@jensonb: I never particularly cared for Paradise. Weirdly enough I liked the previous Burnout games but Paradise seemed empty to me and kinda bland in comparison.
@steelknight2000: not changing engines seems to be working out for Bethesda just fine. Why spend extra resources when people are gobbling up the same all same all just the same.
@cagliostro88: My issue is that whenever we talk about modern games having these patches that are huge and radically impact your gaming experience no one brings up the fact that at the launch of the XB1 consumers and media alike ripped that whole always online idea apart, but when you look at the modern gaming space if you're not always hooked up to the internet you'll run into some pretty big issues playing a lot of AAA releases. It's like built in DRM. Imagine someone doesn't have an online connection or has very stringent data caps and they put in NMS - what kind of experience will they get compared to someone that downloaded the patch? Is that fair? Is that O-K? Should we just say "well game development is hard" or what I've heard said before "well we should be happy they keep working on it even after it went gold." But is that continued workflow at the cost of people that won't be able to make use of it because of their particular circumstances.
I too would like them to explore these issues from the side of the consumer rather than the developer. Yah it's a small team, yah they had to work their asses off, but hey so did a lot of other people in order to earn the money to buy their game. Oftentimes I feel like the paying customer is the least important part of the equation at the very bottom of the totem pole. It really very often feels like we should all be happy we even get these games and shut up and just hand over our money.
@cagliostro88: wow, sounds like you have a few axes to grind. curious: have you bought and been disappointed by the game yourself?
i think some people out there are forming this huge plan of hello games to milk the rubes of their hard earned cash in their heads that i just don't think is actually there...
I think he makes a decent point. I've seen Jeff swing from "I understand the hardships of game development" to "the consumer shouldn't care about development hardships" and I'm not sure what prompts one or the other. The man has a ton of experience under his belt so he definitely knows what he's talking about but they do throw some games under the bus while others had a sympathetic nod which is something I never understood and usually attributed to a) personal preference b) knowledge about the game I'm not privy to as just an online user.
From what I've seen and read, I don't think NMS is for me. Early stuff made it just look chill. I just wanted to cruise around the universe and discover stuff and it is that but with the added layer of the survival genre. Even if it doesn't permeate the gameplay too much, it's just there enough for it to grate on me. Having to manage meters and systems is not chill.
This might be the most boring looking AAA game I have seen in ages. I can't for the new Hitman episode next week and Deus Ex the week after.
Not a AAA game. Might be sold at $60 but it's a small team with no where near the budget
Even though the definition of AAA is pretty fluid and vague, I agree with you there.
That is something I never really thought about. Why is this game $60 when most other indie titles are like $20/$40 at most? If we are classifying this as an indie game, shouldn't the price match? Is it just the procedural generation? How much does Minecraft sell for?
Humanity's comments