As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Rocksteady's [Suicide Squad] and WB Montreal's [Gotham Knights]

12021222426

Posts

  • Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    SeGaTai wrote: »
    Isn't a battle pass without a long tale for multiple years worse? Why invest in cosmetics for a game your going to drop?

    People went crazy for the suits in Arkham City (the Batman Beyond skin went for crazy prices online), skins in Fortnite are basically their own economy at this point. Hell, half the reason I wanted the Spiderman PS4 dlc was... More suits baby

  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited February 24
    You mean like... A city? They all have unique travel mechanics and unlike Gotham Knights, it actually looks fun and fluid to move around the city. This is something the Arkham games did well too

    Anyways, I'm excited. Which in a world of mediocre modern super hero games, I went in with low expectations and came away positive

    I mean a city can be a bit more than that so not really. Like as far as the movement went they weren't so much interacting with the environment as they were kind of just jumping around. Which is why I wouldn't put it on the same level as SO cause you interacted with things in the environment a lot.

    I can tell you're excited so not trying to be a downer just saying I didn't see much that impressed me.

    Dragkonias on
    Preacher
  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited February 24
    To show you what I'm saying here is a very, very old video I recorded of a MP match in SO.

    There is a lot more moment to moment things going on and the environment itself is both traversal and a weapon.

    https://youtu.be/NUASX6QklAs

    Compared to what I saw there it was kind of just characters floating in the air as they shot the weak points for massive damage.

    Dragkonias on
    Preacher
  • Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    Boomer had a teleport, Quinn had a grapple, Deadshot had the jetpack, like they all look like fun traversal methods to me. The comparison was that it's a fast paced shooter with fun movement and over the top scale, exaggerated physics and fast paced gameplay

  • -Loki--Loki- Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining. Registered User regular
    Looks miles ahead both Gotham Knights and Marvel's Avengers just based on traversal alone. They literally show an ability where King Shark takes out his hook knifes. Looks like a blast to me. Reminds me of Sunset Overdrive too, another fun and fast paced shoot em up

    They showed him take out his knives and then proceed o keep shooting a gun.

    I want to see the melee system, not just an animation for pulling out some knives. All of the melee they showed was just finishers.

    DemonStacey
  • Andy JoeAndy Joe We claim the land for the highlord! The AdirondacksRegistered User regular
    Suicide Squad gameplay didn't look very appealing.

    But, I owe it to Kevin Conroy to slog through it.

    XBL: Stealth Crane PSN: ajpet12 3DS: 1160-9999-5810 NNID: StealthCrane Pokemon Scarlet Name: Carmen
  • AegeriAegeri Tiny wee bacteriums Plateau of LengRegistered User regular
    GaaS like systems? Utterly shite looking gameplay? Always online?

    Well this is an easy decision for me!

    The Roleplayer's Guild: My blog for roleplaying games, advice and adventuring.
    LucascraftBrainiac 8PenumbraDemonStacey
  • KyouguKyougu Registered User regular
    I think (based on the gameplay shown) it's so disappointing that they have these unique characters just using guns.

    I'm sure it's so you can use any character without adjustment but it's so boring.

    Also if this is in the Arkham universe just pick Deadshot, Red Hood, Slade and uhmmm... Some other gun based comic character at least.

    rahkeesh2000
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    Didn't think they'd be dumb enough to do it this hard, but I guess they really are.

    Guess the only question now is whether the single-player bit will be passable enough to experience when the game gets cheap or if the mechanics will turn it into an Avengers slog.

    Dammit, I really don't wanna miss one of Kevin Conroy's final performances.

    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    Rewatched the trailer again this morning.

    What I see:

    -Captain Boomerang, a character who uses a boomerang as a deadly ranged weapon, is using a boring gun to shoot purple weak points on enemies.
    -King Shark, who has ultra-thick hide and is a natural bruiser and brawler, and a melee character, is using a boring gun to shoot purple weak points on enemies.
    -King Shark, who is a natural bruiser and brawler, does a leap attack into a pack of dudes. And then instead of bruisin' and brawlin' he pulls out a gun to shoot at them from point blank range.
    -Harley Quinn is apparently Spider-Man and can web-sling and perpetually keep herself airborn, by air grappling all the time anywhere.
    -Harley Quinn, who famously uses a bat or cartoonishly oversized mallet, does not use any sort of melee weapon at all in the trailer.


    Seems like they took some characters and then just gave them all guns and gave them the ability to float or stay suspended in midair and shoot purple bubbles on big baddies. Maybe the team they chose isn't the right set of character for the gameplay they're trying to accomplish? Deadshot fits well enough with this gameplay style but the other 3 do not. Especially not King Shark. If I'm gonna play as a giant shark-man, I want to get in there and punch some dudes in the face and just generally cause some good old fashioned on-the-ground mayhem. Hulk style. Being a shark with an AK is not what I want from a playable King Shark character.

    rahkeesh2000
  • shoeboxjeddyshoeboxjeddy Registered User regular
    Being a shark with an AK is just Fortnite. Play as any character from media... in a Battle Royale setting. You do BR stuff.

    Preacher
  • Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    Its a game about the suicide squad I just don't know how people didn't think this was gonna be a shooter in some way. Like maybe they just haven't shown off the melee combat or weapons yet? Feels like Gotham Knights was the studios chance to make a Arkham successor and they fumbled it, but I never expected this to be like Arkham combat

  • LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    edited February 24
    Gotham Knights was WB Montreal. It was not made by Rocksteady. The fact that they went a different way is less surprising.

    But when you tell me that Rocskteady, who are the kings of melee combat and the team who reinvented what a melee brawler is, tells me that they're making a game with King Shark and Harley Quinn in it, I expect freeflow combat from those two characters at the very least. Tell me you're making a game with Captain Boomerang, and I expect to be able to do trick-shots and actually throw a boomerang. But his gameplay in the video was just guns too. Why in the hell is a character whose whole gimmick is trick-shots with a boomerang using a gun? His name is not Captain Gun.

    Lucascraft on
    rahkeesh2000
  • KyouguKyougu Registered User regular
    Harley does have a drone that seems to follow her and which she attaches her grapple too. So credit to that.

    King Shark being able to air dash is weird but I'm sure they'll hand wave it with "he's part god"

  • Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    Lucascraft wrote: »
    Gotham Knights was WB Montreal. It was not made by Rocksteady. The fact that they went a different way is less surprising.

    But when you tell me that Rocskteady, who are the kings of melee combat and the team who reinvented what a melee brawler is, tells me that they're making a game with King Shark and Harley Quinn in it, I expect freeflow combat from those two characters at the very least. Tell me you're making a game with Captain Boomerang, and I expect to be able to do trick-shots and actually throw a boomerang. But his gameplay in the video was just guns too. Why in the hell is a character whose whole gimmick is trick-shots with a boomerang using a gun? His name is not Captain Gun.

    Montreal also made Arkham Origins though, and most people loved that. I'm in a mostly positive view of the game, not everything Rocksteady makes has to be a brawler

  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited February 24
    The problem with making a GaaS rn is you are basically jumping into an oversaturated market that was already on the downturn.

    It is MMOs all over again in that it isn't impossible to break into the market but you have to really be bringing something new to the table.

    To be fair to Rocksteady though they did start development right as the downturn was starting. And the pandemic didn't help. But I don't think most people will care

    Dragkonias on
  • Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    edited February 24
    I'd say that the games that did it well thrived under the model. And since online the backlash is loud, it'll probably go F2P before long. I think with a steady drip of new characters, weapons and content the game could be great. The Division, dead by daylight, Warframe, Sea of Thieves, there's quite a few examples of games using the model and finding success.

    These games live or die by how fun they are to play. Destiny is fun as shit moment to moment so it has endured. That's what matters to me, how it plays. Avengers was so, so bad. Clunky, horrible traversal, etc. This looks like the opposite of Avengers to me, personally.

    Local H Jay on
  • PenumbraPenumbra Registered User regular
    I'd say that the games that did it well thrived under the model. And since online the backlash is loud, it'll probably go F2P before long. I think with a steady drip of new characters, weapons and content the game could be great. The Division, dead by daylight, Warframe, Sea of Thieves, there's quite a few examples of games using the model and finding success.

    These games live or die by how fun they are to play. Destiny is fun as shit moment to moment so it has endured. That's what matters to me, how it plays. Avengers was so, so bad. Clunky, horrible traversal, etc. This looks like the opposite of Avengers to me, personally.

    To me it looks exactly like the Avengers. And I played that game once already. Just kidding. I played it in destiny. I played it in The Division. I don’t need another half baked GaaS. Once it hits PS+ or game pass I’ll give it a shot. I’m impressed with how throughly the news about this game this week made it go from “interested” to “nah”.

    Switch Friend Code: 6359-7575-9391
  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited February 24
    My issue is I have no interest in the GaaS stuff so I was only ever interested in the single player campaign.

    And I have yet to play a game that tried to marry the two where the SP wasn't obviously negatively impacted by it.

    And if I'm being completely honest the trailer did little to extinguish that.

    Dragkonias on
    Penumbra
  • Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    Destiny and Division are pretty different and lots of people enjoy them. Avengers felt soulless, like the people making it didn't care at all about the source material. Here I can feel the love the for characters, the art style and character design is great compared to that. Gameplay loop looks way more satisfying and fun but hey, I love games like this. So if the game goes cheap quick y'all are just doing me a favor

  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    Penumbra wrote: »
    I'd say that the games that did it well thrived under the model. And since online the backlash is loud, it'll probably go F2P before long. I think with a steady drip of new characters, weapons and content the game could be great. The Division, dead by daylight, Warframe, Sea of Thieves, there's quite a few examples of games using the model and finding success.

    These games live or die by how fun they are to play. Destiny is fun as shit moment to moment so it has endured. That's what matters to me, how it plays. Avengers was so, so bad. Clunky, horrible traversal, etc. This looks like the opposite of Avengers to me, personally.

    To me it looks exactly like the Avengers. And I played that game once already. Just kidding. I played it in destiny. I played it in The Division. I don’t need another half baked GaaS. Once it hits PS+ or game pass I’ll give it a shot. I’m impressed with how throughly the news about this game this week made it go from “interested” to “nah”.

    To be fair this game doesn't make the characters look like K-Mart brand knockoffs, and it looks like there will be more than like two actual comic characters to fight.

    But that's a pretty goddamn low bar to clear.

    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
    rahkeesh2000Penumbra
  • LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    Sea of Thieves might be following a general GaaS model and selling battlepasses and seasonal content, but it is an entirely different type of game and found a niche that it exists in quite nicely. Sea of Thieves is not trying to compete with Destiny or The Division. It's doing its own thing, quite confidently, and succeeding.

    Likewise with Genshin. That game is an anime action combat RPG and waifu simulator and occupies a fairly unique niche spot, although that new game, Tower of Whatever, is a pretty obvious clone and knockoff. Trying to horn in on some of the success of Genshin.

    When I look at the new trailer for SS, what I see is a reskinned Iron Man floating around shooting at colored weak spots on big tank-sized enemies. Which is exactly what Crystal Dynamics' Avengers was. Or Thor floating around throwing lightning hammers. It looks exactly like that game, but with a DC coat of paint. Also, when I look at the gameplay of SS in the new trailer, I see Anthem. Which is also a hover-based shooter. Basically, I would classify Anthem, the Iron Man combat of Avengers, and Rocksteady's Suicide Squad as all being the same type of gameplay.

    GaaS is more of a concept than a genre unto itself. Destiny is a FPS. That's its genre. The Division is a third person cover-shooter. That's its genre. Genshin is an action combat RPG / anime waifu simulator. That's the genre. Sea of Thieves is a sandbox pirate simulator. Fortnite is a battle royale. That's the genre.

    The GaaS stuff are the meta-game parts. The services. Battlepasses. Constant stream of costumes, dances, emotes, sprays, tags, blips, blings, and weapon charms that they trickle out in seasonal content bundles. GaaS is not in-and-of-itself a genre. It's a business model that can be applied to many genres.

    I don't accuse SS as trying to compete with Destiny. They're not the same type of game. Yes, there might be some overlap because FPS and TPS both have very wide market appeal. But you can't really directly compare the gameplay of SS to Destiny. You can, however, directly compare the business models.

    rahkeesh2000
  • StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    They could have just used the Borderlands model of a complete game on launch with 1-2 years of story, character, and cosmetic DLC packs.

    YL9WnCY.png
    Penumbra
  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    Yeah I feel most games have some service aspects these days and that in itself isn't a bad thing.

    Most people only play a handful of games a year and the games you play getting continued support is usually a plus.

    That said I feel most hardcore GaaS have gotten to the point where fun is secondary to engagement and when you break free of that cycle of grinding and FOMO you start to see how shallow a lot of them are.

    PreachershoeboxjeddyLucascraftShenl742AxenPenumbra
  • ED!ED! Registered User regular
    I really like that they are getting that this is a GAAS right out of the way; there's no confusion and angry "We Need To Talk About" YouTube videos near or at launch. This is the game and it clearly has been designed as such from scratch.

    I will say, that the first half of this presentation kind of left me cold. Like, that was not an interesting combat slice. At all. And the MCU level writing (EVERYONE has to quip of course) is just. . .blargh. The developer overview though saved this for me, especially with them confirming that this is a "fast" game, which I dig. I'd like to know more about the open world itself and whether it will be interesting enough to justify the GAAS with gameplay that brings you back for random gameplay sessions at "end game."
    Lucascraft wrote: »
    Also, gear score? Uggghhhhh....

    The UI looks exactly like Gotham Knights. I didn't hate Gotham Knights. It was fine. But I expect much better from Rocksteady.

    And they're already talking about a battle pass, DLC, customization options, and all the things that I have grown to hate in modern gaming. They're throwing out all of the wrong buzzwords.

    No way. GK's UI looks like a mobile game starter point that never got updated. Unless you mean the actual gameplay HUD, then sure they look about the same, though it does look cleaner here than in GK if you ask me.

    "Get the hell out of me" - [ex]girlfriend
  • AxenAxen My avatar is Excalibur. Yes, the sword.Registered User regular
    IMHO I don't think there is necessarily anything inherently wrong with GaaS. It is a tool that can be used for good or ill.

    That said, I feel like people's negative gut reaction to GaaS is warranted more often than not. I put the blame for that squarely on the countless publishers/devs out there who see GaaS as shorthand for "make loads of money with little effort by exploiting human phycology".

    A Capellan's favorite sheath for any blade is your back.
    Local H JayFencingsax
  • LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    I brought this up a couple months ago in the Diablo thread…

    I have never seen a game that was improved by having a battlepass. Battlepasses are built around player retention metrics, FOMO, habit forming behavior, addiction to small reward payouts, and dangling a big prize as a carrot on a stick to get people to play through hours of repetitive content to unlock one desirable thing at the end of a tedious grind. Over and over. Each season.

    Battlepasses are manipulative, predatory, unhealthy to human psyche, and never deliver a good cost value.

    So for me, if I hear that a new game is coming out and it will be built around a battlepass, that game is a hard pass from me. I have no desire to be manipulated and coerced into playing more hours of a game than I would under normal circumstances, just to unlock some shiny limited time skin at the end of it all.

    (As a side note, I’m very seriously considering not buying D4, because that game has a battlepass system. And I’m saying that as someone who is a lifelong Diablo fan and have been since the original in 1997.)

    This is relevant to the discussion of SS, because if I’m considering not buying D4 over the inclusion of a battlepass, I sure as shit won’t be buying Suicide Squad, which is an IP I don’t care about at all. I was seriously disappointed back a really long time ago when Rocksteady announced that their new game was SS. And now I’ve gone from disappointment to “go fuck yourselves and your trend-chasing corporate greed.”

  • NosfNosf Registered User regular
    If a game has a season pass that I pay for and then it expires regardless of my finishing the thing... that's a hard no. It's why I ditched Destiny. I want to play other things, if I pay for a season I expect to come back and be able to finish it later. I paid for it.

    shoeboxjeddyFencingsax
  • AlphaRomeroAlphaRomero Registered User regular
    GaaS just seems like it's not a fun game model. It's generally always online and has little story, or not a particularly great story because you're playing at the pace of a group of others, and any additional content is gated by grinding. I watched King Shark heading toward the tank and thought he was going to Hulk it out of there because he has super strength, but no, he's running around like a Fortnite character. It's a shame because the story looks fun but this seems like it was intended to be The Avengers and they tried to dial it back because of The Avengers. It's basically a service of half measures withholding good content for scheduled drops.

  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    Nosf wrote: »
    If a game has a season pass that I pay for and then it expires regardless of my finishing the thing... that's a hard no. It's why I ditched Destiny. I want to play other things, if I pay for a season I expect to come back and be able to finish it later. I paid for it.

    I think the worst trend within the season pass model, which I already dislike, has been paid tier skips. Like, you’re gonna take away what I paid for at the end of the season, but you’ll magnanimously offer to let me pay you even more money to get what’s in the season pass if I didn’t play the required amount? So generous.

    That’s one of the main advertised features of the newest COD’s expensive “Vault Edition,” you get 50 skips of the season pass.

    smCQ5WE.jpg
    shoeboxjeddyPenumbraPreacher
  • Blackbird SR-71CBlackbird SR-71C Registered User regular
    edited February 25
    Lucascraft wrote: »
    I brought this up a couple months ago in the Diablo thread…

    I have never seen a game that was improved by having a battlepass. Battlepasses are built around player retention metrics, FOMO, habit forming behavior, addiction to small reward payouts, and dangling a big prize as a carrot on a stick to get people to play through hours of repetitive content to unlock one desirable thing at the end of a tedious grind. Over and over. Each season.

    Deep Rock Galactic.

    The Battlepass is completely free, there is no premium tier at all, the only thing you can ever spend real money on in that game is completely separate, entirely cosmetic DLCs.

    Granted, the Battlepass in DRG also aims for player retention, as you have to play regularely, but again, it's completely free, you can accumulate up to 3 daily challenges if you have busy days, and re-roll up to one of those per day if they are poorly chosen.

    I would say that game is improved by having a Battlepass because they choose this way to add a *ton* of free cosmetics to the game every season, just spread out over the Battlepass instead of dumping 100 cosmetic items onto the player at the start.

    Blackbird SR-71C on
    steam_sig.png
    Steam ID: 76561198021298113
    Origin ID: SR71C_Blackbird

    Fencingsax
  • DemonStaceyDemonStacey TTODewback's Daughter In love with the TaySwayRegistered User regular
    I mean this gameplay looks miles better than Gotham Knights...
    https://youtu.be/EoXUE4TKHwc

    I mean I’m not sure why the GK comparison as they are completely different kinds of gameplay.

    I think it looks totally fine as a another looter shooter if that is what one is looking for. But it just begs the question of… why these characters if they have such little identity? It looks like they just threw a suicide squad skin on it. That is something GK inarguably did miles better. It had 4 clearly unique playstyles and characters.

    But as much as it’s a little funny to see the shoe on the other foot it’s definitely not a game I’m playing so I don’t wanna spend too long shitting on it other than to say the above.

    Fencingsax
  • Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    Gotham Knights is made by the same publisher, made by the same studio that worked on an Arkham game, and all these are third person action games about super heroes. They invite comparison on the basis of... Being the same genre and from the same people at the top level.

    I can just tell from gameplay footage if a game is gonna be good or bad (in my opinion, obviously) and I was right on both counts with Avengers and Gotham Knights. Both those games I felt absolutely nothing watching footage of, and ultimately playing them I felt nothing (other than annoyance I suppose). Also, both those games launched in horribly buggy and underperforming states.

    So for me, Suicide Squad looks like quite a lot of fun from the trailer. At launch, if I hear it's not fun, or that it's buggy and has a bad unstable frame rate, then I'll likely skip it. Maybe I'll try a demo or something. But to me, you can just feel the difference between those former games and this one just by looking at it.

    I understand that the majority of the complaints aren't even against the game itself, aside from a lack of melee combat. Most of the complaints are about a business model, one that many have failed at but the ones who found success, found great success and thrive in the model. Seems to me unlike my hot take, most people just wanted another Arkham game which I can empathize with! That's what I said when I saw Gotham Knights? Which is arguably a better concept for a Arkham type game than Suicide Squad which is a squad of assassins

  • DemonStaceyDemonStacey TTODewback's Daughter In love with the TaySwayRegistered User regular
    Yea that’s putting things under such an incredibly broad umbrella that I can’t really understand the point. Like I’m not gonna be comparing last of us gameplay and gears of war because they both can fall under the incredibly broad spectrum of third person shooter. Single player focused action RPG with co-op and mega fast paced looter shooter are not in the same ballpark in my book. Not even the same general control style by the looks of it.

    But that just says to me we see this stuff in such a different light we’re basically talking different languages and that discussion would go nowhere via text haha.

    Any which way i can see pretty clearly it’s not a game I would enjoy but I do hope it ends up being fun for you. Games are for fun and always better for games to come out enjoyable than not!

    Preacher
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    I would disagree that GK and Squad are in the same genre, but I want to know more about how the game actually plays before I pass judgement. Then again, I liked GK, so what do I know?

    DemonStacey
  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited March 9


    Woah...I haven't seen something like this since Dragon Age was basically reset after Anthem bombed.

    Sure it's only a few months so I doubt the game changes that much but kind of crazy. That said overall sentiment was pretty negative so it isn't that surprising but not sure what they plan to do in a few months.

    Dragkonias on
    DemonStacey
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular

    This delay also moves Suicide Squad out of a crowded release window that currently includes new Zelda, Diablo, and Final Fantasy games.


    For what it's worth, a delay like this is mainly for polish, not to overhaul the core gameplay that caused the backlash. Suicide Squad started off as a Game as a Service and will remain one short of a complete reboot, which would require a much longer delay

    Tweeter is Jason Schreier, one of the best journalists working today.

    So yeah, this will just keep it from getting buried underneath massive names/make sure it functions okay/both. It's possible WB is losing faith in the game, but it's equally possible they want it to get a fair shot.

    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
    Andy JoeFencingsax
  • Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    I mean they could also just be adding the much requested melee weapons/combat people seem to want which probably wouldn't be too hard to do

  • LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    On that topic, Yahtzee (of Zero Punctuation) released a video today talking generally about the state of the games industry, and the cyclical nature of bandwagoning that the boardroom money people do. The video also directly touches on why public response was so negative towards SS:KtJL. It's a very insightful video not just about SS, but about trends in the games industry as a whole. Strongly recommend giving it a watch for anyone who cares about the games industry.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_9Jh74nEaI


    RE: WB losing faith in the game... I think it's fair to say that now we know why the two studio heads and founding members of Rocksteady both abandoned ship very recently. They haven't said as much, so this is just speculation and conjecture, but it's fairly sound logic. They saw the writing on the wall. They knew the industry as a whole is trending away from Live Service games. They probably realized that the big ones that make all the money are the outliers and exceptions to the rule, not the norm. The Fortnites, the Apex Legends, the Destiny 2's, those are the few that have survived in an oversaturated market. Everything else has withered and died. And the studio heads of Rocksteady probably realized that the game they were making was going to have a very lukewarm (or worse) response, and they got out before their names would be permanently associated with a game that is looking like it might be dead on arrival.

    Dragkonias
  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited March 9
    I have been saying for a while that the game industry as a whole is sorely missing the mid-sized game devs that were hollowed out during the PS3/360 era.( CliffyB said the same but I feel people didn't listen to him cause he's a bit too much of a dudebro)

    AAA are too risk averse to take any big risks and Indie devs don't have the funds to do it at scale. So we have a AAA space that feels fairly stagnant.

    It's been slowly...slowly getting better but it's a far cry from what it used to be.

    Dragkonias on
    LucascraftcloudeagleAndy Joe
Sign In or Register to comment.