I don’t disagree that a true space exploration game should have barren planets (I’d imagine most planets in the universe are barren), but they should be more like set pieces (like how a tree is a set piece in a normal exploration game). And they shouldn’t be included in metrics used to quantify the size of the world.
Gamer can wait until the day a good game comes out, a company needs hype to build it’s brand for stock holders.
This is absolutely not true, gamers freak out whenever a game is delayed, even for good reason. And people were absolutely causing a huge fuss about whether or not there was going to be an ES6 so they released a teaser to say that it was coming eventually.
The shareholders would only want them to release the teaser if the goal was the sell stock immediately. Any bump in price from the teaser would even out after probably just a few months.
For what it’s worth, you can’t use public domain to make a copy of someone else’s take on that public domain character. It’s like how Winnie the Pooh is public domain but you can’t make a Winnie the Pooh with a red shirt and no pants since thats clearly Disney’s version which isn’t public domain.
I thought the title was saying Amazon was going to release a video game based on the Fallout series next year and was like “a video game adaption of a tv series adaptation of a video game?”
For what it’s worth, it’s almost never worth it to give any company “the benefit of the doubt”. For single player games, there’s pretty much no reason to play it right when it releases unless you’re impatient. I choose to think of the games release date as a beta release. If I’m super excited, I may choose to play a game in beta but usually I’ll wait for the final release. Then when all the initial issues (which all games have, just some way more than others) have been fixed, I’ll consider the game actually released and buy it for a fraction of the initial cost.
I don’t know that I’ve played a single game that’s released this year yet. And those games will still be just as good next year (likely better) for less cost.
Would you prefer they recast and re-record over his voice so the family didn’t get any royalties and his name is less well-known? It’s not hard to make regulations that you need consent from next of kin and have to pay to use the “likeness” of their voice like you do with appearance. Refusing to use new technology because someone might misuse it before regulations are in place are what luddites do
Yeah this headline should really just say the ~$41m they actually spent improving the game because that’s still an incredibly impressive number (2/3 the amount of a full expansion). I hate when there’s a good story to tell but they want to make it look even better so they decide to mislead instead of just saying the actually impressive thing
Starfield dev says some of the space RPG's "planets are empty by design - but that's not boring" (www.yahoo.com)
Bethesda revealed Elder Scrolls 6 early due to "pitchforks and torches" from fans (www.pcgamesn.com)
American McGee says they were "emotionally quite destroyed" by EA canceling Alice Asylum, and now they can't touch the IP "for the rest of [their] life (www.gamesradar.com)
‘Fallout’ Video Game Adaptation Gets 2024 Release Date on Prime Video (variety.com)
Cyberpunk 2077's redemption is complete, but the future remains murky for CD Projekt (www.pcgamer.com)
Video Game Cyberpunk 2077 Uses AI To Replace Deceased Voice Actor (www.bloomberg.com)
CD Projekt Spent Roughly $125 Million Turning Cyberpunk 2077 Around Post-Launch (www.ign.com)