I did a first impressions video of Herald earlier this week that Blue kindly linked. It's neat if you want a different spin on the Telltale formula. It's in a very different time period, with a fictionalised history and it's much more limited in scope but it's the same core concepts, done by a much smaller team for a smaller price. Definitely not for everyone (and based on both the sales and views on my video, not even that many) but some cool ideas.

LiTh wrote on Apr 7, 2017, 10:23:

Cutter wrote on Apr 7, 2017, 09:51:
Not cool, regardless of how they try to 'splain it. Why not a TM for "Cyberpunk 2077" the video game? Once again this just shows how drastically the USPTO needs to be overhauled.

Perhaps so they can have a sequel and have already bought the rights to past Cyberpunk #### content?

They actually addressed that point in their statement. But that assumes Cutter actually read it before running his mouth.

Cutter wrote on Apr 6, 2017, 22:21:
Well Gearbox knows a thing or two about shoddy practices so they're in good company. And fuck Total Biscuit. You try living somewhere where your dollar is weaker than others and get charged more for games while others in the same boat get price breaks. If not for key resellers most devs would be seeing a lot less sales overall.

Ahh yes, the old "drop in a thread, make one most full of claims without a shred of evidence and then bail out" style of Cutter post. You might want to spend a few minutes learning how currency conversion works.

I watched TB's video and if they changes they are talking about come to pass, it will be a big improvement. Kind of disappointed they involved Sterling. He doesn't want these fake games gone from Steam, one of his most popular series is his low-effort taking the piss out of them. They're a profit driver for him. In recent years, Sterling has shown that his position on something is based solely on how many views and Patreon dollars it gets him. He doesn't have a view of his own, it's based around what he thinks will satiate his audience the most. Say what you will about TB and I can say plenty but his opinions are genuine and based on the best interests of his audience, not what will get him more views.

descender wrote on Mar 20, 2017, 09:56:
Did you actually read all of those reviews or do you just assume that they all agree with your preconceived notions about the game based on one shit RPS article? They certainly aren't all doom and gloom... I've no dog in this fight, I was never going to buy this game after ME3 no matter what they did... but the demo was far less of a tragic experience than most of the early reviews would have you believe.

I watched Giant Bomb play the game live for over 2 hours to form my opinion. I saw horrendous animations, many of which were worse than the last generation Mass Effect games, Tumblr fanfic level writing, bland, flat voice acting, boring fetch quests, combat that hasn't evolved an inch in the last decade and oh yeah, it was buggy as all get out as well. The Giant Bomb guys are huge Mass Effect fans and they were all like "I don't know about this man..." I don't care about reviews, I care about real-world impressions and neither they nor me were impressed. This is a game that was made by a BioWare B-team that either didn't have the talent needed or were forced to ship it before it was ready. It's telling that up until close to release, EA basically showed nothing of this game to the press other than some concept videos. They weren't confident in it.

If there are people out there enjoying it, that's awesome and I'm happy for them. But let's not pretend like this game doesn't have serious issues and that the people down on it are just haters. I very much wanted this to be good and it isn't. I'll play it some day, when it's $15 or less with all the DLC included. An epic shitton of incredible, huge, open-world games came out in this quarter. Mediocre doesn't cut it right now.

Don't worry, they'll continue to.

They downsized to two studios last year and they basically have to give away CryEngine now because Amazon's free Lumberyard Engine is based on it. I'm guessing they won't survive the year.

I think Nintendo's attitude towards dead pixels is pretty dumb, especially at the system's launch but it's also the same stance literally every monitor and laptop manufacturer takes as well. Hell, even the $1,000 ROG Swift isn't guaranteed to not have dead pixels. Don't get me wrong, it's a ridiculous industry policy to claim that a certain amount of defect is OK but it's not like Nintendo's the only one doing this.

I have a strong suspicion that before this game ships, Hello Games will quietly undergo a rebranding.

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 2, 2017, 21:12:

Creston wrote on Mar 2, 2017, 20:18:
30 Billion... Has Snapchat ever actually earned a profit?

Would it surprise you to hear that, to date, this company has not made a single $ profit? Has no monetization idea, and has no idea how to ever actually turn a profit?

Apps are the new .coms.

Switching to Unreal was a smart move. As someone who covers a lot of different games, Unity titles almost always look dated and run substantially worse. That engine still hasn't shaken off its mobile/web based roots. It's easy to use and get started with but it's not up for high-fidelity titles unless you're prepared to do a LOT of optimisation with it. I've never played anything in Unity that has this kind of scope and both looks better than Unreal and doesn't run substantially worse.

nin wrote on Feb 18, 2017, 12:32:

The KillSmith wrote on Feb 18, 2017, 10:51:

ViRGE wrote on Feb 17, 2017, 20:11:
While I'm happy that Erik is (apparently) getting to do what he wants, it sounds like Valve has an employee retention problem. It's not a good sign when your employees are leaving to be baristas (or for that matter, that they can afford to do so).

Apparently you didn't catch Erik's sense of humor.

Kind of wondered that as well.

I can't remember where I read it but apparently a lot of employees have shares in the company. One of the reasons they aren't public is that they want to keep it employee owned as that method works with their flat "choose your own job/no hierarchy" structure.

Agent-Zero wrote on Feb 13, 2017, 11:03:

he was given a chance to live out his dream and play Breath of the Wild, for a little more than 30 minutes. It was the same demo that's been shown a million times, a constrained slice of the game's open world. (Given Gabe's physical limitations in the real-world, it was oddly fitting.)

thats a pretty strange editorial comment there

It's Waypoint. Being overly pretentious and editorial moralising is their whole schtick.

bozu wrote on Feb 6, 2017, 15:54:
Besides the ship date, what problems did you have with the Double Fine Adventure kickstarter? To me, it looked like they greatly increased the scope of the game due to the wild success of the kickstarter.

The game was split into two parts because they overscoped and somehow blew their budget, which was almost 10x what they initially asked for. The second part was delayed repeatedly yet felt super rushed, full of recycled environments, few new characters, boring, padding puzzles, much weaker writing (which already relied on a lot of 90s style jokes) and a terrible conclusion. They also spent a ton of money on celebrity voice actors like Wil Wheaton, Elijah Wood and Jack Black, all of whom either phoned in their lines or were directed so badly, you barely knew it was them.

bozu wrote on Feb 6, 2017, 15:54:
DF-9 was an Early Access title that didn't pan out. That's a bummer for everyone, but it doesn't speak to their ability to ship titles. When the sales aren't there, it's hard to justify making the product.

I'm sorry no, that's not acceptable. When you take people's money based on a certain laid out plan of expectations and fail to deliver on those, you don't just get to go "Sorry bye!" and keep all the money, leaving them with an unfinished product, especially when you're a well regarded, supposedly successful developer. You either finish it or you offer refunds to anyone who wants them. That project wasn't cancelled because Double Fine went under, they just abandoned it. If you watch this analysis of the situation, they also got a bunch of investment from Indie Fund, who got paid back in full while the fans were left screwed. The people who are supposed to take the biggest risk in exchange for the biggest potential reward got paid back, but fans were left with an alpha that was changed to v1.0 and most insultingly, is still being sold as a finished game to this day. If you don't see how unethical and anti-consumer that is, then I don't think I'll convince you.

bozu wrote on Feb 6, 2017, 15:54:
Double Fine makes a lot of different bets in games. Some work out and some don't. To me, their brand is about innovation, and has never been about hitting AAA sales targets.

I'm not deriding their willingness to try new things. Indeed, that's their biggest strength. And this has nothing to do with sales targets, this simply has to do with delivering what they promise to the people they ask to back ideas on faith. So far, they are 0 for 3 on delivering what they promised with their crowdfunded projects. If they didn't have the insane nostalgia behind Psychonauts and the Tim Schafer name, it never would have got funded. People are free to spend their money how they choose of course and hey, if you backed Psychonauts 2, I truly hope you get the game you want. If it comes out and it's as good as they promise it will be, I'll buy it without a doubt. But as someone who covers indie games on YouTube, it drives me mad to see so many incredible games made by talented people that get no attention, while a guy who has repeatedly screwed his fans over gets all kinds of fanfare and is still considered above reproach by so many.

Orogogus wrote on Feb 6, 2017, 16:36:

People who liked Psychonauts are understandably excited to see a sequel, and Double Fine was the original developer, with Schafer at the helm. It seems pretty cynical to go on about this as exploitation of nostalgia.

People were excited about Broken Age as well. Hell, I was, that's why I backed it for so much. And it underdelivered in almost every way for me and many others. I loved the first Psychonauts as well but fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Between Broken Age, Massive Chalice, SpaceBase DF-9 and what's come out about their past projects before turning to Kickstarter, Double Fine and Tim Schafer have shown they don't have a lot of respect for their fan's money or anyone's frankly.

Orogogus wrote on Feb 6, 2017, 16:36:
When you have a new developer using the Star Control name even though they don't have the rights to any of the aliens and they're immediately rebooting the history -- I can see how that charge would apply. But this seems like giving people what they want.

Star Control II is my favourite game of all-time so I can speak to that as well. There's one key difference between what Stardock is doing and what Double Fine does: Stardock's paying for it themselves. Yes, they sold Founder's Packs for Star Control (and full disclosure, I had a massive slip in judgement and bought one, which I have regretted for some time now) but the game would be getting made whether a single one sold or not. They aren't using nostalgia as a way to get people to pay them to make something. They're making it and hoping nostalgia, combined with quality will help it sell well enough to make a profit for them.

Now all that said, I will say that Starbreeze pumping a bunch of money into Psychonauts 2 is a good thing in the sense that unlike the Fig backers, Double Fine has legal obligations to Starbreeze because it's now a publishing relationship. Having a company with actual investment in the project holding their feet to the fire so they actually deliver will hopefully ensure Psychonauts 2 is much better for it. If they burn their Fig backers like they burned me as a Kickstarter backer, there's no recourse. They burn Starbreeze, there are legal ramifications. Hopefully Starbreeze can keep them on track.

This comment was edited on Feb 6, 2017, 18:29.

Sepharo wrote on Feb 6, 2017, 14:50:
Do you think its easy to keep an independent studio of that size operating? I'd say management is especially competent considering the outcome that most developers in their position experience.

When you're able to milk people's nostalgia at every turn to have them throw money at you, despite repeatedly failing to deliver? I'd say that's an advantage. Broken Age was a nightmare of a project that most people considered disappointing (especially the second half.) Massive Chalice was met with a huge "Meh." SpaceBase DF-9 received tons of Early Access money, then they abandoned the project unfinished and are still selling it to this day. But all Tim Schafer had to say was "Hey, remember Psychonauts? Pay up and we'll make another one maybe!" and a legion of fools showed up again. He's a master as manipulating people's nostalgia, that doesn't mean he knows how to run a business. Hell, Trump is proof enough that you can be bad at honest business and still make a mint.

I'm not saying they aren't beating the odds but if you look at Double Fine's history, they've almost gone out of business multiple times and one of the reasons they're relying so heavily on crowdfunding is because no big publishers will work with them any more because their two AAA projects (the first Psychonauts and Brutal Legend) went so far over budget and deadline that they didn't have a hope of being profitable. Tim Schafer made some awesome games back in the day and has been riding that reputation since, even though nothing Double Fine's made in recent years comes close to matching those. Hell, some of their most widely revered releases of the last couple of years were remasters of his old projects.

Compare Double Fine to inXile or Obsidian. Those two studios crowdfunded games and while they didn't ship on the stated Kickstarter date (to be fair, almost no Kickstarter ships when they say they will), they came out, are generally thought of as great experiences, were well managed and communicated projects and everyone got their backer rewards in a timely manner. I got my boxed copy of Wasteland 2 (which I backed after Broken Age) almost 2 years before I got my boxed copy of Broken Age.

They're getting funding for future projects because they showed they can deliver. Broken Age was a mismanaged mess (Hell, their own documentary shows a lot of it) but Double Fine didn't get backing for Psychonauts 2 because they showed they'll do a good job with it, they did it by exploiting nostalgia for a cult hit. Now, if you're saying that's a bad reason for a ton of people to throw money at it, I'd agree with you but it doesn't let Double Fine off the hook for exploiting that to begin with.

I hope Psychonauts 2 isn't a train wreck but if it is, I wonder if this is when people will finally learn. But I suspect Tim Schafer will just try to make a new Full Throttle next and the cycle will repeat.

A company whose lack of competent management is legendary in the industry and Starbreeze is throwing $8M at them. Mind you, despite Broken Age, Massive Chalice and SpaceBase DF-9, people still lined up to fund them on Fig so I guess why not. As someone who backed that Broken Age disaster for $100 back in the day and just 3 months ago received the box copy that was part of my reward tier, I chuckled. I'll be amazed if this game ships on time and isn't a mess like Broken Age was. Tim Schafer and Double Fine succeed in spite of themselves. I hope this game is good but I have zero confidence it will be.

The story in Mafia III was the only reason I finished it. I loved the first game and even liked the second but the open world in this one was so empty and boring. It felt like an open world from the PS2 era. I really regret buying it at full price. I'd rather they improve the game play than the story.

This just in, Tim Sweeney is still a massive hypocrite, making claims with no evidence and that as yet, haven't borne any fruit. Hey Tim, we gonna' be able to buy Epic titles through Steam instead of your garbage launcher soon? Oh right.

It was horrible at launch. Looked dated, 30Hz netcode and cheaters everywhere. Since then, they added a high-res texture pack, the netcode is now 60Hz and BattleEye has all but eliminated cheating. The game gets frequent updates, including major balance changes and new maps. Matchmaking times have been substantially reduced lately too.

As for in-game currency, it's completely optional. You can earn enough renown to buy a non-DLC operative in about an hour of play (less if you win frequently) and 4-5 hours for the DLC operatives. You can unlock every operative in around 20 hours without ever buying DLC. I bought the first season pass on a huge sale because I was lazy but since then, I've earned enough renown through playing that I could have unlocked every operator if I wanted. I haven't spent a cent on premium currency. Anything beyond operator unlocks is cosmetic.

I took a hard pass on this when it came out but a crew from work pushed me to buy it and a I found a PC physical copy at Best Buy for $19. I've played over 70 hours of multiplayer, play it with my work friends almost every night and don't see that changing any time soon.

Don't go by how it was at launch, it's a whole other experience now. I haven't had this much fun with a smaller team game since SWAT 4.