shikamaru317 said:
One option would be to do both. Get maybe half of Arkane Austin started on their next project in pre-production, while the other half stays behind on Redfall to properly fix it, Xbox could contract out a 2nd party studio to assist those staying behind on Redfall to help them fix it faster as well, with half of Arkane staying on Redfall plus a 2nd party studio assisting them with fixing it they should be able to get them game into a proper state in around a year. Then the Redfall post-launch team could move on and start working on the next Arkane Austin game as it exits pre-production and enters full production. But in the end, alot depends on what Arkane wants to do imo. Do Harvey and his team want to stay behind and fix it, or do they want to just scrap the game and move on to their next project asap? While I do believe that Phil needs a firmer hand than he seems to have with some of his first party studios and making sure they are working on projects with commercial appeal, I'm not sure that it would be a good idea for Phil to force Arkane Austin to abandon Redfall and move on their next project if they want to properly fix Redfall first, that could really demoralize the team and potentially cause massive turnover at Arkane Austin. Few developers want a bad game ruining their track record and their résumé/CV, I get the feeling most developers at Arkane Austin would rather try and fix Redfall properly before moving on to their next game. |
I would rather they take the time to fix Redfall and get some of that goodwill back. I am interested in playing it, but I will wait until the majority of the issues are fixed before doing so.
VGChartz Sales Analyst and Writer - William D'Angelo - I stream on Twitch and have my own YouTube. Follow me on Bluesky and Threads.
I post and adjust the VGChartz hardware estimates, with help from Machina.
Writer of the Sales Comparison | Monthly Hardware Breakdown | Monthly Sales Analysis | Marketshare Features, as well as daily news on the Video Game Industry.