Chronicling the inability of gamedevs to make video games

[CSM-101]

Making games today is arguably easier than ever with all the available assets, documentation on engines, etc.

What made it hard back in the day is that they usually had to program a engine from the ground up. Now you can just buy Unreal or Unity etc **** and paste it wherever. ****. RPG Maker has been a thing for a really long time and arguably the best RPG Maker game, Super Columbine Massacre, came out almost 20 years ago.

[rusty_shackleford]

AAA and some AA games are harder to make than they were in the past

Completely untrue and I'm tired of seeing this sentiment. Everything is easier than it was. You just have ******* running studios with ******* that care more about virtue signaling and hiring more **** than they do knowing how to code.

This lesbian grandma argues from authority.

Why won't any of them actually explain why it is so then? They just state "believe me, I'm an expert." But what if they actually aren't an expert, but at the peak of Mount Stupid where they can't conceive that the reason they think it's so hard is because they only work at the same handful of western californian companies that all hire the same employees?


Spiders reliably pumps out a new AA game every 2-3 years. The quality has only gotten higher and they've had more content the longer they've done this.


How does Soyer plan on explaining this?
I picked Spiders for a reason. This is a constant amongst all French studios I'm aware of! France & Japan were entirely unimpacted productivity-wise by the Great Awokening. Ubisoft pumped out three massive Assassin's Creed games(Origins, Odyssey, Valhalla) each with 100-200 hours of content in the span of 5 years(5 years including Origins development, not from when Origins released) — approximately 6 with Valhalla's DLC included. The entire development cycle of Avowed is probably going to be longer than it took them to make all three of those games combined.

Solasta? Under budget and ahead of schedule, they actually released the game before the kickstarter pitch said it would be ready. 18 months from the demo to finish, and its development was smack in the middle of the coofdemic.

---

Soyer is wrong here and him asserting he knows more because of his personal experience is conflating anecdote with actual data. Long development cycles is a cultural issue.

[KnightoftheWind]

Completely untrue and I'm tired of seeing this sentiment. Everything is easier than it was. You just have ******* running studios with ******* that care more about virtue signaling and hiring more **** than they do knowing how to code.

This lesbian grandma argues from authority.

Why won't any of them actually explain why it is so then? They just state "believe me, I'm an expert." But what if they actually aren't an expert, but at the peak of Mount Stupid where they can't conceive that the reason they think it's so hard is because they only work at the same handful of western californian companies that all hire the same employees?


Spiders reliably pumps out a new AA game every 2-3 years. The quality has only gotten higher and they've had more content the longer they've done this.


How does Soyer plan on explaining this?
I picked Spiders for a reason. This is a constant amongst all French studios I'm aware of! France & Japan were entirely unimpacted productivity-wise by the Great Awokening. Ubisoft pumped out three massive Assassin's Creed games(Origins, Odyssey, Valhalla) each with 100-200 hours of content in the span of 5 years(5 years including Origins development, not from when Origins released) — approximately 6 with Valhalla's DLC included. The entire development cycle of Avowed is probably going to be longer than it took them to make all three of those games combined.

Solasta? Under budget and ahead of schedule, they actually released the game before the kickstarter pitch said it would be ready. 18 months from the demo to finish, and its development was smack in the middle of the coofdemic.

---

Soyer is wrong here and him asserting he knows more because of his personal experience is conflating anecdote with actual data. Long development cycles is a cultural issue.

Ubisoft brute forces it's perceived "quality" by putting multiple studios to work on a single game, with each studio having 1000+ employees. They also reuse a ton of assets and code, no doubt. Ubisoft games are not so much works of art in the sense that there are developers working to tell a genuine story of some kind, but literal assembly line products. There is more merit in a game like Borderlands 3 than there is in a typical Ubisoft title, because at least Borderlands 3 has genuine intent behind it. Even if that intent is to be repulsive vomit. Also, Assassin's Creed in particular was woke since it's first installment, when you played as a character (in that case an Arab) fighting evil Christians. That has been a consistent theme of sorts in the series, and I would count that as being the wokest of woke by default.

[rusty_shackleford]

This lesbian grandma argues from authority.

Why won't any of them actually explain why it is so then? They just state "believe me, I'm an expert." But what if they actually aren't an expert, but at the peak of Mount Stupid where they can't conceive that the reason they think it's so hard is because they only work at the same handful of western californian companies that all hire the same employees?


Spiders reliably pumps out a new AA game every 2-3 years. The quality has only gotten higher and they've had more content the longer they've done this.


How does Soyer plan on explaining this?
I picked Spiders for a reason. This is a constant amongst all French studios I'm aware of! France & Japan were entirely unimpacted productivity-wise by the Great Awokening. Ubisoft pumped out three massive Assassin's Creed games(Origins, Odyssey, Valhalla) each with 100-200 hours of content in the span of 5 years(5 years including Origins development, not from when Origins released) — approximately 6 with Valhalla's DLC included. The entire development cycle of Avowed is probably going to be longer than it took them to make all three of those games combined.

Solasta? Under budget and ahead of schedule, they actually released the game before the kickstarter pitch said it would be ready. 18 months from the demo to finish, and its development was smack in the middle of the coofdemic.

---

Soyer is wrong here and him asserting he knows more because of his personal experience is conflating anecdote with actual data. Long development cycles is a cultural issue.

Ubisoft brute forces it's perceived "quality" by putting multiple studios to work on a single game, with each studio having 1000+ employees. They also reuse a ton of assets and code, no doubt. Ubisoft games are not so much works of art in the sense that there are developers working to tell a genuine story of some kind, but literal assembly line products. There is more merit in a game like Borderlands 3 than there is in a typical Ubisoft title, because at least Borderlands 3 has genuine intent behind it. Even if that intent is to be repulsive vomit. Also, Assassin's Creed in particular was woke since it's first installment, when you played as a character (in that case an Arab) fighting evil Christians. That has been a consistent theme of sorts in the series, and I would count that as being the wokest of woke by default.

You'd have a point if those were the only 3 games that were being made in that time period by Ubisoft + game development was actually sped up by hiring more people.

in other words, "no". They don't use every single studio to develop one game, they're all each working on one or more games.

And the idea that Ubisoft is somehow unique here is ridiculous. Xbox Game Studios & Electronic Arts developed about 1/5th as many games in the same time period.

[KnightoftheWind]

Why won't any of them actually explain why it is so then? They just state "believe me, I'm an expert." But what if they actually aren't an expert, but at the peak of Mount Stupid where they can't conceive that the reason they think it's so hard is because they only work at the same handful of western californian companies that all hire the same employees?


Spiders reliably pumps out a new AA game every 2-3 years. The quality has only gotten higher and they've had more content the longer they've done this.


How does Soyer plan on explaining this?
I picked Spiders for a reason. This is a constant amongst all French studios I'm aware of! France & Japan were entirely unimpacted productivity-wise by the Great Awokening. Ubisoft pumped out three massive Assassin's Creed games(Origins, Odyssey, Valhalla) each with 100-200 hours of content in the span of 5 years(5 years including Origins development, not from when Origins released) — approximately 6 with Valhalla's DLC included. The entire development cycle of Avowed is probably going to be longer than it took them to make all three of those games combined.

Solasta? Under budget and ahead of schedule, they actually released the game before the kickstarter pitch said it would be ready. 18 months from the demo to finish, and its development was smack in the middle of the coofdemic.

---

Soyer is wrong here and him asserting he knows more because of his personal experience is conflating anecdote with actual data. Long development cycles is a cultural issue.

Ubisoft brute forces it's perceived "quality" by putting multiple studios to work on a single game, with each studio having 1000+ employees. They also reuse a ton of assets and code, no doubt. Ubisoft games are not so much works of art in the sense that there are developers working to tell a genuine story of some kind, but literal assembly line products. There is more merit in a game like Borderlands 3 than there is in a typical Ubisoft title, because at least Borderlands 3 has genuine intent behind it. Even if that intent is to be repulsive vomit. Also, Assassin's Creed in particular was woke since it's first installment, when you played as a character (in that case an Arab) fighting evil Christians. That has been a consistent theme of sorts in the series, and I would count that as being the wokest of woke by default.

You'd have a point if those were the only 3 games that were being made in that time period by Ubisoft + game development was actually sped up by hiring more people.

in other words, "no"

And the idea that Ubisoft is somehow unique here is ridiculous. Xbox Game Studios & Electronic Arts developed about 1/5th as many games in the same time period.

A lot of those are ports and shovelware. Or do you think "Just Dance" takes a lot of time and money to produce?. Ubisoft hasn't produced an original game in years, even their latest Avatar game is just a reskinned Far Cry with near identical gameplay. They're masters of asset flipping and corner cutting. Any perceived quality is just smoke and mirrors.

[rusty_shackleford]

Ubisoft brute forces it's perceived "quality" by putting multiple studios to work on a single game, with each studio having 1000+ employees. They also reuse a ton of assets and code, no doubt. Ubisoft games are not so much works of art in the sense that there are developers working to tell a genuine story of some kind, but literal assembly line products. There is more merit in a game like Borderlands 3 than there is in a typical Ubisoft title, because at least Borderlands 3 has genuine intent behind it. Even if that intent is to be repulsive vomit. Also, Assassin's Creed in particular was woke since it's first installment, when you played as a character (in that case an Arab) fighting evil Christians. That has been a consistent theme of sorts in the series, and I would count that as being the wokest of woke by default.

You'd have a point if those were the only 3 games that were being made in that time period by Ubisoft + game development was actually sped up by hiring more people.

in other words, "no"

And the idea that Ubisoft is somehow unique here is ridiculous. Xbox Game Studios & Electronic Arts developed about 1/5th as many games in the same time period.

A lot of those are ports and shovelware. Or do you think "Just Dance" takes a lot of time and money to produce?. Ubisoft hasn't produced an original game in years, even their latest Avatar game is just a reskinned Far Cry with near identical gameplay. They're masters of asset flipping and corner cutting. Any perceived quality is just smoke and mirrors.

Do you think Outerworlds or Avowed are extremely unique games that aren't just shovelware slop?

And if it's so easy to do what Ubisoft does… everyone else would be doing it!
Yet they don't. Why?

[KnightoftheWind]

You'd have a point if those were the only 3 games that were being made in that time period by Ubisoft + game development was actually sped up by hiring more people.

in other words, "no"

And the idea that Ubisoft is somehow unique here is ridiculous. Xbox Game Studios & Electronic Arts developed about 1/5th as many games in the same time period.

A lot of those are ports and shovelware. Or do you think "Just Dance" takes a lot of time and money to produce?. Ubisoft hasn't produced an original game in years, even their latest Avatar game is just a reskinned Far Cry with near identical gameplay. They're masters of asset flipping and corner cutting. Any perceived quality is just smoke and mirrors.

Do you think Outerworlds or Avowed are extremely unique games that aren't just shovelware slop?

We're not talking about those games, we're talking about Ubisoft.

[rusty_shackleford]

A lot of those are ports and shovelware. Or do you think "Just Dance" takes a lot of time and money to produce?. Ubisoft hasn't produced an original game in years, even their latest Avatar game is just a reskinned Far Cry with near identical gameplay. They're masters of asset flipping and corner cutting. Any perceived quality is just smoke and mirrors.

Do you think Outerworlds or Avowed are extremely unique games that aren't just shovelware slop?

We're not talking about those games, we're talking about Ubisoft.

Do you just enter threads, read a few sentences, then reply?

[KnightoftheWind]

Do you think Outerworlds or Avowed are extremely unique games that aren't just shovelware slop?

We're not talking about those games, we're talking about Ubisoft.

Do you just enter threads, read a few sentences, then reply?

You edited your comment, ******. But the reason why other companies don't do what Ubisoft does is because people would notice. Ubisoft gets away with it because that's what their customers have grown to expect. They expect the Assassin's Creeds and Far Crys to be uninnovative and largely copy-paste. Just as they do for Call of Duty or Madden. Avowed is a brand new AAA RPG, of course it's not going to be an asset flip. Even gaymers are getting on Bethesda's *** over Starfield being a modded version of Skyrim. When it comes to RPGs, and most games for that matter, originality is a requirement. That's a thing UbiSLOP is incapable of.

[rusty_shackleford]

We're not talking about those games, we're talking about Ubisoft.

Do you just enter threads, read a few sentences, then reply?

You edited your comment, ******. But the reason why other companies don't do what Ubisoft does is because people would notice. Ubisoft gets away with it because that's what their customers have grown to expect. They expect the Assassin's Creeds and Far Crys to be uninnovative and largely copy-paste. Just as they do for Call of Duty or Madden. Avowed is a brand new AAA RPG, of course it's not going to be an asset flip. Even gaymers are getting on Bethesda's *** over Starfield being a modded version of Skyrim. When it comes to RPGs, and most games for that matter, originality is a requirement. That's a thing UbiSLOP is incapable of.

They don't do it because they can't. Ubisoft's formula is widely copied, yet other developers take 3x as long to make the same exact kind of games.
Again, why?

[KnightoftheWind]

Do you just enter threads, read a few sentences, then reply?

You edited your comment, ******. But the reason why other companies don't do what Ubisoft does is because people would notice. Ubisoft gets away with it because that's what their customers have grown to expect. They expect the Assassin's Creeds and Far Crys to be uninnovative and largely copy-paste. Just as they do for Call of Duty or Madden. Avowed is a brand new AAA RPG, of course it's not going to be an asset flip. Even gaymers are getting on Bethesda's *** over Starfield being a modded version of Skyrim. When it comes to RPGs, and most games for that matter, originality is a requirement. That's a thing UbiSLOP is incapable of.

They don't do it because they can't. Ubisoft's formula is widely copied, yet other developers take 3x as long to make the same exact kind of games.
Again, why?

Because those developers don't have the benefit of reusing assets that Ubisoft does. Every Far Cry game since 2012 is a reskinned version of Far Cry 3. But first they had to build that base, which did take many years. Other developers obviously don't have access to Ubisoft's sheer number of resources and asset libraries, so they have to start from scratch if they want to piggyback off Ubislop.

[rusty_shackleford]

You edited your comment, ******. But the reason why other companies don't do what Ubisoft does is because people would notice. Ubisoft gets away with it because that's what their customers have grown to expect. They expect the Assassin's Creeds and Far Crys to be uninnovative and largely copy-paste. Just as they do for Call of Duty or Madden. Avowed is a brand new AAA RPG, of course it's not going to be an asset flip. Even gaymers are getting on Bethesda's *** over Starfield being a modded version of Skyrim. When it comes to RPGs, and most games for that matter, originality is a requirement. That's a thing UbiSLOP is incapable of.

They don't do it because they can't. Ubisoft's formula is widely copied, yet other developers take 3x as long to make the same exact kind of games.
Again, why?

Because those developers don't have the benefit of reusing assets that Ubisoft does. Every Far Cry game since 2012 is a reskinned version of Far Cry 3. But first they had to build that base, which did take many years. Other developers obviously don't have access to Ubisoft's sheer number of resources and asset libraries, so they have to start from scratch if they want to piggyback off Ubislop.

So why did it take 7 years to make Dying Light 2, an ubisoft-style open world game that makes heavy reuse of assets from the first game?

[KnightoftheWind]

They don't do it because they can't. Ubisoft's formula is widely copied, yet other developers take 3x as long to make the same exact kind of games.
Again, why?

Because those developers don't have the benefit of reusing assets that Ubisoft does. Every Far Cry game since 2012 is a reskinned version of Far Cry 3. But first they had to build that base, which did take many years. Other developers obviously don't have access to Ubisoft's sheer number of resources and asset libraries, so they have to start from scratch if they want to piggyback off Ubislop.

So why did it take 7 years to make Dying Light 2, an ubisoft-style open world game that makes heavy reuse of assets from the first game?

Because devs are untalented hacks?. As I said, Ubisoft has to brute force each release, they have thousands of pajeets and women working around the clock JUST to release an asset flip product. And let's not forget that Skull & Bones, their only original title in years, went through development hell and released half baked. That's your precious Ubisoft we're talking about, too.

[rusty_shackleford]

Because those developers don't have the benefit of reusing assets that Ubisoft does. Every Far Cry game since 2012 is a reskinned version of Far Cry 3. But first they had to build that base, which did take many years. Other developers obviously don't have access to Ubisoft's sheer number of resources and asset libraries, so they have to start from scratch if they want to piggyback off Ubislop.

So why did it take 7 years to make Dying Light 2, an ubisoft-style open world game that makes heavy reuse of assets from the first game?

Because devs are untalented hacks?. As I said, Ubisoft has to brute force each release, they have thousands of pajeets and women working around the clock JUST to release an asset flip product. And let's not forget that Skull & Bones, their only original title in years, went through development hell and released half baked. That's your precious Ubisoft we're talking about, too.

But they don't have thousands of developers working on one game, Ubisoft currently has 17 announced titles in development.

Again, you cannot "brute force" game development. There is absolutely no evidence that more developers past a certain point makes it go faster. I'd suggest picking up a copy of the Mythical Man Month.

[rusty_shackleford]

But they don't have thousands of developers working on one game, Ubisoft currently has 17 announced titles in development.

Again, you cannot "brute force" game development. There is absolutely no evidence that more developers past a certain point makes it go faster. I'd suggest picking up a copy of the Mythical Man Month.

If you remove the studios doing quality control, localization, online, marketing, and cash shop, you're left with about 150 credited developers who worked on the actual game part:
https://www.mobygames.com/game/114743/a ... tform=true

It was basically just Ubisoft Quebec.

[KnightoftheWind]

There is no way you're going to convince me that Ubisoft just has the most talented devs in the world. And there is no way those 17 titles are anything other than games like Just Dance, or other asset flip Assassin's Creeds. Ubisoft is in the franchise business, and their output speaks for themselves. These are games that look very similar, and play very similar. Even if they have a maximum of 150 people working on each game, they are NOT creating anything original. And when their only original project in years, Skull & Bones, was a massive flop in both production values and sales, it speaks volumes as to how """""talented"""" these hacks really are.

In other words, when they aren't piggybacking off of previous successes, they are quick to fail.

[rusty_shackleford]

There is no way you're going to convince me that Ubisoft just has the most talented devs in the world. And there is no way those 17 titles are anything other than games like Just Dance, or other asset flip Assassin's Creeds. Ubisoft is in the franchise business, and their output speaks for themselves. These are games that look very similar, and play very similar. Even if they have a maximum of 150 people working on each game, they are NOT creating anything original. And when their only original project in years, Skull & Bones, was a massive flop in both production values and sales, it speaks volumes as to how """""talented"""" these hacks really are.

In other words, when they aren't piggybacking off of previous successes, they are quick to fail.

The entire argument was that it takes more effort to create AA & AAA games now than 10 years ago. I posted evidence to the contrary showing it's a cultural phenomenon that is not affecting cultures that tend to be more isolated from the English speaking world,
I don't even know what you're arguing but it's some strawman you made up in your head.

[rusty_shackleford]

also, ironically, FNV was just an asset flip yet nobody complains about it

[KnightoftheWind]

There is no way you're going to convince me that Ubisoft just has the most talented devs in the world. And there is no way those 17 titles are anything other than games like Just Dance, or other asset flip Assassin's Creeds. Ubisoft is in the franchise business, and their output speaks for themselves. These are games that look very similar, and play very similar. Even if they have a maximum of 150 people working on each game, they are NOT creating anything original. And when their only original project in years, Skull & Bones, was a massive flop in both production values and sales, it speaks volumes as to how """""talented"""" these hacks really are.

In other words, when they aren't piggybacking off of previous successes, they are quick to fail.

The entire argument was that it takes more effort to create AA & AAA games now than 10 years ago. I posted evidence to the contrary showing it's a cultural phenomenon that is not affecting cultures that tend to be more isolated from the English speaking world,
I don't even know what you're arguing but it's some strawman you made up in your head.

But I am DEBOOOONKING your claim that somehow, Ubisoft has cracked the code and is more efficient than everyone else. They aren't, they're just reusing a ton of assets and code in each release. You might as well argue that Activision is a talented developer because they manage to release a Call of Duty every year that looks good at face value.

[rusty_shackleford]

There is no way you're going to convince me that Ubisoft just has the most talented devs in the world. And there is no way those 17 titles are anything other than games like Just Dance, or other asset flip Assassin's Creeds. Ubisoft is in the franchise business, and their output speaks for themselves. These are games that look very similar, and play very similar. Even if they have a maximum of 150 people working on each game, they are NOT creating anything original. And when their only original project in years, Skull & Bones, was a massive flop in both production values and sales, it speaks volumes as to how """""talented"""" these hacks really are.

In other words, when they aren't piggybacking off of previous successes, they are quick to fail.

The entire argument was that it takes more effort to create AA & AAA games now than 10 years ago. I posted evidence to the contrary showing it's a cultural phenomenon that is not affecting cultures that tend to be more isolated from the English speaking world,
I don't even know what you're arguing but it's some strawman you made up in your head.

But I am DEBOOOONKING your claim that somehow, Ubisoft has cracked the code and is more efficient than everyone else. They aren't, they're just reusing a ton of assets and code in each release. You might as well argue that Activision is a talented developer because they manage to release a Call of Duty every year that looks good at face value.

[KnightoftheWind]

The entire argument was that it takes more effort to create AA & AAA games now than 10 years ago. I posted evidence to the contrary showing it's a cultural phenomenon that is not affecting cultures that tend to be more isolated from the English speaking world,
I don't even know what you're arguing but it's some strawman you made up in your head.

But I am DEBOOOONKING your claim that somehow, Ubisoft has cracked the code and is more efficient than everyone else. They aren't, they're just reusing a ton of assets and code in each release. You might as well argue that Activision is a talented developer because they manage to release a Call of Duty every year that looks good at face value.

Irrelevant. People also complained that Odyssey felt way too bloated with meaningless padding, and again, they had the benefit of drawing resources from the previous RPG *** Creed, Origins. If playtime is a metric for quality, then I have a dozen RPG Maker games by Kemco to sell you.

[rusty_shackleford]

But I am DEBOOOONKING your claim that somehow, Ubisoft has cracked the code and is more efficient than everyone else. They aren't, they're just reusing a ton of assets and code in each release. You might as well argue that Activision is a talented developer because they manage to release a Call of Duty every year that looks good at face value.

Irrelevant. People also complained that Odyssey felt way too bloated with meaningless padding, and again, they had the benefit of drawing resources from the previous RPG *** Creed, Origins. If playtime is a metric for quality, then I have a dozen RPG Maker games by Kemco to sell you.

The 'Main Story' is just that, the main story. Not doing any side content. It's longer than Outer World's completionist, btw.

[Roguey]

If it is harder and more complicated to make a game today than 10 years ago, why are there 100x more games being made?

The number of AAA games has significantly decreased. I'm not certain about the number of AA games but I wouldn't say there's been a significant increase.

Why won't any of them actually explain why it is so then? They just state "believe me, I'm an expert." But what if they actually aren't an expert, but at the peak of Mount Stupid where they can't conceive that the reason they think it's so hard is because they only work at the same handful of western californian companies that all hire the same employees?

Raph said it took four days to make a chair for Dishonored 2 and Prey. I would guess that an effect on pipelines.

On Dishonored 2 and Prey it took 4 days to make a chair... 4 days! Granted it was a beautiful chair, and as much as I have enjoyed that phase of my career and my passion, now I want to work on games where making a chair takes no more than 2 hours.

Spiders reliably pumps out a new AA game every 2-3 years. The quality has only gotten higher and they've had more content the longer they've done this.

I dunno, I gave Steelrising a pass. Their next title is debuting into Early Access.

also, ironically, FNV was just an asset flip yet nobody complains about it

It's all about design. Assassin's Creed Brotherhood was a fantastic expansion pack sequel, Revelations was a bit of a disappointment.

[Nooneatall]

Making games today is arguably easier than ever with all the available assets, documentation on engines, etc.

What made it hard back in the day is that they usually had to program a engine from the ground up. Now you can just buy Unreal or Unity etc **** and paste it wherever. ****. RPG Maker has been a thing for a really long time and arguably the best RPG Maker game, Super Columbine Massacre, came out almost 20 years ago.

If we go way back, not only did they have to program a game, but sometimes an os to boot it. Way harder than today.

[rusty_shackleford]

Raph said it took four days to make a chair for Dishonored 2 and Prey. I would guess that an effect on pipelines.

One of the recent final fantasy games had thousands of unused assets, can't remember which. Nobody could remember who even asked for them, or what they were for. Enough to fill complete levels.

[SoLong]

I had the ultra rare drop drake mount from the one instance, ponycucks couldn't even fathom how great it felt to actually play the game and get rewards that way
https://www.wowhead.com/wotlk/item=4415 ... roto-drake

1.6% chance from the final boss of an instance that you had to roll against 4 other people for

Oh, I got that one too. On a private server though, when I started obsessively collecting mounts. It doesn't drop from the final boss though?

The mount I was most proud of was Time Lost Protodrake. I had to hunt that thing while competing against the entire ******* server.

I managed to tag the ***** while jumping off my flying mount with my priest. Thank you levitate.

Seriously WoW's graphics might look like *** nowadays but there is just something about this game and the private server community I really like. If Tauri ever finishes their legion realm I might just start playing again.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Raph said it took four days to make a chair for Dishonored 2 and Prey. I would guess that an effect on pipelines.

One of the recent final fantasy games had thousands of unused assets, can't remember which. Nobody could remember who even asked for them, or what they were for. Enough to fill complete levels.

I believe that was Final Fantasy XIII.

Edit: Now I made myself sad by thinking of Guild Wars 2. That game went to **** after Heart of Thorns. No idea if it's **** writers (some obnoxious feminist got fired for ******** on fans on Twitter) or the devs never expected the game to last so long.

The game was doing good up through the end of season 4. Yes, PvP and WvW were abandoned, and Anet walked about the increased difficulty of HoT, and the PoF maps didn't have the same level of verticality as HoT, but between 2016 and 2019 we were at a good spot where we were getting a brand new high fantasy zone every 2 months, and there was no content drought before or after PoF's release. You had three years of lots of new high fantasy places to go adventuring.

What happened was that Arena Net wanted to make another game, and were diverted resources away from GW2 to it. After Path of Fire's release, GW2 was not greenlit for another expansion, so the devs began making season 4 with the expectation that it could very well be the actual ending of the game. Thus, they wrote season 4 to be a climax and S4E6 to be a soft ending. They gave players a flying dragon mount in the final chapter which trivialized traversal in the rest of the game, which is okay if at that point the player has "beaten" GW2 and there is nothing left to overcome. But then it turned out that GW2 didn't end. It got renewed for season 5 aka Icebrood Saga, and the devs didn't want to take away people's flying dragon mounts, so that reduced the longevity of future content if trying to traverse this world wasn't challenging anymore.

Then NCsoft caught wind that Anet wasn't focusing all of their attention on GW2 (which is a proven and successful game and has people paying money for cash shop mount skins) to instead make some new game (which is unknown and doesn't have a fanbase and is risky), and told them to get back to working on GW2. A round of layoffs happened. A third expansion began development, and season 5/IBS was aborted. Then we got a long content drought until EoD released, and when it did it was very lackluster as the veteran game designers who made HoT were gone.

[Vergil]

There is no way you're going to convince me that Ubisoft just has the most talented devs in the world. And there is no way those 17 titles are anything other than games like Just Dance, or other asset flip Assassin's Creeds. Ubisoft is in the franchise business, and their output speaks for themselves. These are games that look very similar, and play very similar. Even if they have a maximum of 150 people working on each game, they are NOT creating anything original. And when their only original project in years, Skull & Bones, was a massive flop in both production values and sales, it speaks volumes as to how """""talented"""" these hacks really are.

In other words, when they aren't piggybacking off of previous successes, they are quick to fail.

Assassin's Creed Unity spent so much time painstakingly recreating locations in Paris like Notre Dame that the 3D model they created was being used to help the reconstruction process after the fire.
The issue with Assassin's Creed games is with the gameplay of all the criticisms of the series "asset flip" is perhaps the most ******** one to come up with it's kind of impressive you managed to take low hanging fruit like dunking of AssCreed and managing to be wrong about it.

[KnightoftheWind]

There is no way you're going to convince me that Ubisoft just has the most talented devs in the world. And there is no way those 17 titles are anything other than games like Just Dance, or other asset flip Assassin's Creeds. Ubisoft is in the franchise business, and their output speaks for themselves. These are games that look very similar, and play very similar. Even if they have a maximum of 150 people working on each game, they are NOT creating anything original. And when their only original project in years, Skull & Bones, was a massive flop in both production values and sales, it speaks volumes as to how """""talented"""" these hacks really are.

In other words, when they aren't piggybacking off of previous successes, they are quick to fail.

Assassin's Creed Unity spent so much time painstakingly recreating locations in Paris like Notre Dame that the 3D model they created was being used to help the reconstruction process after the fire.
The issue with Assassin's Creed games is with the gameplay of all the criticisms of the series "asset flip" is perhaps the most ******** one to come up with it's kind of impressive you managed to take low hanging fruit like dunking of AssCreed and managing to be wrong about it.

Coincidentally, Unity is the game people look back on when critiquing the decline of AAA standards. Unity, after it's dozens of patches, still manages to look as good or better than some titles today. Including newer AssCreeds. So my point stands. Unity was the first next gen AssCreed, and maybe Ubisoft did earnestly try for that game, before they started to recycle stuff ad nauseam.

[rusty_shackleford]

There is no way you're going to convince me that Ubisoft just has the most talented devs in the world. And there is no way those 17 titles are anything other than games like Just Dance, or other asset flip Assassin's Creeds. Ubisoft is in the franchise business, and their output speaks for themselves. These are games that look very similar, and play very similar. Even if they have a maximum of 150 people working on each game, they are NOT creating anything original. And when their only original project in years, Skull & Bones, was a massive flop in both production values and sales, it speaks volumes as to how """""talented"""" these hacks really are.

In other words, when they aren't piggybacking off of previous successes, they are quick to fail.

Assassin's Creed Unity spent so much time painstakingly recreating locations in Paris like Notre Dame that the 3D model they created was being used to help the reconstruction process after the fire.
The issue with Assassin's Creed games is with the gameplay of all the criticisms of the series "asset flip" is perhaps the most ******** one to come up with it's kind of impressive you managed to take low hanging fruit like dunking of AssCreed and managing to be wrong about it.

Coincidentally, Unity is the game people look back on when critiquing the decline of AAA standards. Unity, after it's dozens of patches, still manages to look as good or better than some titles today. Including newer AssCreeds. So my point stands. Unity was the first next gen AssCreed, and maybe Ubisoft did earnestly try for that game, before they started to recycle stuff ad nauseam.

I'd suggest actually playing Odyssey and actually walking around Athens. You come off as having never played the games and just regurgitating opinions you heard from a yewtoober.


Probably some of the biggest cities in any game that's not set entirely in the city.

Unless you think they just copy-pasted Athens, Sparta, etc., from some other game they made, which I'd like to hear about.