games

Duke Nukem mentioned, kinda surprised by this

Tiny Tina had good reception, but 3 was bad and the movie is going to be worse

I was bullish on Embracer group as a "AA siphon" pick up where THQ left off

Saudi's fucked them over

Take2.... eh

Other than Rockstar making GTA, I'm not sure they even want to make games anymore

Borderlands needed to become what Destiny is ~10 years ago

after Borderlands 2 was a massive it, that should have been their focus, make a multi-world Borderlands that went all-in on the vault idea

I feel like that's even what they teased with 3 (and at the end of 2)

I forget what they got distracted by, oh wait

it was that Moba Hero shooter thing

uh.....

Battleborne

that was it

yeah

I actually think this is a bad outcome for Gearbox vs going independent

I don't think Take2 has any interest in AA (or w/e the fuck you want to call Gearbox) games

After talking to my friend who is a big borderlands fan, this is probably bad you're right

Will be interesting, Take 2 has the money to be a major publisher if they wanted to

They shut down the studio that made wonderlands, and I wasn't aware that the writers of 4 are the people defending sweet baby on twitter

lmao

and wait what? I thought Tiny Tina's game did alright

was that a recent embracer group closure

(a concept which I still don't really understand tbh)

was there issues with borderlands 3 other than the writing? i didnt actually play a lot of it

i just know the writing got screwed over because the lead writer is a ESG/DEI simp who is incredibly unfunny

I don't think it did enough new things, 7-8 years after BL2 and it felt like BL2.5

cringe writing was hit or miss as well ^^ like you said

then (presumably because it didn't sell absurdly well), it got dropped fairly quick and there wasn't much post-launch content

apparently theres a borderlands 4 in development, though

there's also a hollow knight sequel

lol

silk song taking forever isn't something i really mind

as long as its good if/when it does come out

I look at is as a graph, that after a certain amount of devtime the expected quality of a release drops

and Silksong has LONG since passed that point

games are like wine, right

They went from having real gameplay to show off to indefinite hiatus

the absurd crunch games like majora's mask and smash melee are clear counterpoints

I think dev time past ~5 years indicates major start/stops or restarts/rewrites in the development process

But yes, development hell, classic

and yes, I do think quality tends to decrease if something has been in development for forever

I really don't know what it is that stopped a basically complete-looking silksong from being released, so I'm mostly assuming they weren't impressed with their own work

short of those absurd passion projects like Stardew, where it's 1 guy working on it in their free time

there are plenty of exceptions to that

Huge AAA games with 10 studios and 3,000 employees take longer than 5 years

tiny indie games take shorter

how long was crosscode in development, spooky

this game is doomed

no idea Dialga

I don't know the development story

It was made by 2 guys it looks like though

the demo was put on newgrounds in early 2015, so it was in dev longer than that

it released lates 2018

i guess there's the recent success of Unicorn Overlord with its 10 year dev time

so 4 maybe 5 years

not as long as i thought it was

but its longer than your expectation

smaller teams games are harder to judge, but yeah I would have guessed ~3 years

I'm glad it didn't have an Owlboy-tier development though

So a lot of devs and a lot of time is where you have a recipe for disaster

i know opinion on BOTW isnt consistent in this server but that was what, 6-7 years? which i think is standard for a zelda iirc.

I feel like we don't disagree Dialga, or if we do it's some some semantic point of the exact point in time where the death cross is

i dont think theres a dev time limit at all, though spooky

Do you think development hell is a thing?

i wont say theres no correlation but i dont think its a big factor

Was botw done when originally planned for the wii u

it was meant to be a wii u game yes

Yeah but was it ready to be released or were they forced to delay it and just decided to release it with the switch

I think most projects (especially those with a normal-sized development team) fit into a pretty standard design rhythm was my only point Delays happen for any number of strange one-off reasons, but most of the time you don't enter a period of "who the fuck knows" unless something has gone extremely wrong and the project has been scrapped/restarted or majorly reworked

which is usually a sign that the game they designed wasn't fun to play

if they delayed it to put it on switch it couldnt have been more than half a year

and in that time they probably did some polish work

I think then botw would be at 2 years of strict development time, 4 if you're gonna be really generous

but its known BOTW was in development for 6 or 7 years gent

Dialga, they had the idea immediately after skyward sword, but they obviously were releasing other zelda games in the mean time

there's more than one team

sometimes they power though, and release it in a mixed state anyway (like Starfield) sometimes they start over and remake it (like what I assume happened to Silksong) sometimes the devs give up and spend their remaining days cooming on Twitter (like Va11HallA) sometimes the game gets canceled, and remade into something else (like Overwatch)