. "AC Mirage" has shown that fans would much prefer a return to form that focuses on stealth mechanics rather than the Souls-like approach the series has been coerced into.

But let's both agree on this: Yasuke himself is not the issue: proof in the pudding?



No outrage there, was there? Seems like when a game finds its footing, the "grifters" take a backseat.

You wanna live out your Samurai fantasy play the Ghost series right?

I fear that "Ghost of Yutei" will turn out to be a better "AC Shadow" than "AC Shadow" itself.

I honestly think the only reason he's playable and not one of the 'historical character' inserts at all is BECAUSE of the Ghost series popularity. I

I would argue it's because of the series' evolution since Origins, and in an attempt to take inspiration from "Skyrim", "Dark Souls", "Ghost",...

You could argue that AC's original combat system was Ubisoft's take on Rocksteady's Free Flow system. The point being, the series has lost its original vision a long time ago under the pressure of ill-advised investors who ask for stuff from Guillemot, who is an absolute toolbox when it comes to management.

From what I understand he can't even free run... which is basically the most important gameplay mechanic of the whole series... so as soon as people try him out and realize they can't really DO assassin's creed with him, they'll probably just revert to the character that does Assassins' Creed.

Naoe will be played by most people, no doubt. The melee combat has never felt great in Assassin's Creed, and it shouldn't be rewarded as much as it's been since the series' "rebirth," with the exception of "AC Mirage."

In all fairness, we should probably create a new topic to discuss that

Malice wrote: ↑

1 year ago

Naoe will be played by most people, no doubt. The melee combat has never felt great in Assassin's Creed, and it shouldn't be rewarded as much as it's been since the series' "rebirth," with the exception of "AC Mirage."

In all fairness, we should probably create a new topic to discuss that

This is fair. I don't really wanna do it though. Opening an AC2 topic is a road to a can of worms that won't go anywhere good. Thus I'd rather only mention it in passing somewhere else xD.

I think it's been discussed enough anyway.

All I'll say is... a 'portion' of the Japanese audience isn't that important, the WHOLE of that audience is. The same way a 'portion' of American audiences don't matter either. If a portion of the audience doesn't like a thing, my overall opinion is... so what? Don't play it then. There are other games, you may want to play one of them (The 'royale' you not YOU Malice). Not every game needs to be for everyONE. The major problem with the grift seems to be some bizarre opinion that EVERY game has to cater to like... that one guy who freaked the f'k out about pronoun options in Starfield... and the grand fact of the universe is... no, it doesn't. If we've become SO unabashedly neurotic that we're incapable of enjoying a videogame because of a few crooked straws in a pile of hey, then we shouldn't be playing videogames period. Even our favorite games are never PERFECT, all of existence is a grand experience of taking what we like and doing our best to exist alongside the stuff we don't like, if you can't enjoy a videogame because of a few nitpicks, then move on and find a game that doesn't have those nitpicks. I can see why one might be irked when these nitpicks get in the way of a long running game series they typically loved... but the TRUELY HONEST nitpicker will realize that previous games in said series included plenty of nitpicks they didn't lose their shit over before, and that the major problem is basically that they've become older, less forgiving, and vastly more neurotic.

It's like how once you play a game in 60fps, you invariably become a PC master race snob that nobody likes and forget that in the past you had NO ISSUE at all with playing games in 30 FPS, or back when your pc sucked and you could barely run 20 FPS but since that was playable you smiled and had a good time. Then you played Gotham Knights in 60 FPS at your friends house, went home and realized your life is actually shit. Nothing ACTUALLY changed that made your life worse, all that's actually changed is your perception of it. The grift is all perception, no substance.

This is fair. I don't really wanna do it though. Opening an AC2 topic is a road to a can of worms that won't go anywhere good. Thus I'd rather only mention it in passing somewhere else xD.

I think it's been discussed enough anyway.

All I'll say is... a 'portion' of the Japanese audience isn't that important, the WHOLE of that audience is. The same way a 'portion' of American audiences don't matter either. If a portion of the audience doesn't like a thing, my overall opinion is... so what? Don't play it then. There are other games, you may want to play one of them (The 'royale' you not YOU Malice). Not every game needs to be for everyONE. The major problem with the grift seems to be some bizarre opinion that EVERY game has to cater to like... that one guy who freaked the f'k out about pronoun options in Starfield... and the grand fact of the universe is... no, it doesn't. If we've become SO unabashedly neurotic that we're incapable of enjoying a videogame because of a few crooked straws in a pile of hey, then we shouldn't be playing videogames period. Even our favorite games are never PERFECT, all of existence is a grand experience of taking what we like and doing our best to exist alongside the stuff we don't like, if you can't enjoy a videogame because of a few nitpicks, then move on and find a game that doesn't have those nitpicks. I can see why one might be irked when these nitpicks get in the way of a long running game series they typically loved... but the TRUELY HONEST nitpicker will realize that previous games in said series included plenty of nitpicks they didn't lose their shit over before, and that the major problem is basically that they've become older, less forgiving, and vastly more neurotic.

It's like how once you play a game in 60fps, you invariably become a PC master race snob that nobody likes and forget that in the past you had NO ISSUE at all with playing games in 30 FPS, or back when your pc sucked and you could barely run 20 FPS but since that was playable you smiled and had a good time. Then you played Gotham Knights in 60 FPS at your friends house, went home and realized your life is actually shit. Nothing ACTUALLY changed that made your life worse, all that's actually changed is your perception of it. The grift is all perception, no substance.

I think we’re essentially on the same page regarding most points.

The reaction from the Japanese community prompted Ubisoft to respond, and it looks like they took issue with some aspects of the Yasuke narrative.

You might want to check out this article, it approaches the situation professionally, steering clear of any sensationalism and sticking to the facts. It's in f****g French but thank god you can translate it.

https://www.gamekult.com/actualite/assa ... 60019.html

The fact that you genuinely care about Assassin’s Creed as a franchise comes through, and to me, that says it all. Just because we can discuss what’s missing in the franchise right now doesn’t mean we want to bash it, in fact, quite the opposite.

For me, AC has always felt like a dream come true, the chance to explore pivotal moments in our collective past (even if through a creative lens) is something that resonated with me, and clearly, with millions of players too.

From conversations with my gamer friends, they aren’t as excited about the franchise these days for the reasons we’ve laid out. It’s starting to feel like Ubisoft is more focused on pleasing shareholders than delivering that sweet, immersive experience.

Of course, I understand they need to cater to their investors, but I still believe that true creative vision and economic success can go hand in hand.

And what transpires from the article I shared is that they received the message, for all its shortcomings Origins felt at the time like Ubi had acknowledged some critics at least. The result was hit and miss, but if this whole ordeal helps set the franchise on a brighter path, I’ll be glad for it.

Whether it’s "Gotham Knights" or "AC", I take no joy in watching these titles struggle... The only place I really enjoy seeing peril is in superheroine stories!

Malice wrote: ↑

1 year ago

No outrage there, was there? Seems like when a game finds its footing, the "grifters" take a backseat.

THIS is the tell. This is what the observant will note as the proof of the sauce. A popular well loved game that's either A: Already established before the 'offensive' thing is injected or B: Releases and is GOOD enough that the audience's praise overshadows the grift then SUDDENLY the grifter pretends like they agreed with the popular opinion from the beginning or will declare it an anomaly (despite the assloads of such 'anomalies' that currently exist and continue to mount up). They love to come at these situations sideways. In the case of AC (I'll only disagree with you here on that I wouldn't say I 'care' so much about the AC franchise as that I HOPE for a good game and like to make judgments only on finished products, and try not to make up my opinion AHEAD of time) Yasuke, an actual historical person who absolutely was more probably a Samurai than ANY of the fictional characters in the series were assassins right? EVEN if that possibility is only a variable of the man having actually existed in reality in Japan in the era. Ezio didn't exist, therefore he wasn't a historical Assassin, he didn't kill the Patsi, we don't know who did, we'll never know. Edward Kenway didn't exist, he didn't aid Blackbeard in stealing the Queen Anne, Blackbeard and his crew did that themselves. Connor is a fictional Native American, what thread of historical continuity could even the entirety of the Native Americans possibly have with the middle eastern historical Hassassins? None. It's FICTION. Where it doesn't offend people for whatever reason they're choosing to be offended, they don't operate as though Assassin's Creed is a game ABOUT historical Accuracy. This sudden concern over Assassins's Creed being Historically accurate... despite the fact that AC is NOT a game ABOUT history but instead about science fiction memory machines, alien god relics, and historic fiction superheroes, is all smoke and mirrors in attempt to tank it's sales months in advance, hope that hate holds and that the game isn't good enough to overcome it, then use the game's failure to solidify the base of their platform to continue doing this with other games that don't suit their particular optics, and scrub the record of the times they guessed wrong.

Take Heelxbabyface looserman dude who had that famous manbaby tantrum over player options being included in a roleplaying game with character customization in it and the inclusion of a sorta kinda but not REALLY trans character in it (ignoring the poltics of the trans issue entirely to focus solely on the TANTRUM istself), has recently been showboating around as though 'see I was right all along!' and that he always hated the game from the very beginning... only he DIDN'T! He's a liar. He enjoyed the eight or so hours PRECEEDING his massive tantrum well enough, he's only PRETENDING like he didn't now because it suits his platform. You see, Starfield isn't a good game, its popularity dispersed very quickly, and thus it's now safe for the manbaby to pretend like he had the right opinion from the very beginning, utilizing humanities short attention span to goose up his platform and feel smug about himself.

...

But I didn't forget. I don't forget these things. Cause where his psychosis is to lose his mind over pronoun options this ONE time, I'm a fluke of nature whose own psychosis is that of overanalysis and observation. I remember the man practically had an ORGASM onscreen ranting about customization options in a game ABOUT customization options. A game he had just been enjoying for eight solid hours, and psychotically deciding on the spot that he actually hated the game from the very start because that's what suddenly suited his optics. I ALSO remember months prior the man crusading for Hogwarts Legacys right to exist DESPITE all the trans stuff (including effective 'pronoun options') in the game itself because doing so stuck it to the overarching trans activists calling for the silly boycotts. I REMEMBER who Heelxbabyface has presented himself as in the past and who he presents himself as in the present.

And what that is... is a Fuckin'. Loser. Grifter with no solid foundations of principles beyond what will make his platform more money today, and a nebulous allegiance to the growing grifter community that steadily has been drowning out the voices of people with REAL and VALID concerns about the games that are releasing, like the good folks who've spent HOURS going over the art direction of Concord and how that inferiority vs other hero shooters on the market resulted in an enormous element of it's failure. INSTEAD all we hear loudest from the masses of grifter hypnotized normies is that maybe there really is a 'Go Woke Go Broke' problem aftearll? All while WOKE AS FUCK Arcane season 2 is all set to premiere next month to the excitement of basically all of those people.

He who control's the grift, controls the universe... of youtube. I feel like it's time we started treating social media darlings who express to effectively be today's honest news mediums with the same manner of scrutiny as we do Fox news or CNN. Their intent is EXACTLY the same as those news programs. They aren't bringing us the news slathered in their opinionated bias for our benefit or 'as one of us', they're doing it to influence and control us in the EXACT same manner as the real and true press and they don't deserve to be treated otherwise considering the track record of their biases impact. They are currently an uncredited force upon our collective decision making that are being allowed to operate under the radar because they begin and end their videos with content creator community slang and Twitch community emotes.

(P.S. I don't care about the trans issue here on this website. I'm not inviting a conversation about trans politics. The tantrum itself and the man's actions during and around that tantrum is what's important here... in this case that tantrum was 'expressed' to be about the trans inclusions of the game. MY intent here is to illustrate how, regardless of what HeelxBabyface ACTUALLY believes on this subject, to the GRIFT the subject matter is only material in how it benefits him in maintaining his platform, vibing with other like minded grifters, and influencing the opinions of those who watch him. It's probable his TRUE beliefs incited the rant, but his actions AROUND the Rant illustrate how very little those beliefs factor into the way he's operating his 'critiques' in and around these game releases... He's also a relatively SMALL actor in this sphere as well, just one notable due to his explosion of relevance during this period, but even the smallest grifters feed and grow the grift. The grift isn't even ALWAYS about anything inherently political. Some of it is just weird fixation related stuff like how suddenly gamers are tired of games giving them nav points all of a sudden or how not every female character in videogames are supermodels anymore, which at least has some particular relevance here on our website by sheer nature of that even something like half my fellow female contributors to the site here typically prefer a gorgeous woman at the head of things... but in terms of what's occurring in the mainstream, that doesn't really MATTER that much to what makes a game good or bad right? The grift hyperfixates on 'something' it doesn't like every time, and uses it's inner workings to attempt to sabotage the medium ahead of time REGARDLESS of whether the final product's quality proves to have been deserving of all the drama or not.)

P.S.S. Maybe you're right and we do just need a new topic thread if we are interested in discussing this further? Or maybe you can PM me idk... I don't WANT to drag this topic off course. I'd just as soon chat about how great Batgirl is in this game! Of all the character's she comes off the most as the true successor to the Batman mantle. Being the only character of the four that represents as much the 'detective' element of the Batman as the actual ass whupping.

Arcane season 2 is all set to premiere next month to the excitement of basically everyone.

I think we both agree that if there were real substance to these rants, they’d extend to productions like these, but they don’t.

Personally, I watch a lot from these guys and from more "mainstream" sources. As I get older (and hopefully wiser), I’ve found I can more easily separate the wheat from the chaff.

Once again, I think these guys succeed because their sentiment resonates with the mainstream. While this is based on my own local experiences, it still points to a trend.

The truth is, people have been facing big issues over the past few years. When they finally get a moment to breathe, they want to enjoy it, not feel like they’re being lectured or burdened with more stress.

And I think that’s exactly what HeelvsBabyface tapped into with his video. He put his British finger on something much bigger than himself, so that’s huge.

Be that as it may, that "video" didn’t translate into a real success story, just another buzz in an ocean of content.



I’m sure if you look at his numbers, it’s showing that he’s catering to a niche, not the more "casual" audience.

I personally believe that the majority is capable of forming their own opinions and doesn’t need third-party confirmation to express them. The decrease in ticket and certain game sales should serve as a clear indicator that something is wrong, prompting introspection from those in charge, not an inquisition.

Once again, I’m not trying to pose as a moral authority or anything (I mean, just look at me postin'). I’m simply stating my opinion as a gamer, and for what it’s worth, even though we’re straying from the original topic, it’s refreshing to have these kinds of discussions in this day and age.

It’s also nice to engage with someone who’s willing to have a meaningful conversation, instead of just throwing out baseless accusations or shallow takes, so I really appreciate reading your comments.



For what it's worth, I really hope we can both share our love for the "Wonder Woman" game when it comes out, and maybe even on some other topics.

There are still plenty of positive ways to enjoy gaming these days. Life is what you make of it, and I personally find solace in exchanges like this.

As for "Concord", a mate said to me, “Why should I spend 40 quid on a dud when I can play better live service games for free?”

As for myself, the first announcement a few years back regarding Sony's strategy on the matter (GAAS) had me perplexed, to say the least, from the get-go. So when the first State of Play featuring Concord came out, I was like:



Look, if anything, this conversation has motivated me to do this:



Prompting Ideogram to create all these Batgirl images was too much.

Malice wrote: ↑

1 year ago

As for "Concord", a mate said to me, “Why should I spend 40 quid on a dud when I can play better live service games for free?”

As for myself, the first announcement a few years back regarding Sony's strategy on the matter (GAAS) had me perplexed, to say the least, from the get-go. So when the first State of Play featuring Concord came out, I was like:

Yeah exactly. I recall that State of Play as well and thinking 'there sure are a lot of these bland ass hero shooters these days...' and simply could not imagine anybody else thinking anything different. The Hero Shooter genre is basically full. Doubly so if you consider the new age hyper quality mobile crowds darling Mihoyo style games to be party of the 'hero' genre and doing things with their characters in stories and shit that hero shooters can only DREAM of in too limited cutscenes and occasional trailers. Someone really needs to consider making one of these Hero Shooters that really get into and flesh the story for these characters they spend SO much time and money crafting. I just don't know if I think deathmatch arena shooting has EVER been the ideal genre for these sorts of games.

Anyway, people will whine till the cows come home that Concord failed cause somehow Sweet Baby Inc is the true shadow government dominating the globe that controls all of videogames somehow, and that it 'went woke thus gone broke'
...
When the real issue is that it was a lackluster attempt to enter into an already crowded marketplace of already established and popular entries that, let's face it, were better made, had better art direction, and better marketing. Concord dropped that State of Play video and basically the only time I heard about it after that was when it had already failed. Nothing 'woke' about this failure, just good ol' fashioned lazy design and marketing. Concord is what happens when the suits decide that 'anything in Genre A WILL sell like hotcakes easy' and assume no extra effort is necessary to sell it.

Gotham Knights, as I recall, was moderately hype for awhile just before it first launched. Courtesy of a pretty decent game demo during that whole big DC stuffapalooza press junket and some good faith, up front marketing.

Anyway, people will whine till the cows come home that Concord failed cause somehow Sweet Baby Inc is the true shadow government dominating the globe that controls all of videogames somehow, and that it 'went woke thus gone broke'

This is too big of a topic to dive into here, but my views are a bit more nuanced.

I get where you’re coming from, and I mostly agree with your points on "Concord". It definitely failed more due to weak design, marketing, and entering an over-saturated market than any woke aspect you-tubers keep harping on.

While the game might not have failed because it was woke, there were elements that felt like they were trying to make a statement. And in today’s world, that’s a double-edged sword. From a brand perspective, making bold statements can alienate part of your potential customer base, whether that’s right or wrong.

The issue is, if you’re going to go down that road, you need to have a game (or a movie,...) that’s rock solid to back it up, otherwise, it just invites ridicule from the masses.

I think that alienation is a risk in any creative venture, but especially in the gaming world, where people are looking for an escape, not necessarily a debate. And when a game lacks polish and quality on top of that, it’s a recipe for disaster.

So, while I don’t think woke was the primary reason for Concord’s failure, I believe it did contribute by driving a wedge between potential players and the game itself close to its release.

As for Sweet Baby Inc., I think their involvement in games doesn’t really fix the issues they claim to advocate for, if anything, it does the opposite.

Malice wrote: ↑

1 year ago

Anyway, people will whine till the cows come home that Concord failed cause somehow Sweet Baby Inc is the true shadow government dominating the globe that controls all of videogames somehow, and that it 'went woke thus gone broke'

The issue is, if you’re going to go down that road, you need to have a game (or a movie,...) that’s rock solid to back it up, otherwise, it just invites ridicule from the masses.

I honestly think that, in this day and age, you just need a game that's rock solid PERIOD to make an impact. We're spoiled for choices.

"Get woke go broke" is a myth. Concord was a massive failure because it was a mediocre game in a saturated, multiplayer genre (also, atrocious character designs in a hero shooter, but there were plenty of reasons why they were atrocious that had nothing political to them). Suicide Squad is a failure because it is a live service game designed by people who know nothing about live service games and, as such, has a broken gameplay loop and a broken monetization scheme. There are also a ton of examples of 'woke' games that sell very well. Baldur's Gate 3 has a ton of 'wokeism' and was a massive success. Last of Us 2 is a hate poster child of the anti-woke camp and still sold crazy figures.

That doesn't mean certain design decisions have no impact in sales. If your target audience is full of prepubescent males, adding beautiful women to your game is a good idea, and this is not being done as often as you'd expect. All the talk of 'uglification' of women in games is often hyperbolic, but there is some truth to it, and it makes no sense. I feel like this is the old tale of wanting to reach a bigger audience and then losing track of who your primary target was. The same thing happened to comics, and they are essentially dead now (except purely as IP holders).

In any case, what I hate about the gaming world is how polarizing it is, and that goes past anything political. Nowadays, games are either a masterpiece or pure garbage. I'd swear Gotham Knights is a fine game, even a great game. It launched with many issues (poor optimization, poor loot and progression system which hint at some terrible GaaS roots, etc.) but it is still very enjoyable. Sure, I'm biased because I'd pay an arm for any game where you play as Batgirl and are gassed and put in a death trap XD, but in any case, it was never given a chance. I blame the horde of 'influencers' who are only there to amplify whatever the mob says, propelled by a new form of media which only serves to create bigger and bigger echo chambers.

In any case, what I hate about the gaming world is how polarizing it is, and that goes past anything political. Nowadays, games are either a masterpiece or pure garbage. I'd swear Gotham Knights is a fine game, even a great game. It launched with many issues (poor optimization, poor loot and progression system which hint at some terrible GaaS roots, etc.) but it is still very enjoyable. Sure, I'm biased because I'd pay an arm for any game where you play as Batgirl and are gassed and put in a death trap XD, but in any case, it was never given a chance. I blame the horde of 'influencers' who are only there to amplify whatever the mob says, propelled by a new form of media which only serves to create bigger and bigger echo chambers.

I think that’s exactly the point I was trying to make, and I couldn’t agree more with this take. Things are more complicated than they seem, and while "go woke, go broke" is definitely a myth, it still reflects something about current trends and the mindset of today’s consumers.

I’d agree with the enjoyable aspects of the game, but I have to underline that the character movement was a major letdown for me. As for optimization, it’s not really an issue at this point. On PS5, the game runs at a steady 30 fps (which, honestly, feels smoother than a choppy 60).

The combat system is intuitive and allows for some finesse, but it doesn’t feel nearly as satisfying as any of the Spider-Man games.

But really, the heart of it is: we love Batgirl!

I can’t help but wish for a different kind of game than the one we got (which I’m actually playing as we speak).

As I refresh my memory, I can’t help but feel that "Gotham Knights" would’ve shone brighter in a more focused, tighter experience: smaller but more compact. It could’ve paved the way for a solid sequel.

Development costs are skyrocketing these days, and I feel like GK became a casualty of that. More so than any agenda-driven decision.

Malice wrote: ↑

1 year ago

I’d agree with the enjoyable aspects of the game, but I have to underline that the character movement was a major letdown for me. As for optimization, it’s not really an issue at this point. On PS5, the game runs at a steady 30 fps (which, honestly, feels smoother than a choppy 60).

The combat system is intuitive and allows for some finesse, but it doesn’t feel nearly as satisfying as any of the Spider-Man games.

But really, the heart of it is: we love Batgirl!

I can’t help but wish for a different kind of game than the one we got (which I’m actually playing as we speak).

As I refresh my memory, I can’t help but feel that "Gotham Knights" would’ve shone brighter in a more focused, tighter experience: smaller but more compact. It could’ve paved the way for a solid sequel.

I'd agree with you in all those points. Performance was abysmal on launch and the game would go often under 30 fps on PS5, especially on vehicle. Some patches improved the situation, but they only went so far, as the game was essentially abandoned after mediocre sales (also, DLC and support plans were mostly all about multiplayer, yet another hint at the rotten GaaS roots).

Combat was okish, but it suffered from a serious lack of depth and some nuances that I think were a result of being designed for online coop play first. It's not as the Arkham games are all that deep, but they all have a core mechanic with a sky-high skill ceiling that are the result of things like decreasing response windows as your combo goes up, that won't fit well with network play.

I don't remember character movement being an issue, but I may be misremembering that.

To be honest, the game they made is very close to what I wanted, except the execution was not good enough. The only thing I wish it had would be more polish, especially in the core mechanics and the loot/skill progression. That's why I find it extremely frustrating: if the game had decent sales, a potential sequel focusing on the single player components would probably have fixed all my issues. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen :(

Bladebur wrote: ↑

1 year ago

I'd agree with you in all those points. Performance was abysmal on launch and the game would go often under 30 fps on PS5, especially on vehicle. Some patches improved the situation, but they only went so far, as the game was essentially abandoned after mediocre sales (also, DLC and support plans were mostly all about multiplayer, yet another hint at the rotten GaaS roots).

Combat was okish, but it suffered from a serious lack of depth and some nuances that I think were a result of being designed for online coop play first. It's not as the Arkham games are all that deep, but they all have a core mechanic with a sky-high skill ceiling that are the result of things like decreasing response windows as your combo goes up, that won't fit well with network play.

I don't remember character movement being an issue, but I may be misremembering that.

To be honest, the game they made is very close to what I wanted, except the execution was not good enough. The only thing I wish it had would be more polish, especially in the core mechanics and the loot/skill progression. That's why I find it extremely frustrating: if the game had decent sales, a potential sequel focusing on the single player components would probably have fixed all my issues. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen :(



Batgirl Walls 2.png

I just... I wanna reiterate a point I made ages ago when this game was still new... and being COMPARED to Arkham Knights as though Arkham Knights was this shining example of 'do no wrongness' in gaming for... some reason... that the game ran about a billion times better than Arkham Knights did. Arkham Knights ran SO POORLY at launch, that Steam TOOK IT OFF the store... Gotham Knights was very VERY far from 'unplayable'. Did it have some bugs, sure, but show me the game today that launches without bugs. At least it worked, which was far more than the game people pointed at was doing during it's launch.

Alas, we don't live in the same world as Arkham Knights dropped into, that game dropped in an environment where you could flip your audience off at launch and still turn the game into the masterpiece you envisioned over the following seven years, while Gotham Knights has dropped into a world where if you aren't just the most popular game EVER at launch, gamers snub it.

I don't remember character movement being an issue, but I may be misremembering that.

The animations don’t feel as responsive as in other titles, and the interactions aren’t as well integrated as they were in the "Arkham" series or even "Justice League," for that matter. Even a game like "Control," which is considerably older, felt more responsive.

The general direction of the game seemed uninspired, but I think that’s more due to shifts in development rather than any push for a "woke" agenda or anything political.

Barbara/Batgirl is fine, and she has a few moments I enjoyed. But I get it, we’re probably in wet-dream territory when it comes to expectations for her own solo IP.

I forgive the lack of depth in the combat system, especially with 4 playable characters that vary the gameplay. Still, the game felt easy, even on the hardest difficulty, which was a bit of a bummer.

Man, I just hope they nail it with "Wonder Woman." I think we’d all love to see this forum united in awe of a solid production.

Femina wrote: ↑

1 year ago

I just... I wanna reiterate a point I made ages ago when this game was still new... and being COMPARED to Arkham Knights as though Arkham Knights was this shining example of 'do no wrongness' in gaming for... some reason... that the game ran about a billion times better than Arkham Knights did. Arkham Knights ran SO POORLY at launch, that Steam TOOK IT OFF the store... Gotham Knights was very VERY far from 'unplayable'. Did it have some bugs, sure, but show me the game today that launches without bugs. At least it worked, which was far more than the game people pointed at was doing during it's launch.

Alas, we don't live in the same world as Arkham Knights dropped into, that game dropped in an environment where you could flip your audience off at launch and still turn the game into the masterpiece you envisioned over the following seven years, while Gotham Knights has dropped into a world where if you aren't just the most popular game EVER at launch, gamers snub it.

I'm not a fan of Arkham Knight and consider it by far the weakest of the Arkham entries, even in its final form. However, I have to agree that its release was a complete disaster (especially on PC). Nowadays, Arkham Knight would have been immediately ridiculed and scrapped, and probably would never have the chance to fix its many issues and end up shining. Today, one bad launch and you're dead. There are some counterexamples (No Man's Sky, perhaps?) but those usually come from smaller studios.

Game development is risky, and it has always been a hit-driven industry, but it is way too extreme now. In my opinion, the audience is to blame, fueled by social media echo chambers that amplify every message to the point of distortion. Notice how sales figures tend to be either insanely high in the millions or just a few thousand, with nothing in between. It's all love or hate.

When the only messages you hear are that a few things are masterpieces and everything else is garbage, your experience will be miserable no matter what. The so-called masterpieces aren't really that great, and you'll miss out on the good things that never got a chance.

I'm not a fan of Arkham Knight and consider it by far the weakest of the Arkham entries, even in its final form.

The Batgirl DLC was solid, but yeah, "Arkham City" is still the best in the series by far, in my opinion.

In my opinion, the audience is to blame, fueled by social media echo chambers that amplify every message to the point of distortion.

That, along with an economic context, drives even the most nuanced players to raise their expectations. Systems are becoming increasingly expensive, and their running costs(like electricity) are also on the rise.

People are genuinely more demanding than ever, yet paradoxically, studios have never invested as much as they do now.

It's a tough phase because what it ultimately means is that if a game doesn't sell, people lose their jobs, and that's not good for anyone.

Malice wrote: ↑

1 year ago

It's a tough phase because what it ultimately means is that if a game doesn't sell, people lose their jobs, and that's not good for anyone.

They lose their jobs anyway. Corpo America being what it is, once the project is finished, rather than keep and cultivate talent, they just fire everyone to try and make the chart look like they've made MOAR profit than last month REGARDLESS of if they made a hit. It astonishes me we still have people who defend the corporate business model as it continues to erode the quality of everything from toilet paper quality... to our quality of life.

They lose their jobs anyway. Corpo America being what it is, once the project is finished, rather than keep and cultivate talent, they just fire everyone to try and make the chart look like they've made MOAR profit than last month REGARDLESS of if they made a hit. It astonishes me we still have people who defend the corporate business model as it continues to erode the quality of everything from toilet paper quality... to our quality of life.

I hear you, and we’re definitely on the same page about the shitty side of things. Though, to be fair, not all companies are out there firing everyone right after a project wraps. Some of the bigger ones, like Ubisoft and EA, are notorious for it, sure.

But there are others that actually do keep their staff around, building on that talent. It’s not all doom and gloom out there... but yeah, the corporate grind often makes it feel that way.