samoilaaa
Member
got any proof ? or you just like to sound like a "fucking genius "You don't need to be a fucking genius.
Game Pass is designed to kill Pure Single Player experiences.
got any proof ? or you just like to sound like a "fucking genius "You don't need to be a fucking genius.
Game Pass is designed to kill Pure Single Player experiences.
Really? Hitman 3 developers IO said the complete opposite though hitman trilogy does have a huge amount of dlc available, maybe it would be tough without dlc but if hitman 3 was to leave gamepass tomorrow id buy it rn
The proof is in the pudding.got any proof ? or you just like to sound like a "fucking genius "
#RiccitielloProtocolReally? Hitman 3 developers IO said the complete opposite though hitman trilogy does have a huge amount of dlc available, maybe it would be tough without dlc but if hitman 3 was to leave gamepass tomorrow id buy it rn
so no proof , thanksThe proof is in the pudding.
Just look at the current trends. Game Pass is just going to exacerbate them.
Again the proof is in the pudding. Just look at the financial reports of these companies. Just look at the most profitable games.so no proof , thanks
It is a service that requires lots of content. It’s not the type of content that matters, it’s the amount.Again the proof is in the pudding. Just look at the financial reports of these companies. Just look at the most profitable games.
Game Pass is designed to encourage GaaS/MTXs.
No and Yes.It is a service that requires lots of content. It’s not the type of content that matters, it’s the amount.
EA killed Dead space. This studio is not under EA.Correction: Pure single player experiences are past their expiration date. That model gets ****ed no matter where you release on.
Not if they don't solve the issue of what killed Dead Space.
EA killed Dead Space because it wasn't performing on the market.EA killed Dead space. This studio is not under EA.
Hitman 3 also isn’t a AAA game
EA had unreasonable expectations for a single player game. Striking distance will make money and be satisfied with the sales.EA killed Dead Space because it wasn't performing on the market.
If Striking Distance didn't figure out why, then CP too will underperform.
Making a game is a business and not a hobby, so....Makes you think. When making a game don’t you want as many people to play as possible? I get they are trying to make money as well. What’s the priority?
This ain't doing Sony first party numbers though. Not all games sell super well at launch. You're talking about a small percentage that do huge numbers at release.That’s his point though. It needs to make its money in the launch window. It’s exactly what Sony, Take 2 etc have been saying. It’s effective for catalogue games and indies that can have their costs covered by the GP money.
Dead Space 3 killed Dead Space.EA killed Dead Space because it wasn't performing on the market.
If Striking Distance didn't figure out why, then CP too will underperform.
… it would make even less if it were on a sub service at launch.This ain't doing Sony first party numbers though. Not all games sell super well at launch. You're talking about a small percentage that do huge numbers at release.
IO Interactive ?MS's offer wasn't probably even a thing in this case. They announced PS exclusive content a while ago, i-e it has a marketing agreement with Sony. No doubt this has first right of refusal to Sony ala the leaked Village contract for sub services as well.
Meanwhile another studio like I/O is happy to praise and talk about the revenue, performance bonuses and minimum guarantees they got from game pass in their earnings call for Hitman, another single player franchise.
Dead Space 3 killed Dead Space.
If you played Dead Space and Dead Space 2, you fully understand why Dead Space 3 killed the series.
I'm sure it's tough.
[/URL]
Very tough with the weight of the marketing deals.
Yes and no. It did, but at the same time Dead Space 3 was made the way it was because of pressure from EA to shift the game to mass market appeal and MT. Ultimately it's EA that killed it.Dead Space 3 killed Dead Space.
If you played Dead Space and Dead Space 2, you fully understand why Dead Space 3 killed the series.
That's proven not to be the case, they'd have a nice pile of cash from Microsoft and a huge amount of people to play their game which will (if its good) give great word of mouth. A new IP like this would benefit from a GP release IMO.… it would make even less if it were on a sub service at launch.
man, xbox fans on this forum were really hurt by this statement lol
It makes sense, but whether it comes to a service within 6 months or a year depends on how it good it actually is.
I am sure they can make free money by putting it on a service once sales decline from the initial window.
it's not incorrect, looks like you're hurt too.Nobody's "hurt" by this statement, laughing at a dev saying something incorrect isn't being "hurt"
Yeah, Dead Space 2 was expensive, however it sold more than OG Dead Space. A lot more. But it wasn't enough for EA. Yuuuup. With 3 they wanted to make it appeal to other folks that thought Dead Space was "too scary" so they added co-op, among other things that made Dead Space 3, unlike Dead Space. And then they shuttered Visceral. I'd blame EA before anything else.Yes and no. It did, but at the same time Dead Space 3 was made the way it was because of pressure from EA to shift the game to mass market appeal and MT. Ultimately it's EA that killed it.
Reading it, I didn't think it was "Xbox fans" at all. Nor did I think they hurt by the statement. Just that it's a strange opinion and take compared to other comments made from devs that have made single player experiences.man, xbox fans on this forum were really hurt by this statement lol
It makes sense, but whether it comes to a service within 6 months or a year depends on how it good it actually is.
I am sure they can make free money by putting it on a service once sales decline from the initial window.
Please explain how this is a strange opinion, the game doesn't have monetization within since it's single player - what if it is fantastic and sells 5 million copies? thats $250M, is MS or Sony gonna give them that at launch?Yeah, Dead Space 2 was expensive, however it sold more than OG Dead Space. A lot more. But it wasn't enough for EA. Yuuuup. With 3 they wanted to make it appeal to other folks that thought Dead Space was "too scary" so they added co-op, among other things that made Dead Space 3, unlike Dead Space. And then they shuttered Visceral. I'd blame EA before anything else.
Reading it, I didn't think it was "Xbox fans" at all. Nor did I think they hurt by the statement. Just that it's a strange opinion and take compared to other comments made from devs that have made single player experiences.
it's not incorrect, looks like you're hurt too.
i don't think you understand what hurt is, im not complaining or butthurt like a lot of posts here.Wow why are you so hurt over my statement?
Wow why are you so hurt over my statement?
The game has a marketing agreement with PlayStation and also exclusive content on PS5. The background indicates that, when this happens, Sony accompanies the agreement with the prohibition that the game reaches Gamepass in a long time.I give the game six months tops until it comes to Gamepass
Roughly 200 people were working on the game. Same goes for Callisto.Hitman 3 also isn’t a AAA game
I give the game six months tops until it comes to Gamepass
its not about being positive or negative , for now nobody can really know how will gamepass affect the gaming market in the long run , everyone can only guess , all these devs that talk like they know the future 100% are just trollsSo let me get this straight. If a dev says something positive about gamepass, then it’s true, but if a dev says something negative about gamepass, then it’s false?
Or they also approached MS at the same time but instead went with ps marketing agreement as they believe it is more profitable than putting their game day 1 into a service.The game has a marketing agreement with PlayStation and also exclusive content on PS5. The background indicates that, when this happens, Sony accompanies the agreement with the prohibition that the game reaches Gamepass in a long time.
In the event that it ends up reaching a subscription service, we will surely see it first on PS + and not on Gamepass.
PS.This statement is simply an excuse. It has a clear objective that is for no other purpose than to convince as many users as possible to buy the game at its launch because it will not reach a subscription service in the short-medium term. It is a strategy against "I will play it when it reaches Gamepass"
WatHitman 3 also isn’t a AAA game
Nobody's "hurt" by this statement
it's not incorrect, looks like you're hurt too.
its not about being positive or negative , for now nobody can really know how will gamepass affect the gaming market in the long run , everyone can only guess , all these devs that talk like they know the future 100% are just trolls
I played that shit recently. While I think it's better than the first time I played it.. it's still shit compared to DS1/2. They even fucked Isaac over in the beginning of the game, too. I felt bad for him.Dead Space 3 killed Dead Space.
If you played Dead Space and Dead Space 2, you fully understand why Dead Space 3 killed the series.
Are you a man living in a box?This game is ****ed.
fanboy? im talking about both services if you read another response.Game Dev: 1+1=11
Normal Person: that is not correct
Sony fanboy: lol look who's hurt!
Yes and no, again any and all types of games are viable.No and Yes.
You required a lot of content. The majority is going to be "filler" your 60-70 Metacritic games.
But you still need your quality content. 80+ on meta.
The issue is.
If you are losing/conditioning consumers to NOT buy games. And the industry itself is moving towards a service-based economy.
Well, you need to keep making money one way or the other. (Especially in services like Game Pass).
GaaS/MTXs/incomplete games/ early access games/ are going to be even more prevalent.
A small niche place.Yes and no, again any and all types of games are viable.
How do you know in advance that your games are going to be "80+ meta" games?
Also, if the industry is moving towards service games, then aren't single player games already being killed by the industry, as opposed to the delivery/service?
But lastly, prevelance of service games doesn't mean that single player games are not viable or have a place.
I