EPTDunno, there are some IPs you could make into a GaaS multiplayer game I guess.
Most notably would be Horizon and God of War. And apparently they own Everquest (whatever happened to Everquest Next)?
The Games Industry And ATVI - Page 61
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Harris1st
Germany7082 Posts
Dunno, there are some IPs you could make into a GaaS multiplayer game I guess. Most notably would be Horizon and God of War. And apparently they own Everquest (whatever happened to Everquest Next)? | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17261 Posts
SW:O combat is very boring. Concord was a disaster. Corpo outlets like IGN gave these games the old 7/10. What little credibility IGN still has gets reduced every time they give a disaster title like Concord a passing grade. On September 10 2024 17:29 frontgarden2222 wrote: Layoffs are going to happen like in the rest of the entertainment industry but that's not coded language for 'I'm going to fire people [to cut costs]'. It wasn't even in the background either, he practically yelled it. The quote in question: thx for the detailed reply. that is not him yelling we are going to layoff everyone at Firewalk Studios. That is Totoki preparing everyone for the next investor call when he must explain the money they lost in buying Firewalk. Totoki is also explaining why Sony further developed a failure of a game. This implies Firewalk Studios is dead. Sony will have layoffs like the rest of the entertainment industry. However, the layoffs at Firewalk Studios are not "like in the rest of the entertainment industry". Their only game failed. On September 10 2024 20:16 Harris1st wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Sony_Interactive_Entertainment_franchises Dunno, there are some IPs you could make into a GaaS multiplayer game I guess. Most notably would be Horizon and God of War. And apparently they own Everquest (whatever happened to Everquest Next)? and to think... David Kelly and Bobby Kotick got all of Activision's IP for half a million. On September 10 2024 17:29 frontgarden2222 wrote: They have no real mobile efforts, their IP strength is nowhere near the strength of Nintendo where they can maintain MSRP for their entire lifespan, and the IP they do own is built with the expectation that it will swing for the fences. At certain points, they were better off not developing anything and just shoving money into a term deposit. Nintendo maintaining MSRP is a relatively new phenomenon. Nintendo's dedicated IP offerings used to fall in price as it aged just like everyone else's. Owning IP does not translate into keeping your prices up. Pricing remaining high for Nintendo occurs because Nintendo is incredible. And, NIntendo STAYS OFF OF STEAM!  Even the Switch itself. We've never seen a console maintain its price. Inflation was worse in the late 70s and the 2600 was a smash hit and it still dropped like a rock in price despite a slate of amazing titles in '81 and '82. The PS2 fell in price 4+ years after its release. my 5 closest female relatives own 7 Switches between them. Had you told me even 10 years ago all these women would own more than 1 $300 video game console each I would've told you that you are crazy. LOL. Its nucking futz. | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
Even though I haven't followed Star Wars: Outlaws, I'm sure a 7/10 for that is justifiable too. Even if its combat is boring, even if the stealth sections are frustrating, does it evoke the world of Star Wars? Does it have the wacky aliens, the political strife, the familiar sounds and music, and the quips? That's why Star Wars is successful as an IP and what carries many of its games. If you nail the immersion, that gives you a baseline 7/10 by any reviewer. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26255 Posts
On September 11 2024 00:37 Excalibur_Z wrote: I can absolutely understand giving Concord a 7/10. By all accounts, the gunplay in Concord was actually pretty fun. There were many technical aspects that were executed properly. The problem with Concord was that it didn't do anything to stand out. Its presentation was derivative, there wasn't much novelty in the game, its characters were generic and uninspired. That says 7/10 to me. But technical merits alone and middling reviews don't translate to sales for gamers. Even though I haven't followed Star Wars: Outlaws, I'm sure a 7/10 for that is justifiable too. Even if its combat is boring, even if the stealth sections are frustrating, does it evoke the world of Star Wars? Does it have the wacky aliens, the political strife, the familiar sounds and music, and the quips? That's why Star Wars is successful as an IP and what carries many of its games. If you nail the immersion, that gives you a baseline 7/10 by any reviewer. People complain about ‘review inflation’ I genuinely think review inflation is partly influenced by fanboys/girls of various properties freaking out every time one of their favourites ‘merely’ gets an 8/10. Outlets couldn’t be arsed with the hassle and give anything halfway decent a 9 Concord is an absolute flop of a game, but reviewers aren’t reviewing sales figures, they’re reviewing games. 6/10 is generally my ‘competent but meh’ rating or ‘interesting but unbelievable janky’ mark, and I think perfectly fair. 7/10 would be ‘enjoyable but lacking spark’, which I could also see fitting too It was interesting getting a link to old review pages, can’t remember who directed me, but fascinating to see a whole different calibration of scale. 50% or 5/10 was decent/bang average | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17261 Posts
On September 11 2024 00:37 Excalibur_Z wrote: But technical merits alone and middling reviews don't translate to sales for gamers. IGN gave it "middling reviews". Independent reviewers were laughing at how garbage the characters were and how slow and clunky the movement was. IGN midding reviews do not translate to sales because IGN has little credibility. IGN gave Black Myth Wukong an 8/10. So we have 8/10: $1 Billion in a week and #2 game on Steam everyone having a blast playing the game. 7/10: one of the worst failures in video game history with Sony making Concord Controllers and pushing the game to the moon. This is why IGN reviews have low credibility and the IGN 7/10 has become a meme. Also, IGN rigs the Metacritic system by having publishing satellites in 30 different countries submitting the same 7/10 review. So it looks like 30 reviewers gave it 7/10. Really they are all owned by Ziff Davis. On September 11 2024 00:37 Excalibur_Z wrote: But technical merits alone and middling reviews don't translate to sales for gamers. during the Concord free open beta on Steam the player #s dropped compared to the player #s for the previous paid beta. The low player count had nothing to do with money and everything to do with fun factor. Everyone thought the game was boring. On September 11 2024 00:37 Excalibur_Z wrote: Even though I haven't followed Star Wars: Outlaws, I'm sure a 7/10 for that is justifiable too. Even if its combat is boring, even if the stealth sections are frustrating, does it evoke the world of Star Wars? Does it have the wacky aliens, the political strife, the familiar sounds and music, and the quips? That's why Star Wars is successful as an IP and what carries many of its games. If you nail the immersion, that gives you a baseline 7/10 by any reviewer. IGN will always make their statements seemingly "justifiable" to people just glancing over their info. If you are looking for rationalizations... go to IGN. These guys are absolute experts. Star Wars Outlaws is boring and weirdly binary.. like Laser Disk game binary. The stealth combat is closer to 1983 Laser Disk Dragon's Lair than it is to any decent Stealth Combat game made in the 2010s. Since SW:O came out the stock has gone from €17.50 to €13.25. Investors know whats up. To be fair XDefiant is also failing. SW:O is not the only reason Ubisoft is tanking. IGN employees will also be really good at being "shocked and stunned" at the failure of Concord and SW:O. It makes for great comedy. On September 11 2024 00:53 WombaT wrote: Concord is an absolute flop of a game, but reviewers aren’t reviewing sales figures, they’re reviewing games. Video game players use reviews they trust to assist in making buying decisions. Video game players have very little trust for IGN's reviews. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=ign&hl=en-GB Its already over. IGN is not trusted. Independent places like Steam, TL.Net, Angry Joe, etc have far more credibility than IGN. Hell, DarkPlasmaBall's Nintendo reviews hold more weight in my mind than anything coming out of IGN. I had no idea IGN was TWICE AS POPULAR in Canada versus the USA. That is interesting! | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26255 Posts
People have a proven inability to differentiate flawed from completely worthless and throw the baby out with the proverbial bath water. People want reviews curated to their personal tastes, and ya know what that’s fine and makes a lot of sense. Be it independent or ‘independent’ reviewers on YouTube, or ye olde Steam reviews. I’ll listen to what Grubby has to say on any RTS. He’s one of my favourite humans going and he knows his shit, the game that made him famous is my favourite game of all time. He’s far more likely to be a good gauge of any upcoming RTS’ quality than most other people, for my specific tastes anyway. However it doesn’t make everything else worthless, they’re general interest sites, for a general audience. I’m not especially a consumer of IGN specifically but people say the exact same things about Eurogamer, PC Gamer and basically every publication from the ‘legacy media’ days. Plenty of people find ‘person they follow on Twitter’ more credible for their news than the entire mainstream media, and it’s their prerogative to. Doesn’t mean they’re necessarily correct in thinking that. Even the concept that IGN isn’t some singular hive mind, but consists of different reviewers who may have different tastes seems beyond some. Maybe 7/10 is reasonable for Concord, I’ve never played it, and now never will. Black Myth Wukong is crushing it and people seem to love it, cool. 8/10 is still a good score at the end of the day. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18216 Posts
On September 11 2024 01:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote: IGN gave it "middling reviews". Independent reviewers were laughing at how garbage the characters were and how slow and clunky the movement was. IGN midding reviews do not translate to sales because IGN has little credibility. IGN gave Black Myth Wukong an 8/10. So we have 8/10: $1 Billion in a week and #2 game on Steam everyone having a blast playing the game. 7/10: one of the worst failures in video game history with Sony making Concord Controllers and pushing the game to the moon. This is why IGN reviews have low credibility and the IGN 7/10 has become a meme. Also, IGN rigs the Metacritic system by having publishing satellites in 30 different countries submitting the same 7/10 review. So it looks like 30 reviewers gave it 7/10. Really they are all owned by Ziff Davis. during the Concord free open beta on Steam the player #s dropped compared to the player #s for the previous paid beta. The low player count had nothing to do with money and everything to do with fun factor. Everyone thought the game was boring. IGN will always make their statements seemingly "justifiable" to people just glancing over their info. If you are looking for rationalizations... go to IGN. These guys are absolute experts. Star Wars Outlaws is boring and weirdly binary.. like Laser Disk game binary. The stealth combat is closer to 1983 Laser Disk Dragon's Lair than it is to any decent Stealth Combat game made in the 2010s. Since SW:O came out the stock has gone from €17.50 to €13.25. Investors know whats up. To be fair XDefiant is also failing. SW:O is not the only reason Ubisoft is tanking. IGN employees will also be really good at being "shocked and stunned" at the failure of Concord and SW:O. It makes for great comedy. Video game players use reviews they trust to assist in making buying decisions. Video game players have very little trust for IGN's reviews. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=ign&hl=en-GB Its already over. IGN is not trusted. Independent places like Steam, TL.Net, Angry Joe, etc have far more credibility than IGN. Hell, DarkPlasmaBall's Nintendo reviews hold more weight in my mind than anything coming out of IGN. I had no idea IGN was TWICE AS POPULAR in Canada versus the USA. That is interesting! Reviews don't translate to sales in games for the same reasons they don't in movies. Laypeople and professional critics look at different things. Flappy bird sold millions and was the top selling mobile game for a few months. I doubt it scored higher than a 3 in any critical review. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17261 Posts
On September 11 2024 02:21 WombaT wrote: Maybe 7/10 is reasonable for Concord A few hundred people who played the game for free on Steam agree with you. Even those few hundred were growing bored of the game by the hour. 100 million other Steam users disagree and said the game was not worth their TIME.. never mind their money. Long before the IGN review the warning signs were there. A million views in July. There are several objective things noted by Asmongold throughout his video about why Concord is garbage. The UI is bad. etc. TTK is too high. Movement is janky and animations don't fit together. The screen is covered with garbage all around it. Asmongold's look at Concord in July got 1M views. IGN Concord review got 200K reviews. I trust Asmongold's judgement more than I trust the judgement of almost all IGN public facing employees. Looks like Asmongold was dead bang on the money with this one in July while IGN missed the boat on August 29 with way more info at their disposal. "who wants to play a Hero Shooter with a bunch the characters look more like Walmart customers than Spiderman or Batman" On September 11 2024 02:28 Acrofales wrote: Reviews don't translate to sales in games for the same reasons they don't in movies. Laypeople and professional critics look at different things. Flappy bird sold millions and was the top selling mobile game for a few months. I doubt it scored higher than a 3 in any critical review. Pro critics are also protecting their access when reviewing games like SW:O and Concord. Steam users read reviews to assist in making a buying decision. When a reviewer says a lousy game is a good game the reviewer loses credibility. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26255 Posts
On September 11 2024 02:36 JimmyJRaynor wrote: A few hundred people who played the game for free on Steam agree with you. Even those few hundred were growing bored of the game by the hour. 100 million other Steam users disagree and said the game was not worth their TIME.. never mind their money. Long before the IGN review the warning signs were there. A million views in July. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZ3cMoHKVvQ There are several objective things noted by Asmongold throughout his video about why Concord is garbage. The UI is bad. etc. TTK is too high. Movement is janky and animations don't fit together. The screen is covered with garbage all around it. Asmongold's look at Concord in July got 1M views. IGN Concord review got 200K reviews. I trust Asmongold's judgement more than I trust the judgement of almost all IGN public facing employees. Looks like Asmongold was dead bang on the money with this one in July while IGN missed the boat on August 29 with way more info at their disposal. "who wants to play a Hero Shooter with a bunch the characters look more like Walmart customers than Spiderman or Batman" Pro critics are also protecting their access when reviewing games like SW:O and Concord. Steam users read reviews to assist in making a buying decision. When a reviewer says a lousy game is a good game the reviewer loses credibility. Why are you conflating success with a game being decent or not? Me and kiddo had a lot of fun with a ‘Fortnite, but with wrestlers’ game called Rumbleverse whose servers shut down a week or two later. Was a shame it was a pretty cool game Also while you’re quite on the money in recognising various incentives you seem pretty oblivious to such things in the YouTube space. I’m not saying he tailored his content accordingly but ‘Concord is fucking trash’ is going to perform better than ‘Yeah Concord is pretty mediocre’. Negativity and hyperbole sell in that space, it’s absolutely reflected in engagement numbers. Not saying Asmongold is not giving his honest opinion, but the possibility of hamming it up is clearly there with such content creators given they tend to make more money that way. He’s pivoted since but Angry Joe initially cultivated his audience by finding games to savage, to take one example. He didn’t build that brand by doing sober and balanced reviews, although I think he does it alright nowadays. And as I said, I’ll never get the chance to play Concord, maybe it is genuinely terrible. It feels much more a case of chasing a trend and coming out too late to capitalise, especially given a long development cycle, abysmal marketing and a ‘meh’ game rather than the game itself being an absolute trash. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26255 Posts
I, who played a ton of WC3 and SC2, as well as some BW in competitive modes and want my next fix of something similar, or ideally an evolution and thus far Stormgate ain’t it They’re both completely reasonable positions to hold, held by different gamers and broadcast to a different audience. My kid still would rather learn how to play StarCraft with me, but he still had some fun with it, he’s never really played RTS games before If SC2 is my heroin, Stormgate is my methodone. Hey it’s similar but it doesn’t quite hit right. If you’re not a heroin addict that methodone might be quite enjoyable | ||
hexhaven
Finland960 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17261 Posts
On September 11 2024 03:22 WombaT wrote: Why are you conflating success with a game being decent or not? It was a bad game. Because it was a bad game it sold poorly. The game was available free on Steam and player counts declined throughout the Free Play period. That is a bad game. IGN's Destin said the game was garbage and explained in detail along many aspects all of the bad stuff. IGN corporate chose to publish the review of a guy who gave them the 7/10 they wanted. IGN's Destin expressed many of the same points as Asmongold. Sometimes, bad games like Atari 2600 Pacman can be bad and sell well. However, within that type of slower sales and review cycle the next game becomes a harder sell and you get Atari cart sales collapsing in 1983 the nanosecond the Commodore 64 arrives on the scene. In the end, bad games are always bad for biz long term. | ||
|
Fleetfeet
Canada2640 Posts
On September 11 2024 04:25 hexhaven wrote: I'm now extremely confused by Concord simultaneously being the biggest flop in the history of history, and also having a 100 million players on Steam at some point. I think he meant 100 million people exist on steam and didn't play this free to play game on it, or something. In any case it's the same melting potato brain stuff from Jimmy that it's always been. Not much point having a conversation with someone who only knows how to talk to themself. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7082 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17261 Posts
Now , seriously, do you want to play as Spiderman or Hulk in a Class Based Hero Shooter. OR do you want to play any one of the slow moving clunky Walmart Customers in Concord? No one wants to be a Walmart Customer moving through a hallway at the speed of someone with a full shopping cart of discount groceries. Everyone wants to be Spiderman or Hulk. The toughest guy in my high school gang used to quote Bill Bixby from that old Hulk TV Show. "Don't make me angry... you won't like me when I'm angry" Asmongold, destin legarie at IGN, and Paul Tassi at Forbes are all very long term industry vets with very long proven track records of credibility. All of them said Concord was a very very bad game. The #s indicate the game was a disaster. Once Sony people outside of Firewalk looked at it they went to huge expense to RECALL the millions of retails copies on 10s of thousands of retail shelves. Sony made the unprecedented move of offering REFUNDS to all customers. Sony never offers refunds. Do you know how much money Sony is going to have to pay retailers for the empty shelves they booked? You think Walmart just hands Sony space in their stores? Sony is in scramble mode because Walmart just did them a solid. And trust me boys... Walmart does no favours. They help you... they will squeeze you in return whenever they can. Sony is paying for this disaster on many levels we'll never see. IGN's Travis Northrop carried the water for the Corporate America and gave the game the 7/10 the MBAs in the Finance Department at Ziff Davis demanded. Travis Northrop is the water boy over at IGN. The game was garbage. Asmongold put it best when he said... "who green lit this thing?" Every employee at Firewalk Studios should be spending all their time while they are pretending to work ... looking for a job. When I'm pretending to work I'm often making TL.Net and reddit posts. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26255 Posts
On September 11 2024 09:26 Fleetfeet wrote: I think he meant 100 million people exist on steam and didn't play this free to play game on it, or something. In any case it's the same melting potato brain stuff from Jimmy that it's always been. Not much point having a conversation with someone who only knows how to talk to themself. I’m unsure why I temporarily forget this every time I respond like | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17261 Posts
These IGN 7/10's get people fired. To be fair, xDefiant is also tanking. This is not just because SW:O is bad. Ubisoft stated they spent more money marketing SW:O than any other game they've ever made. On September 11 2024 09:26 Fleetfeet wrote: I think he meant 100 million people exist on steam and didn't play this free to play game on it, or something. In any case it's the same melting potato brain stuff from Jimmy that it's always been. Not much point having a conversation with someone who only knows how to talk to themself. nah, i've explained why the game is garbage. I gotta give Asmongold some credit. He predicted Sony would pack this game up fast. "i don't think we're going to see any live service evolution with this game" | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26255 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26255 Posts
You’ve linked two Asmongold videos where he reacts to that, and another review. And the other review, doesn’t review the game at all it spends most of its time dunking on the character design for humourous effect. Enjoyable in ways but completely uninformative overall, despite some pertinent points. Having not seen gameplay up to this point, the IGN one is far, far better in actually discussing the game. Which seems to be competent enough but rather uninspired | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4742 Posts
In regards to IGN I used to trust them, but several years ago I noticed that their ratings do not really correspond to my own impressions of the games and stopped. As an additional note - I know two people who write game reviews semi-professionally, and I do not trust their opinions. They know less about gaming than I do... IDK. Maybe they are just too casual for me? Also, I would absolutely never ever trust an opinion of a reviewer about e-sport type game unless said person is or was an active progamer in the given type of game. | ||
| ||
