• Atomic@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 years ago

    Why are they getting so much attention for it?

    Nintendo does the same with BoTW and ToTK. Long dev cycles that releases a functional game without micro-transactions.

    FromSoft does the same with most of their games. Where people actually beg them to release DLCs.

    But no… it’s Larion they seem to go after.

    Nintendo is huge. FromSoft has their own cult. But Larion? What’s can they blame there? Nothing. Most big studios that bitch about this is larger than Larion. Maybe because they are more scared that if Larion can do it. There’s no excuse anymore.

    • FeelsGouda@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      I think the “problem” for those people is that the game broke out of its bubble. nintendo, from soft and also larion up until now all had their own bubble of fans. Larion broke that mold and even people who have nothing to do with the genre celebrate it.

    • bonfire921@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I agree with you, thing is: Nintendo produces Nintendo exclusives, so it doesn’t affect the gaming space as much as other games might

    • Syo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yeah, to the OP in the posted tweet… I did put a lot of thought into it. If a game that’s just $60 can do this, then all new games are measured against it. Go compete. If your business model is outdated, convince your investors to change or be downgraded to B tier game dev.

      Don’t come me, the consumer, complaining about your poor ability to hedge business markets. You saw BG3 in early access for 3 years, you knew it was coming.

  • theAndrewJeff@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Here’s my thing: I don’t necessarily care what sort of game you make, I just want it to be feature-complete and technically solid (I.e. mostly bug-free). Whether that’s a small indie game or a massive AAA game, those two things should be true.

    I think what most people find frustrating is that the in-game store is the most well developed part of most AAA releases nowadays, which often ship riddled with bugs.

    • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 🏆@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      BG3 has still been riddled with bugs for me and since it doesn’t have MTX or a store or anything, it feels kinda worse. At least I know why the crap riddled with MTX is rife with issues; what is BG3’s excuse?

      I probably wouldn’t mind the bugs so much if the whole game was shit. But the game is fucking awesome. I just want to play it without being frustrated by technical issues. 😩

      I’m hoping that by the time the PS5 version launches, it’ll be much smoother.

  • frezik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Would it be so bad if games didn’t have insane budgets? Most of my favorite games from the past decade are from small studios operating on pizza and hope.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      BG3 did have a pretty huge budget though. I would totally be fine if games took notes from BG3 but reduced scope a lot. Bioware used to make games similar to BG, but they stopped and now make garbage. The idea other studios can’t make similar games is wrong. They can’t make games this big usually though without publishers telling them they need to include microtransactions and other bullshit.

      • avapa@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        BioWare didn’t just make games similar to Baldur’s Gate, they created Baldur’s Gate.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Yep, you’re right. I didn’t realize they were a studio at that point. Yeah, they have no reason to complain about new expectations. They could have created BG3 if they had kept doing what they were known for, but EA and the money were too good…

    • zaphod@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Lower budgets would probably be better. High budgets mean high risk, developers and publishers try to minimize that risk and you get bland games that try to cater to too many tastes. Movies suffer from the same problem. They get budgets in the hundreds of millions and you wonder what they spent it all for.

  • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I have no problem if games reached this via a similar model that Larian used here (lots of experienced staff, pre-built systems, 6 years of development, 3 years of expertly done early-access with a highly engaged player base) but they’re not going to. They’re going to implement more crunch, more abuse, more destruction of the few people who want to work in games in order to get there. And that’s where I have the issue.

    I want shorter games, with worse graphics, made by people who get paid more to do less. Because that’s what’s needed to make truly great games. People who are passionate, not burning themselves out just to barely make deadlines, make great games.

  • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    "what funding?"is a dumb question. all companies have funding. especially software. very few companies legit started in a basement and progressed to international status relying purely on profit and loss sheets.

    • Akrenion@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      It is not when replying to the comment. There was no funding for being a dnd game. They are simply lying for their point.

    • theodewere@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      you are ignorant… you don’t understand what he’s talking about… they are both talking about VC funding… that means Venture Capital, which you did not know… for some reason you are here being ignorant and loud about something you do not understand…

  • HellAwaits@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Honestly, this kind of pleading from the other AAA developers is just making them look pathetic. Yes, it’s reasonable not to expect BG3 for every AAA games, but it’s not because of time and money, but simply because developers are just not always going to make lightning strike twice. But these devs have plenty of time and money and they look terrible in comparison to a dev that took it’s time to make sure it was well polished before release.