ll_Exile_ll

I also ended up putting down Yakuza 0, which is actually something I very rarely do. I finish like 95% of the games I play, but I stopped playing Yakuza 0 like 40 hours in. I often succumb to completionist compulsions when I play games and that led me deep into the mire of the real estate and cabaret management grinds that just ended up burning me out.

I remember enjoying the story, if not so much the combat, but I really should get back into that game and eventually the rest of the series.

The 360 was never ahead of the Wii, and Microsoft had squandered the lead they had over Sony in the second half of the 360's life. By the end they ended up neck and neck, but Sony had all the momentum with their slew of high quality exclusives in the back half of the generation while MS was doing gimmicky kinect nonsense to go along with nothing but Gears, Halo, and Forza from first party.

Even if the Xbox One didn't have all the issues it did, MS was entering the generation from a weakened position. Of course, the Xbox One doubled down on the bad direction and essentially buried the brand in the dirt.

There were a lot of bad decisions made with the Xbox One, but the most baffling to me will always be the focus on cable TV in an era where cord cutting was already a growing phenomenon (especially among the main video game playing demographics). Like, I can understand why they prioritized kinect integration and wanted to lock down used games. Those were bad decisions, no doubt, but ones you can at least understand what they were doing. But, building in such an emphasis on cable TV integration in 2013 (on a console that would need to last 7+ years) is just monumentally idiotic. I will never understand what they could have possibly been thinking.

I enjoyed this well enough for what it is, but I don't think this is a game that will stick with me or anything. It looks nice, the gameplay was engaging to a degree, and your little buddy is very cute, but I can't really say I was particularly moved or anything. As just a quick four hour thing with some nice art it was good, but not really much more than that for me.

EDIT: I would like to add that, even though this game didn't exactly blow me away, I remain a big fan of Don't Nod. I really like that they seem to have a commitment to delivering both on "indie scale" games like this, Tell Me Why, and their Life is Strange games, as well working on more ambitious traditional style games with AA budget like Vampyr and the upcoming Banishers. I will always be paying attention when they put something out.

@splodge: Control 2 was officially announced late last year. I believe they recently said it's still in early development, but will be getting more focus now that Alan Wake 2 has been released.

According to Jason Schreier, this was mostly driven by Destiny falling under projections in the last year. Revenue down 45% and player population dropping.

To me, this can all be traced back to Destiny's horrible new player experience that has only been getting worse. Population for this type of game always hinges on the people that leave being replaced by new players. With Destiny, the attrition rate doesn't seem like it's too bad for a game that has been going this long, but the terrible onboarding process for new players is turning people away before they can become regular players.

It certainly doesn't help that most of the old campaigns that would be pretty good first impressions have been removed from the game. There is currently no story campaign available for free to play players. The way the game introduces the core mechanics and the general progression loop to first time players is bad enough, but not having a big cinematic story campaign to get free to play players interested in the universe is, quite frankly, idiotic. There are multiple campaigns just sitting in the garbage completely inaccessible, they really should put at least one in the game. Content vaulting was the worst thing to ever happen to Destiny.

Starfield may have been financially successful, but public perception was pretty mixed. It certainly didn't help that it came out between BG3 and Phantom Liberty, both of which basically make Starfield look pretty weak in comparison in specific ways (BG3 in terms of RPG freedom, Phantom Liberty in terms of first person RPG presentation, both in regards to quality of writing and worldbuilding).

Microsoft first party doesn't have anywhere near the reputation of quality that Sony and Nintendo first party have. They need more than just a game that sells, they need games that embody prestige and AAA quality in the ways that Sony and Nintendo games do. Bethesda no longer commands that level of respect, and if MS wants Bethesda Game Studios to be a part of building up the reputation of their first party brand, the studio likely needs an outside voice.

Strong sales or not, I don't think Microsoft's hope for one of their flagship releases was for the conversation to be dominated by discussion about how it's not as good as other games in its release window. They wanted a 90+ scoring game with a strong case for GOTY, not one that will be lucky to crack the top 5.

I don't know how much this will impact Bethesda Game Studios directly, but boy do they need an infusion of new ideas and a challenge to their entrenched design and writing approach. Starfield has basically all the same weaknesses their games have always had, but they have become less palatable with each new release. Things that were easily ignored when their games were still fresh and unique have become far less easy to look past as their games have become less unique and less impressive compared to the rest of the industry. They have fallen so far behind the standards of other RPGs and open world games in so many areas.

The fact a lot of these criticisms started getting pretty loud with Fallout 4 and they seemed to take no steps to address any of these same core shortcomings with Starfield was the most baffling thing to me. I really would love someone to step in and give BGS a much needed reality check. Bring on better writers, challenge them on their rigid design decisions that haven't evolved in 20 years, because it seems clear that Todd and the other higher ups at BGS have no interest in changing the way they do things.

Not sure I agree with the premise that scripted set pieces are a thing of the past. Sure, open ended games have grown in number, but big scripted sequences haven't gone away. Spider-Man 2 came out just this week and it's full of them. Jedi Survivor from earlier in the year was full of them as well. Last year we had GoW Ragnarök and Plague Tale Requiem. Like, I get that they aren't as common as in the 7th generation, but they aren't gone by a long shot.

Looking at my own list of 2023 releases I've played, I count 15 games so far and I think I would have Starfield at 14. I could see shuffling around the games in the 12-14 range, so I could possibly be talked into Starfield at 12 or 13, but not really any higher. With Spider-Man 2 and Alan Wake 2 still to come, plus potentially other games I missed or are still to come that I may get to before the end of the year, Starfield will probably continue to fall.