I wish these games would put some more time in before asking for money... Am I out of touch now? I don't know. Let me know down below what you think! 👇👇👇
Nah, we see these games coming out every few months and its just always too early tech demos in development. The problem is Steam Early Access just being treated like its Kickstarter.
Question BIG, What tactical fps shooters in the last 5 years or so do you think are good? If any at all, and do you think delta force is good? bad? 1 out of 10 rank? Just wondering, this game looks terrible too.
I personally miss good ol' singleplayer military FPS games. Something with a cinematic story, memorable characters, some heart pumping, bombastic music, etc. I know we've got Black Ops 6 and its campaign was pretty good I've heard (haven't played it yet myself), but a new IP in the genre would be a welcome change. I just get tired of all these multiplayer only/live service/early access games too.
Wouldve loved if Ubisoft were to do this with Rainbow 6 but looks like theyre about to be bought out by Tencent anyway..guess the new Ghost Recon game probably wont be happening either
I think the campaign of Blops 6 is the best part of the game. It’s that perfect Treyarch over-the-top story that makes you feel like you’re in an action movie that would star Arnold Schwarzenegger. And it’s actually a comparatively long campaign for recent cods
I still don’t get it, there’s zero audience for it outside of Tarkov and its 1800s cousin Hunt. Every other extraction shooter flopped immediately, even COD (Delta Force is too early to call).
@@onemorescoutThere hasn't been a single extraction shooter to reach a 1.0 state that's actually good. Let alone come to console. Pretending that they've flooded the market is nuts. It took over 40 BR games to get 3 good ones that stuck around. Calm tf down.
@lighter9611 last time I checked grayzone is hated by everyone lol. The point I wanted to make is that you should vote with your wallet. And don't be surprised if you get what you vote for.
Dude, we are burnt out just of looking at all these EA games. We need a new idea, ffs, we need new premises not the same thing all over, pick up shit, extract, kill, pick up, rinse and repeat. Throw some randomness into. I love eft, and gzw but it's all the same deep down inside, it's all the same. And you nailed it, charging almost 1.0 prices and a development of 6 plus year. the problem is that we as a player base keep indulging into the same never ending cycle, giving money away for nothing you can't trust to get completed. It's all our fault for consuming half baked stuff. Like a crack addiction.
Not really as easy as most people think. There's one major problem: Nobody wants it. Whenever something new and genuinely down to earth with how it's constructed comes up to the stage, it gets ripped to shreds and pelted with KYS messages to the devs for being some "Low effort money grabber that nobody cares about" I'm the slaughterhouse of criticism that is the modern day gamer's ideals. NFS Unbound has some problems on its own, that's fair. But the sheer amount of polarizing criticism that it got just off the ART STYLE shows that first impressions are too highly relied on to judge a game on its overall gameplay and character. You can have a game be everything your audience wants, even done to the finest detail. But if someone finds something to rip on and takes it to the max, there will eventually be a flood of the same ideas pulling the game into the deep pit of bad reviews that will most likely be used to judge the game at a glance and ruin its chances of having a chance at glory.
I don't know what goes on in these devs heads. How do you delude yourself to just create the same pure shit over and over again like some insane cycle of idiocy.
@@nightfury7321 The problem with games like NFS unbound is that the devs did everything EXCEPT what people ask for, there's no excuse for the slop they produce when they have Underground, Most Wanted and Carbon as perfect recipes they can pull from, but they don't do it, they'd rather give us modern brake to drift with horrible physics, bad music, underwhelming gameplay and put in some washed up rapper with a goofy artstyle instead of focusing on making great gameplay first. And that's why people rip it to shreds, forget the artstyle, the game isn't any good regardless. So bad example to use, but also bad argument in the first place, sure there's always people who are unhappy with a game release, they will always exist and there's nothing you can do about it, but when a good game releases, the praise it gets and the amount of players it has speaks for itself, it's just gotten so goddamn rare nowadays that people confuse bad games for good games that did everything right because they have no idea what an actually good game is supposed to be.
@@nightfury7321 nobody wanted tarkov at first, and now look at it despite being absolutely ragged on every wipe. everybody and their brother is copying what it made popular, when battle royals was the last thing everybody was copying to a bare minimum outside of your top 3-4 because nobody is creative. such as while I know I'm not the only one from seeing it discussed in numerous forums we never got a single battleroyal were you dropped in fully geared with premade kits for sheer large scale conflicts, would it have failed maybe we wouldn't know because it was never tried. or the odd time they do try and make something creative they let hackers run their playerbases off( cough cough) maruaders/ the cycle they just copy the current hot thing not wanting to try and be the next hot thing. or if they try to be the next hot thing its a concord were everybody just says stop and the devs decide that means it will be a huge hit.
There really isn't any reason to buy any of these early access titles with how far the libraries grown for FPS shooters outside of AAA. We have Arma/Reforger, Hell Let Loose, Squad, Squad44, Insurgency, Ready Or Not, Escape From Tarkov, Six Days In Fallujah, and whatever else. We have soo many games now that is there any reason to support early versions of slop with a high chance of just failure?
Escape from Tarkov lol, the biggest scam, and you're mentioning it among other more reliable games. ETF has a nice gameplay but anything beyond that is really terrible. Maps are good tho, but spawns, AI and funking cheaters, c'mon...
@@Theundeadleader ABI... it is much better than tarkov. Better maps(armory & TV station are awesome), easier inventory management. But both are not tactical shooters. Both are RPG driven arcade shooters. They both create illusion of realism. But the moment you would put up HUD with HP bar and Armor bar everything would look and feel like The Division for example...
This is why I'm all in on Road to Vostok. You can play everything in the demo FOR FREE and it feels more fleshed out than some of these EA releases asking for $30. like the game, like the dude,
The industry is just fucked, not even Stalker 2 was safe. Just feels like there is precious little to look forward to. Everything is a rushed and released too early mess and its SO tiresome
To be fair, can you talk about stalker 2 without acknowledging the literal hellzone development? Most of the industry isn't impacted by war nearly to the degree it was
I was team leader for oce during its internal testing stage and i tried to voice my opinion and concerns about the game going into early access but i wasn’t listened to i eventually gave up trying as there was no communication from the dev team to me when people were asking me questions i couldn’t answer this game had/has the potential to be great but they need to stop fuck assing around and work on the things that need to be worked on, every update i see is all about UI and coding but nothing about movement improvements more content. Sure there are maps and once in a blue moon a weapon added but none of that matters if the game is shit
Damn, I just see more similar information from other comments who've played this previously. While things can change now, Early Access backlash could force improvement that is supposedly ignored by the community.
This why I'm going back to old school gaming like 007, Classic Mafia, Classic Ghost Recon, Classics in general. Those games are better than the games we're getting today. There's to many devs, and to little commitment.
All of these games are also going to have the same issue with cheaters, because everyone is focused on PvP. If you don't have the resources to build the game out before asking for money, you don't have the resources to fight the cheaters that are inevitably going to ruin the experience for legit players. Even big companies can't get on top of it, these indies don't stand a chance. I've been playing shooters since Quake was a thing, literally decades of online gaming experience. Anyone who says cheating isn't an epidemic at this point is either blind or willfully ignorant, it's gotten to the point there are ads openly advertising cheats for every game under the sun. That was never a thing before.
Tactical shooters are coming out fast and empty, because they know a chunk of the community are so happy LARPing that the game doesn't have to provide much content. just a Sandbox for your imagination to dreaaaammmmmm about the Potential. Some gamers see good gun and gear customisation and they're excited already.
Based video. I remember when ready or not came out into 1.0 people were calling it a scam for not fulfilling some of its promises. My response then is my bitch with the indie tactical shooter market now. Name a indie tactical shooter that is complete and has fulfilled all of its promises. Most of them are like ground branch that gets maybe one update a year that will include incredible features such as “going prone”. So many of the communities and devs won’t hear their product sucks and is a sandbox not a game. I’m so tried of indie tactical shooters selling me on the potential of what the game could be one day that will have to be heavily supplemented with mods in the interim. “Realism” is not an excuse to push out a half baked product.
AMEN. I don't care what a game CAN be in my imagination, if you ask for money I want it complete at launch. People let cyberpunk slide, took 2 years for a real 1.0
Yeah, I have to agree it’s pretty old with these games coming out that are nothing more than a demo and expecting you to wait years for them to be completed. And Delta Force is fun.
Steam shouldn't be treated like Kickstarter. Your game would prob do better if the Demo was actually good. But I'm old and remember when games were complete before coming to market.
Delta force, for a free to play game is amazing. There's a reason that so many people who have previously streamed tarkov or battlefield have been so into it. It's fun, it has content and it will definitely make money in its current state. And it's only gonna get better. Not having to wait for 9 years until it's a finished product running on antiquated tech for it to be fun to play is a godsend in my honest opinion. I would never shit all over any indie dev's dream of making a similar game but there's just too much competition which is doing it better and right now for me to want to entertain something like this.
I made it a rule, where if a game doesn't get my attention (Early Access or not), I'm not sticking around and I'm refunding. Selaco is in Early Access, yet the first chapter lasts for a good 8 hours and is fun to play.
When I was looking at the reviews a day or two ago, all the positive reviews seemed really sus. Anyone else feel like they all follow the same format? It feels like they're all worded way too similar. The accounts are sus as well.
i like when games have tacked on multiplayer all games should have both multiplayer and singleplayer, since singleplayer games get boring really fast after you beat them a few times thats where the tacked on multiplayer comes into play, devs need to go back to the 90s early 2000s where games wasnt all about live services and garbage early access
So, are all MAJOR Dev companies just shitting on quality gaming and becoming money hungry? Whatever happened to quality? Now it's just a race to see who can get their game in EA the quickest and make the most money, scamming people. I would rather get rid of EA all together and force these Devs to build QUALITY AND RELEASE WHEN FINISHED! A lot of EA games I quit playing over time bec I get burnt out with the same lame unfinished crap. Then when they FINALLY release 1.0, I have already lost interest. I get it though, small dev team, not enough funding, but c'mon man! You're right Fry, I'm getting sick of this same trend as well. Too many "Tactical" games, not many tactics. IMS! 🤷♂
i dont usually agree with bigfry in many occasions but this time i 1 million % agrees with him.. this game is poopoo.. and they r charging money for this barebone pile of 💩 ... make it f2p.. people might give it a try.. charging 30 for a barebone 💩 is not good
They want to avoid what mistake made by GZW? Selling over a million copies and ensuring financing of the game's further development for years to come? It's not like MFG pulled some kind of bait&switch on players, they marketed their game as exactly what it is and it's not their fault that hoards of Tarkov orphans happened to look for a substitute the exact time GZW's early access release. Those who took the game for what it is and not for a Tarkov killer they wished it to be are content with their purchase and still play the game. That's some very unelegant shade throwing from that Exfil dev that reeks of arrogance and jealousy.
I feel like every tactical fps is following the RoN formula of taking fucking centuries to release content and pay a really heavy price for the belief in a product that doesn’t yet exist. These “long burn” tactical shooters do nothing but make me stay away from them.
$30 is a low price, however... FOr a game in EA and in alpha? nah not worth it it to me, Beta maybe because then at least I know it'll be some what fimished. If they're going to release a game in alpha or pre-alpha, don't charge for it, simple just don't charge fo rit. Once you're game is nearing completion then charge for it.
People need to fund their games and investors are running up dry right now as gaming overall is in quite a bit of slump in funding. Great die-off of companies of all sizes is here and more is coming unfortunately. In my opinion the solution isn't "no EA that costs money" it's transparency and communication.
@@BeardedCatDad I can agree to that but I'm not really against games being in EA... kinda... just as long as its not pre-alpha state. If you're going to want testers have them sign up for pre-alpha and alpha then release it in beta state where it's at least a bit more stable.
@@blckmlr7573 I don't disagree. Part of the problem here, and I am going to be semantic, is what people actually expect a "pre-alpha" game to look like though. Because a pre-alpha would be rough graybox, flat color materials, with minimal animations and the very earliest of implementations of the gameplay loop. AA and AAA games being released in early access and sometimes even calling themselves "early-alpha" but actually being in a beta state has been extremely harmful to the gaming community and discourse because now if an indie wants to release a game in actual pre-alpha and is extremely transparent about where the game is, what to expect, and why not to buy the game yet if you aren't okay with that, people get mad because they expect it to be further along when it was adequately explained to be pre-alpha.
Fry, I’m just gonna be COMPLETELY honest with you here. This is why we need games like Transience. These devs need a big hit, a game that completely destroys everything their trying to put it on the market to show them once and for all what actually needs to be done to make a successful game and one that will actually have players. Because let’s face it, no one is playing these games to begin with. And those who are, are wasting their money. These devs need a HUGE reality check and a big kick in the ass. Hopefully that’s what you game can do, and hopefully it keeps them at least somewhat quiet for a time. But deep down, something tells me it’s going to require more than just one good game.
This dude whom claims $30 isn't a lot... He fails to mention that $30 American is usually quite a bit more in other places like Canada or Australia. And, $30 for trash is still far too much. Good video, dawg. Thank you.
What? I was told Indy Developers could do no wrong and that they were the future of gaming, leaving those evil, greedy, 'predatory' AAA publishers behind?!
any yet nothings changed... Survival games are the same as extractions games. none of them do it different. spawn in, loot, build base if they have the tech, raid others, pvp, rinse and repeat.
All this just makes me think about Interstellar Marines. Very sad that the game was never able to take off like it should have. It had a story planned, co-op was working, mechanically it was awesome. It was definitely ahead of its time and I feel like the tactical gaming community would have loved if it released to EA today with some updates.
That appears to be the model for game development these days. Launch a bare bones product into early access and get the players to fund the development, rather than investors who'll demand a return.
I saw it popped up in my timeline and got this game on Steam. Waited till it was downloaded and started it. I played the tutorial to set up my graphics, mouse sens, audio etc.... I then just hopped in a session, because the game is already dead af. I jumped in...... DAMN i played a LOT of EA titles and FPS.... This game HAS to be the roughest, unpolished, bare-bones game is EVER touched. From the performance to movement and interactions, this game feels SOOOO damn stiff! I walked up a hill and thought what the fck is my ping?? i was rubberbanding the shit outta this game, but i had a normal ping. I died because of VERY bad Gunplay, instantly hit the AltF4, refund and done. Maybe this game will still live in a few years.... But at the time we live in, i dont see this game getting really successful.
Im convinced if someone copied Bad Company 2 maps and game modes, improved the weapon selection (like Medal of Honor Warfighter) and shipped a traditional style shooter with some tactical elements and destruction. - that game would do very well.
Also I really enjoyed this style of video, you managed to bring your normal bravado, but in such a way that it didn't come off as abrasive. Well done and I couldn't agree more with the review. However, I think you're being a tad generous even. With the supposed talent they have, they should be way further along than they are.
Hideo Kojima pulled this off years ago with Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes. Many blame Konami. While technically true; that’s bc Kojima, VP of Konami at the time forced the issue hard even when the President , Investors and so on didn’t want to.
Every time a developer starts his response to the criticism saying that "$x is pretty low for a video game this days", you can hear the facepalms of the people that read that. Good job IrOnTaXi, you just shot the game in its foot and it will be DOA now
On one hand I can understand the consumers not wanting to pay 30 bucks for an alpha, but on the other hand I can also understand the devs that need money to develop their game. The industry as a whole is at a stalemate rn. Consumers are unwilling to support upcoming projects while spending record amounts in microtransactions on AAA games funded by investors only to then complain about how the gaming space sucks nowadays. And developers can't get funding from investors and are putting out their alpha versions on Steam and then having to close doors because no one is buying it. As it is rn, there has to be a change on both sides. Gamers need to realize that nothing is going to change if they only keep buying AAA games and should be more willing to throw 30 bucks at something for the chance of it turning out well. And developers need to realize that their game needs to be more than just a tech demo to attract players.
The problem is that many of these devs fail to understand that first impressions matter. They also fail to understand that if someone is paying 30 bucks, they expect more than a barely functioning tech demo
You said it yourself, that the devs need to put out something more than a functioning demo. It’s not consumers fault these devs are lazy/unwilling to put more time into development. What are you talking about
The people who pioneered this space had to keep their day job, get loans, crowdfund a vertical slice to then seek investors, etc so who are these new people to demand a world where they're entitled to gamers' money?
@seanpoulton2446 the problem is that gamers think that they are disconnected from the market. Guess what, you reap what you sow. Of you don't want to fund the games you like, no one is going to make them for you.
ultrakill launched on steam for like $20 and offered enough to where it pretty quickly became one of the top games on steam. after years of development the amount of content has just about doubled, and the price has increased to... $25 💀 asking $30 for a game that is arguably not even playable yet is crazy like eden ring is on sale for $30 rn
if sombody could release a finished game on steam it might actually be successful feels like most devs treat their games like crypto currencies, lie about making somthing valuable, then when a bunch of people buy into it they abandon it and take all the money
People are gonna look at this video and say you're just "punching down on indie devs", completely missing the point/reason why you're upset. Yeah you're talking about about the game in a harsh light but it comes from your own experience with game development. You look at the work you and your team is doing on Transience and say to yourself "how could they release it in this state and why are they getting a pass by the niche shooter community?" It feels almost unfair that, like you said, people will talk shit about GZW, Delta Force, even your game...but give this game a pass because of who makes it/what genre the game is in. I have no doubt that these guys CAN make Exfil good but my god, the amount of money they'll have to invest will be heavy. Then there's a competitive aspect. $30 for this or Free.99 for Delta Force? Fuck it man I'm battling with the Chinese all day if that's the case. Great video dude!
hash tag not sponsored - hashtag the spies are watching . hashtag - corporate espionage is real - boy if i dont get some little items in transience with some hashtags on it that will blow. hahaha - The game needs to cook for sure - but they need to deliver first before asking for money in order for us to believe the dream or promise
i see that the game says it allows us to host dedicated servers, anyone know if we can host the game on linux dedicated server right now or no support for that would be a shame?
Maybe tac shooters in themselves are the issue. From what I grasped Delta Force isn't hellbent on realism. But nowadays some people seem to only care about exaggerated hyperrealism both in gameplay and visuals. Many of these boring extraction shooters seem to share one thing: UE5. Too many times I see people say "imagine this or that game in UE5", even if they are an entirely different genre. I believe some gamers and by extension devs too have their priorities all wrong.
What happened to releasing free betas that players can play and give feedback to? Now we have to fund these broken messes? I honestly think in more ways than not that steams early access program has done harm to the industry.
I completely agree with this video... also I'll add that I used to be apart of a certain gaming community and discord server as an admin for a long time and some of the devs were also admins and would give access to a lot of the people in the admin server they were pretty cool people besides most of the old heads at the very top of said community but that's to be expected from a bunch of boomers. Game sucked at the time and still sucks today. I'm fairly certain all the positive reviews are people in that same community and clearly have a bias because there is no way in a legitimate world that it has a mostly positive rating
why do so many devs make extraction shooters...I never liked them, but it seems like they have tarkov and then 100s of games that are the same but fail with in a month. and like they know that tarkovs biggest problem is cheaters, but all these new games dont care about cheaters, so everyone that trys the game quits anyway...
Im going to be honest. Im just tired of modern fps games. It's rinse and repeat. I believe I'm just growing out of online gaming because I've found more joy in single-player story games or coops. Maybe I'm getting old maybe the industry has lost innovation. Who knows.
2:00 isn’t it against tos to release a paid demo, unfinished game, and say that it’ll be done in not ONE year but TWO..? Isn’t it similar to them saying: “as long as we get money, we’ll be able to complete it”. (I know you covered similar Early Access games that said something like that, but I for the life of me cannot remember the exact wording).
There's simply to many fps games in general. There's very few that are worth purchasing if we are talking about gameplay alone, but we're not. We're talking about community as well and most of them crash then burn b/c they get abandoned when another one drops. They might as well be shovelwear, theres so many. The problem is theres too many in the space doing the same things, nothing stands out anymore, unless it's truly different. Then they chuck them into early access way too early and you get this shit. Idk who needs to hear it, but fps games are a dime a dozen. Extraction shooters? Go ahead, count them. Then tell me how many are successful and played regularly with a sizable community.
The last time I did anything with a videogame other than a few small sound mods on Stalker Anomaly was making a few maps when I was like 14 for Aliens vs Predator 2. Maybe I'm just so far out of the loop I really have zero clue. If someone honestly spent 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, putting in an actual 40 hour work week... Would there really not be enough time in 2 years to complete a game that already had some type of backbone to work on? I mean 40 hours a week, 52 weeks in a year, that's over 4,000 hours. I've worked for companies that have changed hands and literally become unrecognizable in 2 years. Just wondering, is developing a game really that time consuming nowadays? I was under the impression there's technology that you could pretty much enter in Google Maps coordinates and a map could be created with AI in a 1 to 1 ratio in something like Unreal Engine 5. Maybe I'm just that far detached from the reality of game development lol. I'm not defending them, just kind of trying to wrap my head around the timeframes that it takes nowadays.
You said it. The game loops are the after thoughts. We want games that can we grow with and coop with friends. I still want a milsim MMO :) we can grow with our friends and coop.
I wish these games would put some more time in before asking for money... Am I out of touch now? I don't know. Let me know down below what you think!
👇👇👇
Nah, we see these games coming out every few months and its just always too early tech demos in development. The problem is Steam Early Access just being treated like its Kickstarter.
Completely agree 👍❤
Careful, redditor-tier people are going to bootlick game devs. "THIS IS THEIR LIVELYHOOD THEY NEED SUPPORT TO MAKE A GOOD PRODUCT"
@@Theundeadleader isnt that what "early access" means like?
Question BIG, What tactical fps shooters in the last 5 years or so do you think are good? If any at all, and do you think delta force is good? bad? 1 out of 10 rank? Just wondering, this game looks terrible too.
I personally miss good ol' singleplayer military FPS games. Something with a cinematic story, memorable characters, some heart pumping, bombastic music, etc. I know we've got Black Ops 6 and its campaign was pretty good I've heard (haven't played it yet myself), but a new IP in the genre would be a welcome change. I just get tired of all these multiplayer only/live service/early access games too.
Wouldve loved if Ubisoft were to do this with Rainbow 6 but looks like theyre about to be bought out by Tencent anyway..guess the new Ghost Recon game probably wont be happening either
@TTrigg I'm still salty about R6: Patriots
@generalpixel WHY WOULD YOU BRING THAT UP?!
@@RhotoActualI never fully forgave Ubisoft after that. It’s part of the reason I never played siege despite it being good
I think the campaign of Blops 6 is the best part of the game. It’s that perfect Treyarch over-the-top story that makes you feel like you’re in an action movie that would star Arnold Schwarzenegger. And it’s actually a comparatively long campaign for recent cods
And just like that, battle royale got replaced with exfiltration games! And now everyone wants a slice from the pie.
All I want is big team battles 😂
I still don’t get it, there’s zero audience for it outside of Tarkov and its 1800s cousin Hunt. Every other extraction shooter flopped immediately, even COD (Delta Force is too early to call).
@@onemorescoutDMZ was fine
Meanwhile Fortnite is still Fortnite.
@@onemorescoutThere hasn't been a single extraction shooter to reach a 1.0 state that's actually good. Let alone come to console.
Pretending that they've flooded the market is nuts. It took over 40 BR games to get 3 good ones that stuck around. Calm tf down.
these devs need a reality check lol
"These devs need a reality check" also "The gaming indistry sucks, why are there no good games anymore"
The sword cuts both ways.
@kobi399 Very different when you're releasing a rough ass game like this for $30 when gray zone is the same price, and it's infinitely better.
bruh I can buy a full fledge game when it's winter sale for 30 dollars
@lighter9611 last time I checked grayzone is hated by everyone lol.
The point I wanted to make is that you should vote with your wallet. And don't be surprised if you get what you vote for.
@@lighter9611 Bro even Gray Zone is rough as hell. No way I'm paying for demos.
Tactical game devs try to finish a game and not release a janky mess in early access for full price challenge (impossible)
Dude, we are burnt out just of looking at all these EA games. We need a new idea, ffs, we need new premises not the same thing all over, pick up shit, extract, kill, pick up, rinse and repeat. Throw some randomness into. I love eft, and gzw but it's all the same deep down inside, it's all the same. And you nailed it, charging almost 1.0 prices and a development of 6 plus year. the problem is that we as a player base keep indulging into the same never ending cycle, giving money away for nothing you can't trust to get completed. It's all our fault for consuming half baked stuff. Like a crack addiction.
Not really as easy as most people think. There's one major problem: Nobody wants it. Whenever something new and genuinely down to earth with how it's constructed comes up to the stage, it gets ripped to shreds and pelted with KYS messages to the devs for being some "Low effort money grabber that nobody cares about" I'm the slaughterhouse of criticism that is the modern day gamer's ideals. NFS Unbound has some problems on its own, that's fair. But the sheer amount of polarizing criticism that it got just off the ART STYLE shows that first impressions are too highly relied on to judge a game on its overall gameplay and character. You can have a game be everything your audience wants, even done to the finest detail. But if someone finds something to rip on and takes it to the max, there will eventually be a flood of the same ideas pulling the game into the deep pit of bad reviews that will most likely be used to judge the game at a glance and ruin its chances of having a chance at glory.
I don't know what goes on in these devs heads. How do you delude yourself to just create the same pure shit over and over again like some insane cycle of idiocy.
@@nightfury7321 The problem with games like NFS unbound is that the devs did everything EXCEPT what people ask for, there's no excuse for the slop they produce when they have Underground, Most Wanted and Carbon as perfect recipes they can pull from, but they don't do it, they'd rather give us modern brake to drift with horrible physics, bad music, underwhelming gameplay and put in some washed up rapper with a goofy artstyle instead of focusing on making great gameplay first. And that's why people rip it to shreds, forget the artstyle, the game isn't any good regardless.
So bad example to use, but also bad argument in the first place, sure there's always people who are unhappy with a game release, they will always exist and there's nothing you can do about it, but when a good game releases, the praise it gets and the amount of players it has speaks for itself, it's just gotten so goddamn rare nowadays that people confuse bad games for good games that did everything right because they have no idea what an actually good game is supposed to be.
@@nightfury7321 nobody wanted tarkov at first, and now look at it despite being absolutely ragged on every wipe. everybody and their brother is copying what it made popular, when battle royals was the last thing everybody was copying to a bare minimum outside of your top 3-4 because nobody is creative.
such as while I know I'm not the only one from seeing it discussed in numerous forums we never got a single battleroyal were you dropped in fully geared with premade kits for sheer large scale conflicts, would it have failed maybe we wouldn't know because it was never tried. or the odd time they do try and make something creative they let hackers run their playerbases off( cough cough) maruaders/ the cycle
they just copy the current hot thing not wanting to try and be the next hot thing. or if they try to be the next hot thing its a concord were everybody just says stop and the devs decide that means it will be a huge hit.
The Tactical Genre is an endless cycle of Unoptimized, Unpolished, Unfinished Early Access Titles...
tactical sloppa
I played the alpha for this. I spawned in, saw a house 2 times the size of my body, then left the playtesting team.
There really isn't any reason to buy any of these early access titles with how far the libraries grown for FPS shooters outside of AAA. We have Arma/Reforger, Hell Let Loose, Squad, Squad44, Insurgency, Ready Or Not, Escape From Tarkov, Six Days In Fallujah, and whatever else. We have soo many games now that is there any reason to support early versions of slop with a high chance of just failure?
fax OPERATOR is coming up too
Escape from Tarkov lol, the biggest scam, and you're mentioning it among other more reliable games. ETF has a nice gameplay but anything beyond that is really terrible. Maps are good tho, but spawns, AI and funking cheaters, c'mon...
@@kvrtman_ true, but has a community and nothing seems to be replacing it anytime soon.
Don't forget Easy Red 2. That game is painfully underrated...
@@Theundeadleader ABI... it is much better than tarkov. Better maps(armory & TV station are awesome), easier inventory management. But both are not tactical shooters.
Both are RPG driven arcade shooters. They both create illusion of realism. But the moment you would put up HUD with HP bar and Armor bar everything would look and feel like The Division for example...
This is why I'm all in on Road to Vostok. You can play everything in the demo FOR FREE and it feels more fleshed out than some of these EA releases asking for $30.
like the game, like the dude,
The industry is just fucked, not even Stalker 2 was safe. Just feels like there is precious little to look forward to. Everything is a rushed and released too early mess and its SO tiresome
Exfil didn't have a war involved, it's just a trash cashgrab lol
Too many small teams, with too much ambition and feature creep. They need more polish and less janky features.
I thoroughly enjoyed stalker 2
To be fair, can you talk about stalker 2 without acknowledging the literal hellzone development?
Most of the industry isn't impacted by war nearly to the degree it was
@MhnFive all the more reason to delay it or call it what it is, early access
Can agree the idea is cool. I played it, it’s fun, but it feels like just a proof of concept.
Ready or not costs 30something bucks too and its better
I was team leader for oce during its internal testing stage and i tried to voice my opinion and concerns about the game going into early access but i wasn’t listened to i eventually gave up trying as there was no communication from the dev team to me when people were asking me questions i couldn’t answer this game had/has the potential to be great but they need to stop fuck assing around and work on the things that need to be worked on, every update i see is all about UI and coding but nothing about movement improvements more content. Sure there are maps and once in a blue moon a weapon added but none of that matters if the game is shit
Damn, I just see more similar information from other comments who've played this previously. While things can change now, Early Access backlash could force improvement that is supposedly ignored by the community.
This why I'm going back to old school gaming like 007, Classic Mafia, Classic Ghost Recon, Classics in general. Those games are better than the games we're getting today. There's to many devs, and to little commitment.
All of these games are also going to have the same issue with cheaters, because everyone is focused on PvP. If you don't have the resources to build the game out before asking for money, you don't have the resources to fight the cheaters that are inevitably going to ruin the experience for legit players. Even big companies can't get on top of it, these indies don't stand a chance. I've been playing shooters since Quake was a thing, literally decades of online gaming experience. Anyone who says cheating isn't an epidemic at this point is either blind or willfully ignorant, it's gotten to the point there are ads openly advertising cheats for every game under the sun. That was never a thing before.
Man hearing you say Marauders gave me flash backs. Absolutely love that game but man... what're they doing over there.
All these games have the same Unreal Marketplace and 3DMA assets. The majority of these 'tactical shooters' are just clones
I guarantee you there’s some free game on Roblox that is infinitely better than this
I hope Karmakut's game will be good!
This is what I was afraid of.
Tactical shooters are coming out fast and empty, because they know a chunk of the community are so happy LARPing that the game doesn't have to provide much content. just a Sandbox for your imagination to dreaaaammmmmm about the Potential.
Some gamers see good gun and gear customisation and they're excited already.
Whats the beat playing at 3:45 or 7:55 in the background? BigFry always got good music playing
Entire game is premade assets from the marketplace.. COOL!!
and even with that they couldnt remotly hit acceptable graphics.
@@digitalesthetics Well yeah because its using Assets of varied quality.
Based video.
I remember when ready or not came out into 1.0 people were calling it a scam for not fulfilling some of its promises. My response then is my bitch with the indie tactical shooter market now. Name a indie tactical shooter that is complete and has fulfilled all of its promises. Most of them are like ground branch that gets maybe one update a year that will include incredible features such as “going prone”. So many of the communities and devs won’t hear their product sucks and is a sandbox not a game. I’m so tried of indie tactical shooters selling me on the potential of what the game could be one day that will have to be heavily supplemented with mods in the interim. “Realism” is not an excuse to push out a half baked product.
yo that's the oil refinery map asset from unreal store
To me the exfiltration games genre was already dead the moment it began.
Knowing BD, he's going to skip the hashtags on 5:12 and make a 60 minute video
BD already made the video in advance
Bought it, played it 20 minutes, and then refunded. Cool concept but it brings absolutely nothing to the table.
AMEN. I don't care what a game CAN be in my imagination, if you ask for money I want it complete at launch. People let cyberpunk slide, took 2 years for a real 1.0
My how Microprose declined from the 90s.
Not the same people.
Yeah, I have to agree it’s pretty old with these games coming out that are nothing more than a demo and expecting you to wait years for them to be completed. And Delta Force is fun.
$30 for a game is very fair, but this is not a game, its a test demo at best.
I played this in the invite-only period… it felt super unintuitive and there was a terrible forced upscale. I think that’s all I need to say
Steam shouldn't be treated like Kickstarter. Your game would prob do better if the Demo was actually good. But I'm old and remember when games were complete before coming to market.
Delta force, for a free to play game is amazing. There's a reason that so many people who have previously streamed tarkov or battlefield have been so into it. It's fun, it has content and it will definitely make money in its current state. And it's only gonna get better. Not having to wait for 9 years until it's a finished product running on antiquated tech for it to be fun to play is a godsend in my honest opinion. I would never shit all over any indie dev's dream of making a similar game but there's just too much competition which is doing it better and right now for me to want to entertain something like this.
ABI is better, delta force is marvel DEI slop
Too arcade for my liking.
I made it a rule, where if a game doesn't get my attention (Early Access or not), I'm not sticking around and I'm refunding. Selaco is in Early Access, yet the first chapter lasts for a good 8 hours and is fun to play.
I’m the same way but I’m picky on which games I will even try. I know what to look for in if they will satisfy my wants or not
Keep speaking the truth, brother. Those of us who are not converged appreciate it!
When I was looking at the reviews a day or two ago, all the positive reviews seemed really sus. Anyone else feel like they all follow the same format? It feels like they're all worded way too similar. The accounts are sus as well.
Ya, saw something about their positive reviews sus and being basically being pushed by the devs in-game to give it.
I'm also noticing comments here are following the same format of "I didn't do enough research etc" - Feels a bit deliberate yes
Played it. Quit after 2 rounds.
i like when games have tacked on multiplayer all games should have both multiplayer and singleplayer,
since singleplayer games get boring really fast after you beat them a few times thats where the tacked on multiplayer comes into play,
devs need to go back to the 90s early 2000s where games wasnt all about live services and garbage early access
So, are all MAJOR Dev companies just shitting on quality gaming and becoming money hungry? Whatever happened to quality? Now it's just a race to see who can get their game in EA the quickest and make the most money, scamming people. I would rather get rid of EA all together and force these Devs to build QUALITY AND RELEASE WHEN FINISHED! A lot of EA games I quit playing over time bec I get burnt out with the same lame unfinished crap. Then when they FINALLY release 1.0, I have already lost interest. I get it though, small dev team, not enough funding, but c'mon man! You're right Fry, I'm getting sick of this same trend as well. Too many "Tactical" games, not many tactics. IMS! 🤷♂
And my Hotline Miami inspired FPS with no asset flip bs is not selling...
Good luck Gaming Industry, Im out b👋
to many early access, especally crazy for $30 , and I absolutely hate todays map design that is a terrain populated with some random POIs
Steam needs a better system to prevent these half assed games from appearing on the market.
i dont usually agree with bigfry in many occasions but this time i 1 million % agrees with him.. this game is poopoo.. and they r charging money for this barebone pile of 💩 ... make it f2p.. people might give it a try.. charging 30 for a barebone 💩 is not good
Got an email as well and I was like... Uhhhh, this doesn't look like much so far
They want to avoid what mistake made by GZW? Selling over a million copies and ensuring financing of the game's further development for years to come? It's not like MFG pulled some kind of bait&switch on players, they marketed their game as exactly what it is and it's not their fault that hoards of Tarkov orphans happened to look for a substitute the exact time GZW's early access release. Those who took the game for what it is and not for a Tarkov killer they wished it to be are content with their purchase and still play the game.
That's some very unelegant shade throwing from that Exfil dev that reeks of arrogance and jealousy.
I feel like every tactical fps is following the RoN formula of taking fucking centuries to release content and pay a really heavy price for the belief in a product that doesn’t yet exist. These “long burn” tactical shooters do nothing but make me stay away from them.
$30 is a low price, however... FOr a game in EA and in alpha? nah not worth it it to me, Beta maybe because then at least I know it'll be some what fimished. If they're going to release a game in alpha or pre-alpha, don't charge for it, simple just don't charge fo rit. Once you're game is nearing completion then charge for it.
People need to fund their games and investors are running up dry right now as gaming overall is in quite a bit of slump in funding. Great die-off of companies of all sizes is here and more is coming unfortunately. In my opinion the solution isn't "no EA that costs money" it's transparency and communication.
@@BeardedCatDad I can agree to that but I'm not really against games being in EA... kinda... just as long as its not pre-alpha state. If you're going to want testers have them sign up for pre-alpha and alpha then release it in beta state where it's at least a bit more stable.
@@blckmlr7573 I don't disagree. Part of the problem here, and I am going to be semantic, is what people actually expect a "pre-alpha" game to look like though. Because a pre-alpha would be rough graybox, flat color materials, with minimal animations and the very earliest of implementations of the gameplay loop. AA and AAA games being released in early access and sometimes even calling themselves "early-alpha" but actually being in a beta state has been extremely harmful to the gaming community and discourse because now if an indie wants to release a game in actual pre-alpha and is extremely transparent about where the game is, what to expect, and why not to buy the game yet if you aren't okay with that, people get mad because they expect it to be further along when it was adequately explained to be pre-alpha.
Like a cheap fidget spinner in a landfill of fidget spinners.
The sad truth is these poor excuses of video games are being made because people still buy them. Why, I'm not sure?
I'm glad i'm not the only one who is feeling this way. FPS games all copy and past each other.
Fry, I’m just gonna be COMPLETELY honest with you here. This is why we need games like Transience. These devs need a big hit, a game that completely destroys everything their trying to put it on the market to show them once and for all what actually needs to be done to make a successful game and one that will actually have players. Because let’s face it, no one is playing these games to begin with. And those who are, are wasting their money. These devs need a HUGE reality check and a big kick in the ass. Hopefully that’s what you game can do, and hopefully it keeps them at least somewhat quiet for a time. But deep down, something tells me it’s going to require more than just one good game.
This dude whom claims $30 isn't a lot... He fails to mention that $30 American is usually quite a bit more in other places like Canada or Australia. And, $30 for trash is still far too much.
Good video, dawg. Thank you.
What? I was told Indy Developers could do no wrong and that they were the future of gaming, leaving those evil, greedy, 'predatory' AAA publishers behind?!
Talk about Deadside again, the game just got it's largest update ever
any yet nothings changed... Survival games are the same as extractions games. none of them do it different. spawn in, loot, build base if they have the tech, raid others, pvp, rinse and repeat.
The funny thing is the dev of this game is a dev from squad so dont expect anything to change or get done soon
All this just makes me think about Interstellar Marines. Very sad that the game was never able to take off like it should have. It had a story planned, co-op was working, mechanically it was awesome. It was definitely ahead of its time and I feel like the tactical gaming community would have loved if it released to EA today with some updates.
“We are self funded”
Clearly, *there’s about $10,000 worth of work hours and asset flips in your $30 early access title* 😂
Ground branch actually has a roadmap and has made development progress tho
That appears to be the model for game development these days. Launch a bare bones product into early access and get the players to fund the development, rather than investors who'll demand a return.
5:34 aint no FUCKING way that tracer round gently and slowly hit the ground like a lightsaber XD
I saw it popped up in my timeline and got this game on Steam. Waited till it was downloaded and started it. I played the tutorial to set up my graphics, mouse sens, audio etc.... I then just hopped in a session, because the game is already dead af. I jumped in...... DAMN i played a LOT of EA titles and FPS.... This game HAS to be the roughest, unpolished, bare-bones game is EVER touched. From the performance to movement and interactions, this game feels SOOOO damn stiff! I walked up a hill and thought what the fck is my ping?? i was rubberbanding the shit outta this game, but i had a normal ping. I died because of VERY bad Gunplay, instantly hit the AltF4, refund and done. Maybe this game will still live in a few years.... But at the time we live in, i dont see this game getting really successful.
My personal favorite when everyone says WoW killer or EFT killer and they have 0% stake in the market after 1 year.
Indie games: everyone wants a piece of it lul
Im convinced if someone copied Bad Company 2 maps and game modes, improved the weapon selection (like Medal of Honor Warfighter) and shipped a traditional style shooter with some tactical elements and destruction. - that game would do very well.
Dude your videos and commentary are great when I want the truth about games I wait till you put a video out about them keep it up dude
Any fps that is complete that you would recommend to me fora low end PC?
It's currently sitting at Mostly Positive with 72 reviews.
Also I really enjoyed this style of video, you managed to bring your normal bravado, but in such a way that it didn't come off as abrasive. Well done and I couldn't agree more with the review. However, I think you're being a tad generous even. With the supposed talent they have, they should be way further along than they are.
I love Early Access, the moment I see those two words I drop any interest I might of had.
Hideo Kojima pulled this off years ago with Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes.
Many blame Konami. While technically true; that’s bc Kojima, VP of Konami at the time forced the issue hard even when the President , Investors and so on didn’t want to.
Some people have no artistic taste. Some guy probably still think Novalogic Delta Force from the 90s is better than today's games.
Any word on when Ground Branch v1035 will be released?
Every time a developer starts his response to the criticism saying that "$x is pretty low for a video game this days", you can hear the facepalms of the people that read that. Good job IrOnTaXi, you just shot the game in its foot and it will be DOA now
On one hand I can understand the consumers not wanting to pay 30 bucks for an alpha, but on the other hand I can also understand the devs that need money to develop their game.
The industry as a whole is at a stalemate rn. Consumers are unwilling to support upcoming projects while spending record amounts in microtransactions on AAA games funded by investors only to then complain about how the gaming space sucks nowadays.
And developers can't get funding from investors and are putting out their alpha versions on Steam and then having to close doors because no one is buying it.
As it is rn, there has to be a change on both sides. Gamers need to realize that nothing is going to change if they only keep buying AAA games and should be more willing to throw 30 bucks at something for the chance of it turning out well. And developers need to realize that their game needs to be more than just a tech demo to attract players.
The problem is that many of these devs fail to understand that first impressions matter. They also fail to understand that if someone is paying 30 bucks, they expect more than a barely functioning tech demo
They could just crowdfund rather than throwing this in Early Access?
You said it yourself, that the devs need to put out something more than a functioning demo. It’s not consumers fault these devs are lazy/unwilling to put more time into development. What are you talking about
The people who pioneered this space had to keep their day job, get loans, crowdfund a vertical slice to then seek investors, etc so who are these new people to demand a world where they're entitled to gamers' money?
@seanpoulton2446 the problem is that gamers think that they are disconnected from the market. Guess what, you reap what you sow. Of you don't want to fund the games you like, no one is going to make them for you.
ultrakill launched on steam for like $20 and offered enough to where it pretty quickly became one of the top games on steam. after years of development the amount of content has just about doubled, and the price has increased to... $25 💀
asking $30 for a game that is arguably not even playable yet is crazy like eden ring is on sale for $30 rn
I would never pay 30 for this 😂
if sombody could release a finished game on steam it might actually be successful
feels like most devs treat their games like crypto currencies, lie about making somthing valuable, then when a bunch of people buy into it they abandon it and take all the money
Earrth 2 is about to make a comeback. Better watch out BigFry.
People are gonna look at this video and say you're just "punching down on indie devs", completely missing the point/reason why you're upset.
Yeah you're talking about about the game in a harsh light but it comes from your own experience with game development. You look at the work you and your team is doing on Transience and say to yourself "how could they release it in this state and why are they getting a pass by the niche shooter community?" It feels almost unfair that, like you said, people will talk shit about GZW, Delta Force, even your game...but give this game a pass because of who makes it/what genre the game is in. I have no doubt that these guys CAN make Exfil good but my god, the amount of money they'll have to invest will be heavy.
Then there's a competitive aspect. $30 for this or Free.99 for Delta Force? Fuck it man I'm battling with the Chinese all day if that's the case.
Great video dude!
100% man absolutely feckin spot on. I'm glad I was the first generation of gamers to come out of the late 70s. Feck it's gone to the feckin Dogs man.
I just paid 8$ for my wife and 2 kids to get BF1, I know what I would prefer.
hash tag not sponsored - hashtag the spies are watching . hashtag - corporate espionage is real - boy if i dont get some little items in transience with some hashtags on it that will blow. hahaha - The game needs to cook for sure - but they need to deliver first before asking for money in order for us to believe the dream or promise
I feel this sentiment in my soul.
I may not like delta force’s current state, but there’s no way in hell I’d recommend this game, we do not claim those people big fry
i see that the game says it allows us to host dedicated servers, anyone know if we can host the game on linux dedicated server right now or no support for that would be a shame?
Maybe tac shooters in themselves are the issue. From what I grasped Delta Force isn't hellbent on realism. But nowadays some people seem to only care about exaggerated hyperrealism both in gameplay and visuals. Many of these boring extraction shooters seem to share one thing: UE5. Too many times I see people say "imagine this or that game in UE5", even if they are an entirely different genre. I believe some gamers and by extension devs too have their priorities all wrong.
What happened to releasing free betas that players can play and give feedback to? Now we have to fund these broken messes? I honestly think in more ways than not that steams early access program has done harm to the industry.
I completely agree with this video... also I'll add that I used to be apart of a certain gaming community and discord server as an admin for a long time and some of the devs were also admins and would give access to a lot of the people in the admin server they were pretty cool people besides most of the old heads at the very top of said community but that's to be expected from a bunch of boomers. Game sucked at the time and still sucks today. I'm fairly certain all the positive reviews are people in that same community and clearly have a bias because there is no way in a legitimate world that it has a mostly positive rating
why do so many devs make extraction shooters...I never liked them, but it seems like they have tarkov and then 100s of games that are the same but fail with in a month. and like they know that tarkovs biggest problem is cheaters, but all these new games dont care about cheaters, so everyone that trys the game quits anyway...
There is nothing even close to scratching my PS2 era socom itch on console.
Im going to be honest. Im just tired of modern fps games. It's rinse and repeat. I believe I'm just growing out of online gaming because I've found more joy in single-player story games or coops. Maybe I'm getting old maybe the industry has lost innovation. Who knows.
I fucking LOVE bigfry rants bashing lazy devs. If it’s one dude, sure, benefit of the doubt, but not 30 bucks a copy. That’s wild
2:00 isn’t it against tos to release a paid demo, unfinished game, and say that it’ll be done in not ONE year but TWO..?
Isn’t it similar to them saying: “as long as we get money, we’ll be able to complete it”.
(I know you covered similar Early Access games that said something like that, but I for the life of me cannot remember the exact wording).
Buildings ripped straight out of the example map of the asset packs, straight asset flip garbage
Sq44 is looking pretty grand with iwo jima and the pacific update coming
There's simply to many fps games in general. There's very few that are worth purchasing if we are talking about gameplay alone, but we're not. We're talking about community as well and most of them crash then burn b/c they get abandoned when another one drops. They might as well be shovelwear, theres so many. The problem is theres too many in the space doing the same things, nothing stands out anymore, unless it's truly different. Then they chuck them into early access way too early and you get this shit. Idk who needs to hear it, but fps games are a dime a dozen. Extraction shooters? Go ahead, count them. Then tell me how many are successful and played regularly with a sizable community.
The last time I did anything with a videogame other than a few small sound mods on Stalker Anomaly was making a few maps when I was like 14 for Aliens vs Predator 2. Maybe I'm just so far out of the loop I really have zero clue. If someone honestly spent 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, putting in an actual 40 hour work week... Would there really not be enough time in 2 years to complete a game that already had some type of backbone to work on? I mean 40 hours a week, 52 weeks in a year, that's over 4,000 hours.
I've worked for companies that have changed hands and literally become unrecognizable in 2 years. Just wondering, is developing a game really that time consuming nowadays? I was under the impression there's technology that you could pretty much enter in Google Maps coordinates and a map could be created with AI in a 1 to 1 ratio in something like Unreal Engine 5. Maybe I'm just that far detached from the reality of game development lol. I'm not defending them, just kind of trying to wrap my head around the timeframes that it takes nowadays.
You said it. The game loops are the after thoughts. We want games that can we grow with and coop with friends. I still want a milsim MMO :) we can grow with our friends and coop.