“I can’t stress enough how often I’d hear a retail rep declare a genre/style/look was dead with zero supporting data.”

  • MudMan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I mean… yeah, retailer gut checks were a major driver for the industry for ages. The entire myth of the videogame crash in the early eighties, blown out of proportion as it is, comes down to retailers having a bad feeling about gaming after Atari. I’m big on preservation and physical media, but don’t downplay the schadenfreude caused by the absolutely toxic videogame retail industry entirely collapsing after digital distribution became a thing. I’ll buy direct to consumer from boutique retailers all day before I go back to buckets of games stolen from little kids and retailers keeping shelf space hostage based on how some rep’s E3’s afterparties went.

    That said, those guys really did flood the market with cookie cutter games in a very short time there for a while. There were a LOT of these.

    Weirdly, Neverwinter Nights must have done extremely well for how much credit Bioware gives it for redefining the genre, but at the time I remember being frustrated by it. It looked worse than the 2D stuff, the user generated content stuff was fun to mess with it didn’t create the huge endless content mill you’d expect from something like that today.

    I should go look up if there’s any data about how commercially successful it really was somewhere. Any pointers?

  • emptyother@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’m no fan of sports games. I dont play sports games. Also the kind of people I hang with also dislike sports games. And the last sport games I read about, a decade ago, had horrible reviews and awful graphics. So therefor I declare the Sports game genre for dead! /s

    • Lath@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      The /s is not needed. I was quite impressed to hear that EA Sports is one of the main money makers of EA despite having each new game as a buggier version of a previous one, only with an updated roster. I had no idea they were so popular and the last FIFA I played properly was in 2003.
      So we are out there and we do think like that.

      • Dojan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 months ago

        Did you know that EA lost the FIFA license? FIFA decided that they wanted the whole cake so they’ve taken to developing the future FIFA games themselves.

        EA is obviously continuing to develop their golden cow, now called EA Sports FC.

        • Lath@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          6 months ago

          No, I didn’t. Huh. Still, golden cow is right. Because what it produces is still a pile of manure.

          • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Considering the way they responded to ESPN football back when I was younger, I cheer on every time I hear bad things about EA Sports.

            For those too young or who don’t recall… ESPN (or I should say, a company who licensed ESPN) came out with a budget football game 2000ish. They charged $20 for it, and it blew that year’s Madden game out of the water in terms of quality and reviews. It was situated to force the industry to pivot from AAA to lovingly-crafted AA titles by teams that clearly cared about the product being fun.

            So EA gave the NFL a metric fuckton of money for exclusivity to murder the competition.

            The end.

        • emptyother@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          6 months ago

          Huh. I was wondering about the name change when I bought FC 24 for my nephew this xmas. He made it very clear that they had changed names so that I didnt buy the wrong one, but he didnt say why it had changed. 🤯

          • Dojan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            Yep, that’s why! I’m guessing he was clear because he wanted the newest version of the same game. No idea if the official game is any good or not. Could be it’s a complete disaster.

      • BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        madden should be dead but the people who buy it are literally like heroin addicts

        all year they swear they wont buy it, its going to garbage like the last game, and then it comes out and they spend thousands on it. rinse repeat. i wish somebody else could use the nfl liscence just so EA or the other devs have to actually try making a good game

      • kurcatovium@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Last fifa I played didn’t even have number in it. It was called Fifa Soccer, I believe from '93? Good times back then…

  • Deconceptualist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    For me, the problem is “isometric”. There have been very few games like that I’ve finished compared to others. It feels artificially constrained, especially in a 3D environment, when visibility is limited to like <10 meters away from your character. It’s worse if the camera rotates because then I find it quite hard to make a mental map.

    I don’t have this issue with a top-down perspective generally. Maybe those tend to be more 2D (even if rendered they can’t really include environmental verticality) so it’s easier to navigate.

    • Blaidd@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Dragon Age: Origins had the perfect camera that let you look around like an action game and then switch to the tactical camera. It’s astounding that modern rpgs cannot match how good the camera was in a game from 2009.

      • Sanity_in_Moderation@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I adore BG3. But fighting the camera is harder than fighting the mobs.

        Although it did get easier when I started using a controller to get around and a mouse to fight.

    • Daxtron2@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      IMO there’s very few instances where an isometric camera makes sense these days unless you’re explicitly trying to capture the nostalgia of old isometric games.

      • Deconceptualist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I do find it’s a barrier for some fairly modern games I want to play like Divinity Original Sin 1+2 and Disco Elysium. I wish that wasn’t the case…

        • Daxtron2@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          I’m not sure I’d call D:OS isometric, definitely birds eye view camera. I believe there are mods for divinity as well as BG3 that allow more dynamic cameras. I have one for bg3 and it’s definitely a different experience but if that’s one you’re after, you should try it out.

          • Deconceptualist@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Cool I’ll take a look at mods, good suggestion. Yeah I’d like to be able to get more of an over-shoulder view sometimes during combat or exploration. Or at least lower to the ground.

        • Coelacanth@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Fair enough on Divinity: Original Sin, but it won’t really be a factor in Disco Elysium due to how it plays (or reads, rather). If you’re interested in DE just give it a shot and treat it as an interactive novel (which is what it is, really). The camera won’t be a factor in that game, trust me.

          • Deconceptualist@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Ok, thanks. I’ve played maybe an hour of DE so far and maybe it was the controls moreso than the perspective that felt awkward. I might just need to tinker or get acclimated. Since it’s all story I want to play it on my TV or Steam Deck, so gamepad input rather than M+KB.

            • Coelacanth@feddit.nu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              That’s fair, yeah. I played it with M+KB but have heard many others complain about awkward controls on a gamepad, and can imagine it isn’t ideal.

  • LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    6 months ago

    And they are probably correct.

    If this game wasn’t called bg 3 it wouldn’t be selling like it it.

    Rouge trader hit #2 for a day or two and went away. It’ll be a mid success and make some money from the 40k name. But other crogs just don’t sell as much and are risky.

    • TotalTrash@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      6 months ago

      Rouge trader hit #2 for a day or two and went away

      Probably because there’s only so much makeup you can sell before the novelty wears off.

    • kandoh@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Counter: If they’d called in Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition The Videogame it would have sold just as well.

      • rambaroo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I don’t know, I think the BG branding on top of it did help with the hype because of BG2’s reputation and existing fanbase. The D&D aspect is definitely a bigger deal though.

        Ultimately I think it sold well because it’s a really good game that was easy to turn into fun memes and clips. Plus early access meant there were a ton of people who already played it which helped the hype even more.

        • kandoh@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          Long time between BG2’s release and the phenomenon that is Fifth Edition DnD.

          The popularity and widespread appeal of dungeons and dragons in recent years can’t be overstated

    • emptyother@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      It would probably only have sold as much as D:OS 3. Which wouldn’t have been a bad sale either, just not as much as BG3.

      • LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Agreed, but Bg was FAR more complex and involved. The high quality acting is expensive as fuck which makes it a higher risk.

    • ATPA9@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I think you are overestimating the brand recognition of a game series from the 2000s.