Newfangled

@bonbonetti said:

I made a sneaky edit to my post prior to your reply to acknowledge that you weren't necessarily talking about single-series titles--apologies, I probably leaned in a little hard on that considering it wasn't the core of your discussion!

But yes, Grid was a brief foray into offering multiple formulae under a single umbrella, which was too much of a loose arcade-y approximation than faithful recreation of several series.

Dirt Rally addressed a untapped, wholly unserviced market which was clamouring for a modern, uncompromising rally simulation. I mean, Richard Burns Rally (2004) was the previous reference point for the sub-genre at the time of DR's release! Essentially, it wasn't battling for attention in an oversaturated marketplace of PC road-racing sims. Codemasters engineered a savvy marketing and development strategy for Dirt Rally--it was rolled out incrementally when crowdfunding was really in vogue--but I don't think lightning's going to strike twice on that front.

Agree with your other points re: smaller developers! Thank heavens for consoles.

I don't believe development of a series-specific racing title (apart from for Formula 1, given its enormous worldwide install base) is commercially viable for Codemasters. Back in the Days of ToCA, ToCA 2,and 2003's IndyCar Series, development costs were far lower, and gaming was much more of a niche industry. The PSX BTCC games weren't as a big of a risk to develop and release, despite the series' comparatively small audience. Even NASCAR has fallen out of favour these past few generations.

What's more, contemporary simulation racing games tend to cover a much wider gamut: titles like iRacing, rFactor, and Project CARS feature an attractive variety of formulae to cater to most motorsport enthusiasts. By being a part of a greater package--rather than the whole pie--each title casts a wider net, again lessening risk, and broadening appeal. An average consumer would look at an IndyCar game and likely question why it only featured a single car model when a rival simulation title offered that and so much more beside it. There wouldn't be enough hardened fans clamouring for anything IndyCar for a title like that to be anything other than a loss-maker. Lazer-scanning and recreating every destination circuit and/or location from scratch would cost an unbelievable amount of money and take forever and a day to complete, plus the cost of an official license... it's too big of an ask given Codies' commitments to other projects.

Most importantly, current titles are arguably already doing as good a job recreating a single experience than a developer concentrating on producing a solely IndyCar-focused racing game would do. The most prominent series are already represented in a sufficient capacity in contemporary titles: iRacing's IndyCar experience, for example, is a far greater draw than a modern-day, say, Newman-Haas racing for a dedicated US open-wheel fanbase. Nobody's going to make that game. The market is already saturated with far-reaching sims, so that's a no-go for Codies, too.

I wish it was a different story, as there is nothing quite like an accurately recreated broadcasting package to double-down on an authentic, single-series experience, but that's the way the industry is these days. I used IndyCar as an example, but it's interchangeable with any of those you mentioned. Codies can cater to the arcade audience like you mentioned, which is why they're headed further in that direction--but it seems like a trajectory with a limited life expectancy.

Over in the UK, I saw a Sea of Thieves advert playing on one of the big screens at Piccadilly Circus--that's about as big time as you can get, given how expensive a spot there most likely is!

Oh. This looks nothing like the spiritual Motorstorm successor I was hoping it was going to be. Definitely giving it a hard pass!

I'm a little worried about Codemasters. Dirt 4 has struggled, Showdown was deeply unspectacular, this is a risky proposition that could (I'm not saying will) tank, and without the F1 license there's not much worth getting excited about in their portfolio.

Had 'Get Innocuous!', if I remember correctly. Nothing else lives on in the memory apart from You Know What.

Ryan, Jeff, Brad, Vinny, Patrick, Drew. To be honest, Alex, Dave (Snider), and Dan are a line change, plus Rorie as a sub goalie.

To add to this, I think reviews absolutely have a important part to play when the hype curve is at its peak, even if that means reviewing a game months before its official 1.0 release (a la PUBG). Every review will become outdated and irrelevant eventually, but masses will still be searching for trustworthy opinion(s) on a game when interest is at its maximum, and site traffic will surely justify the effort made. I also enjoyed video reviews as a companion piece, as it made 'big' games feel more like an event worth engaging in--plus the additional production flair made for a refreshing, more professional contrast to the mostly unedited content the site offered (you might even say unprofessional! Ugh). I came to GB initially for its unique slant on journalism, not the personality-centric/unqualified commentary the site is largely cultivating now with the new hires (although the original team have always been endlessly entertaining on film), and have consequently been going elsewhere for professional opinions and overviews more and more frequently in recent years.

I'm pro-review, because I think the traditions of games journalism are still relevant--they can live alongside the more modern slant some outlets have taken in reaction to the rise of video sharing platforms and 'content creators'. The problem is, there isn't really anyone working at GB who could take up the mantle of a dedicated reviewer and ease the workload of Brad, Jeff, Alex and, to a lesser extent, Dan--I would take a review from Abby or Ben with a grain of salt, for example, because they're personalities, not journalists. I'm sure both of them are capable of writing a passable review, but you can't pull decades of accumulated respect and experience out of a hat, nor attempt to rebrand both as hardened writers company-side without devaluing the stock of the medium.

it's $12

on Humble

buy it

instead

you should listen to what he says he's a scientist

I must emphasise just how important this is. Not only must you accept that you need to sever ties physically, you also have to separate yourself digitally, too. She has moved on. Wallowing in the past, and potentially exposing yourself to emotional trauma through seeing photographs of her with somebody else is absolutely a worst-case scenario in the painfully raw short-term if you still have feelings for her. You can't hang your hat on the thought of her coming back--it isn't healthy.

It's a good idea to work on re-establishing yourself as a single, independent entity. Bring joy to your life by focusing on yourself. As others have suggested, this is achievable by doing things that make you feel good about yourself: exercise, organising something special (a trip; attending an event of some description; a party with close friends), and indulging in a hobby (or hobbies), new or old.

You may have low points, and everybody resurrects themselves post-breakup on different timescales, so there's no magic point at which I can guarantee you're going to be 100% 'over it', but it will happen eventually--you just have to put yourself on a healthy coping programme in the meantime until it does.