| Eagle367 said: Anyone still defending CDPR, watch this video: |
Chazore said:
Welcome to my jaded reality. This is what I've been wanting from a myriad of AAA companies, and they all end up resorting to "ooh, small shiny thing!". Each time it happens, another time AI is braindead, another time a game hasn't really innovated as much to push the entire medium forward, and never backward (unless you're like Nintendo, who does this EVERY FUCKING TIME WITH EVERY GAME, lookin at you New Horizons!). I know Cyberpunk will get those patches, but I know for damn sure they'll never fix the AI or deliver on most of those near decade long promises, because really, thinking like a stuck up CEo/Manager, I'd say that wouldn't make me money or business sense, and considering all that's transpired, those buggers haven't been fired yet, so we're likely to see an outcome of half delivered promises up to a year or two down the line, but they'll never reach NMS level of redemption. But this is me, this is me nearly all the time, bud. I'm hella jaded, because I'm at that stage where I know we should be getting better AI, bigger and more immersive, interactive worlds, but we're never getting them any time soon, because suits are greedy fuckers, who quite literally hold back innovation, because it doesn't line their coffers. I look at all these AAA games and I know they can be so much more, but they don't, because someone's always holding them back from being what they could be, and that really gets me jaded like fuck. I'm used to expecting the absolute worst at this point in my gaming life tbh. New game announced for PC?, bet it'll go EGS exclusive or come with MT's, be a butchered port, or a 2077 bugfest experience, or a genre that's well and truly saturated to fuck (like FPS, TBS, TBRPG, BR etc). At first I tried looking at the positives, but those just grew smaller over the years, and well, EG made damn sure I don't look forward to any kind of small or even big game, without me flinging hate at a dev team for being so damn short sighted with an obvious as fuck short term, anti-consumer deal. |
The shiniest possible graphics look like the worst resource guzzler, leaving only the crumbs for deeper aspects of games like gameplay, AI, interactivity, openness, multidimensionality and nonlinearity.
The other enemy for games aiming at such deeper goals is how much time and money they can cost if the wishlist gets out of control, like in Star Citizen, if we want an example of a game where they try to fulfil the promises, but keep on promising too many new things and get caught in a neverending vicious circle, or like in Duke Nukem Forever, where 15 years of promises were actually fulfilled with a giant pile of dung. All this frightens both execs and investors, and the latter cannot really play innocent as if execs took the easy, shiny and sloppy, but financially safest choice by themselves.
The only solution could be to decide the deepest aspects of a game first, ensure they are viable on the HW they are expected to run on and only at the end decide the level of graphics that will be viable too on top of them, but this will make pure graphics whores unhappy. But both Ninty and the best CDPR past games, and many other excellent games and devs teach us that really good games don't need to please graphics whores first to succeed.
I don't think last gen computing power was the problem: 7th gen had powerful enough CPUs and GPUs, but really not enough RAM for the largest and most interactive worlds, unless devs devised clever and as smooth as possible ways to dynamically load limited portions of an open world at a time, a thing that in a very coarse way was done even during 6th gen, for example in Morrowind (with the added compromise of separating with non dynamic loadings single indoors environments from the large, dynamically loaded oudoors), but 8th gen was totally capable of managing games with vast interactive worlds.
