Time for combat posting like we are in a pit fighting for our lives,prefferably with knife fighting



Anyways,we really should let franchises die,go dormant (a 5 to 10 years pause) and use more spin offs that expand the setting

It can help mitigate the saturation as well handle hype better

I dont need sequels every 3 years
 
Last edited:
From what we're seeing in the games industry, at least in the AAA space, that's already the case.

Big names like Rockstar used to publish a new game every year or every couple years. Look at what they're doing now we're lucky to have two games per decade. We haven't had a mainline Elder Scrolls game in 13 years. Even indies aren't spared from this, see everyone putting on clown makeup waiting for Silksong news.

There are exceptions like Ubisoft, of course. But personally, I'd like a sequel to be out every 2-3 years.
 
I need a Zelda game every 30-36 months. I want 8-12 dungeons, a forest, main character Link, support but not main character Zelda, and the Triforce in there somewhere.
 
I think that Valve aren't actually being slow about how they develop their games.

Rather, I think that they're one of the few companies that still work the way how things used to work while everyone else has massively accelerated in how they develop games, mostly for the worse.
 
No, no, I want my playable-Zelda game!



They should make one! Make a TRPG, more likely in the vein of Fire Emblem than Orge Battle 64/Unicorn Overlord like I'd prefer, where she directly saves the kingdom. Or maybe a Stardew/Kingdom builder that's about rebuilding after one of the games, Dragon Quest Builders was a great twist on the DQ formula. Or just be boring and make a Shiek game Nintendo.

But it would likely sell well and differentiating the genre can keep the series from being saturated.
 
Last edited:
From what we're seeing in the games industry, at least in the AAA space, that's already the case.

Big names like Rockstar used to publish a new game every year or every couple years. Look at what they're doing now we're lucky to have two games per decade. We haven't had a mainline Elder Scrolls game in 13 years. Even indies aren't spared from this, see everyone putting on clown makeup waiting for Silksong news.

There are exceptions like Ubisoft, of course. But personally, I'd like a sequel to be out every 2-3 years.
For Rockstar, the blame can be placed squarely on the absurd success of GTA5 online. Moving on quickly from the amount of money that generated in return for occasionally making a small dlc with a maybe a dozen vehicles and mostly recycled busywork missions would be objectively bad business. Much better to wallow in their past success than risk a new game that competes with their own product. Elder Scrolls Online has been chugging along as well, not doing worldbeating numbers but too safe to cancel as everything else Bethesda does explodes in their faces.

We aren't going half a decade between games, games are starting to last for half a decade as the industry as a whole tries to chase the new fad of live services. And at the time it was a very easy pitch; you don't need to keep beating the odds and making good games, just make one game good enough to hold attention and keep milking that audience for as long as you can. At the time, consumers were even pretty interested in the idea as the annual sequels for things like Assassin's Creed or [your annual sport franchise game of choice] were starting to show the cracks caused by that low development time and putting out either broken messes or the same game in a slightly different coat of paint. Lots of fans and journalists were starting to talk about how maybe it was right to take a little longer between games to do things right and make something higher quality.

So, of course, we got the shittiest possible version of that. Sell a half finished game now for full price, promise you have a plan to fix it, and then only follow through if you got enough bites on the hook for bait you said you'd add later. And hey, you can't really charge for adding basic functionality or bug fixes and dev hours don't come cheap, so sell some microtransactions to the people you suckered in while you're at it. Gotta fund that pretty roadmap jpeg you made, after all.
 
Last edited:
Someone did a spiritual CD-I zelda game recently on steam, which almost counts? It's very much based on Wand of Gamelon specifically. (Which is, I think, the only main character Zelda game that was ever produced.)
 
Honestly when you say "Wand of Gamelon" I wonder how many people actually think of Zelda vs. Space Battleship Yamato.
 
I recall a post on Tumblr that said that a lot of people trying to emulate the style of Zelda CDI are missing a very important component of the style.

It looks bad, yes, that part most people do get, but it is also animated with waaaaaaaay more effort than is necessary even for, say, old-style 2D Disney animation. Constant movement, poses that change orientation with near-every frame, constant zooms in and zooms out, etcetera. And most people imitating the artstyle don't do that because they actually know how to animate and thus know where to draw the line.
 
Last edited:
Is that an unpopular opinion? It seems like a common complaint. (I mean, I think it's pretty cool, but I wouldn't go so far to say it's simple or coherent.)
Given how few people seem to have heard of it, yeah? The opinion is unpopular simply because the system is uncommon.

I like mongoose traveler because dying in character creation is hilarious.
 
I'm kind of afraid that the recent FixTF2 movement, along with the review bomb, might end up instead convincing Valve to finally pull the plug on the game instead of trying to fix it
 
I don't think you can die in character creation in Mongoose Traveller.
You can, it's terrific. Character creation has you rolling for events every year. You can get injuries from some events, like combat. If they bring your stats below zero then the character either dies, or you need to spend money on a prosthetic to bring the stat back up to a minimum of 1.
 
Given how few people seem to have heard of it, yeah? The opinion is unpopular simply because the system is uncommon.
The thread is titled "controversial", not "unpopular".

There is no controversy about Palladium's system – even people who have had lots of fun playing the game will agree with you that the system has massive design issues.
 
I'm kind of afraid that the recent FixTF2 movement, along with the review bomb, might end up instead convincing Valve to finally pull the plug on the game instead of trying to fix it

They still have servers up for L4D1 and Artifact and lots of very failed games, so I don't think they'd do it completely - but they might decide to write off patching or something sure.
 
Or maybe I'll play its prequel, Super Robot Wars OG Saga: Endless Frontier. That might be good for a laugh :V
Comment actually got me to crack that one open again after not playing it for a... while.

Tone shift between it and the main-er line SRW games is just... it's wild. Like, I knew that because I've played before but it'd been a long time ago and the intensity of it had worn off. Writing (and art) is just relentlessly thirsty while still maintaining that better-than-it-probably-should-be SRW quality, the puns never stop, the gameplay is as engaging as it is fairly simple (there's like... three buttons worth note to press, basically everything about it is timing), lots of animation and general aesthetics is pretty damn impressive even outside the unceasing horndog stuff, Suzuka's got like one of the best battle animations in any game, ever. So damn much going on. It has lines like this:
Aschen: Maybe it's a tentacle, molesting the planet itself.

It's cliched and fanservicey as hell but it's still probably one of the best games on the NDS?

I'm never quite sure what I think about the endless frontier line, other than someone must have been like incredibly drunk to okay it. It's got to be some of the most divergent spinoff games in existence.
 
Back
Top