this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
213 points (98.2% liked)

Games

16729 readers
542 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
213
As the WGA writers' strike looks set to end, a massive video game strike could be just around the corner (www.vg247.com)
submitted 1 year ago by nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works to c/games@sh.itjust.works
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 36 points 1 year ago (5 children)

There needs to be a strike and a boycott of video games. I believe everyone is absolutely sick of being beta testers for unfinished AAA game releases.

I have been a Diablo fan for years but my last straw was Diablo IV. Not only is the game incomplete, Blizzard is going to charge for yearly expansions. If there was actual content in D4 to start, I would have gladly bought an expansion later. If future seasons anything like Season 1, Blizzard can fuck right the hell off.

What is sad is that Blizzard threw so many employees under the bus by having them lie about the game as well. That is seriously fucked.

[–] AnonTwo@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I don't think a strike really has anything to do with that. It has to do with treating the workers better.

Now if that also came with extending the time for releases (yes, even the really long AAA development cycles) that could probably improve the quality of said games.

[–] Fester@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It’s for voice actors’ IP rights for AI and non-existent residuals, according to the article. It’s basically about the same issues as the writers/actors strikes.

Though it’s interesting because games have a legitimate use for AI voiceovers. I hope they can negotiate for per-title AI training and residuals, and not just eliminating AI altogether. The potential situational and reactive voiceover seems amazing for games - or even just having an NPC speak your unique name.

IMO the devs could stand to unionize and strike too. God knows gamers all have a backlog and many would hopefully support them for the long haul.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

"Eliminating AI" would probably just mean that game studios would stop using SAG actors entirely in the future. There's limits to the power of unions like these.

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My comment was more about adding fuel to the fire. Devs need to strike and we need to boycott.

My last example of how Blizzard threw devs to the wolves over the course of many interviews is just another reason for employees to strike.

[–] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Devs need to strike

Proof of exactly how important unions are. I never got into gamedev because of its well-earned reputation of being a meatgrinder full of underpaid, overworked devs who never get credit and are the first to be laid off.

[–] although8172@lemmynsfw.com 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hate to break it to you bro, but the Blizzard you knew and loved is dead and has been for a good while…and it fucking sucks 😑

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

And maybe don't look into what went on at "the Blizzard you knew and loved."

[–] Tibert@compuverse.uk 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think 180k people disagree with you each day playing starfield.

Tho I myself agree that lots of recent AAA games don't value their 60$ price or whatever. The low effort and quality put into them at launch is just not worth the money.

Maybe sometimes in the future when they are fixed and on discount they could be better value.

Tho hogwarrs legacy for example did not see any update since 4-5 months. And it's still cursed with bugs. Maybe it's what we could see with other recent releases too.

[–] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think 180k people disagree with you each day playing starfield.

As a developer myself, I consider Starfield to be a fairly finished product in terms of quality. The outstanding bugs I've seen are uncommon and the type I would expect to end up in a production product.

My complaints about Starfield are fairly specific. I don't like how they built the bounty and forgiveness process, as it's a bit unpredictable and simultaneously gamable. I can pirate a ship and rack up a $650 bounty, or get a $30000+ bounty pirating the same ship. The way stealth works is comical (if not buggy) in that it's stealthier to be seen throwing a grenade into a room and running than to shoot someone from hiding. But those (presumably) aren't bugs or incompleteness, they're side-effects of the designed systems working as intended.

[–] SolOrion@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not a developer, for the record, but I was also pretty impressed with Starfield's lack of bugs. It's still got some, but it's definitely at the 'normal and acceptable' level. Not how Bethesda usually releases games.

[–] Tibert@compuverse.uk 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's not about the bugs. I have no idea what bugs are in the game.

The game was advertised as "next gen" priced as a high quality AAA, then it's just not next gen, it's last/previous gen with s* optimisation, and bad physics on many parts. And not delivering well on the rest either.

NikTek did some videos on starfield. The channel is mostly news as meme or similar things : https://youtube.com/@NikTek?si=Ovu03z8y9UeIiiMo

It's a bit extreme, but we can see the care put into the character, weapon and static object physics and interaction is nothing. It's year 2000 type of quality, even then there was maybe better character physics.

They didn't even bother to add a brightness control in the game. No hdr (even if I can't run it, is a f 60+$ game !). And the start screen could have just been a style, to be "empty". But with all of this, it's more likely they just didn't bother.

And there is plenty more complaints on the game quality.

I don't call such a game "finished".

[–] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The game was advertised as “next gen” priced as a high quality AAA

I mean, they were very clear that it was Creation Engine 2, a new iteration on the Creation Engine. What were you or anyone expecting except another iteration on the Creation Engine?

it’s last/previous gen with s* optimisation, and bad physics on many parts

This is a surprise or a disappointment? Nobody plays a Bethesda game for the physics.

And not delivering well on the rest either.

What "the rest" did they not deliver well on? Consensus seems to be that if you like Bethesda games, you love Starfield. If you don't, you don't. I mean, I don't buy the fancy new Madden Football. You know why? I don't like Madden Football. When Madden 2077 comes out with a new "throw the ball" engine, I'm not getting all amped up that this is finally the Madden Football I'll want to play. They promised us Skyrim in Space. They gave us Skyrim in Space. The only let-down is that it didn't have nearly as many "signature bugs" as I would expect from Skyrim in Space.

It’s a bit extreme

Extreme is an understatement. I love CP2077, but they made terrible design decisions and most gamers would have been happier if we got a little less "physics realism" and a lot more game at release. Call me old school, but I feel like "Realistic Physics Simulation" is something that doesn't belong in most games, and it's often the cause of bugs and detracts from the game itself.

but we can see the care put into the character, weapon and static object physics and interaction is nothing

You probably want to separate all those other things from interaction. You kinda shoehorned that in at the end of the rant about physics. Even that Nik guy focuses on physics mostly (and drugged out people dancing).

It’s year 2000 type of quality, even then there was maybe better character physics.

I'm thinking you're a fairly young gamer. You clearly don't remember year 2000 quality. Morrowind came out in 2002 and Vampire Bloodlines cames out in 2004... Starfield definitely feels like a game 20 years newer than those.

They didn’t even bother to add a brightness control in the game

...full tilt, here? Sounds like you're looking for a year 2000 game. More and more games leave out brightness control the last decade because you can do it at system level on tv or computer. When I see one of those brightness control gauges, I think "early-mid 2000s". Bioshock 1 comes to mind.

No hdr (even if I can’t run it, is a f 60+$ game !).

That's a very cherry-picked feature. HDR is not "the big buzzword of the future of gaming" or some shit, it's just a color range technology. Big deal? The lack of native RTX/DLSS (otoh) is a bit disappointing, but not exactly unique to Starfield. Most new games don't have it, and it generally has to do with vendor/API lock-in (something I can respect)

And the start screen could have just been a style, to be “empty”. But with all of this, it’s more likely they just didn’t bother.

Or it was just a style to be "empty" since that was a signature of Skyrim and they were trying to give us Skyrim in Space.

And there is plenty more complaints on the game quality.

Go on. None of your complaints have had to do with game quality so far. They were that it isn't a Physics Simulator, and that it doesn't have certain vendor-lock video features you admitted you can't even run on your system.

I don’t call such a game “finished”.

I think you need to look up what "finished" means. None of your complaints are about an incomplete nature to the game, but for decisions not to include things that were unnecessary to the game's vision. This isn't "they left out major questlines halfway through to save money" or "they were 6 months short on QA time". This was "I want a physics simulator with my cheesy poofs!"

EDIT: Just to add a bit more. I find it interesting everyone wants Bethesda to be a physics simulation. Nobody expects that of a Diablo, or a Baldur's Gate, or even a GTA. A few FPS games added it. So what? Truth is, people are falling into this "FPS rut" where every game is expected to have (and lack) the features the a few FPS franchises spearheaded. I literally spent my entire life avoiding FPS games because I hate them, and everyone bitches at the good and original games for every time an FPS has a feature they don't.

You know what else doesn't have a physics simulator built in? Microsoft Excel.

[–] Tibert@compuverse.uk 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm just gonna comment on some things :

Sounds like you're looking for a year 2000 game. More and more games leave out brightness control the last decade because you can do it at system level on tv or computer.

I'm sorry, but not everyone has a high brightness display. Adding a brightness gauge can be very useful for those people.

The rest is just nonsense and Bethesda fanatism. Like

if you like Bethesda games, you love Starfield

Is one of the worst take possible to save your wallet.

Like if they come out with a broken game at 150$ you are going to buy it because you like Bethesda? I cannot agree with this, and lots of steam comments neither. People are complaining about issues with the characters, broken launch mission launch bugs and bad quest variety.

And maybe you need to take a new look at what "finished" means in a dictionary. Because quest breaking bugs and missing features don't seem to mean "finished".

[–] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I’m sorry, but not everyone has a high brightness display. Adding a brightness gauge can be very useful for those people.

Sure... but that's not an indicator if a game is complete or if it's "like a circa 2000 game". I don't fault you for wanting a feature that's not present. But that's not an objective measure of the game.

The rest is just nonsense and Bethesda fanatism. Like

You know how you can tell someone is approaching toxicity? They fault people for liking things. I disagree with you, therefore I must be a stupid fan who would accept anything.

if you like Bethesda games, you love Starfield Is one of the worst take possible to save your wallet.

Not sure what you mean here. Bethesda flagships are equational games. You expect "X", so if you want "X", you give them money for "X". I dunno about you, but I used to "demo pirate" games because you never knew what you were getting and nothing sucks like blowing $50+ hoping for "X" and getting "Y".

ME: "I want Skyrim in Space"
Them: "Here you go, Skyrim in Space"

I call that a breath of fresh air. You're actually holding that against them and me. Why? Have you never bought a game that surprised you unpleasantly?

Like if they come out with a broken game at 150$ you are going to buy it because you like Bethesda?

That's the opposite of what I said.

Let's put it this way. I don't like McDonalds. But I know people who do. When they order a Big Mac, it is exactly the same every single time. So if you're craving a Big Mac, you will never be disappointed when you buy a Big Mac. I'm not saying a McDonalds fan should drop $150 on a flaming bag of crap. I'm saying that you don't get a "flaming bag of crap" when you order a Big Mac. You get a Big Mac.

Bethesda didn't come out with a broken game at $150. They came out with Skyrim in Space. If you don't like McDonalds, don't buy McDonalds. But stop treating people who happen to like McDonalds like there's something wrong with them, or like they're zealous superfans.

People are complaining about issues with the characters, broken launch mission launch bugs and bad quest variety.

Do you know what moving the goalposts is? It starts with the line "It’s not about the bugs. I have no idea what bugs are in the game.". Make up your mind, because we've had a fairly heated discussion where you chose to make no meaningful statements about bugs. You don't get to just drop that line, now. And you were smart to do so, because overall consensus seems to be that Starfield is overall less buggy than the new Gold Standard AAA (BG3). I've been playing it since release, and have found exactly ONE frustrating bug (related to outpost building), significantly lower than my gaming expectation of ANY game over the last 20+ years.

And maybe you need to take a new look at what “finished” means in a dictionary. Because quest breaking bugs

Let me reiterate your words: "It’s not about the bugs. I have no idea what bugs are in the game."

...and missing features don’t seem to mean “finished”.

As a developer, someone whining to me that my product isn't "finished" because it doesn't have this silly feature they want that was never on our roadmap is annoying as hell. Can you imagine that? Is your house "finished"? I don't see an indoor pool or sauna, so it can't be.

[–] Tibert@compuverse.uk 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

First, you can disagree with my opinion and it's totally fine.

Not sure what you mean here.

Sencond stop commenting every line out of the context of my answer. It makes your answer extremely long to say nothing.

I was saying that the arguments didn't make sense other than "buy it and ignore the issues" mentality, now maybe I understand better your point.

For my my point? It's on the Niktek channel.

Whatever the game is. It could cost 60$ whatever I don't care if it's bad or not, it's just a game. What I care about is if the game is worth that amount of money. And in my opinion it isn't, or maybe if you just want to play a sandbox with loading screens.

If you want game faults it's mostly on the technical, immersion + developer implication in story telling.

Just look at the latest video on that channel (don't if you don't want to get spoiled) : It presents a part of the game where you get chased. You are supposed to get fast to your ship with your crew. The crew does run, but it stops at tables, people... Like everyone is chill jogging. And there is just some cries just for "ambiance". The run is interrupted by 4 loading screens. When in the ship it's like nothing happened outside and everyone is chill around the chaser. And keep in mind it's a f story mission!

I myself cannot call such thing exciting (for a chase part) or something good quality.

Nvidia issues were present on "lower" spec cards with plenty enough vram. Not even sure if they fixed anything. (https://youtu.be/lGL3fczSXaI?si=C2bAg_k77CAkhfcN) Nvidia could also have been at fault (nvidia deivers aren't always perfect).

Starfield is overall less buggy than the new Gold Standard AAA

Call finished whatever you want, but a game slightly better than others recent releases isn't "finished" just because it's better. It's a company experimenting at what extent they can screw you before they get hurt. And companies have been doing this for a lot of time, each time, screwing up people's preorders and hopes.

Now if starfield has everything you need, it's fine. But if it doesn't have everything someone else needs to play it at a good quality, the it isn't fine by my standards of quality.

[–] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm sorry to feel that way. Looks like sticking to the topic isn't working. Cheers.

One point, though. You punctuate your point with a statement that sounds like you think no game is to your "standards of quality" if there exists a gamer somewhere in the world who doesn't get what they want out of it. Seems a weird type of measurement. I usually consider "mostly positive" on Steam a fairly decent bar for quality. But you can consider whatever you like, of course.

[–] iegod@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah so money talks and that's just not true.

[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

Strong doubt.

While a large chunk of game developers are in America, it's still a small fraction compared to worldwide.

A video game strike would probably slow down a few triple AAA projects. But rather than 10,000 games being released in a year, it might be 9,000 games.

I'm not anti-union or strikes. I just believe that if say Ubisoft America strikes, nothing will really change perception-wise as indie devs will fill in the blank, and Ubisoft shifts to Canada/Europe branches.

[–] CryptidBestiary@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Good, I hope so. Heard a lot of horror stories of working conditions for game devs.

[–] WeLoveCastingSpellz@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 year ago

Good

[–] Facebones@reddthat.com 5 points 1 year ago

Go team go!

[–] greenskye@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Given how little I play AAA games, I'm not sure a strike would affect me at all

[–] MrBusiness@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

Is it supposed to affect you?

[–] Donger@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

GTA 6 getting delayed

[–] spudwart@spudwart.com 1 points 1 year ago

Fascinating how swiftly it went from Unity absolutely ruining their rep to a overdue video game strike.

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If this delays Silksong again I’m taking the rest of the afternoon off in protest.

[–] Tibert@compuverse.uk 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The metroidvania games where saved by hollow knight. And now there are so many good options, even recent releases (some. May not have the tag).

Get yourself something else in the meantime.