but then gamers always cry for announcements, if early announcements die you will go 4-5 years without hearing from your favourite developers with no clue what they are up to, and we all know gamers wont stand for that
Yes because early announcements cause high demand from fans which causes game devs to rush which causes them to give an early release time just to shut people up which causes their game to not be ready by said release time which causes them delaying the game to get it into a playable state
I couldn't disagree more with number 7. When your game is not ready it is better to delay it, rather than release it unfinished. What most gamers do not understand is that it's mostly not the developers who decide the new premiere date, it's the executives who have no idea how making games work and they only have unrealistic expectations
Did you even listen to the whole section of the video?? Like Falcon said in the video, they shouldn't announce a release date in the first place if it's still prone to change. "Better to delay it, than release it unfinished". Well duh, but the "release it unfinished" shouldn't even be an option to begin with.
No I'd rather have a game come out nd give feedback to make it better earlier then later games still come out unfinished after years of delays...skull and bones will feel like it was made 10 years ago cuz thts wen they started to make it games get more nd more dated b4 they even release
I'm indifferent about this one. Maybe don't announce things when you don't know when you're finished for sure? Elder Scrolls is doing a good job at not giving a release date.
Delays are only an issue because developers announce games too early. Remember when Bethesda announced Elder Scrolls 6 in 2018 simply stating they plan on making it at some point
And? How can Elder Scrolls 6 be delayed when it doesn’t have a release date? Clearly that’s not the issue there so a very weird example for you to choose.
@@criert135 I do feel like there's a bit of an issue showing a "teaser trailer" at a big show for a game that's not even being worked on yet. If you just want to let people know "the IP isn't cancelled forever", you can simply do that through a press release. A trailer, even just a teaser, sets some kind of expectation. It's not a huge grab-your-pitchforks issue, but to me it still feels a little dishonest, trying to create a sliver of hype when there's absolutely zero prospects yet to be hyped about.
@@lyianx Boom!! Cyberpunk is the perfect example of execs getting too involved and try to reach quarterly projections instead of releasing a quality product.
Back then they could get away with that because games weren't as big. In the early '90s the development teams were a couple dozen tops, it had increased by the early 00s, but the scale of the games was still not as large as it is for some of them today. Some of the biggest games like the open world games are effectively never at the point where there's nothing left to do. That and, with all the consolidation, there isn't as much competition on the quality front and a deadline for the holiday season seems to be more important than patching after the fact.
Love how consistent and faithful this channel has been through the years. Haven’t tried to do some weird BS change up, just good old fashion constant uploads talking about gaming news and kept everything nice and simple. One of the most comforting and reliable channels on UA-cam.
A lot of these can be explained as still being fallout from 2020. Us little guys are back to normal, but for big companies, they probably won't be 100% until like five years after their area reopened. Products don't just happen. They take years to develop. All that time, not only development was disrupted, but companies were also draining whatever small stockpile they had for building hardware.
dont let big companies fool you, they had no reason for this big fallout from covid, literally everything they have to do is over the computer, and literally games made more money than ever during covid, cuz ppl could only be at home.
@@Yosemite_sam694 Supply chain isn't something made up, and things don't just come to you from nowhere. Trucks, planes, ships, and trains don't travel digitally, and manufacturing plants don't build digitally. Materials don't make themselves.
Still don't see how so much was affected by 2020 at least in the gaming industry. Almost everything that it takes to make a game can be done with programs on a computer which can the be shared amongst staff.
No, the only explanation is that they are greedy pieces of shit. There's no reason to become a game dev, because the hours and pay are trash. Period. Why work for more hours and less money? Passion doesn't put food on the table.
Yup. You can't complain about games being delayed and that they need to stop delaying releases and then in the next breath complain about games being released unfinished. What do these people want when a game simply isn't ready to be released when the release date approaches? The problem isn't with the delay, it is with unrealistic release dates being announced much too early just to get the hype going and probably cash in on that pre-order money, usually done by the marketing team of the publishers rather than the actual developers anyway.
As a developer - that is very rarely the case. In the vast majority of cases, a delay means there were serious development issues that made hitting the deadline impossible - things like design/architecture issues, overestimation of the hardware or engine's capabilities, changes in management and direction, etc. Delays are basically just the symptome, and it's very easy to see that most games that get delayed eventually do end up releasing in a terrible state anyway - because the studio starts to run out of money and has to release to be able to fund further development. So delays definitely do need to stop. I don't think they will, though. Especially not in AAA titles, because every AAA game tries to be "the next big thing" and that usually ends up leading to one of the serious development issues I mentioned above
When it comes to delays, I would rather companies not announce a release date until the game is finished and ready for release. And even then, announce the release date for 6 months after it's finished. That gives them 6 months to go over the game with a fine toothed comb to find the glitched & bugs and correct them.
@@rps215 you didn't follow CP's development huh? The Dev team wanted EXACTLY that... more time to fix the bugs and do testing... but the corpo suits pushed the game out knowing fullwell it wasn't ready... because corpo suits only care about lining their pockets and the bottom line. EDIT: and that's barring the idea that those same corpo suits outsourced the testing to a company whom, to anyone who can do a bit of detective work, were known for fraudulent practises involving saying they did stuff and billing for it whilst in reality not doing jack friggin squat... all in the name of the profit again... CP failed because of the Corpo's involved... not because the devs messed up
@@AshAsmodeus Precisely what I was thinking. Their biggest mistake was that premature release date announcement. I was guessing the investors are getting uneasy and those higher ups think they can rush it in time.
Publishers need to give developers at least a vague timeframe for a game’s release, otherwise devs would take all the time in the world and the game would never release. It’s not as black and white as you think.
For me, RPG elements in non-RPG games. Not every open world game needs to be a rpg or have the essential elements of one. Whatever happened to normal open world games?
forreal im losing interest in gaming when literally nearly all games nowadays are rpg it completely destroys the immersion for me especially if there are health bars or numbers flying around
@@DTraiN5795 No games don't need to be forced into being made coop. There are so many mechanic in certain single player games that forcing coop into would mean taking a huge chunk of Single Player mechanics out and ruining the game. Not everyone has friends and would like to have a proper NPC allies that function right then having a game developer forcefully place a Coop option (most developers that do that then completely ignore working on the NPC to even properly function right {the shit show that is Colonial Marines is a prime example of hoping Coop and multiplayer to ignore how horribly it functions for a single player}).
@@TheDarknessin2light to me that all sounds like bs considering what they do in other games. It’s not that hard and tons of money to be made. I also didn’t say force made either
the delay thing is nothing to complain about...that is the only thing that gave me hope that we might get some games that are not completly unplayable at launch
If only the games had been fixed after tons of delays. They get pushed back because someone decides not to fuck with a bigger competitor (like Skull and Bones intending to release 1 day before GoW) and then still release completely broken and take 2 years of patching to fix.
I think you said it best about NFTs, "the token is unique but not the digital item attached to it." Better than nearly anyone I've seen on the internet. I really only see the value of NFT/Blockchain as a public database not tied to (maybe supercedes) a government agency.
I don't mind the delays but I think the companies shouldn't announce dates right away, maybe have your prospective release date and just automatically tack on another year.
DELAYS are fine. It means the devs are trying to not just throw out an unfinished product. A company saying "We need more time to get this right" is totally fine. But devs and publishers need to start being more realistic about their time tables and stop trying to rush releases. Stop setting dates with the expectation that it will get finished by then. Finish your game, THEN worry about the release.
I dont mind delays but part of why they release details of games early is because they want there to be enough time to build up anticipation to help the game sell well on release
The first thing that popped into my head when I learned about NFTs was screenshots. It’s like “owning” something that has infinite copies of itself 🤦🏻♂️
I have no problems with dialogue. There was a time where it was disappointing when games had no dialogue, or at least barely had any. The more the merrier for me. It adds to the entertainment value
Market consolidation is a concern for me. While it gives studios access to greater resources, it also puts them at the mercy of risk adverse shareholders, potentially stifling creativity. It could also make it harder for new devs to have any visibility.
but like we just saw with Playground Games for Xbox. People who have been at the place for nearly a decade has left to form a new independent studio, Maverick We might have more studios under a certain publisher than before but that doesnt mean new studios wont break off from those bigger ones Even some ex-Witcher devs from CDPR went to create their own studio, its a circle
Another comment said that they don't mind delays but wish that companies wouldn't give a release date that seemed sure to begin with, and I completely agree. I didn't reply on that thread because I wanted to raise the chance of this being seen but....PLEASE DONT SLAM DELAYS. Let devs have as little pressure on their timeliness as possible.
Fans should give devs less pressure by not getting mad at devs YES. By all means, delay the game as many times as needed but for the love of god let’s stop pretending release dates are anything other than lies to build hype and get early interest for preordering. Release dates aren’t based on reality and should just be ignored. I think people can be mad that release dates are a joke without rushing devs at the same time.
Honestly it wouldn’t even matter if they said “we’re hoping for winter/spring/summer/fall 20XX, but we’ll be sure to keep the fans up to date with any info”
Yes please yes delays are annoying, but they are kinda good I'd rather wait for the game to be delayed than releasing a game unfinished. And I agree don't post a release date, not only does it cause distrust between the fans but it also pressures the devs to work too hard
I hope they do realize these dudes are audited and have to sit in meetings with big wigs and tell them when they’re going to release their cash cow even when they just started making it. It’s for marketing purposes, not when they actually plan on being finished. Idk why everybody throws around the word dev as if 32 year old bob with a wife and kid who writes code everyday has any ounce of control over the game. They need to familiarize themselves with what it takes to make a game.
I blame the companies making unrealistic release windows, getting fans excited, and then pulling the rug from under them. How about waiting until the game is 90% finished before setting a timeframe?
HFW dialogue was kind of immersive to me. You being alone for that long, you will talk to yourself. A LOT. As a major introvert who is a borderline agoraphobe, it registers with me quite a bit. It makes a lot of sense that Aloy would given how much she travels the world alone.
Agreed. As an extreme introvert who also shows some signs of autism (though I've never been formally diagnosed), I'm not hugely bothered by protagonists talking to themselves. It can actually be a good way to work out your thoughts if you have nobody else around to bounce ideas off of.
That’s probably the issue then: publishers saw how popular the game was, made an incorrect assumption on what made it popular (the constant talking from the protagonist), and then tried to copy it without understanding the reasoning behind the character trait. In the end, you get endless and needless dialogue that the players quickly lose patience over.
i had no issue with aloy talking in horizon, but ragnarok really needed to increase the amount of time before hints. i'm usually in the middle of solving the puzzle when they start telling me how to do it anyway and it just comes off more condescending than helpful. while it can be annoying, if you take a realistic look at things from mimir's perspective you can't blame him for telling kratos he's on fire. when this happens, mimir is on fire too, and there's nothing else he can actually do but yell about it.
We have two choices in the delay issue: the delay or the unfinished game. Personally I think studios should only set estimated release dates and stop making official release dates if it's not 100% definite that the game will be done by then. At least an estimate by definition isn't definite. It's an estimate. It can be moved.
Yep, if it's a question of delay or the game sucks or is unfinished I'm happy with a delay every time. So many games had promise only to fall flat on release due to rushed releases.
yes bro I can't agree more. you know the saying you won't be disappointed if you don't expect anything? if they only told us guesses or estimates of when they might think a game could be released the community and fans would take that info way way better than them trying to use a quote on quote "definitive release date" we will hear about the game knowing hey it could possibly be delayed which always sucks but hey at least they was honest and transparent and now we know it could possibly be moved to a later release date. but instead we get told yes yes we promise on our company and life this game will 100% be released on so and so date just to find out the game STILL won't be released for another year. it's not the classic we need one more month for optimization nah bro they give us the we going to get milk pray we come back one day treatment ong
0:31 - Game delays 2:50 - Studio acquisitions and merges 5:47 - Still in the last gen 7:56 - Characters who will not shut up 10:07 - Switch big performance problem 12:16 - Price increases 13:37 - NFT's in gaming
I think the delays are a good indicator of things getting better in the games industry. People are not pushed to the edge to meet deadlines and to publish unfinished products. Announcements should be made later, thats all. Then there are other reasons as well. Stalker 2 got delayed because the devs had to go to go and defend their home country from an invasion. Some of them have died now and it's not sure if the game will ever be finished..
As an aspiring indie game dev I get the annoying delays are of course annoying, but people beg for a date and if you give in you can get it wrong and if you dont people still complain, its a lose lose situation, and its very hard to properly guess when you will release, if a developer gives a release date over a year that probably means they are creating something easy or unoriginal, as something unoriginal is a lot easier to guess when you will finish it, or they could just be giving themselves a lot of wiggle room
@@afrog2666 Even when you say that a lot of people will complain when you go past those dates. People need to just accept that developers aren't privy to special future telling powers that everyone else lacks and any date they give will ALWAYS be an estimate. They also need to treat a date given by the publisher or marketing department as a completely separate entity than one given by the actual developers, ie complete make believe.
Blizzard used to do this pretty well by managing expectations. Back when they made excellent, mostly bug-free games that everybody loved they refused to give release dates until they were sure they would make them. They could do it because they made excellent games and players just accepted that that's how long it took to make an excellent game. I think that can still work. "It'll be done when it's done" is the best thing you can say. Now, staying afloat financially while you make the best game you can might be a challenge, and if you work for a larger company the suits are going to make it pretty hard to keep your job, but it's the best policy.
It’s normal in game development to take way longer than expected but it’s also common knowledge to plan ahead for that. I understand indie devs struggling to meet deadlines but I don’t really understand AAA studios missing the make by so much.
I don't understand with something like Halo Infinite being delayed. I played it in December as they finally released co-op and I hadn't played it since January 2022 and there's still barely any content in the game. There was barely any content at launch as well, so how TF would they even try to release a game in 2020? It's crazy
That forced "engagement" I cant stand either. We should want to play a game because its core gameplay loop is in itself engaging and is fun/rewarding, not so we can get a reward for that day/week for doing X to get Y
I think number 6 could be scary because if let’s say they owned all the companies, thus they own all the games, they can control the prices and who else are you gonna buy from if it’s the only people to buy it from. I think that’s something like monopoly? I learned about this in history class and this is a possibility idk I could be wrong though.
The inflation will surely happen if this continues because knowing that only few companies own all the other companies that make games, the investors will start investing more and more and to fullfil the profit of those investors companies have to earn more profit. Enough so they can give investors their share, the game companies that they own get their earnings from games so they can produce more games and of course their own profit because ultimately these companies have the ultimate ownership and to achieve this they might increase prices because more money = more profit and that indeed isn't a good sign at all.
There are anti-monopoly government offices that deal with such things. If big companies want to merge, they must ask first and the offices will investigate before they allow it. Disney had to wait more than a year before they could buy Fox. And so far, only European Union allowed the Xbox-Activision-Blizzard merger.
Delays only seem like a problem if making content about games is your job or if a person only plays AAA titles. For many of us, delays don't mean jack because there's always a list of titles that fall into the "Heard it was good, but couldn't get to it because there are 5-10 other games that I also want to check out".
That also runs completely counter to the "stop releasing unfinished games" point later on too. You can't have both - either the game comes out "on time" and is a broken, buggy unfinished mess or it gets delayed to give the devs enough time to get the game to a playable state.
@@Dargonhuman completely incorrect. The solution to games being pushed back is for studios to stop announcing them and marketing them years before so they can build hype. Their hype is why them delaying a game is unacceptable. If we were told about a game a year from its release rather than two to four years before its release the developers would have a better idea of the actual state of their game with that much work already put into it. The choices aren't "the game gets delayed" or "the game is a buggy mess" because the best solution is "we don't know the game exists so it getting pushed back doesn't effect us".
@@NottherealLucifer,not exactly. It's not studios it's publishers. Publishers make PR and Marketing commitments to appease shareholders and investors. Studios have to appease publishers and investors (usually). Indies are an exception, but they are pinned down by limited time AND capital whose principal investors are often members of the studio. Without a potential return on investment, there will be no investment. That means there has to be at least a potential profit in the process somewhere or we won't get a game. A launched buggy game is what happens when investors want to cut their losses, or Indies lose their seed money. Indies can rarely afford marketing, so the cost for investing for hype is near zero. Publishers can and often do, spend more on company overhead and hype than the dev studio making the game. When a game needs more time, the publishers compare the invested cost in all things up to that point and decide if it's better to launch a buggy game than eat the loss with no launch. Indies usually just run out of money and have few to no choices. This is also true for studios owned by larger corporations, it's the devil's due for studio acquisitions by publishers or larger corporations acting as publishers. All this overhead continues to drive the cost for game development into the financial stratosphere. Ideally, changing when to announce and hype should be scaled and pushed off until the product is closer to completion to avoid the mistake. But that's not the studio's call.
@@Dargonhuman that is a false dilemma. The solution is to only announce games when it's reasonable they will release. Look at apex legends. The game wouldn't have been so popular if they announced it way before release.
Mimir wasnt the problem in Ragnarok (imo). It was your companion immediately telling you where to go/how to solve the puzzle the SECOND you walk into in area.
Actually no one had a problem with that only this guy who got this Channel nobody had a problem with it in the first one either it gives you much more imersive feeling when characters doing this it's just nonses to brag about that.
@@XWXS2 No the constant puzzle solving in Ragnarok was insane. It almost turned me away from playing. It was almost instant. And during the fights atreus even seems to break the meta a bit, he'll say something along the lines of "father you're xyz, but... you probably already know that." Like yes Atreus, I *do* know that.
The monopoly effect on the market is very troubling. Microsoft having a lions share of the developers in their pocket is scary at the least. Less competition is never good for the consumer and always benefits the seller.
With the purchase of activision-blizzard, I believe that Microsoft is crossing over the line between simply taking up some of the video game market share and full on monopolizing the market. I wouldn’t be surprised if they got hit with an antitrust lawsuit, or even got the acquisition blocked entirely
I agree with you there. If there are only like 3 developers - then their 'requirements/development bible/people signing off' will be a much smaller pool and probably more stringent. So I can't see that do anything than drop projects that are not fitting a mould or being cookie cutter.
I think a good solution for game delays is to not announce release dates and just say when it's ready cause then developers have all the time you need.
Agreed. All they have to do is get it to a good demo state, then make a gameplay video, show that at some convention or event, then for "Releases: Whenever It Is Done, Stay Tuned Sheeple." maybe Gamers instead of Sheeple, but yeah. Then they can do DevTalk videos on YT or Twitch or whatever once a month as a roadmap style thing just so people dont feel like it showed up then died off.
@@insanityplea5502 That's far less profitable and when the goal is to have increasing profits every quarter that's not something companies for the most part are willing to do. I think we should move away from a profits based economy tbh.
Unfortunately, the companies are so big they have to worry about investors and stock holders. So they have to do things like those announcements that will affect their stock prices.
Regarding delays, the issue occurs when doing entirely new things. For example, if the solution doesn't already exist, then you have to develop it. However going in, you don't now how long it is going to take until you actually do it. Thus, unless they already have the thing solved or it is easy to solve quickly, then time estimates are pretty much useless. That's the reason for delays in software. While deadlines are powerful motivators to try to get people to hit a target, things don't magically happen just because someone sets a deadline. The work still needs to get done. Thus, its an issue of communicating the challenges that are resulting in the delays. From a marketing standpoint, delays also benefit the company since they can negotiate more favorable terms with advertisers.
Personally, I would like to see the end of preordering. It has a terrible effect on the final product and serves little purpose in a world of digital delivery where supply is not an issue. Even in my business which is fixing cars, I see these preorders years ahead of time for untested first gen vehicles that will likely take a few years to correct and stabilize and that is truly insane. Whether you liked the game or didn't, there was a time when games shipped finished because there was no internet, so there was no day one patch coming. Now, they count on it and use that (and preorders) to buff their bottom line all while rushing an unfinished product that they can later pledge to fix and it's disgusting.
Honestly the amount of topics that get put out is about as interesting as your typical Gaming Bolt or watch mojo video; it gets pretty tiresome and cringy as they keep on getting churned out.😑
Nr. 5: that's a negative for a lot of people who still aren't able to buy a next gen console. Sony and MS need to push production. It's astonishing that even 3 years after release of next gen there simply isn't a way for a lot of people to be able to upgrade. All the offers I see are either pre-orders with uncertain shipping dates or simply cost twice as much as on the original release
@SpongeHub you're right. You've been able to get a ps5 pretty easily since November of last year. Playstation works with Klarna so you can get it without shucking out $549.99 right off the bat. That's how I got mine.
Wait, people arw still having trouble buying a PS5/ Xbox Series? I've had two PS5s and I swapped the first one for a Series X. Every time I go into my local Game store there's boxes of both stacked behind the counter... unless it's a cost thing then fair enough.
I think it's early announcements that need to die not delays themselves. Some games are out here announcing release dates when the game is practically still a demo then when it inevitably gets delayed by a year/years, or worse yet gets release as an unfinished game, players that were hyped or that preordered get ticked off. Preorders are another thing that should definitely be scaled back. I don't think they will ever stop but having a preorder open for at most one month in advance (2 weeks ideal) with potentially an early access bonus attached to it should be the limit. Having preorders open for more than a month is kinda scummy in my books because it's literally just taking money from fans at that point rather than building hype and advertisement. Preorders are also a double edged sword because no matter how meticulous you are there are bound to be bugs, glitches, and tom foolery upon release. Having said problems added on top of the fact that people are paying for these games in advance, before any outside reviews can come out, can really add fuel on the fire of frustration/disappointment. This is what causes what would've been seen as a stumble to turn into the sinking of a game. At the very least it can seriously damage a games reputation which could hinder the future potential of said game, franchise or company.
I get annoyed when people complain about NFTs without understanding what they are, but you actually explained pretty well, I'm legitimately impressed by this level of research.
I notice the common thread of almost all of these (except for maybe blabbermouth characters) is the business side of gaming. We're feeling more and more each year that games companies don't really care about us, except as a means to achiever ever increasing profitabilty. And it's that "ever increasing" part that's the kicker. It's not enough for a game to pay for itself and then some, it's gotta make more and more money every year, which puts the pressure to put in more things we don't like, but make the company accountants happy.
@@skyisreallyhigh3333 it isnt really capitalism rather than its harder for new developers to adjust into new generation of gaming because we had 2 different finanical crises in less than 2 decades
@@raptorfromthe6ix833 Nope, what op wrote is literally how capitalism works. Capitalism demands ever increasing profits every quarter. This isnt developers dealing with two economic crashes (caused by the failings of capitalism btw)
@@skyisreallyhigh3333 capitalism allows those small developers to exist in the first place and gives the freedom for consumers to choose which product they want during good economic climate we had several successes such as minecraft and fall guys and guess what those games ended up being popular than the norma AAA games
@@raptorfromthe6ix833 Yes, if capitalism is ever overthrown, videogamea will cease to exist. People will no longer want to make or play video games post capitalism. Once we get past capitalism all technology required to make and play video games will cease to exist. Ita funny how you mention Minecraft as if it iant owned by Microsoft. It may have started off indie but it certainly isnt anymore, so not a great example. Capitalists are also working to consolidate the video game industry, as that's the logical thing to happen under capitalism. This was actually touched on by this video. To say these indie developers exist because of capitalism (even though the basis of the technology used would never have been developed by private companies because the development costs were to high and instead were developed using public money, but that's a whole different conversation) is incorrect. I would argue these indie developers exist despite capitalists trying to consolidate everything. I would argue that post capitalism we would have both a greater quantity of video games and greater quality of video games since well being for all will have been reached and there would be more people making games since they arent living in poverty.
I really disagree with no 4. Personally, I love the chatter in games, the character feels much more engaged in the world So it's not just me moving the character between cutscenes, but it feels like the character actually exists it the game
Some part of me hopes that the huge backlash towards major releases being unfinished was the reason for the mass delays last year. I’d imagine, to publishers, that the days of pumping out games every year really wasn’t that long ago, but we’re obviously at a point where tech has advanced quicker than their business model. Hopefully this is a sign of positive changes to come in the way publishers treat developers and their customers
I just love Falcons condescending (lol) yet informative commentary. He could be talking about anything and I’d tune in to listen. The dude is very entertaining and he probably doesn’t even realize it
All the videos should be Falcon. I hate the other guy (Not-Falcon) who feels the need to get in front of the camera. His voice is weird and whiny to begin with an now I have to apply it to that face. I just downvote Not-Falcon videos automatically.
i don't mind delays if it means the game will be polished/complete, but we've seen that so often not be the case. a delay doesn't make me any more confident in the game when it's finally released
One trend I’ve wished dead for years is buying a game, putting it into the system…and then having to wait for the game to download. It just now happened to me when I played Gotham Knights for the first time. Just let me play my games as soon as I get it home. Maybe I’m old school, but I miss the days when I would get a game for the NES, SNES, etc. and play it right out of the box/case.
Isn't it the case for most games? I buy mostly digital but the ones I bought on disk for the PS4 and 5 gave me the option to play the disk version without downloading anything. I need to install them, yes, but I don't need to download anything to play.
@@anaxo28 i think disks are obsolete at this point. why not just use something similar to a USB or SSD drive those things are tiny and can go up to 12TB these days. I have a 600GB portable SSD and a 200GB USB drive and I can literally fit them both in my wallet at the same time.
The PS4 version of Last of Us was a Remaster, not a remake. Really confused at how so many people in the industry don't seem to understand the difference between the two...
I don't think the game in industry gave up on the NFT market. What I think is happening is they're just trying to figure out a way to reintroduce it later under a different name, or under a different branding.
Steam market already does that without the need for blockchain bullshit. See those exorbitant costs on CSGO skins? Steam makes profits off of market trades for those.
@@romarbetc123 Valve does not need blockchain for verification since they are the sole owners of the Steam community market. They don’t need to rely on blockchain to force exclusivity because they do that on their own. Steam holds the biggest marketshare for digital storefronts for games. Not only would adding blockchain slow trades, it would also mean allowing other companies to access the community market outside of Steam leading to so many other problems like integration and security problems, as well as huge public backlash. The market feature already fulfills everything NFTs were designed to do in Steam’s system.
Dragon Age: Origins had just the right amount of character dialogue during exploration. The conversations were even tailored to what characters you had in your party at the time! If you ever want a laugh, the Grandma of a Mage would mother the crap out of your Templar, or if you have the Dwarf with you she'll match drunken stories with him!
Here's one that no one ever talks about: Right-handed characters in third-person games who wear their gear left-handed for no reason. Worse than that is when a character loses their right eye, yet they continue to shoot right-handed.
1. Microtransactions 2. Loot boxes 3. Pre-orders Done Just announce your game three months before release. That way the chances of delays are also very slim and you don't have to sit five years waiting for something that keeps getting pushed forward expecting preorders
The only issue with the whole next generation things are people really couldn't find it anywhere as you Said and people can't afford the next system. I think it's nice to not so exclusives. They cover a bigger market and make more money (possibly)
The only? No there’s plenty of issues, yes we have next gen games but they don’t feel like that as he said. Yet they raised the base price of these games. They want more money for the same amount of work put into games, less work even. New gen devs will be the end of good games. Gaming peaked and we are now experiencing the downhill
@@cxngo8124 that wasn't a conversation about PC though, so its irrelevant. Besides, PC being "next gen" before everything else has been a thing since the 90s.
@@adamw.7169 exactly, we know PC is where you go if you want the next-gen features, higher settings, more tuning how you want your game to play etc. but it comes with an upfront cost
I still am completely blown away that ZYNGA the garbage shovelware developer that literally sold their games at staples of all places sold for billions of dollars....crazy
Massive companies consolidating (monopolizing) an industry is historically bad news. It breeds less competition, which leads to poorer quality products. I'm extremely concerned about the future of the industry I love so much.
I think it's actually possible that some delays are fully intentional and planned from the very start. What they do is they maintain he hype and the attention on a video game longer, it creates several waves of articles in media, people just talking about it etc, instead of just two, which would be announcement and then the actual release. It wouldn't be that stupid for a company to delay a game intentionally if you think about it this way...
Very, very, very unlikely. This only works if you subscribe to the "All PR is good PR" school of thought, which I think is total nonsense. A delay doesn't get people more excited about a game, quite the opposite: It makes people worry if the development is troubled, it makes some people cancel their pre-orders and buy other games instead etc. Also, this has the same problem as many other conspiracy theories where you'd have to depend on literally hundreds of people not leaking that information about the fake release date out to the press.
On Meta Quest 2, I believe the story was that it underwent a large redesign and they also realised it's performance was too low and needed to be upspecced substantially, hence the delay and price increase.
I think you're confusing the Quest 2 with the Quest Pro. The Quest 2 released in 2020 and Meta just flat out bumped the price up by 100 bucks last year.
End the following: -Games releasing in buggy, unfinished states. -Microtransactions. -"Exclusive Games" (I'm sorry but not all of us can afford two next gen gaming systems AND pay $70/game) -STOP CRUNCHING WORKERS!! -Nintendo, for the love of God, stop walling off your classic content by not adding them to the eShop.
I can't believe lootboxes or excessive monetization was not mentioned in this video especially in cases where games are broken unfinished and have them slapped in to add insult to injury to players
@@BoleDaPole you mean most of the younger generation now have gambling addictions because of the predatory practice and dont see the consequences using mommy and daddies credit card
@@gameranxTV battle passes, dlc, and loot boxes. All micro transactions that basically say “we made the full game then diluted the cool stuff behind pay walls”.
@kiddkunai3324 Very true. Back when DLC was still called an "expansion pack" and would also be released on physical media, it was great. With those, a studio could keep the lights on between game releases. By allocating a small team to make additional/add cut content to games that sold well in their first year but were about to be price cut in their second year (used to be common practice). Meanwhile, gamers would get another great new experience on a game they really liked, and it wouldn't cost as much as a full game. Like RA2 YR or GTA TLAD and GTA TBOGT. Those were great. Now, DLC is better known for asking a low amount of money that people can easily miss, for something useless like a skin, that was probably put together in an afternoon. Or something that should have been in the game to begin with. Like "premium cars" in Forza.
@@CheapBastard1988 While car DLCs have gone overboard it is worth noting that the devs have to pay license fees to put cars in so there is a limit to how many they can put in on release as part of the production budget. Still, there was one Forza game where you could spend a grand on DLC cars which was effing outrageous. There can be a happy medium without ripping people off I think but while companies like EA make the vast majority of their income through microtransactions they're not going to stop milking it, the worse thing is that it kills quality in the final product.
For number 7: How about we stop prematurely announcing games with unrealistic release dates while simultaneously crunching developers to hell and back instead?
"Yeah we gonna release this awesome new game next month and it will be 100$ and it will need to be pre ordered at first and it will come with DLC coz we wanna split the main game into sections to earn more money and you will need 64gb ram and windows 10 to play it coz everyone lives in a 1st world country and..." Yeah the future of gaming is scary...luckily ill be too old to care in a few decades.
Can we get a video on the laziest and/or most "we really couldn't think of anything but we needed a boss fight" mechanics in games? Like for example when a "boss fight" is basically just you fighting a bunch of minions of the actual boss for most of it, but the boss isn't actually themed around summoning, and they obviously just did it to try to make the boss fight last longer
I can't stand Fodder fights. The whole purpose was to fight the boss, not his minions. What gets even more annoying are when these minions are just beefed up versions with some kimick like cannot be stunned or tanks ever hit or can only be damaged by certain attacks. All while you also have the "boss" to worry about.
Turning down the frequency of dialog is okay but having a volume option with closed caption seems better. Some games like GTA Online, which has seen 3 generations, still don't give players an option to mute in-game dialog so the entire game has to be muted to maintain sanity when replaying a job.
People that say games at $60/70$ is too expensive, they weren't around in the 90s. Turok on N64 was $70 when I bought it and Goldeneye was $80. That price in the 90s would mean today they'd cost over $100. Games today really aren't that expensive, especially since the amount of content you get is a lot.
For small developer studios, the delays are caused by inexperience and over-optimism in estimating deadlines. For AAA studios, the delays are caused by: 1) features added during development; and 2) difficulty in telling management that things are going slower than estimated.
and another example is skull & bones released date is november 8th 2022, and suddenly gow ragnarok would released on november 9th 2022. ofc people would buy gow ragnarok over skull and bones because most of them dont want to play 2 games at the same time or they only had to choose 1 game because they dont have much money to buy both of them.
Well for Stalker 2 isn't their fault. The company was based in Kyiv so when the Russian invasion started they had to pause the production for some time
Tbh the community will always be angry. Release the game in time in a broken state due crowd pressure or delay it, no matter what gamers will get angry for any small reason.
It seems like Naughty Dog, at least from their most recent are trying to do away with the Delay issue entirely by shortening the time from reveal to launch down substantially.. I personally feel like 5-7 months is the perfect balance of the timeline from reveal to release. Games should never be revealed without a solid release date locked in my opinion.
Why do you care? Studios can announce whenever they want and there's no wrong way to do it. I almost forgot about Elden Ring but then it released and it was awesome. Just bc you can't be patient doesn't mean a short turnover is always inherently better.
What?? Last ND announcement (cause Tlou remake doesn't count) was in 2016.. For a game they delayed for FOUR YEARS let's wait to see if they've changed or just didn't announce TloU remake till almost release to avoid backlash..
@@geordiejones5618 I agree with Absolute here. Announcing a title years in advance gets the fanbase hyped and then squanders a lot of good will. For instance, Silksong. Officially announced in 2019 and Team Cherry hasn't even bothered updating their blog since Dec 2019. Nothing about it has been seen in over a year (possibly two but I'm not looking up info for this). Is it cancelled? Is it still in work? By announcing early, they create an expectation that more information will be coming and the silence just enables the fans question what's going on. Plus, if you have to delay, that delay has to be announced which just makes the company look bad (better to release in a good state certainly, but it'd be great to not renege on promises simultaneously). Conversely, waiting until you're polishing up the title for release before announcing it to the world and then following that up with monthly info dumps, interviews, dev blogs, previews, etc. gets the fans interested and maintains that interest until launch day when the product itself takes over that role.
One of my major beefs with games is non-skippable dialogue and non-skippable cut scenes. When you're playing through a game for the second or third time, I personally don't want to sit through everything again. I just want to get back into the action and play. Not sit there for ten to twenty minutes over and over again just to take two or three steps and more dialogue or cutscene to start up again.
I wouldn't even mind if it was a setting that you could turn on or off. You could have it set to off if you're playing through the first time and don't want to accidentally skip and on for when you just want to plow through.. perhaps even being able to set it to automatically do it.
I don't want to complain about delays, because they're infinitely better than crunch and unfinished releases. Although I know your point, it all comes down to management. That or studios are way too keen to announce games and their release date before the teams working on the project are comfortable to put and end date forward.
Living in south africa, I can say that games here are simply too expensive, I have to wait at least 2 years for good games to go on sale for cheap enough to be afforded and even then I feel it's too much. I only bought and played red dead 2 this year because it was too expensive for years and I happened to see a really cheap cd key and got it.
Not very true. The reason there aren't many games that take advantage of them is because they aren't whats being worked on currently. Now for consoles, it's even less true for the same reason since the games that only focus on PS5 are not yet released.
Theyre both the same problem tbh. Release dates as they are, shiuld change. Games need alot of time and manpower to make these days but the shareholders setting dates dont understand this
Lord Falcon literally explains this point during number 7: unfinished games are frustrating - the point is to be more generous on release titles to omit meeting deadlines.
I think the issue is the release dates getting announced way too early. Delays happen that's fine but the dissapointment from delays could be avoided if the dates weren't firmed up until they're sure they'll hit it
Honestly, if a game comes out in a good state without any bigger bugs, I don't care if it is delayed. I rather wait a couple of months than have a game released on its original date in an unplayable state and the community giving up on it and let it rot even if it gets patched up to be a good game later on. Happened many times before. Delays are not an issue
@@jacobfife7273 2 years is a long time when you could easily play them on previous consoles.. I would be thankful too.. but when the next gen console isn’t demonstrating its potential, it can feel like a waste of money. Hopefully this year will have enough to satisfy both generations.
@@pheel7142 well for me I never understood why people go nuts and demand the newest console immediately upon release. I have even watched side by side comparisons of some games and it barely looks different to me. I mean sure I do see the differences somewhat but it's not enough for me to go ok I'm gonna shell out several hundred bucks to get this new console that makes things look slightly better when I am pretty happy with what I already have. And personally unless the frame rate drops are really intense I'm don't mind it much.
Your point #6 partially explained why #7 happened. IMHO, another reason might be politics among various teams within the same company. There will always be some team leads want to do things their way or whatnot and clash with everyone.
Another great video, Falcon! 😊 For number five, I think there are so many reasons we’re stuck in the next generation, but I think a big one (NOT speaking for myself: I’m excited) is that there just isn’t the hype for new games. I don’t think it’s necessarily that developers did anything wrong, that the consoles and/or games aren’t good (at least not unilaterally), or that people somehow dislike it-I just think that this current generation has so many good memories on older consoles and with older games; that current gaming-trends has adopted some really rough practices that are major issues for a lot of folks (though these are not across-the-board issues); and that gamers have been burned by a lot of unkept promises and delays-not to mention that it just seems like either everything is coming out all at once and folks are being overwhelming to keep up with it all, or there are spaces where it seems like almost nothing at all really happens, so people just lose interest pretty quickly out of a combination of confusion, frustration, already having what they want and not looking for more, or feeling overwhelmed-or-underwhelmed on a consistent basis. It just seems like these new consoles, which should have been a volcanic-eruption, are turning more into a slow, continuously-sputtering fizzle. Like I said, I’m not speaking for myself: I am excited to see the new stuff coming out, even though I like the way gaming used to go a bit better, in many cases-I just think the above list are issues with a lot of folks I talk to and observations I see happening, at least as far as I can tell.
If the prices continue to increase then the quality had better do the same. That's my biggest gripe with modern gaming. Abysmal launches with broken games, but a full $70 price tag now.
it’s gonna be at LEAST another year or two until i can get my hands on a next gen console. they’re between $750 and $850 in australia!!! what the hell!!! consoles used to be like $400 and now they’re almost a THOUSAND dollars??? prices are getting SO ridiculous. consoles used to be $400-$500, games used to be $60-$70, and now prices have almost doubled. insane.
About #5, Game Development has changed a lot in the last 10 years, it makes it so much easier to support previous consoles. That and next Gen consoles are not as big as leaps in technology as they once were.
Maybe it’s just because as a kid my perception of time was warped, but it felt like there was a much larger amount of time between Xbox360/PS3 and XboxOne/PS4 then between previous and current gen. It also doesn’t seem like a huge leap in quality either
@@lucasallods If you're broke just say that. Ps4 definitely holds back the ps5 and im glad studios are finally moving away from it. When a studio always has to plan for the lowest common denominator visual quality suffers because they don't want to make two fundamental different games. This means ps5 gets an upressed, higher detail version of the ps4 version, instead of being pushed to its full potential.
@@bazonga9085 yeah because imagine you live in a world where definition is a thing, and you can choose resolution and etc, they don't need to make a compleat different game just low a little bit of graphic in one console.
![[UA] Team Vitality проти NAVI | IEM Cologne 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wttO1zVRTC0/mqdefault.jpg)
Delays don't need to die. Early announcements do.
Exactly, Apex Legends got announced then released literally days later
@@infinitygaming4230 and boy what a mess it was, I played it about 1 day after it was released, terrible framerrate, server problems and yadda yadda
@@Noir1998 exactly
but then gamers always cry for announcements, if early announcements die you will go 4-5 years without hearing from your favourite developers with no clue what they are up to, and we all know gamers wont stand for that
Yes because early announcements cause high demand from fans which causes game devs to rush which causes them to give an early release time just to shut people up which causes their game to not be ready by said release time which causes them delaying the game to get it into a playable state
End releasing games in a un finished state & filling them with micro transactions
Then people complain they have to wait longer. Can’t make everyone happy
YES!!! I would rather wait for a finished product.
@@mikelancia3006 Very true
@@mikelancia3006 fewer people will complain about waiting, than getting an uncompleted game.
The majority buys and uses microtransactions, so majority rules
I couldn't disagree more with number 7. When your game is not ready it is better to delay it, rather than release it unfinished. What most gamers do not understand is that it's mostly not the developers who decide the new premiere date, it's the executives who have no idea how making games work and they only have unrealistic expectations
That's their point, let the devs make the release date decisions not the companies so that when they give a release date it will be a true one
You disagree because you didn't understand what he said.
Did you even listen to the whole section of the video?? Like Falcon said in the video, they shouldn't announce a release date in the first place if it's still prone to change. "Better to delay it, than release it unfinished". Well duh, but the "release it unfinished" shouldn't even be an option to begin with.
No I'd rather have a game come out nd give feedback to make it better earlier then later games still come out unfinished after years of delays...skull and bones will feel like it was made 10 years ago cuz thts wen they started to make it games get more nd more dated b4 they even release
I'm indifferent about this one. Maybe don't announce things when you don't know when you're finished for sure? Elder Scrolls is doing a good job at not giving a release date.
Delays are only an issue because developers announce games too early. Remember when Bethesda announced Elder Scrolls 6 in 2018 simply stating they plan on making it at some point
so people would calm down
And? How can Elder Scrolls 6 be delayed when it doesn’t have a release date? Clearly that’s not the issue there so a very weird example for you to choose.
@@criert135 m.... ,, . ...
..
?
N
@@criert135 I do feel like there's a bit of an issue showing a "teaser trailer" at a big show for a game that's not even being worked on yet. If you just want to let people know "the IP isn't cancelled forever", you can simply do that through a press release. A trailer, even just a teaser, sets some kind of expectation. It's not a huge grab-your-pitchforks issue, but to me it still feels a little dishonest, trying to create a sliver of hype when there's absolutely zero prospects yet to be hyped about.
that was a jpeg. thats the worst type of announcement. when they are not even in stage 1
I remember the days when Elite developers were asked about the release date for their games and their answer would literally be "When it's done..." 😄
back when devs weren't beholden to greedy publishers who were themselves beholden to greedy investors? Sure.
Only to later release a Elite expansion that was a total unfinished piece of garbage.
I don't think people fully realize that games are like artpieces. Incredibly complex artpieces that requires multiple people to cooperate.
@@lyianx Boom!! Cyberpunk is the perfect example of execs getting too involved and try to reach quarterly projections instead of releasing a quality product.
Back then they could get away with that because games weren't as big. In the early '90s the development teams were a couple dozen tops, it had increased by the early 00s, but the scale of the games was still not as large as it is for some of them today. Some of the biggest games like the open world games are effectively never at the point where there's nothing left to do. That and, with all the consolidation, there isn't as much competition on the quality front and a deadline for the holiday season seems to be more important than patching after the fact.
Love how consistent and faithful this channel has been through the years. Haven’t tried to do some weird BS change up, just good old fashion constant uploads talking about gaming news and kept everything nice and simple. One of the most comforting and reliable channels on UA-cam.
“I’m Walter Kronkite, and that’s the news.”
Fasho!!!
remember when they gave away a console per week?
That's why they have 7m subs
It is oddly a comforting channel! Never thought about it like that but yes, the term absolutely fits
A lot of these can be explained as still being fallout from 2020. Us little guys are back to normal, but for big companies, they probably won't be 100% until like five years after their area reopened. Products don't just happen. They take years to develop. All that time, not only development was disrupted, but companies were also draining whatever small stockpile they had for building hardware.
dont let big companies fool you, they had no reason for this big fallout from covid, literally everything they have to do is over the computer, and literally games made more money than ever during covid, cuz ppl could only be at home.
@@Yosemite_sam694 Supply chain isn't something made up, and things don't just come to you from nowhere. Trucks, planes, ships, and trains don't travel digitally, and manufacturing plants don't build digitally. Materials don't make themselves.
Still don't see how so much was affected by 2020 at least in the gaming industry. Almost everything that it takes to make a game can be done with programs on a computer which can the be shared amongst staff.
then*
No, the only explanation is that they are greedy pieces of shit. There's no reason to become a game dev, because the hours and pay are trash. Period. Why work for more hours and less money? Passion doesn't put food on the table.
Delays can sometimes be a good thing! It means that they are actually putting the work in, well most of the time
Or that it is in developer hell
Most of the time, the games still take 2 years after coming out to be fixed.
Yup. You can't complain about games being delayed and that they need to stop delaying releases and then in the next breath complain about games being released unfinished. What do these people want when a game simply isn't ready to be released when the release date approaches?
The problem isn't with the delay, it is with unrealistic release dates being announced much too early just to get the hype going and probably cash in on that pre-order money, usually done by the marketing team of the publishers rather than the actual developers anyway.
What people need to do is stop saying that it will come out at a certain time before its finished
As a developer - that is very rarely the case. In the vast majority of cases, a delay means there were serious development issues that made hitting the deadline impossible - things like design/architecture issues, overestimation of the hardware or engine's capabilities, changes in management and direction, etc. Delays are basically just the symptome, and it's very easy to see that most games that get delayed eventually do end up releasing in a terrible state anyway - because the studio starts to run out of money and has to release to be able to fund further development.
So delays definitely do need to stop. I don't think they will, though. Especially not in AAA titles, because every AAA game tries to be "the next big thing" and that usually ends up leading to one of the serious development issues I mentioned above
When it comes to delays, I would rather companies not announce a release date until the game is finished and ready for release. And even then, announce the release date for 6 months after it's finished. That gives them 6 months to go over the game with a fine toothed comb to find the glitched & bugs and correct them.
That was Cyberpunk's biggest mistake
@@rps215 you didn't follow CP's development huh? The Dev team wanted EXACTLY that... more time to fix the bugs and do testing... but the corpo suits pushed the game out knowing fullwell it wasn't ready... because corpo suits only care about lining their pockets and the bottom line.
EDIT: and that's barring the idea that those same corpo suits outsourced the testing to a company whom, to anyone who can do a bit of detective work, were known for fraudulent practises involving saying they did stuff and billing for it whilst in reality not doing jack friggin squat... all in the name of the profit again...
CP failed because of the Corpo's involved... not because the devs messed up
I think they feel pressure to announce a release date early for the sake of stakeholders
@@AshAsmodeus Precisely what I was thinking. Their biggest mistake was that premature release date announcement. I was guessing the investors are getting uneasy and those higher ups think they can rush it in time.
Publishers need to give developers at least a vague timeframe for a game’s release, otherwise devs would take all the time in the world and the game would never release. It’s not as black and white as you think.
For me, RPG elements in non-RPG games. Not every open world game needs to be a rpg or have the essential elements of one. Whatever happened to normal open world games?
No biggest problem is all these games need to become coop if we want to play with friends
This channel made a video about it not too long ago
forreal im losing interest in gaming when literally nearly all games nowadays are rpg it completely destroys the immersion for me especially if there are health bars or numbers flying around
@@DTraiN5795 No games don't need to be forced into being made coop. There are so many mechanic in certain single player games that forcing coop into would mean taking a huge chunk of Single Player mechanics out and ruining the game. Not everyone has friends and would like to have a proper NPC allies that function right then having a game developer forcefully place a Coop option (most developers that do that then completely ignore working on the NPC to even properly function right {the shit show that is Colonial Marines is a prime example of hoping Coop and multiplayer to ignore how horribly it functions for a single player}).
@@TheDarknessin2light to me that all sounds like bs considering what they do in other games. It’s not that hard and tons of money to be made. I also didn’t say force made either
the delay thing is nothing to complain about...that is the only thing that gave me hope that we might get some games that are not completly unplayable at launch
They shouldn't be made to announce release dates if they aren't confident in them. Delays are absolutely something to be upset about.
If only the games had been fixed after tons of delays. They get pushed back because someone decides not to fuck with a bigger competitor (like Skull and Bones intending to release 1 day before GoW) and then still release completely broken and take 2 years of patching to fix.
@@plattbagarn well I mean, I said it gives me hope, not certainty
I think you said it best about NFTs, "the token is unique but not the digital item attached to it." Better than nearly anyone I've seen on the internet. I really only see the value of NFT/Blockchain as a public database not tied to (maybe supercedes) a government agency.
Why not mod the item in for free?
@The Dinkum delusional
@The Dinkum that's very good! look at you
I don't mind the delays but I think the companies shouldn't announce dates right away, maybe have your prospective release date and just automatically tack on another year.
Agreed. The real issue is studios announcing games so long before they are actually done.
DELAYS are fine. It means the devs are trying to not just throw out an unfinished product. A company saying "We need more time to get this right" is totally fine.
But devs and publishers need to start being more realistic about their time tables and stop trying to rush releases. Stop setting dates with the expectation that it will get finished by then. Finish your game, THEN worry about the release.
Thay want those pre-orders, and no one is gonna pay for a game that dont know when its coming out.
@@juan1julian I will. I’d say the opposite is true actually
I dont mind delays but part of why they release details of games early is because they want there to be enough time to build up anticipation to help the game sell well on release
End $69.99 games.
That’s not happening 😢
They’re only going to continue sadly
It's only going to go up.... Pretty much till you die
It's actually going up so they are getting rid of the current price tag, think its like $75
That’s a lot to ask for considering the companies who have made their games that price. I agree but that’s not happening.
The first thing that popped into my head when I learned about NFTs was screenshots. It’s like “owning” something that has infinite copies of itself 🤦🏻♂️
I have no problems with dialogue. There was a time where it was disappointing when games had no dialogue, or at least barely had any. The more the merrier for me. It adds to the entertainment value
Like, the person who did this video sounds stupid. .Why would you not want your character to talk? That's the most idiotic thing i've heard
Market consolidation is a concern for me. While it gives studios access to greater resources, it also puts them at the mercy of risk adverse shareholders, potentially stifling creativity. It could also make it harder for new devs to have any visibility.
but like we just saw with Playground Games for Xbox. People who have been at the place for nearly a decade has left to form a new independent studio, Maverick
We might have more studios under a certain publisher than before but that doesnt mean new studios wont break off from those bigger ones
Even some ex-Witcher devs from CDPR went to create their own studio, its a circle
Less competition is bad in this case
Just look at the crap Hollywood has become with consolidation … Disney + Marvel + Lucas Arts= 💩 💩 💩
Agreed. The shareholders are such cowards and won't take risks.
@@mikespike2099 see also: Activision Blizzard, Ubisoft, EA, etc. Every once in a while a great game comes out, but it feels like an accident.
Another comment said that they don't mind delays but wish that companies wouldn't give a release date that seemed sure to begin with, and I completely agree. I didn't reply on that thread because I wanted to raise the chance of this being seen but....PLEASE DONT SLAM DELAYS. Let devs have as little pressure on their timeliness as possible.
Fans should give devs less pressure by not getting mad at devs YES. By all means, delay the game as many times as needed but for the love of god let’s stop pretending release dates are anything other than lies to build hype and get early interest for preordering. Release dates aren’t based on reality and should just be ignored. I think people can be mad that release dates are a joke without rushing devs at the same time.
Honestly it wouldn’t even matter if they said “we’re hoping for winter/spring/summer/fall 20XX, but we’ll be sure to keep the fans up to date with any info”
Yes please yes delays are annoying, but they are kinda good I'd rather wait for the game to be delayed than releasing a game unfinished. And I agree don't post a release date, not only does it cause distrust between the fans but it also pressures the devs to work too hard
I hope they do realize these dudes are audited and have to sit in meetings with big wigs and tell them when they’re going to release their cash cow even when they just started making it. It’s for marketing purposes, not when they actually plan on being finished. Idk why everybody throws around the word dev as if 32 year old bob with a wife and kid who writes code everyday has any ounce of control over the game. They need to familiarize themselves with what it takes to make a game.
I blame the companies making unrealistic release windows, getting fans excited, and then pulling the rug from under them. How about waiting until the game is 90% finished before setting a timeframe?
HFW dialogue was kind of immersive to me. You being alone for that long, you will talk to yourself. A LOT. As a major introvert who is a borderline agoraphobe, it registers with me quite a bit. It makes a lot of sense that Aloy would given how much she travels the world alone.
Agreed. As an extreme introvert who also shows some signs of autism (though I've never been formally diagnosed), I'm not hugely bothered by protagonists talking to themselves. It can actually be a good way to work out your thoughts if you have nobody else around to bounce ideas off of.
It makes a lot of sense with her backstory but would've been nice to have a slider for those who get annoyed by it
That’s probably the issue then: publishers saw how popular the game was, made an incorrect assumption on what made it popular (the constant talking from the protagonist), and then tried to copy it without understanding the reasoning behind the character trait.
In the end, you get endless and needless dialogue that the players quickly lose patience over.
i had no issue with aloy talking in horizon, but ragnarok really needed to increase the amount of time before hints. i'm usually in the middle of solving the puzzle when they start telling me how to do it anyway and it just comes off more condescending than helpful. while it can be annoying, if you take a realistic look at things from mimir's perspective you can't blame him for telling kratos he's on fire. when this happens, mimir is on fire too, and there's nothing else he can actually do but yell about it.
We have two choices in the delay issue: the delay or the unfinished game. Personally I think studios should only set estimated release dates and stop making official release dates if it's not 100% definite that the game will be done by then. At least an estimate by definition isn't definite. It's an estimate. It can be moved.
Yeah they’ll say things like “Holiday 2022” knowing for a FACT that game isn’t coming out until summer 2023
Yep, if it's a question of delay or the game sucks or is unfinished I'm happy with a delay every time. So many games had promise only to fall flat on release due to rushed releases.
L
Reminds me of Cyberpunk 2077. Cd Projekt Red announced that game way too soon. If I remember right, it even got delayed 2 times.
yes bro I can't agree more. you know the saying you won't be disappointed if you don't expect anything? if they only told us guesses or estimates of when they might think a game could be released the community and fans would take that info way way better than them trying to use a quote on quote "definitive release date" we will hear about the game knowing hey it could possibly be delayed which always sucks but hey at least they was honest and transparent and now we know it could possibly be moved to a later release date. but instead we get told yes yes we promise on our company and life this game will 100% be released on so and so date just to find out the game STILL won't be released for another year. it's not the classic we need one more month for optimization nah bro they give us the we going to get milk pray we come back one day treatment ong
0:31 - Game delays
2:50 - Studio acquisitions and merges
5:47 - Still in the last gen
7:56 - Characters who will not shut up
10:07 - Switch big performance problem
12:16 - Price increases
13:37 - NFT's in gaming
Doing gods work
Ty I didn't want to hear him go on and on about that pirate game 😂😂
@@sama34 damn youre cute
I think the delays are a good indicator of things getting better in the games industry. People are not pushed to the edge to meet deadlines and to publish unfinished products. Announcements should be made later, thats all. Then there are other reasons as well.
Stalker 2 got delayed because the devs had to go to go and defend their home country from an invasion. Some of them have died now and it's not sure if the game will ever be finished..
As an aspiring indie game dev I get the annoying delays are of course annoying, but people beg for a date and if you give in you can get it wrong and if you dont people still complain, its a lose lose situation, and its very hard to properly guess when you will release, if a developer gives a release date over a year that probably means they are creating something easy or unoriginal, as something unoriginal is a lot easier to guess when you will finish it, or they could just be giving themselves a lot of wiggle room
Solution: don`t give absolutes, formulate responses more like: we aim to, or we hope to, et cetera
@@afrog2666 thats why managers take PR training.
@@afrog2666
Even when you say that a lot of people will complain when you go past those dates. People need to just accept that developers aren't privy to special future telling powers that everyone else lacks and any date they give will ALWAYS be an estimate. They also need to treat a date given by the publisher or marketing department as a completely separate entity than one given by the actual developers, ie complete make believe.
"as an aspiring indie game dev" didnt read the rest so quick
Blizzard used to do this pretty well by managing expectations. Back when they made excellent, mostly bug-free games that everybody loved they refused to give release dates until they were sure they would make them. They could do it because they made excellent games and players just accepted that that's how long it took to make an excellent game. I think that can still work. "It'll be done when it's done" is the best thing you can say. Now, staying afloat financially while you make the best game you can might be a challenge, and if you work for a larger company the suits are going to make it pretty hard to keep your job, but it's the best policy.
It’s normal in game development to take way longer than expected but it’s also common knowledge to plan ahead for that. I understand indie devs struggling to meet deadlines but I don’t really understand AAA studios missing the make by so much.
I would definetly wait longer for a game because it might have a chance of being complete and less buggy
@@lucaspetty5990 Same, but lately it’s been a sign of under budgeting, as opposed to refinement.
@@JTAGames More it's a sign of over promising and then failing to deliver.
@@lucaspetty5990 Agreed. But the publishers shouldn't announce the game before it's done
I don't understand with something like Halo Infinite being delayed. I played it in December as they finally released co-op and I hadn't played it since January 2022 and there's still barely any content in the game. There was barely any content at launch as well, so how TF would they even try to release a game in 2020? It's crazy
The seasonal model has to go soon. It's killing the fun out of every game that has one
That forced "engagement" I cant stand either. We should want to play a game because its core gameplay loop is in itself engaging and is fun/rewarding, not so we can get a reward for that day/week for doing X to get Y
Very few games do it right
Hitman is dope tho
It has been said time and time again.
Vote
With
Your
WALLET
@@youstolemyhandleyoutwat yeah people should top buying battlepasses and things like that
I think number 6 could be scary because if let’s say they owned all the companies, thus they own all the games, they can control the prices and who else are you gonna buy from if it’s the only people to buy it from. I think that’s something like monopoly? I learned about this in history class and this is a possibility idk I could be wrong though.
The inflation will surely happen if this continues because knowing that only few companies own all the other companies that make games, the investors will start investing more and more and to fullfil the profit of those investors companies have to earn more profit. Enough so they can give investors their share, the game companies that they own get their earnings from games so they can produce more games and of course their own profit because ultimately these companies have the ultimate ownership and to achieve this they might increase prices because more money = more profit and that indeed isn't a good sign at all.
There are anti-monopoly government offices that deal with such things. If big companies want to merge, they must ask first and the offices will investigate before they allow it. Disney had to wait more than a year before they could buy Fox. And so far, only European Union allowed the Xbox-Activision-Blizzard merger.
I wanna see an end to game models that revolve around you playing just that game all day every day forever.
Delays only seem like a problem if making content about games is your job or if a person only plays AAA titles. For many of us, delays don't mean jack because there's always a list of titles that fall into the "Heard it was good, but couldn't get to it because there are 5-10 other games that I also want to check out".
Exactly this for me. Too focused on games already in my library to worry about games not coming.
That also runs completely counter to the "stop releasing unfinished games" point later on too. You can't have both - either the game comes out "on time" and is a broken, buggy unfinished mess or it gets delayed to give the devs enough time to get the game to a playable state.
@@Dargonhuman completely incorrect. The solution to games being pushed back is for studios to stop announcing them and marketing them years before so they can build hype. Their hype is why them delaying a game is unacceptable. If we were told about a game a year from its release rather than two to four years before its release the developers would have a better idea of the actual state of their game with that much work already put into it. The choices aren't "the game gets delayed" or "the game is a buggy mess" because the best solution is "we don't know the game exists so it getting pushed back doesn't effect us".
@@NottherealLucifer,not exactly. It's not studios it's publishers.
Publishers make PR and Marketing commitments to appease shareholders and investors. Studios have to appease publishers and investors (usually). Indies are an exception, but they are pinned down by limited time AND capital whose principal investors are often members of the studio. Without a potential return on investment, there will be no investment. That means there has to be at least a potential profit in the process somewhere or we won't get a game. A launched buggy game is what happens when investors want to cut their losses, or Indies lose their seed money. Indies can rarely afford marketing, so the cost for investing for hype is near zero.
Publishers can and often do, spend more on company overhead and hype than the dev studio making the game. When a game needs more time, the publishers compare the invested cost in all things up to that point and decide if it's better to launch a buggy game than eat the loss with no launch. Indies usually just run out of money and have few to no choices. This is also true for studios owned by larger corporations, it's the devil's due for studio acquisitions by publishers or larger corporations acting as publishers. All this overhead continues to drive the cost for game development into the financial stratosphere. Ideally, changing when to announce and hype should be scaled and pushed off until the product is closer to completion to avoid the mistake. But that's not the studio's call.
@@Dargonhuman that is a false dilemma. The solution is to only announce games when it's reasonable they will release. Look at apex legends. The game wouldn't have been so popular if they announced it way before release.
We need game announcements to stop coming so soon. Announce the game, then release 3-6 months later.
Exactly. Then they try to blame fans for coming out with a half baked game just bc fans are to impatient
Just don't announce until you're down to the final polish.
The thing about delays is they are not announced to have the time to make the game perfect but to make it less of a disaster and somewhat bearable
Mimir wasnt the problem in Ragnarok (imo). It was your companion immediately telling you where to go/how to solve the puzzle the SECOND you walk into in area.
Actually no one had a problem with that only this guy who got this Channel nobody had a problem with it in the first one either it gives you much more imersive feeling when characters doing this it's just nonses to brag about that.
@@XWXS2 No the constant puzzle solving in Ragnarok was insane. It almost turned me away from playing. It was almost instant. And during the fights atreus even seems to break the meta a bit, he'll say something along the lines of "father you're xyz, but... you probably already know that." Like yes Atreus, I *do* know that.
The monopoly effect on the market is very troubling. Microsoft having a lions share of the developers in their pocket is scary at the least. Less competition is never good for the consumer and always benefits the seller.
True. And if anyone says otherwise, then they’re cooked.
Maybe time for new studio's to arise, not many AAA games of lately really that good, all consumed by greed!
@@sprmn1983 lol true
With the purchase of activision-blizzard, I believe that Microsoft is crossing over the line between simply taking up some of the video game market share and full on monopolizing the market. I wouldn’t be surprised if they got hit with an antitrust lawsuit, or even got the acquisition blocked entirely
I agree with you there. If there are only like 3 developers - then their 'requirements/development bible/people signing off' will be a much smaller pool and probably more stringent. So I can't see that do anything than drop projects that are not fitting a mould or being cookie cutter.
I think a good solution for game delays is to not announce release dates and just say when it's ready cause then developers have all the time you need.
Agreed. All they have to do is get it to a good demo state, then make a gameplay video, show that at some convention or event, then for "Releases: Whenever It Is Done, Stay Tuned Sheeple." maybe Gamers instead of Sheeple, but yeah. Then they can do DevTalk videos on YT or Twitch or whatever once a month as a roadmap style thing just so people dont feel like it showed up then died off.
Players don’t need a date, but investors do.
CDPR did that with Cyberpunk. That turned out well, didn't it?
@@insanityplea5502 That's far less profitable and when the goal is to have increasing profits every quarter that's not something companies for the most part are willing to do. I think we should move away from a profits based economy tbh.
Unfortunately, the companies are so big they have to worry about investors and stock holders. So they have to do things like those announcements that will affect their stock prices.
Regarding delays, the issue occurs when doing entirely new things. For example, if the solution doesn't already exist, then you have to develop it. However going in, you don't now how long it is going to take until you actually do it. Thus, unless they already have the thing solved or it is easy to solve quickly, then time estimates are pretty much useless. That's the reason for delays in software. While deadlines are powerful motivators to try to get people to hit a target, things don't magically happen just because someone sets a deadline. The work still needs to get done. Thus, its an issue of communicating the challenges that are resulting in the delays. From a marketing standpoint, delays also benefit the company since they can negotiate more favorable terms with advertisers.
Personally, I would like to see the end of preordering. It has a terrible effect on the final product and serves little purpose in a world of digital delivery where supply is not an issue. Even in my business which is fixing cars, I see these preorders years ahead of time for untested first gen vehicles that will likely take a few years to correct and stabilize and that is truly insane. Whether you liked the game or didn't, there was a time when games shipped finished because there was no internet, so there was no day one patch coming. Now, they count on it and use that (and preorders) to buff their bottom line all while rushing an unfinished product that they can later pledge to fix and it's disgusting.
Love how you never run out of interesting topics here. I’d like to see a video listing the best quotes from video games. Do a barrel roll!
🤗🤝
Honestly the amount of topics that get put out is about as interesting as your typical Gaming Bolt or watch mojo video; it gets pretty tiresome and cringy as they keep on getting churned out.😑
@@keijijohnson9754 this channel is a whole ass business afterall and people need money to live
Nr. 5: that's a negative for a lot of people who still aren't able to buy a next gen console. Sony and MS need to push production. It's astonishing that even 3 years after release of next gen there simply isn't a way for a lot of people to be able to upgrade. All the offers I see are either pre-orders with uncertain shipping dates or simply cost twice as much as on the original release
Next gen consoles are fairly easy to get now
@@spongehub8246 Maybe the xbox series s
@@thermaljake6289 you can literally order the ps5 and the series x online right now
@SpongeHub you're right. You've been able to get a ps5 pretty easily since November of last year. Playstation works with Klarna so you can get it without shucking out $549.99 right off the bat. That's how I got mine.
Wait, people arw still having trouble buying a PS5/ Xbox Series? I've had two PS5s and I swapped the first one for a Series X. Every time I go into my local Game store there's boxes of both stacked behind the counter... unless it's a cost thing then fair enough.
I think it's early announcements that need to die not delays themselves. Some games are out here announcing release dates when the game is practically still a demo then when it inevitably gets delayed by a year/years, or worse yet gets release as an unfinished game, players that were hyped or that preordered get ticked off.
Preorders are another thing that should definitely be scaled back. I don't think they will ever stop but having a preorder open for at most one month in advance (2 weeks ideal) with potentially an early access bonus attached to it should be the limit. Having preorders open for more than a month is kinda scummy in my books because it's literally just taking money from fans at that point rather than building hype and advertisement.
Preorders are also a double edged sword because no matter how meticulous you are there are bound to be bugs, glitches, and tom foolery upon release. Having said problems added on top of the fact that people are paying for these games in advance, before any outside reviews can come out, can really add fuel on the fire of frustration/disappointment. This is what causes what would've been seen as a stumble to turn into the sinking of a game. At the very least it can seriously damage a games reputation which could hinder the future potential of said game, franchise or company.
I get annoyed when people complain about NFTs without understanding what they are, but you actually explained pretty well, I'm legitimately impressed by this level of research.
The sad thing is that most of these problems will not be fixed.
Maybe with some indies
@@jonahabenhaim1223indie will have to be the way pretty soon here
I notice the common thread of almost all of these (except for maybe blabbermouth characters) is the business side of gaming.
We're feeling more and more each year that games companies don't really care about us, except as a means to achiever ever increasing profitabilty.
And it's that "ever increasing" part that's the kicker. It's not enough for a game to pay for itself and then some, it's gotta make more and more money every year, which puts the pressure to put in more things we don't like, but make the company accountants happy.
Gotta love capitalism
@@skyisreallyhigh3333 it isnt really capitalism rather than its harder for new developers to adjust into new generation of gaming because we had 2 different finanical crises in less than 2 decades
@@raptorfromthe6ix833 Nope, what op wrote is literally how capitalism works. Capitalism demands ever increasing profits every quarter. This isnt developers dealing with two economic crashes (caused by the failings of capitalism btw)
@@skyisreallyhigh3333 capitalism allows those small developers to exist in the first place and gives the freedom for consumers to choose which product they want during good economic climate we had several successes such as minecraft and fall guys and guess what those games ended up being popular than the norma AAA games
@@raptorfromthe6ix833 Yes, if capitalism is ever overthrown, videogamea will cease to exist. People will no longer want to make or play video games post capitalism. Once we get past capitalism all technology required to make and play video games will cease to exist.
Ita funny how you mention Minecraft as if it iant owned by Microsoft. It may have started off indie but it certainly isnt anymore, so not a great example.
Capitalists are also working to consolidate the video game industry, as that's the logical thing to happen under capitalism. This was actually touched on by this video. To say these indie developers exist because of capitalism (even though the basis of the technology used would never have been developed by private companies because the development costs were to high and instead were developed using public money, but that's a whole different conversation) is incorrect. I would argue these indie developers exist despite capitalists trying to consolidate everything. I would argue that post capitalism we would have both a greater quantity of video games and greater quality of video games since well being for all will have been reached and there would be more people making games since they arent living in poverty.
I really disagree with no 4. Personally, I love the chatter in games, the character feels much more engaged in the world So it's not just me moving the character between cutscenes, but it feels like the character actually exists it the game
"We don't want rushed unfinished games but we also don't want games to be delayed!" Make up your minds.
Some part of me hopes that the huge backlash towards major releases being unfinished was the reason for the mass delays last year. I’d imagine, to publishers, that the days of pumping out games every year really wasn’t that long ago, but we’re obviously at a point where tech has advanced quicker than their business model. Hopefully this is a sign of positive changes to come in the way publishers treat developers and their customers
I just love Falcons condescending (lol) yet informative commentary. He could be talking about anything and I’d tune in to listen. The dude is very entertaining and he probably doesn’t even realize it
His voice to me is almost ASMR haha
👍 Jake is the opposite, I just cannot listen to his voice
Jake isn’t bad, but I prefer Falcon to him.
Lol falcon has an interesting past that I can't help but think about every time I watch his videos. But nonetheless I like his voice and commentary
All the videos should be Falcon. I hate the other guy (Not-Falcon) who feels the need to get in front of the camera. His voice is weird and whiny to begin with an now I have to apply it to that face. I just downvote Not-Falcon videos automatically.
i don't mind delays if it means the game will be polished/complete, but we've seen that so often not be the case. a delay doesn't make me any more confident in the game when it's finally released
battlepasses need to either 1 stop having a 3 month time limit to them or just go altogether
Thinks that can’t die in 2023: gameranx daily. Always makes my day
One trend I’ve wished dead for years is buying a game, putting it into the system…and then having to wait for the game to download. It just now happened to me when I played Gotham Knights for the first time. Just let me play my games as soon as I get it home. Maybe I’m old school, but I miss the days when I would get a game for the NES, SNES, etc. and play it right out of the box/case.
Isn't it the case for most games? I buy mostly digital but the ones I bought on disk for the PS4 and 5 gave me the option to play the disk version without downloading anything. I need to install them, yes, but I don't need to download anything to play.
I'm not sure if that's ever gonna be a possibility again, because fitting a 80GB game on a DVD might not be the easiest :D
@@anaxo28 there's already a way around that, use multiple disks (and don't put so much useless crap in the game for "ImMeRsIoN")
Just stop physical games and You will save time by removing 1 unnecessary step :)
@@anaxo28 i think disks are obsolete at this point. why not just use something similar to a USB or SSD drive those things are tiny and can go up to 12TB these days. I have a 600GB portable SSD and a 200GB USB drive and I can literally fit them both in my wallet at the same time.
Eventually the price will be so high for games that it won’t matter, nobody will be able to buy games unless your wealthy
The PS4 version of Last of Us was a Remaster, not a remake. Really confused at how so many people in the industry don't seem to understand the difference between the two...
I don't think the game in industry gave up on the NFT market. What I think is happening is they're just trying to figure out a way to reintroduce it later under a different name, or under a different branding.
Steam market already does that without the need for blockchain bullshit. See those exorbitant costs on CSGO skins? Steam makes profits off of market trades for those.
Agree
it's called microtransactions.
@ANVY アンビー💎 yeah, so why not just use nfts? Then you actually own the item and could set-up independent markets outside of steam.
@@romarbetc123 Valve does not need blockchain for verification since they are the sole owners of the Steam community market. They don’t need to rely on blockchain to force exclusivity because they do that on their own. Steam holds the biggest marketshare for digital storefronts for games. Not only would adding blockchain slow trades, it would also mean allowing other companies to access the community market outside of Steam leading to so many other problems like integration and security problems, as well as huge public backlash. The market feature already fulfills everything NFTs were designed to do in Steam’s system.
Dragon Age: Origins had just the right amount of character dialogue during exploration. The conversations were even tailored to what characters you had in your party at the time! If you ever want a laugh, the Grandma of a Mage would mother the crap out of your Templar, or if you have the Dwarf with you she'll match drunken stories with him!
DA:O is still one of my top 3 RPGs
loved this in DA:O still haven't really found anything like it in a long time.
It’s still the best in the franchise and this is definitely part of why.
That's a fantastic game. Few games come close to it even today.
Still in the middle of a play through, never finished it with all of the dlc, did not exist back then.
Here's one that no one ever talks about: Right-handed characters in third-person games who wear their gear left-handed for no reason. Worse than that is when a character loses their right eye, yet they continue to shoot right-handed.
2021: complain companies released too early and its buggy!
2022/23: TOO MANY DELAYS!!!!
1. Microtransactions
2. Loot boxes
3. Pre-orders
Done
Just announce your game three months before release. That way the chances of delays are also very slim and you don't have to sit five years waiting for something that keeps getting pushed forward expecting preorders
The only issue with the whole next generation things are people really couldn't find it anywhere as you Said and people can't afford the next system. I think it's nice to not so exclusives. They cover a bigger market and make more money (possibly)
I prefer PC over next gen, because most "next gen" features have been on pc for a while now.
The only? No there’s plenty of issues, yes we have next gen games but they don’t feel like that as he said. Yet they raised the base price of these games. They want more money for the same amount of work put into games, less work even. New gen devs will be the end of good games. Gaming peaked and we are now experiencing the downhill
@@cxngo8124 that wasn't a conversation about PC though, so its irrelevant. Besides, PC being "next gen" before everything else has been a thing since the 90s.
@@adamw.7169 exactly, we know PC is where you go if you want the next-gen features, higher settings, more tuning how you want your game to play etc. but it comes with an upfront cost
I still am completely blown away that ZYNGA the garbage shovelware developer that literally sold their games at staples of all places sold for billions of dollars....crazy
Massive companies consolidating (monopolizing) an industry is historically bad news. It breeds less competition, which leads to poorer quality products. I'm extremely concerned about the future of the industry I love so much.
Todd: "If you can see that mountain, you can go there."
Proceeds to go to mountain and there is nothing there.
I think it's actually possible that some delays are fully intentional and planned from the very start. What they do is they maintain he hype and the attention on a video game longer, it creates several waves of articles in media, people just talking about it etc, instead of just two, which would be announcement and then the actual release. It wouldn't be that stupid for a company to delay a game intentionally if you think about it this way...
Very, very, very unlikely. This only works if you subscribe to the "All PR is good PR" school of thought, which I think is total nonsense. A delay doesn't get people more excited about a game, quite the opposite: It makes people worry if the development is troubled, it makes some people cancel their pre-orders and buy other games instead etc.
Also, this has the same problem as many other conspiracy theories where you'd have to depend on literally hundreds of people not leaking that information about the fake release date out to the press.
@@Christopher-md7tf lol stay in school kid.
@@longjohnny dumb
@@longjohnny wdym “stay in school kid” he brought up a good argument and just only disagreed. Meanwhile you only came up with an insult LMAOO.
On Meta Quest 2, I believe the story was that it underwent a large redesign and they also realised it's performance was too low and needed to be upspecced substantially, hence the delay and price increase.
I think you're confusing the Quest 2 with the Quest Pro. The Quest 2 released in 2020 and Meta just flat out bumped the price up by 100 bucks last year.
End the following:
-Games releasing in buggy, unfinished states.
-Microtransactions.
-"Exclusive Games" (I'm sorry but not all of us can afford two next gen gaming systems AND pay $70/game)
-STOP CRUNCHING WORKERS!!
-Nintendo, for the love of God, stop walling off your classic content by not adding them to the eShop.
I can't believe lootboxes or excessive monetization was not mentioned in this video especially in cases where games are broken unfinished and have them slapped in to add insult to injury to players
Bc most ppl enjoy loot boxes now, especially the younger generation.
@@BoleDaPole you mean most of the younger generation now have gambling addictions because of the predatory practice and dont see the consequences using mommy and daddies credit card
Do a list for trends that ruined the evolution of gaming (not just the current market)
Thanks for your suggestion
@@gameranxTV battle passes, dlc, and loot boxes. All micro transactions that basically say “we made the full game then diluted the cool stuff behind pay walls”.
@kiddkunai3324 Very true.
Back when DLC was still called an "expansion pack" and would also be released on physical media, it was great. With those, a studio could keep the lights on between game releases. By allocating a small team to make additional/add cut content to games that sold well in their first year but were about to be price cut in their second year (used to be common practice). Meanwhile, gamers would get another great new experience on a game they really liked, and it wouldn't cost as much as a full game. Like RA2 YR or GTA TLAD and GTA TBOGT. Those were great.
Now, DLC is better known for asking a low amount of money that people can easily miss, for something useless like a skin, that was probably put together in an afternoon. Or something that should have been in the game to begin with. Like "premium cars" in Forza.
Anything that turns a regular game into a casino basically.
@@CheapBastard1988
While car DLCs have gone overboard it is worth noting that the devs have to pay license fees to put cars in so there is a limit to how many they can put in on release as part of the production budget. Still, there was one Forza game where you could spend a grand on DLC cars which was effing outrageous. There can be a happy medium without ripping people off I think but while companies like EA make the vast majority of their income through microtransactions they're not going to stop milking it, the worse thing is that it kills quality in the final product.
For number 7: How about we stop prematurely announcing games with unrealistic release dates while simultaneously crunching developers to hell and back instead?
"Yeah we gonna release this awesome new game next month and it will be 100$ and it will need to be pre ordered at first and it will come with DLC coz we wanna split the main game into sections to earn more money and you will need 64gb ram and windows 10 to play it coz everyone lives in a 1st world country and..." Yeah the future of gaming is scary...luckily ill be too old to care in a few decades.
Can we get a video on the laziest and/or most "we really couldn't think of anything but we needed a boss fight" mechanics in games?
Like for example when a "boss fight" is basically just you fighting a bunch of minions of the actual boss for most of it, but the boss isn't actually themed around summoning, and they obviously just did it to try to make the boss fight last longer
I can't stand Fodder fights. The whole purpose was to fight the boss, not his minions. What gets even more annoying are when these minions are just beefed up versions with some kimick like cannot be stunned or tanks ever hit or can only be damaged by certain attacks. All while you also have the "boss" to worry about.
Invulnerability is the prime exemple of lazy boss fight mechanic.
Turning down the frequency of dialog is okay but having a volume option with closed caption seems better. Some games like GTA Online, which has seen 3 generations, still don't give players an option to mute in-game dialog so the entire game has to be muted to maintain sanity when replaying a job.
Days gone and cyberpunk, being called or radiod every minute about some quest
Can’t have it both ways. If you want devs to stop releasing unfinished games, then you need to support them delaying games that aren’t ready.
People that say games at $60/70$ is too expensive, they weren't around in the 90s.
Turok on N64 was $70 when I bought it and Goldeneye was $80. That price in the 90s would mean today they'd cost over $100.
Games today really aren't that expensive, especially since the amount of content you get is a lot.
For small developer studios, the delays are caused by inexperience and over-optimism in estimating deadlines.
For AAA studios, the delays are caused by: 1) features added during development; and 2) difficulty in telling management that things are going slower than estimated.
Management: Who do we have to fire to make things go faster?
You forgot top executives forcing changes on them last second
and another example is skull & bones released date is november 8th 2022, and suddenly gow ragnarok would released on november 9th 2022. ofc people would buy gow ragnarok over skull and bones because most of them dont want to play 2 games at the same time or they only had to choose 1 game because they dont have much money to buy both of them.
Well for Stalker 2 isn't their fault. The company was based in Kyiv so when the Russian invasion started they had to pause the production for some time
As Shigeru Miyamoto said;
"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad."
The reason I love this quote is it’s 100% spot on about the product of a video game
Which isn't true any more.
Duke Nukem Forever proves otherwise.
@@NeptuneJr technically, it isn't. He said it about a game in the 90's. But I still see some truth in it.
A delayed game with higher quality is much better than an early release without much quality.
Tbh the community will always be angry. Release the game in time in a broken state due crowd pressure or delay it, no matter what gamers will get angry for any small reason.
It seems like Naughty Dog, at least from their most recent are trying to do away with the Delay issue entirely by shortening the time from reveal to launch down substantially..
I personally feel like 5-7 months is the perfect balance of the timeline from reveal to release.
Games should never be revealed without a solid release date locked in my opinion.
Why do you care? Studios can announce whenever they want and there's no wrong way to do it. I almost forgot about Elden Ring but then it released and it was awesome. Just bc you can't be patient doesn't mean a short turnover is always inherently better.
What?? Last ND announcement (cause Tlou remake doesn't count) was in 2016.. For a game they delayed for FOUR YEARS let's wait to see if they've changed or just didn't announce TloU remake till almost release to avoid backlash..
@@geordiejones5618 I agree with Absolute here. Announcing a title years in advance gets the fanbase hyped and then squanders a lot of good will. For instance, Silksong. Officially announced in 2019 and Team Cherry hasn't even bothered updating their blog since Dec 2019. Nothing about it has been seen in over a year (possibly two but I'm not looking up info for this). Is it cancelled? Is it still in work? By announcing early, they create an expectation that more information will be coming and the silence just enables the fans question what's going on. Plus, if you have to delay, that delay has to be announced which just makes the company look bad (better to release in a good state certainly, but it'd be great to not renege on promises simultaneously).
Conversely, waiting until you're polishing up the title for release before announcing it to the world and then following that up with monthly info dumps, interviews, dev blogs, previews, etc. gets the fans interested and maintains that interest until launch day when the product itself takes over that role.
@@ktdagoat1289 Lmao, guess OP is just shilling 🤷♂️
I would much rather have a delay, and wait for a quality game. Than have a half baked/ buggy game ANY day! Also helps catch up on the backlog
I'd rather them wait until the game is mostly done to announce it then set a date later than they expect for release
Out of all delays, STALKER 2 is most understandable because the country is in war
Cross play is a blessing it allows us all to stay connected as gamers. Without cross play the pc master race will began to hate console 100% again.
One of my major beefs with games is non-skippable dialogue and non-skippable cut scenes. When you're playing through a game for the second or third time, I personally don't want to sit through everything again. I just want to get back into the action and play. Not sit there for ten to twenty minutes over and over again just to take two or three steps and more dialogue or cutscene to start up again.
The Dark Pictures Anthology games are notorious for this and require multiple playthroughs without being able to skip cutscenes. Infuriating!
I wouldn't even mind if it was a setting that you could turn on or off. You could have it set to off if you're playing through the first time and don't want to accidentally skip and on for when you just want to plow through.. perhaps even being able to set it to automatically do it.
I don't want to complain about delays, because they're infinitely better than crunch and unfinished releases. Although I know your point, it all comes down to management. That or studios are way too keen to announce games and their release date before the teams working on the project are comfortable to put and end date forward.
Living in south africa, I can say that games here are simply too expensive, I have to wait at least 2 years for good games to go on sale for cheap enough to be afforded and even then I feel it's too much. I only bought and played red dead 2 this year because it was too expensive for years and I happened to see a really cheap cd key and got it.
Here's a much better list:
7. Battle Royale
6. Missing Co-op Campaigns
5. Console exclusives
4. Microtransactions
3. Live Services
2. People buying preorders
1. Bobby Kotick
All I'm hearing about the next gen is that we didn't really need it because things still look fine.
not true at all, i am glad i have one, its way way better.
Not very true. The reason there aren't many games that take advantage of them is because they aren't whats being worked on currently. Now for consoles, it's even less true for the same reason since the games that only focus on PS5 are not yet released.
To be fair, Stalker 2 had a pretty good reason for getting delayed...
That clip of COD reloading and the dude just pastes bullets into the window frame instead of the enemy had me dying 🤣
#6 is just another cyberpunk prediction : Corporate empire owning everything, and the gaming industry is just one part of it
I feel it's a bit two faced to complain of unfinished games AND to complain of games being delayed so they can be finished
Exactly
Right
Theyre both the same problem tbh. Release dates as they are, shiuld change. Games need alot of time and manpower to make these days but the shareholders setting dates dont understand this
Lord Falcon literally explains this point during number 7: unfinished games are frustrating - the point is to be more generous on release titles to omit meeting deadlines.
I think the issue is the release dates getting announced way too early. Delays happen that's fine but the dissapointment from delays could be avoided if the dates weren't firmed up until they're sure they'll hit it
companies are blaming inflation for increased prices, meanwhile shareholders are taking out record high dividends
Honestly, if a game comes out in a good state without any bigger bugs, I don't care if it is delayed. I rather wait a couple of months than have a game released on its original date in an unplayable state and the community giving up on it and let it rot even if it gets patched up to be a good game later on. Happened many times before. Delays are not an issue
For those of us who still haven't been able to get a new Gen console, we are glad that they are still making games for our consoles.
Yup!
Same bro 🙏😎
Yeah I thought that was an odd one to include. 2 years really isn't that long. PS2 still got releases while the PS4 was already released.
@@jacobfife7273 2 years is a long time when you could easily play them on previous consoles.. I would be thankful too.. but when the next gen console isn’t demonstrating its potential, it can feel like a waste of money. Hopefully this year will have enough to satisfy both generations.
@@pheel7142 well for me I never understood why people go nuts and demand the newest console immediately upon release. I have even watched side by side comparisons of some games and it barely looks different to me. I mean sure I do see the differences somewhat but it's not enough for me to go ok I'm gonna shell out several hundred bucks to get this new console that makes things look slightly better when I am pretty happy with what I already have. And personally unless the frame rate drops are really intense I'm don't mind it much.
Your point #6 partially explained why #7 happened. IMHO, another reason might be politics among various teams within the same company. There will always be some team leads want to do things their way or whatnot and clash with everyone.
fingers crossed that Tears of the Kingdom will not be a bad game because of frames, performance and graphic problems
Another great video, Falcon! 😊 For number five, I think there are so many reasons we’re stuck in the next generation, but I think a big one (NOT speaking for myself: I’m excited) is that there just isn’t the hype for new games. I don’t think it’s necessarily that developers did anything wrong, that the consoles and/or games aren’t good (at least not unilaterally), or that people somehow dislike it-I just think that this current generation has so many good memories on older consoles and with older games; that current gaming-trends has adopted some really rough practices that are major issues for a lot of folks (though these are not across-the-board issues); and that gamers have been burned by a lot of unkept promises and delays-not to mention that it just seems like either everything is coming out all at once and folks are being overwhelming to keep up with it all, or there are spaces where it seems like almost nothing at all really happens, so people just lose interest pretty quickly out of a combination of confusion, frustration, already having what they want and not looking for more, or feeling overwhelmed-or-underwhelmed on a consistent basis. It just seems like these new consoles, which should have been a volcanic-eruption, are turning more into a slow, continuously-sputtering fizzle. Like I said, I’m not speaking for myself: I am excited to see the new stuff coming out, even though I like the way gaming used to go a bit better, in many cases-I just think the above list are issues with a lot of folks I talk to and observations I see happening, at least as far as I can tell.
We need more split screen Koop games. Fuck online Koop. Oh yeah, and maybe new AAA games for under 70 Bucks
Yup coooooop all day please
If the prices continue to increase then the quality had better do the same. That's my biggest gripe with modern gaming. Abysmal launches with broken games, but a full $70 price tag now.
it’s gonna be at LEAST another year or two until i can get my hands on a next gen console. they’re between $750 and $850 in australia!!! what the hell!!! consoles used to be like $400 and now they’re almost a THOUSAND dollars??? prices are getting SO ridiculous. consoles used to be $400-$500, games used to be $60-$70, and now prices have almost doubled. insane.
Who ever could have predicted that bitcoin/nft's would end up failing? I'm so shocked, and grateful
About #5, Game Development has changed a lot in the last 10 years, it makes it so much easier to support previous consoles. That and next Gen consoles are not as big as leaps in technology as they once were.
exactly, and tbh this don't affecte the owner of new gen console in nothing only help does that don't have money to buy new gen consoles.
Maybe it’s just because as a kid my perception of time was warped, but it felt like there was a much larger amount of time between Xbox360/PS3 and XboxOne/PS4 then between previous and current gen. It also doesn’t seem like a huge leap in quality either
The leap from last generation to this generation is the biggest jump in console history as far as quality goes...
@@lucasallods If you're broke just say that. Ps4 definitely holds back the ps5 and im glad studios are finally moving away from it. When a studio always has to plan for the lowest common denominator visual quality suffers because they don't want to make two fundamental different games. This means ps5 gets an upressed, higher detail version of the ps4 version, instead of being pushed to its full potential.
@@bazonga9085 yeah because imagine you live in a world where definition is a thing, and you can choose resolution and etc, they don't need to make a compleat different game just low a little bit of graphic in one console.