Phew! So they just have to make good enough games to avoid two complete flops in a row. Which is impossible but feel free to try and argue that it’s possible.
It’s also an extremely privileged view. “Just have lots of money and you’ll be fine lol! Dumb studios who don’t make enough money to weather flops are bad!”
It’s the equivalent of the rich billionaires saying if you want a house just work hard and buy one. It’s not hard! Why are the poor people complaining?
It would be nice to not have Layoffs but it’s just reality it will happen. If you think it’s impossible you are a child or are completely blinded by corporate interests.
Surprisingly narrow minded and incorrect viewpoint.
Layoffs are inevitable, including at Larian studios. Otherwise they’re saying all video game studios just have linear growth forever which is stupid.
People downvoting have no idea what they’re talking about lol. One flop and Larian Studios will do mass lay-offs like every other studio. And no studio will make continual success after success.
Not sure that’s right - before the internet I had no clue what was supposedly good or not. I’d rent games from blockbuster and just try them one by one. Lots of shitty games and I had no idea that Mario or sonic or anything was meant to be good.
Now it’s a lot easier just based on metacritic or steam reviews to figure out if something is good or not.
It’s a nostalgia thing - I don’t remember the games where I got stuck on the first level and could never finish the game (which happened). Or were just boring so I quit after a half hour.
I do remember donkey Kong country, super Mario bros, sonic Etc. Which all worked well and were fun.
I think it’s because people only remember the good games and not the stinkers.
I played a lot of shit games I can’t recall because I played for 30 minutes max. There was one game I never passed the first level as I couldn’t figure out what to do, I think something to do with jelly beans and a blob. How is that good gameplay lol?
But of course myself and others can tell you about the games we played for hours like Super Mario Bros which didn’t really have bugs and were good.
Games were definitely buggy and I honestly think people forget how much better the quality is nowadays.
I also think there is something to it just being the 90s or so and not having much choice. If you only have one game to play then of course you’re going to replay it to death. If I have a steam library of 1000 games then I’m much less likely to.
A lot of this is just nostalgia for the past and the environment as opposed to games being any better.
It’s a hard call at end of day. If you want it to all be privacy respecting and open source and decentralised then you’re almost guaranteeing you won’t make money from it.
The alternative is ad based software that’s free which is also garbage.
Hard to find the balance between the two, can’t think of many examples if any that actually work besides just making a paid product that’s very good and hope it’s better enough than the rest to be successful. But even then you likely will have to cross lines because you’re just relying on viral luck at that stage.
Sure. But it’s a two way street. Climate change is important but you don’t realistically solve it by stopping everything coal powered tomorrow. You have to gradually introduce it.
I don’t know if it’s a younger generation thing, but they’re not patient and demand change now when it’s just not realistic. Change is glacially slow. Voting in something that’s not ideal is better than voting in something completely opposite.
The more you allow that left or moderate side to win, the more the axis changes towards it, which is still a win if you’re left/moderate as it moves it away from the right. It’s this last bit some people don’t understand.