This Video Game Trend is Killing Single Player Games | Asmongold Reacts
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ธ.ค. 2024
- by @gameranxTV • This Video Game Trend ...
► Asmongold's Twitch: / zackrawrr
► Asmongold's Twitter: / asmongold
► Asmongold's Sub-Reddit: / asmongold
► Asmongold's 2nd YT Channel: / zackrawrr
Channel Editors: CatDany & Daily Dose of Asmongold
If you own the copyright of content showed in this video and would like it to be removed:
/ catdanyru
AAA Games aren’t even worth my time to pirate anymore.
😅 Roger that
True man honestly lately for me the indie scene has been where its at, or really even single/double A, just AAA is some massive slop now
For sure, couldn't care less about suicide squad, red fall, or any of these recent garbage AAA
Damn... you got a point
Also imagine the file size you have to download, just to play it for a few and leave you with regret
I don’t pay 70 bucks for games anymore, and I dodged a lot of bullets, and it feels so good.
I just do Game Pass really. I did buy Elden Ring though. Pretty much every other game I get is on sale and the cheaper base price, the better.
I pirate all my games no regrets
The high-seas has never cost me any amount of money. Some of us were just born smart (RobinsMusic), others need to learn lessons the hard way (McRotten), and some never learn (Chronon88).
Nothing better than seeing a game hit 50% off in less than a year on steam
One thing to watch out for is DLC bloat. Like Nintendo almost never puts zelda DLC on sale, which i refuse to buy as they never put the base game on sale either, you still see it for 60$ at the stores. A lot of the other games the DLC can bloat the price by 20 bucks so you're still paying close to full price when there is a sale. But ya 70 is a no go for me. I've only bought Formsoft games at full price and even then I don't preorder i'll at least watch some twitch streams before buying hehe
Bioware = Mass Effect to Anthem
Arkane = Dishonored to Redfall
Rocksteady = Arkham to Suicide Squad
Crystal Dynamic = Tomb Raider to Avengers
All of them was singleplayer focused studio being asked to make Live Service game.
And all of them are very much doomed.
Rare - Sea of Thieves
Respawn - Apex Legends
Bungie - Destiny (sure everyone hates it but its successful)
Ubisoft Montreal - Rainbow six seige AND For Honor (former AC, farcry, and rainbow six devs)
It can work out obviously. It's just up to the higher ups to be smart and determine when and where to choose to live service, not just throw them at the wall and see what sticks because what doesn't ends up falling to its death.
@@nickh4354Sea of Thieves was not successful initially and Destiny 2 is currently failing, hard. Sony is straight up Bungie's ass right now for mismanagement of D2 since their preorders for Final Shape is 50% plus below their last expansion which already wasn't being bought for poor reception. D2 has been hemoraging good will since Forsaken (Witch Queen brought back good will then immediately lost it afterwards).
Christal Dynamics never made Tomb Raider. The only good Tomb Raider they made was the first reboot/remake. They just got the IP after the initial developer was forced into bankruptcy.
@@hollywu7768 Even if they did not originate the IP, they still worked on the reboots. More importantly, they are the group behind the legendary Soul Reaver series.
It’s like asking a bbq pitmaster to switch to making French pastries because the patisserie down the street is fkn killing it
As cook this so fuckin accurate 😂😂
👌
We have focus tested amongst negative 5 years old up to 160 years old and 1270% of all people said they prefer croissants. (snorts line of coke) bro bro numbers don't lie here we have graphs, come on graphs with colours and shit. Does that metric say vegetarians? ignore that, we need more bakeries so i suggest we open up 13 bakeries around that one french one. If each takes 25% of costumers than we'll have 9000% of all the customers that the French has. the numbers make sense, get on it. Don't let me down champ. be a part of the family.
@@admiralspire forgot to add snorts atleast 6 more lines XD
What this dude doesn't understand is that you can't force things, no matter what the "management" does. You can't force caterpillar to build the next Ferrari and wise versa! It's not that simple like this dude makes it out in his mind. There is so much that goes into it, so many layers have to be right in order to make something successful happen. I can tell that he hasn't worked in any modestly large company, or any large project where many different people and departments are involved... It may be easy in your mind theoretically but in practice it doesn't work like that!
Same with Hollywood.. Instead of making what we want, they make what they want us to watch. The entire entertainment industry is on a massive downslide and no end in sight. All we can do as consumers is continue to speak with our wallets and boycott corporate greed
No they are making what they think we want, cuz execs are so far removed from the average movie goer
For example, Dreamworks is, well, fucking insane.
For one, they make a GREAT movie that has true artistic soul, Puss in Boots: Last Wish.
But on the other hand, they make shit movies like Trolls 1 and 2, Kung Fu Panda 4, and THE FUCKING MEGAMIND TV SHOW (which was actually made by peaCock but even still)
But then they DO A 180, releasing Trolls 3 WHICH ISN'T EVEN HALF BAD? WHAT? HOW?
Well, all of this can be chalked up to horrible executives shunning a good story in favor of money. For example, Kung Fu Panda 4 went through development hell, with executives hurting the artistic expression of the writer team. This led to the movie becoming, overall, lackluster.
Except for the Ping and Lee side story. That was gold.
But for Puss in Boots: Last Wish, it was a sequel to a random spinoff movie. Executives wouldn't care about that! So they didn't, and the artists working on it could flourish.
except that doesnt work. cause they'll just buy all there own shit. and say they made X amount of sales. and well where does that money go well back into there own pockets so
Look are borderlands you saw the cast a knew it would be back .. I'm game this girl is 25 oh let's cast a 60 year old .. ohh tiny Tina let's make a whole new story up for her thats 2 lines long .. fans will love it
@@DeputyFishBruh they have a fiscal responsibility to make a profit for their shareholders, they can’t just recirculate money because that doesn’t make new money which is the entire point.
One thing to address - cause in the video the guy was puzzled how a single person leaving the Team affects the quality of the game...
I worked with some Teams that made games and you would be surprised how LITTLE people in there know about "fun". A lot of them couldn't tell what fun is, even if it hit them in the face.
They were absolutely amazing professionals when it came to creating assets, code, animations, music and sound - but had absolutely no idea what makes something "fun".
Hell - an example of a coder who was optimizing the "save" feature. He was hellbent on making sure that the save file was taking the least amount of space possible that he spent weeks on it. Indeed, that is a nice thing to have, but if a player was to choose between "having their save files be x4 as big" or "having the game suck", what do you think a player will choose?
That's why sometimes losing a single person who directs the entire game will result in a terrible product. That might've been the only person who knew what "fun" is.
In bigger studios - you will have a few people leaving. Generally because those people were the only ones who CARED that the game was good.
A coder who was saying the features would not be fun.
A music producer who would say the themes clash with the gameplay.
A 3D/2D artist who wants the animations to be responsive when you play.
These people are the first to jump ship if the rest of the team just goes "no, we're not changing stuff" - cause they know the product will suck.
The others just have no clue, and the changes sound like "more work" so they resist it.
And even just in general. The people you lose will be the ones who have the skills, and therefore have the option to jump to another company or create a new studio.
Your example shows that you know nothing about management. Optimizing saves isn't opposed to making a fun game. Making a fun game takes years for huge teams of people. Any large company that's even remotely decent will spend significant time creating something akin to scriptable objects for save storage, but that's equivalent to a minor mechanic in the game, not "having the game suck". I'd trade any individual GTA V minigame for them to optimize their saves, the loading is the worst part of the game because they didn't put effort into it. Fun is the job of the creative director or game systems managers, it's not the job of the devs and they usually have little influence over it even if they try.
@@longlivenc7235 I'm gonna be very rude and say that your answer shows that you know nothing about reading comprehension.
First of all - I never said I MANAGED the team. I was a 3D Artist and someone else was the producer.
Second of all - I didn't say one coder that is hellbent on optimizing a save feature is the reason a game sucks.
What I said is that there are a lot of amazing professionals in their fields - but their focus is usually on technical stuff that is not related to "fun".
So if you lose a few people in the team that knew what "fun" is, you may get a super-optimized and quick-loading, gorgeous looking game - that is so boring to play, you no longer wish to play it.
That's why - by that example - you can have a team of like 100+ people create a bad game when one person leaves the team.
Cause if that person is the only one who knows what "fun" is, everyone else technically is doing a great job - creating an unfun product.
And nobody on that vast team of people has even a single clue why players say the game sucks.
@@ThomasWindar Ironic to insult my reading comprehension over something I never said. You don't have to be a manager for it to be relevant that you know nothing about management. People leaving the team is a management issue. You directly compared one minor feature to the entire game sucking. I already addressed everything else you said in this comment with my last sentence of the last comment.
@@longlivenc7235 just take the L bro, you must be some layoff from one of the woke companies lmao
The fall from grace of BioWare is the biggest one I've seen in 20+ years and it's not even close. One could argue Blizzard but they're doing FAR better than BioWare.
If dragon age dreadwolf is bad BioWare is completely cooked for sure
The saddest part about it, is that it was deserved. I've been playing SWTOR casually since release and it was getting so bad up until BioWare gave up on the game and since Broadsword took the reins, the game is getting a lot more updates and communication from the devs... it's so obvious to me now how BioWare just didn't give a crap about the game. They got what they deserved for their laziness
Bethesda and EA are right there
KOTOR, Jade Empire, DAO, ME... it's insane.
Rocksteady is definitely worse
It kind of frustrates me that Asmongold missed the fact that this guy wasn't saying that live service was bad, he was saying that FORCED live service was bad. All of these companies either didn't want to or weren't equipped to make a live service game. Of course they had their own issues, but its the fact that they were forced that led to their downward spiral. I usually believe it's upper management or producers who are at fault, and when it isn't them its a lack of enthusiasm in your individual worker. Remember that game development isn't just a job, but an art, and Forcing an artist to paint when they don't want to doesn't amount to much very often. It's easy to look at bad game design and say "a good developer wouldn't have made these decisions" but I feel it's important to understand circumstance. If a good developer doesn't want a game to EXIST, why would they put effort into polishing it at all? Every time Asmongold got SO close to connecting 'live service' to 'bad game design' but every time he'd miss how important game design being a creative artform was. Instead he'd just spout something about "I support live service" and "these games have obviously bad game design", completely missing the circumstance Gameranx spent the whole video describing. it's not live service's fault that these games are bad, but the fact that it was FORCED onto developers who neither needed nor wanted it.
I think, that you are right
Indeed ROCKSTEADY wanted to make superman game and WB said make a live service they quit
@@vergillives9890 Rocksteady went on Record and said that they WANTED to do Kill the Justice League.
If the Management is bad the game will be bad. Its that simple. If you cant present your Developers with a cohesive Vision, make them excited to Build that Vision then you failed at your Job as a Manager and your product will fails as well.
You never hear about a sucessful game where the devs give interviews and say "yeah our Manager was shit but we pulled through". Its always a team effort and usually the Management is looked at favouably and they speak about how passionate Leadership was about it. Sure sometimes they say "We didnt think the game was good enough but clearly we where wrong and the customers loved it"
@@undertakernumberone1 no the ORIGINAL team didn't this makeshift team did
the studio from justice league wanted to make Batman Arkham style single player game. The investors made them change the game to be live service, they didn't make a bad game, they were forced to make what they don't want to make
I'm old enough to remember the Platformer bubble of early 90's, the FPS bubble of mid/late90's, the "obligatory MultiPlayer mode" bubble of 00's and the MMO bubble of late 00's/mid 10's. This is yet another one.
Feel like this is worse cause at least those were trying to be fun. I played the hell out of freerealms, club penguin, Legoverse, and wizard 101. Each one was also different, while every live service seems to be the exact same just different quality.
Unc
ehh it was almost half way through the 2000s for the multiplayer era bro
SBI, forced battlepasses, shitty liveservice, quality cuts to push microtransactions, layoffs, greedy CEOs/Shareholders, pandering, woke-ism, dumb people still preordering... the list goes on. All valid reasons.
Yep, bout as true as it gets and its sad.
And don't forget the Shills who are given access to games prior to anyone else and laud these mediocre games as par excellence because they are paid to give good reviews.
Live service is like the Sith rule of Two. Any more they will destroy each other, only a couple can exist.
Its a risk, like that of a poison and antidote, depends how is it administered and how easy it is to overdose.
I guess we're on korriban lol sith everywhere these days
And like the rule of two, it was pulled of someones ass and then everyone ran with it like it was the gospel.
Falcon is speaking the truth.
True only so many players to go around who want to spend all their time on one game
Its bad story for me, who the fuck would wanna play a game when you have a main character like that girl from forspoken?
Forspoken?
Did you play forspoken? Or did you just boycott it, be honest I’ll wait.
The special games will try to marry amazing gameplay and a great story together in my opinion, Foreskin (Forspoken) is literally neither and on top of that they have a preachy annoying agenda.
I think you mean Sporefoken
@@ToxMod I didn’t actually play it, but I watched a live stream of someone playing it so I did see the whole thing
One thing to point out about Asmons point on Redfall being broken, and that it would have been the same if it was single player, Is that when you increase complexity and scope it becomes exponentially more difficult to make even if the bugs seem like stuff that could occur in a single player game, depending on their architecture it would likely be done quite differently. Single player games are an order of magnitude easier to make than multiplayer, like it's not even comparable, that's why multiplayer games are usually more simplified with less systems etc. Although there are exceptions, and then again Live service and MMO style games are an order of magnitude above that again. So if Arcane stuck with a smaller scope single player game, they would probably have done an order of magnitude better job.
Speaking from experience, the single fastest and most certain way to break any given part of a game is to add networking functionality. Single player and online are simply two different beasts.
I don't understand how it can be so difficult to understand that it's a big difference. Multiple actual players interacting with the world and each other in a free way vs npc that can't do anything on their own.
16:30
Asmon does not understand just how much bad management ruins any project. Some tasks are doomed to fail no matter how many skilled employees you throw at it. Redfall failed because, from the moment of its conceptualization, it never had the possibility of being a good game
dude talks to a mic for a living, dude has no idea how corporate works
Then why weren't the devs fixing bugs?
@@alexandervlaescu9901 They probably aren't being given the time or resources to properly work on bugfixing tasks.
I wouldn't be surprised if they had already been moved to another project that hasn't been made public yet.
We know this studio's devs know what they are doing based on the games they released in the past, so it's unlikely that they just suddenly forgot how to fix bugs
@@alexandervlaescu9901 They have but it's a skeleton crew
You're joking right ? You didn't think an open world vampire survival game would work? It's a GREAT concept that was executed poorly. Lol
There are no more visionaries when it comes to the AAA gaming industry. Gaming has become a corporatized hellscape.
Nah, Larian studios swen is a visionary . And he’s backed by tencent
It's like the small burger joint that's great but eventually evolves into a chain and turns into McShit.
Fromsoftware, and Larian.
That is because they have become so expensive to make that companies are getting VERY risk averse.
@@ChiefOfTheWeb Larian is arguably still an Indie studio
"We are losing great game creators." No, no we aren't. The great game creators have already left those studios and either made their own studios or retired. The game creators left are talentless hacks, who went to college and got a useless degree in game design.
Underrated comment. 100% agree.
it's exactly what happened to Rocksteady and Arkane, that's why they made those pile trash of games afterwards.
And when these mega-studios implode, the actually talented individuals responsible for the few good aspects of a bad AAA game will be scooped up by other studios. "The studio" doesn't make any games, the people within it do.
and you are allowed into game design ONLY if you are a rainbow artist or at the very leat it gives you a crazy headstart
So we are losing great game creators…
Either they leave or get forced to make games made to fail.
gameranx are an example of games journalism done right.
they clearly have passion.
Both Falcon and Jake are great honestly, just a good and honest gaming news channel.
Buries IGN any day of the week
Yeah! I liked gameranx more than the rests of other game journalists
Honestly I've heard of them but never checked it out much, just all the bs in "mainstream" gaming journalism had really turned me off of a lot of these sites/outlets, but I'll have to give them a shot this vid actually seemed decent
@@redchinhunt721They're not fantastic. Frankly, Falcon is the classic curmudgeon with little new to say in pretty much every video. This one is the rare good one by him. Jake is way better in his almost naive, but deceptively clever ways.
But gaming journalism is so, SO bad nowadays that Gameranx is almost a must as they remind us of what *should* be the baseline, the absolute minimum no big "official" outlet seems to manage to deliver.
16:09 - 16:20
Here’s what Asmongold is not understanding here, some projects are destined to fail. Trying to make a terrible project better is like trying to repair a ship that is already sinking, have so many holes, water’s filling he hull and people are running around screaming their heads off not knowing what to do.
he also compared a sponsored stream (monetary gain) to someone's entire livelihood and career. its like an electrician was given a carpentry contract, and asmon is upset that he doesn't want to make the most out of it.. like no shit, he isnt skilled in that field and would rather use his energy towards what he is good at.
The concept behind Redfall was good, coulda been L4D with vampires… dev team and management definitely shit the bed
l4d with vampires is a solid elevator pitch tbh
Shoulda been more like Wolfenstein gameplay wise
to be fair with redfall half the core team quit and none of them wanted to make the game. that was on bethesda
Also, it's kind of weird and out of touch to say if you don't like what you're working on, quit. In the real world people dislike their job and merely check the boxes required in order to earn a paycheck. Why would it be different for a game developer?
@@UhnTisUhnTisbecause it’s art. If you check boxes to earn a paycheck every game company would be EA. There would be no soul left in the industry
@@muninntog142 I'm all for art, but I'm pretty sure Madden sales still there and so are CoDs. People confuse business with art. When it becomes your career it transcends being an artistic hobby.
Example. You paint art and sell it. Sure your an artist, you paint things, but that isn't what makes your living. Your a salesman.
@@bmark6971 working in the steel industry for example and working as a game developer is very different tho. if you work at a forge you generally dont give a shit about the end product. you just do what youre being told. but if you work in a more creative setting like the games industry you are generally more invested in the project. you put your heart and soul into it but if the game youre making isnt at all interesting to you it will show in the end result. just like asmond said about streamers who just follow trends and play games that are popular rather than something they enjoy. the result is a shit product that people dont want to play/watch.
@@Peron1-MC Developers and artists still need to earn a paycheck. It's not exactly easy for the average developer or artist to jump ship mid-project and land whole. They are likely under contractual obligations/non-compete clauses. They could have joined the company based on previous projects that aligned with their interests but then the company turns around and decides they want to shovel slop for profit and they have no real choice but to stick it out until that project is complete.
Nothing will get better in the entertainment industry as long as ESG SCORES/DEI/BRIDGE and companies like BlackRock and Vanguard are a thing.
Look up why Black Rock and Vanguard got in trouble with ESG
I fear people will learn this lesson too late.
Seriously though, without looking it up, tell me what happened with black rock and vanguard.
Sweet Baby Inc
It has a little to do with being live service, but it has EVERYTHING to do with cringe writing, poor gameplay, and hostile marketing.
They can't acknowledge it though because they would be called some -ist or -phobe word and that is "scary".
I agree but live services have been a detriment to good content too. Such a stupid business model when you realize everyone else is trying to do it to
Poor gameplay is the direct consequence of being live service. That's why Suicide Squad was a looter shooter with generic guns to be monetized instead of having character specific combat mechanics like Arkham Batman.
It has everything to do with live service. Devs are forced to prioritize that and everything else suffers in the meantime.
@@randybobandy9828 yep. People have limited time and money, and if you are trying to sell a forever game over and over eventually you'll not have an audience because they are taken by the rest.
the fact is that in 2015 you thought "holy crap, if games are like this today imagine how much better they will be in the next 10 years", the 10 years rolls out and you see what it has become, a huge pile of crap is what the today's games are
3:16 I can agree on a lot of things, but rare IS still around with Sea of Thieves which is a massive hit.
Company: gets big on mastercrafted carpentry
Corperation: buys company and set them to making concrete warehouses
Company: fails
Asmon: "shoulda learned masonry, sucks to suck"
Actually though
Don't sell your company. Sucks to suck
@@randybobandy9828 know what you're buying, sucks to suck
"shouldn't have sold the company"
You make an important point. Asmongold talks as if 5 years is sufficient time to achieve mastery over a genre and mentions Overwatch. Blizzard took 9 years to make Overwatch*. Or take Larian of Baldur's Gate 3, while the Divinity games have usually been good, it took just over a decade for Larian studios to really hit their stride with "Divinity: Original Sin".
Video games aren't like line of business and CRUD software where half-heartedly phoning it in can be sufficient. Games need experience, passion and skill to create. It's art in the sense that the creator's passion is always reflected in the end result. Live-service games are like isekai anime in this sense. Isekai need not always be bad, but since they're almost always the result of soul-less cash grabs, the end result is usually without heart, tasteless beyond comparison. Forcing people to work on art they have no passion for nor any experience in will never result in a good outcome.
* Work on Overwatch began in 2013, but it originated from strip mining the remains of the failed Project Titan, which began in 2007. Experience, assets, learnings and failings on that project carried over into what would eventually be released as Overwatch.
Replayed Black Flag and the mass effect trilogy. The stories seem unmatched to what we see these days.
I'd argue cyberpunk and bg3 had really good stories
@@johnb6474 cyberpunk is the game that proves that a good story line and satisfying play styles ascends game quality. by all metrics cyberpunk SHOULD have failed apron release BECAUSE of endless glitching but, everything else was so well done that gamers powered though to the end of the game. and told all their friends you have to play this game man, oh the glitching? the devs are fixing those play it
@@johnb6474 I agree but good stories used to be the standard not the exception
@@johnb6474 I didn't really find BG3's story all that good, but the conversion of the 5e battle system into game form was done VERY well, its the main reason i put 250 hours into it.
Cyberpunk did nad does have some crust with its systems but the story was very very good.
@@alwaysonyourtail2563 if bugs were reason why games fail, then bethesda wouldn't exist by now
"Arkane Austin shit the bed with redfall"
Yes they did, but it also wasn't the Arkane Austin they had for Prey, they had plenty of people leave, it's all well and good to say it's bad, but it was bad because they forced a dev to make a live service, and that Dev team decided nah screw that i'm out.
EDIT: Like the main issue is a lot of these publishers want a live service, but don't want to offer the fund's or the manpower or the time for a live service to be made.
It'd be like trying to make a car with 3 pieces of sheet metal, 1 person and no tools, the hell did you expect?
It's related to one of the golden rules of software development (adding developers to a late project will only make it later)
When all or almost all the experienced people leave, the "kind of know what they're doing" people are now responsible for literally everything relating to the project. Those people now spend almost all their time teaching the brand new, fresh out of school kids what to do, half of it wrong because they aren't actually senior devs they just got promoted by default. The new kids break things, and so the semi-senior devs have to spend more time going back and fixing it. While all this happens, Zenimax higher ups keep kicking down the door to the studio and demanding things which A) the semi-senior devs don't even know how to do and B) even if they DID know how to do it, they don't have time to implement it because of everything earlier. And remember, the whole time they're working, they just keep eating up more and more money that the shareholders are going to demand back.
There are 2 correct choices when something like this happens: when all the lead devs plan to leave over one decision, go back on the decision to keep them around, until you have backups. Or two, after they leave, cancel the project and have the semi-senior devs work on various other projects in different areas of the company until they have a solid idea of what they're doing. Do NOT let the project just keep running away and eating up more and more money while the devs clearly don't know what's going on, or else the project becomes too expensive to fail and you're forced to just release it, like Skull & Bones.
You cant force a sushi chef to make a cake and get upset when its not good.
How you going tp say these devs are bad when they dont make games like that.
What next your going to scream at an electrian cause they dont know how to fix your toilet?
Thing is nowadays all AAA games aren't passion projects, they all projection based. They will study all the metrics they have and test audiences (no clue where they get those, Refall had GREAT internal feedback) in order to make a game. Not blaming the actual devs/programmers, for them I'm sure it was a passion project, but the studios make the calls, and the calls are heartless SHIT.
Haven't bought a AAA game since Starcraft 2 and it was the greatest move I made. (I'm absolutely excluding FROM SOFTWARE!) The Indie scence is just amazing, in both single and multiplayer.
I really disagree with Asmon's take on Redfall/Arkane, extremely dismissive and ignores the situation of the studio and reduces it to "game bad = dev bad"
Think it like this: I personally think that Asmon is a pretty good gamer when it comes to action games or MMOs
Now grab Asmon and force him to play a game that he isn't good at it, like a racing game or puzzle(idk) and then say "See Asmon sucks at videogaming"
Arkane Austin was good at making single player immersive sims and never tried to make a live service multiplayer game before, the moral was low, most people quit, they struggle to get devs to know how to make this kind of game to their side too and as a result they produced a bad game.
Its like if you grab the dev team of Fortnite and then force them to make a singleplayer-immersive sim, Its hard to say if the game would be good or not, successful or not but it is not hard to think that there will be a struggle to it.
asmon not the type of guy admitting he dun enjoy specific genre and instead shaming them as bad games juz bcoz they dun play according to his preference.
100% agree. Im not sure why asmon wanted to defend the massive company lol.
It’s almost like he’s never had a career in tech or anything fast paced. There are humans behind these games. Not robots
100% agree. Hard to make something that isn't a soulless, buggy mess with low morale and 70% of the staff gone.
To be fair to Asmon though, he did recognize that it was also Microsoft's fault for putting the studio in that position.
Yeah that was a pretty bad take
Asmongold:"The problem is not that its live service its because Redfall is a bad game"
Maybe most of the technical issues arose because a studio used to making single player content and games had a hard time with the networking issues that comes from making an online game?
asmon: no its bad devs the corporations aren't at fault
@@wetnoodleman He couches it later (probably cause he realized he was wrong) saying that its a two prong issue (it really isnt) and then goes back to complaining about the devs being bad
Dude, I’m so tired of people with zero technical background getting no pushback for making wild claims about industries they’ve never worked in.
Hence why Asmongold continued to argue about bad management.
Did you even watch the video @stevepenn2582?
Even if one accepts that the problem is "bad devs". The next question becomes, "Why does this studio have enough bad devs that nobody can steer the ship right, when the industry is full of people who want to make great things?". One bad employee making things worse is an individual problem. Lots of bad employees making things worse is a management problem.
As the lead of a software development team myself, it's my job to fill my team with people who have the skills and can work well together, give them an environment that lets them work most effectively, and let them make great things.
Gaming companies used to be run by gamers that encouraged freedom and creativity in games. This is what made the 6th Gen one of the most memorable Generations ever. Now it’s run by suits who care more about algorithm more than bumping the needle, and creativity. But we need to stop blaming the companies for this, and blame ourselves. If people didn’t pay for micro transactions, season/battle passes, content locked behind paywalls and any unnecessary in game purchases for over a decade straight, maybe we’d still be in a period where creativity and fun rule still.
Give your money to what you want to become the standard, whether it’d be a great AAA release, or Indie stuff. The audience needs to show the gaming business that it wants something to change. And that can’t happen if you buy another COD clone, and games that release unfinished, yet want you to pay for a seasons pass from the start every single year.
The audience is in control here, not the developers. Remember that. Same with music and movies.
i don't know man if the dollar was the only guiding star we would have a lot more games like the sims, and more to the point minecraft. games where the developers made an open EMPTY world then gave gamers the tools to build what ever they wanted. and yes, yes i know they do make some like zelda tears of the kingdom where people are STILL playing around with crazy builds and playstyles but, they are not the norm
@@alwaysonyourtail2563 when COD, Fortnite, GTA, 2K, whatever Ubisoft games release, etc (and clones alike) generate an ungodly amount of billions a year, and you can literally copy and paste the games a year later and make the same amount of money, games like Sims are rendered obsolete when it comes to earnings. There doesn’t need to be a ton of them to overshadow everything else. They spawn plenty of clones (for better or worse). Minecraft will always be huge too either way though lol.
I'm not blaming myself for that. I'm blaming gen z.
@@ooooswain I definitely get that. But there are plenty of people in their 30s playing one of, or every game I just mentioned man lol. But I don’t disagree that gen z make up a large portion of it. I just think a lot of people regardless of age contribute to the problem anyway.
I totally agree. Sadly nowadays the audience is totally different and made of players who never experienced the 6th generation and don't know how great gaming used to be. They grew up with these terrible games so for them it's normal to buy these unfinished games at release and spend money on microtransactions.
Videogames became too popular and its popularity killed its creativity.
lowkey asmon doesnt have any idea wtf he's talking about in regards to Redfall. you spend 5 years being forced to make a shit game you didnt want to make and lose the vast majority of your development team in the process, then get forced to release the game ahead of schedule and the game tanks as aresult, then the studio gets shut down because it didnt make enough money, there's literally nothing Arkane Austin couldve done in that regard.
"you decided this, you went with this."
they didnt decide anything, they were told by the people who bought out their studio. people left because they werent having it, and there wasnt anything even remotely resembling a team working on the game from that point
I play a lot of TTRPGs and Asmon is totally right. My biggest advice to new DMs is to steal everything you can. If you liked something you saw in a show, movie, or game then chances are your players will too.
I think with Baldur's Gate 3 we now have our minimum standard of what a AAA game should be. If you can't match or beat that, you're not AAA. You're wasting money
They complained that such quality could not become a standard and that players should not expect to have this quality in the future.
Then we have Miyazaki, in the shadow of the Erdtree, ready to outdo everyone for 2024.
And for AAAA game?
Then I have really bad news for you....
BG3 was an anomaly though.
BG3 is not the minimum, but it raises the average that the standard should be.
"because they have no creative vision"
This is the real problem at the root of the industry.
People are either ignorant or just straight up ignoring the fact that these studios ALL had their main devs that made those iconic games leave and instead now they have diversity hire hacks in their places. Thats literally the reason the games sucked. The devs that make them are terrible. Its 80% that and 20% upper management problems.
100% correct. Blizzard replaced all writers with women and they gave us subtle storytelling masterpieces such as Lady Sylvanas one-shotting the Lich King (the patriarch), and then literally shattering the glass ceiling of the entire sky. Super subtle... ❤😅 I can feel the backpatting all the way from here.
Arkane sure deserve some of the blame. But there is such a thing as "expertise" in game development!! Lack of passion, experience ot even drive can definitely hurt a project. You gotta be able to manage your projects & studios.
There were literally dozens of other devs at Microsoft studios, which were far more qualified and capable of creating a live service game. But Microsoft decided to go with Arkane Austin!!! That's on them.
To say: "but it doesnt matter if Redfall was single player or live service" is such an asinine statement!
Arkane has made several hit single player games plus several other expansions for those very games in the last decade. All made with the same exact engine and NONE of them were anywhere near as buggy or broken as Redfall!!!! How the F could anyone claim that the game being live service has nothing to do with its failure and bad performance?!
Asmon sometimes blurts out some nonsensical BS. Without knowing anything about the subject matter!!
Inserting live services into a good game will never improve it.
At best a good game will survive it.
Inserting live services into a bad game will always make it worse.
Some (few) live services actually do make for a better game. Look at Deep Rock Galactic, for example.
Add a live service to a bad game and it might make more money in the end. The development resources have to be minimal, though.
@@tarael86 utterly debatable. DRG could easily run on P2P servers with free DLC seasonal updates. It has no reason being a live service and for all intents and purposes it does NOT run like one. Terrible example.
@@Quasar-fv8to Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying. Live service games are games that see a constant stream of new content added post launch. This fits what DRG does, and it's the reason why everyone (including the devs) call it a live service game.
They will survive longer look at genshin if 2 other anime gotchas come out it dies
Overwatch was a game made out of old assets meant for a first person MMO successor to WoW codenamed Titan.
Idk what he's talking about, there are tons and tons and tons of old games that are way more fun and in depth than games out this year. A game loop when fun, is fun forever.
BioShock is a go to amazing game.
I just played and beat Final Fantasy 5 again this year.
i think part of it is because the culture of treating Employees as a Disposable Worker.
There just a Massive Brain Drain, the Knowledge and Skill aren't retained
how can you focus on one single vision, if your talents kept changing every 2 years?
Everytime the head of the Project leaving the companies, the Team become unorganized and become directionless,
They can only resort on creating the same thing that was already established,
because nobody know how to design and improve that Game Design anymore
also For every Generations, the Development Time will be Multiplied by 2,
it took too much time to the point that even Moving One step forward is like Moving a whole Mountain
Gaming company thought that having a good graphics = good game when what gamers want is good game. Even if the game is pixilated, gamers will still play it if it's good.
These are the people that only play "real" games and are considered "real" gamers.
Same people that only play for graphics😂.
Just make a good game that people like and profits won’t be an issue. If its god enough the players will turn it into a live service game themselves. Games like halo 3, and call of duty modern ware-fare 2-3 servers lasted forever. Players even went out of their way and made their own servers after they shut down lol
There is another problem these corporate suits don't understand. You can't replicate fortnite's success because it was an accident. They originally made the battle Royale mode as a trial to funnel people into the save the world pve which was in early access at the time. It exploded on twitch due to streamers. Fortnite is the most successful accident in gaming history. It's also the industry's biggest curse because everyone has been trying to replicate it to this day.
I honestly hate all these "whales" and idiots who waste their life savings on these services more than the developers. Because if they weren't giving them so much of their money none of this would be happening.
Agreed. You are wise, Bob Saget... 😁
I agree Bob. Also, I see that face and I am saddened to remember the man telling his 'Aristocrats' story :( What a hilarious dude he was him and George Carline are my favs.
Why would I pay $70 for a trash game that shames me for wanting to enjoy things when Acheron in honkai star rail got a fat ass
very BAD example, in gachas like HSR 70$ doesn't even guarantees you one copy of a character lol... please...
@@vashe9 its not about how much money you spend its about the fact that because gacha games live and die off of people pulling characters that they have to make attractive characters and give you what you want. Theres a reason you never see gacha games with DEI funding
Bc you can choose which ones to play and aren’t forced to buy what you don’t like. It’s not really that hard, bruh
because higher ups force it a certain way and then complain when they cant them to have support for microtransactions in arkane games. plus the heirarchy changes force you through tedious decisions that werent present before the microsoft aquisition. prey is amazing, they had the leeway to go back to other members of the department who were responsible for certain areas to allow for room and change for their missions through cross feedback
Back when i was playing FGO and first learned about the fact that buying quartzs cost you the price of multiple triple A games for just a character(with a high chance you might even fail), i was shocked but also was wondering why would single-player game studios only make games with only 50-60$ per buyer instead of possible +1000$ per player like those gacha games do? Bet these corpo suit guys in the director's room think the same thing
"Show me a game that makes money and I'll show you a good game"
Counter point, Diablo Immortal
Phone games break this logic, phone games don't need to be good
Counter point, The entire Diablo franchise after 2.
FIFA. It makes money not because it’s good but because it’s basically the only option.
Phone "games" aren't games. They don't count.
They're just cash grabs all about 'click this'
Banana is destroying when it comes to making money and its just a scam lol.
9:30 Assmouth is wrong. There's a HUGE amount of luck in achieving success. And the successful mostly CAN'T see it from their successful position because they rewrite history in their own minds downplaying the luck they experienced. Talent and work are important, too, but they only allow you to fully utilize opportunities you are lucky enough to have. They can't usually make success happen on their own. Read about famous successful people and you'll see that they were simply the fortunate one in the right place at the right time to be able to use their talent to work for a success.
Bro, he has the easiest job in the world. Doesn't bathe often doesn't clean After himself Do you think he actually cares about the little guy.
@@LiveType I'm not reading all that
@@LiveType i ain't reading all that. im happy for you tho, or sorry that happened
Ya I disagree with Asmon they hired a sculpture and fired them because they couldn’t paint the Mona Lisa.
I think his point is that the devs didn't care and worked like they didn't care. They got paid to make a product, but they didn't give it their all and sabotaged their own product hoping it would get canceled. I don't really think luck had anything to do with it, everyone was just bad overall. Management was bad for hiring these devs who didn't want to work on it and the devs were bad because they made it bad on purpose to get it cancelled.
The lack of quality is because of the high turnover rate where most of the developers left and it struggled with staffing to even put out anything functional, because it was forced to do a project it couldn't do well.
To an extend I agree with the sentiment that it's, in the end, still the studio's product and even if they were forced to do it, all the issues it has are their responsibility. But if you ask a car mechanic to take a look at your submarine despite him telling you 8x that he has no idea how a nuceal reactor works, you should not be surprised if the damn thing doesn't end well. Did the mechanic end up causing the reactor's meltdown? Yes. Is it his fault entirely? No, not if his choices were "do it or lose your job".
Having a blast with ff16 and space marine though. Recently has been good.
Convenience stores and restaurants hire psychologists to study why people buy things and build their stores around them to increase impulse shopping. Why are gaming companies not doing the same for games? Instead they hire fake consultants who care more about activism than profit.
Because those industries have been around longer than gaming has, by a massive margin. Gaming is only 40 years old, with it being "mainstream" for only 15-20 years. There isn't anywhere near enough industry expertise (in boardrooms I mean) to understand the nuances of what sells, what doesn't, what makes a game good, what fails, etc etc. Suits just understand money and graphs, and can't figure out why Fortnite makes money, but their Live service game X, doesn't.
It'll take another 20 years or so for boardrooms and publicly traded companies to not clown around, but even so, many of their decisions are rewarded today. Targeting whales, has in fact, proved fairly successful, even for games like AC Valhalla. Similarly, digital pre-orders are always absurdly high, despite what we as consumers, have known for a long time. Microtransactions targeted at kids, work wonders for the graphs. It's like smoking cigarettes; it's super bad, and yet....
BTW, when McDonald's was told by market psychologists to accept credit cards, because plastic money means less to the average consumer than actual cash, the Atari was being launched. That's how new gaming is.
Game development companies *do* hire psychologists (and others) to study people who buy things. That's how we ended up where we are with a constant push towards randomness, peer pressure and flashy dopamine lights. Because that's what gets people to buy more.
They do hire them, that is reason why they change what kind games they are making. But it is much easier to reorganize products in convience store design new menu in restaurant (which usually fails) than it is to get organizational know how to make different type game that you have made in past. Going from single player to multiplayer life service demands knowledge of multitude things that gaming company that focus on singleplayer games does not posses. Like for example understanding network latencies how they effect on player inputs and rendering times and how to build server infastructure that can handle game state for thousands of players same time. And when you take account network security, account management, grouping etc. company may realise that they need different set of engineers to build all the basic stuff that is needed for the game, but usually in that point they have already commited to deadline which they will not be able to achive in that point anymore, even if they found quickly needed engineers. Companies should know what are their assets and where they are good at and what they don't know. Of course in gaming industry it is often difficult to say know for project which promises money as other option may just be close studio, because margins on which lots of gamestudios have are so small that they can't afford not have paid project for year.
they does, but more for the cash shop and less for the game play.
Live service equals bad game. Monetization model determines how much is invested into quality.
One big issue is how much money studios are spending to make games that are bigger and "better." They invest when you invest $100 million, you want at least $200 million in revenue to fund your next game. Youd need to sell 1.4 million copies of a $70 game to make that much. That may sound easy when games like Elden Ring are selling over 20 million copies, but Elden Ring was a massively successful game. AND some companies are spending more than $100 million to make their games. Its absolute insanity. They need to downscale and focus their productions. I hate to say it, but I can guarantee that too many people are working at these studios many times and their is too much dissonance on what the game is meant to look like.
Same thing with movie overproduction
You forgot that steam and such take about 30% of the money. Then there are taxes that countries take. It wouldnt suprise me if there are some more things that take the money. So the publisher probably wont even get half of the money from a 70 dollar game. So i would predict that they would need to sell 3-4 million copies atleast to make back the money.
How much does it cost to hire consultants (costs money) from another company (costs even more money) to make your game less appealing (costs money)?
You would think the investors would learn, but as per usual they are blinded by greed and desperate for control. Oi vey! Every. Single. Time.
@@glikorgo Yeah, I was going for the most basic approach because a lot of these studios are trying to push people into buying games directly from them (ubisoft store, epic games store, etc), but that is not the norm as you mention. It still really shows that its best to hire a small quantity of very passionate people and pay them well rather than hire 1,000 people who only generally know what even going on.
@@caseyimiller In a lot of ways, the gaming industry is turning in to the movie industry with subscription to games services like the Xbox game pass. How many people own discs to their favorite movies anymore? Kinda like how the ubisoft ceo wants people to get used to not owning games...
What this dude doesn't understand is that you can't force things, no matter what the "management" does. You can't force caterpillar to build the next Ferrari and wise versa! It's not that simple like this dude makes it out in his mind. There is so much that goes into it, so many layers have to be right in order to make something successful happen. I can tell that he hasn't worked in any modestly large company, or any large project where many different people and departments are involved... It may be easy in your mind theoretically but in practice it doesn't work like that!
My opinion, it aaalll began, with Fortnite. The game that eventually abandoned their single player base, the “Save the World” crowd, and dumped all the money we “founders” (the early access crowd who were with them since the beginning) gave them straight into Battle Royale.
That was it for me. If I do end up playing Fortnite now, I’m one of the only ones running around with the base player skins. No more V bucks, no battle passes. Epic took my money and put it into a mode I don’t play, so they ain’t gettin another dime from me.
That was the beginning of the end. Other devs saw the money siphon that fortnite became, and wanted a slice of that sweet sweet pie.
DEI, Live service, no vision, rage bait marketing & ugly characters all feel like reasons why western AAA games suck now
It's like getting a team of archaeologists to do landscaping for the Whitehouse because it's all just digging right?
Gameranx looks like a channel that is going to be cringe af but then is surprisingly based.
"You are paid to make a product, If you don't like the product you are making good, then why won't you make it better and find a way to like it"
It goes like this:
The dev: "Hey boss, you said we would need to make it like this, but we found it better to make it like th-"
The game designer: "Nahh, let's go the way i visioned it"
The dev: "sure boss, what ever you say"
like you said *you are PAID to make the product* you aren't paid to shape it to your likings, unless you get a permission to do so. If the client wants a shitty ass game, you make them a shitty ass game. The client gets what the client wants.
If the product is ass and you don't like it, you have to either quit and loose all of that juicy money you would get by making the bad game or you stay, get the money and if the game fails, you either get to make another one or you get assigned to another team.
The biggest reason why redfall was so buggy, was the people who quit. When new people get in, they need to figure out what the hell the previous did and of course, the new people might not be as experiences than the previous people were. When almost the full team gets switched to another team, the game is destined to be fucked, unless they figure out things in a timely manner.
"Game Studios are so allergic to accountability", just like the entire government in pretty much every country in the world. Corporations just mimic that and get away with as much as they can.
falcon is the man shout out gameranx
His name is Peter Coffin and unfortunately…he’s a they/them.
@@nlmnycoh no...
@@nlmnyc Really? OMG!
5:40 Spider-Man with the HUD perfectly cut off at "REQUIRES BAT"
Lmao
3:40 "Remember Rare, they're not around much anymore are they." He says as a game made by Rare is on screen lmao.
Well they got bought out by Microsoft and were forced to work on Kinect games 💀
Massively bad take at 16:00. Yes, they are getting paid so they should do what they need to do... But you're missing the point. This was not a mmo live service game company. Its like hiring a plumber to fix your electricity.... sure they're both contractors, but that plumber probably ain't gonna do the best job, assuming he can do it at all. Then you turn around and claim its because they made a fundamentally bad game. Yeah, no sh*t sherlock, that's how that happened though.
people need to understand, back in my day games sold becuse they were good, there was no pre order or online download, i had to go to the store and buy them. and if the game sucked, then its a full refund, game company's had no choice but to make games there best, compare 2010, to 2020. you cant find any bad games, maybe 2 or 3 meh games, but still entertaining enough to enjoy and buy, 2020. you got maybe 3 or 4 good games out of 50 bad or meh games, all im going to say is stop pre ordering or get a ps2 or xbox 360, trust me, once you go retro, you never go back
11:20 I disagree because a lot of those issues stem from a dev team ill equipped to make an online multiplayer where server and client have to agree over 4 different instances. A single player redfall may have still sucked fundamentally but wouldnt have nearly the same issues. (I have never played redfall so im far from a fanboy of it I am just calling it as I see it.)
Nintendo Switch notwithstanding, this entire console generation has been MASSIVELY underwhelming. Which is really a shame, because the PS5/XSX are a FANTASTIC VALUE in regards to the hardware itself.
How has he never seen a gameranx video 😂
The idea stealing is why I generally don't enjoy AAA games. They all feel the same. I feel like I've been playing the same game reskinned since about 2011.
"If everything goes to hell, GTA VI is still going to be GTA VI"
Anthem should of been a single player game.
-should- shouls of?
Even if you spelled it right, what does "should of" even mean? Did you mean "should _have?"_
@@innocentbystander3317 ok
Anthem if they let them do it right, would have knocked Destiny out easy. But EA wanted "NOW NOW NOW" And instead What we got was a half backed game. I mean the devs made it in about 9 months. Thats absolutely insane for what they were able to do. 9 MONTHS, imagine if they had 2 years? or 4? That game would have revolutionized gaming, just as D1 did when it came out.
"Should've", not "Should of".
If EA didn't keep taking away from other departments making stuff to have 3 losses and killed ANTHEM
So got a question if anyone sees this, and don't get me wrong I like Asmon for the most part, but does anyone else feel like he fundamentally misunderstands what a live service game is at times? Like to me a live service isn't just a game that receives some updates after release, I just think games like Fortnite obviously, but really anything with a battlepass, daily login bonuses, packed with microtransactions, etc. So I generally wouldn't classify most MMOs as such especially if it's on a subscription model (obviously there are exceptions I'm sure), but yeah sometimes it feels like Asmon thinks people mean just any game that gets updates, which like yeah obviously I don't think anyone would argue that the ability for games to receive updates is a bad thing, its just this specific model of game. Am I crazy/misunderstanding something or anyone else feel like this?
Subscription MMOs are definitely live service if they're getting new content regularly
WoW was a live service before the term was even coined.
@@keilafleischbein59 Like i said i just don't think added content is the make or break for a live service, its more the other elements. I don't know enough about WoW to really speak on it but i'd tend to agree it has a lot of the same elements from what I have seen, and I did say there are exceptions, but I just generally think of MMOs as their own thing, modern ones less so as a lot of them are basically just a live service. But again its more the battle passes, usually free to play and heavily monetized, daily login bonuses, loot boxes or other "roll" systems, etc. So my point was more like when I hear him talk about it sometimes, and seemingly talk about a live service as anything that receives new content, its like are we gonna start calling Elden Ring a live service because its getting a dlc, or Fallout 3 because it had a few DLCs (at a pretty regular rate for a while), or if you scale it back even further we could call Sekiro a live service because it got a few performance/bug fix patches after release. Hopefully I'm making sense
How did he never reacts to Gameranx lol
I like anthem I think it got killed by console players they released it to early for consoles to run the game on full potential the game is insane on PC if you can hit 120fps I wish I can play it now but not on the current servers
What Asmon doesn't understand about Redfall, is that multiplayer games are architecturally, fundamentally different from singleplayer games. instead of everything happening on your computer, part of it happens on a remote server so others can see what you're doing. (And I'm not going to mention p2p, For Honor had enough trouble trying that anyway) So if you make a bunch of people work in an environment they never worked in before, that they don't even like, is going to be demotivating. That's why you can't just turn a single player game into a multiplayer one, it pretty much has to be built like a multiplayer game from day 1. A really good example of this is Fallout 76.
16:25 To be fair, network multiplayer games blow the complexity up dramatically, the underlying system is complete different from single player. How much money you are paying would not matter, time and man power will be the primary factor. Programming is a challenging job because sometimes working with a complexed game when you need find out a issue in 100,000 lines of codes and fixing it means affecting 50,000 more lines from different system.
Thank god somebody said it, some of these commenters think good net code and other things they can't see takes 0 work to create, maintain and scale up - something that's especially important for live service games.
I would argue suicide squad campaign sucked because they didn’t give enough attention to it.
Btw asmons ideology on “you’re never always going to be doing what you want. The worst thing you can do is act like it.”
I’m 32 and I’m just learning this. He is ABSOLUTELY correct. I missed out on a lot of opportunities because of my poor attitude. Always do your best no matter what it is. It will get you way further in life in general. Trust us. This is a very important life lesson.
A more serious issue is DEI, and specifically DEI hiring. These studios don't have the same people working there anymore.
True
Gameranx is actually the only game reviewers I actually listen to. Their Before You Buys are literally lifesavers!
Jules at FGS is pretty good, been following him for quite a while.
'Is It Worth A Buy' is my favorite amongst others.
Does he seriously not get that designing a single player game and a live service game require different skill sets?
i dont think asmon realizes how much just telling a singleplayer studio "make a live service" is going to mess everything up. redfall didnt work forsure but keep in mind it was build from the ground up with multiplayer in mind. which the team didnt even have experience with. its like telling a master fire bender to move water. singleplayer experiences and multiplayer from the ground are extremely different in a way that just picking one will drastically change every single aspect of the game. legit all of them
"Rare isn't around anymore", he says, while STARING at Sea of Thieves; their latest game. To be fair, that was released in 2018, but it's still being supported and expanded.
We all know what's ruining these games but we can't say it without getting cancelled.
The current corporate hiring practice
I'll say. Puerto Ricans.
wokeness
jew shareholders/blackrock and DEI hiring practices
@@sean7221 nope. Puerto Ricans.
FF7 Rebirth has (ALOT OF) climbing towers, to unlock points of interest on the map. There are also birds, that make noise, and shoot sparks, while leading to you to rocks that need scanning (QuickTime event, aka press a button 3 times). Peak gaming
But, but.. The feels!
Ok ….. but it balances that out with the combat sequences some which are over 20-40mins you also have other side quests like the card game which highly engaging …. This seems like a misrepresentation of what the game is as a whole
@@ranchalthor3526 the game is boring as fuck no denying that. I mean look at the sales
@@chivasroco1752 I don’t understand how sales is quantifiable to a good game by that standard COD has the highest sales every year would you say that means the game is good …. Also I don’t think it’s boring cause a lot of people really like it at least the ones that have played
@@ranchalthor3526 no, but more because I have a specific taste, I like strategy games like civ or the old total war games.
A games purpose is to make money, since a game needs sales in order to do so, a game that failed to sell well is therefore a bad game. Objectively speaking, it just happens that my opinion matches that. I thought it was kinda how I imagined an ubisoft version of final fantasy.
Asmon, its common sense. You don't buy a professional football team and have them compete in the major leagues. So, why is it okay to purchase a single player third person rpg company like Bioware and make them develop anthem, or buy Respawn, the actual fps shooter developer and make them produce a third person action RPG, Star Wars fallen order? The same is happening with Arkane Austin.
11:00 you're missing the point, Jesus. He's sayign those games came out so bad exactly because they had to focus on creating live-service systems instead of polishing the game;
Hi-Fi Rush was a cool funky game, but it wasn’t some groundbreaking experience people are claiming it to be
If every game needs to be revolutionary for studios not to close , well be left with 10studios in a few years time , so that obviously not a treshold that needs to be reached , not to mention it was a japanese studio , they pay their devs peanuts compared to US studios , so its not like they were bleeding money on devs , the Gamepass model is simply broken , thats what killed that studio , if someone can pay 10dollars , play game and cancel the subscription for next month , now the dev is splitting those 10 dollars woth every other game played on gamepass that month , so in reality Microsoft made a service that devalues games but also didn't realize itll need to eat cost until the service is huge enough to support it self
@@bingbong3084 That’s not how GamePass works. Xbox pays them a flat fee to be on GP, they pay every time someone plays the game through GP, and they get paid for every subscriber on GP. The revenue is negotiated with the studio and usually is up to the studio on a per game basis to negotiate. This works differently for Xbox Studios who probably have it built into their contract pre-development. I’m not saying every game should be revolutionary. I’m simply saying that Hi-Fi Rush hype was overblown
Maybe if Prey was a live service game it would also be dogshit with clipping and all that? Maybe redfall if it wasn't live service had more time to focus on polishing he gameplay and it would have been as fun as Prey? That's the point mate
Redfall annoyed the hell out of me. How the hell do you make a vampire hunting game suck so badly. The bugs were the big problem, but I don't see many people commenting on just how ugly, unlikeable and cringe the hunters were. They looked like the wierdos off TikTok, not some cool vampire hunters. If they had fixed the game and the combat was gool, with cool looking hunters to play I doubt the game would have crashed so hard. I liked the concept, but when I saw the hunters I was immediately turned away. Same thing happened with Concord. If you make a game with awful, boring and ugly looking characters why would anyone want to play as them...
13:52 He is ignoring the fact that they could have been blindsighted by the Execs pushing the Release Date Up.
A game having an additive theme doesn’t mean it’s a good game
Steve Jobs explained it years ago: you remove any obstacle between the customer and the product, make it easy to access and highly desirable. and you can even sell at a highe price as long as everything is very comfortable
40:15 I think Asmongold forgot the topic of the video, live service killing single player games. I agree live service games can be fun, leave them to studios who want to tackle them not force them on renowned single player development teams.
25:00
You know what the Genshin Devs are doing right? They’re playing Wuthering Waves, and even making it publicly known that they’re playing it.
Why do you think Wuthering Waves is good in combat? The dev team learned from PGR and Genshin’s gameplay.
Personally i think a lot of people mix up inspiration with stealing. Inspiration is pretty much how nature and in extension we function and survive: you see something that works, have an idea to improve off of it, and create something of your own on that basis. Some things may be very similar to the original, but overall it’s its own thing.
I wish DiabloTeam play Genshin learn how to make great loot and can show where to find the loot you look for them.
Genshin does not have great loot. Gearing in genshin is complete RNG in rolling the proper primary stat and substats with no way of influencing the rolls. PoE's crafting system on the other hand, has a weighted affix system with many years of affix groups and crafting methods to influence what you can roll.
What make games are bad politics, no heart and soul, focus don making profit, online only and bad game, gameplay, concept and story and lore.
The issue wasn't that the studios didn't know how to make a good game, the issue is that these game's problems start because a lot of these studios that are tasked with making live service games have no desire to do so. Yeah it is a job, but it's a job in an industry that's inherently fueled by creativity. People who say "if you don't like the job just quit" are actually unknowingly hitting the nail on the head, because that's exactly what's happening. The creative heads in a lot of these studios end up leaving once they start getting tasked with making live service games, leaving people who are nowhere near as creative or driven to take up the reigns of the project. Just look at games like Anthem and Redfall. A lot of those teams had key personnel leave mid-project likely because they were having their creativity stifled by these demands for live service titles.
There was a point before the release of Anthem where EA was renaming every studio to Bioware. The dev teams change and the leadership just wants their golden parachutes because they've been making games for 3 decades and want to spend time with their grandkids.