The art is a fair bit more detailed, but I’m fascinated with whatever might be taking them so long. The original took about two years to finish and is ridiculously polished, so doubling the development time is wild. Is Hornet’s movement system just terrifically prone to breaking? Is the game simply gargantuan? Did they make a game of sneezing into each other’s coffee and lose a few years to the kitchen camping meta? All equally possible.
I loved Half-Life and played through it several times to get all the details.
However, watching the 25 year anniversary about it is about as boring as watching the anecdotes from some old rock band describing their amplifier setup in the 1970s. I’s interesting in some technical historical way, but it also seems soo out of touch with what’s happening today.
These guys aren’t going to put out a new banger.
Your analogy sucks because knowing your tools, even old ones, is important in both of the fields you’re talking about. Funk and soul are using old music tools to create new and unique sounds in their genres regularly (see vulfmon). You apparently just hate the history of music/gaming or have no interest and that’s fine, but you are a FOOL to think these tools can’t still be used today. Low fidelity is a choice you can make that has no actual bearing on the final product’s quality overall (See Lethal company).
Can’t stand this Miyamoto quote. Not only it’s contentious at best (think of all the terrible games the kept getting delayed), it’s factually untrue since the mid to late 2000s when online patching for games became common practice across the industry.
I think there’s a kernel of truth to it. A poor first impression followed by a subsequent recovery tells us that a game could have been good at launch, but was rushed out for various reasons. This practice of forcing the public to pay to be beta testers for a half finished product should be punished.
And nothing’s going to erase a garbage launch. It will always have been garbage and the shit launch will always be a part of the conversation about the game. Hence why we still talk about it even in games that have recovered.
I agree with the first impression aspect and I believe it’s important to get the release right because of it, but the phrase deliberately implies a bad game will always be bad which just isn’t true. “Bad impressions are forever” would be more accurate.
I also liked ‘the narcissistic injury of the level ignoring me’ as an excuse for unrealistic hit decals.
I didn’t care for his ‘so what?’ attitude about someone pointing out they were unrealistic - because the game’s supposed to be immersive. If you want an effect and the excuse doesn’t fit, find a different excuse. What else would justify the mechanic you’re trying to convey?
Someone complained about the hit decals from a 25 year old game being unrealistic? I don’t blame him for the “attitude”; this was among the first games to have such a thing. That shit was cutting edge for the time and it blew our minds. Not even Quake 2 had hit decals, IIRC.
Half-life was hella immersive for the time. People take everything for granted nowadays.
Not sure why we’re arguing this quote with the same two games over and over. Nms and cyberpunk are great games, but they’re a rarity.
Game Dev crunch is a plague in th industry, we suffer as consumers who cop bad releases on release. The whole industry could learn from its roots and delay things for a better initial product.
Defending the current practice of redevelopment in post is almost consumer gaslighting.
Both Destiny and Destiny 2 had really poor launches. Then they cleaned up their act and we’re very successful and had thriving playerbases. Light fall and this past year notwithstanding…
I fucking loved the Forsaken expansion and felt that it was worth the money. I got Black Armory not realizing it wasn’t an expansion like Forsaken and was so fucking disappointed. I eventually quit because they kept making the game worse.
I would even say NMS is a good example of this sentiment. The game has been good for years now and has had tons of free updates. There’s a lot of people out there who just don’t care and you can see this in forums whenever the game makes news. People still show up to decry the game for how terrible the release was.
Public sentiment on the game and the studio is still pretty mixed
Seriously, we need to return to pre-internet console mentality. You put out an N64 game, it better be goddamn finished. Companies rely way too much on “ehh can just patch it”.
I mean, modern games are many times more complex so the idea of putting out a “finished” game these days is more like “this is an acceptable level of bugs/most players won’t hit this.” The problem is that the acceptable level has shifted way too fucking far in the wrong direction to the point where in some cases we’re barely getting an alpha, much less a beta. In general, I have no problem with companies putting out good games that get better, like tuning for performance so you get better FPS, it’s player on lower spec machines, etc. I don’t like the idea of paying to be a beta tester for two years, and not getting the good game until way later.
I’m not arguing in favor of companies putting out shoddy gamesor the practice of games needing patches to fix glaring issues, but suggesting that the 90s and early 2000s were the days of totally flawless games seems like a result of survivorship bias.
We remember the great games from those days, but there were mountains of shovelware games releasing with all the problems we see today.
Even many good or great games from those days have problems that either remain unfixed, or have only been fixed years later by fans.
I’m not defending the need for post-launch patches to fix glaring issues and I’m not defending crunch, but suggesting that buggy releases and crunch haven’t been with gaming since the earliest days of the industry seems like putting on rose colored glasses. There is a lot to damn about the current industry, but painting the root days of the industry as free of those same issues just to make the comparison seems unrealistic.
The fact that it’s only the same two games is more of an argument against than for, honestly. With all of the awful launches people can think of two games that were redeemed.
Their problem is they already made a perfect game. Now they have to do it again. Doing something perfectly once can be chance, doing it twice is massively more difficult.
My Deck64 was turned into a 1tb before you could even buy them like that though. For anyone who had extra 2230s lying around and was going to use a screen protector anyways it was a no brainer.
I modified mine too but I tried to go the 512GB SD card route first and just install everything on that. Yeah still filled the internal storage. 1TB SSD is worth it. Now i just use the SD card for emudeck+roms.
It would be free marketing if they went with that approach. I can already see the headlines: “Why the ‘Steam Deck 3’ is called the ‘Steam Deck: Episode 1’ and other 5 things with origins on the memeverse”
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
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.
I will wait for Silksong like a good little boi, if it ends up as good as the original.
The art is a fair bit more detailed, but I’m fascinated with whatever might be taking them so long. The original took about two years to finish and is ridiculously polished, so doubling the development time is wild. Is Hornet’s movement system just terrifically prone to breaking? Is the game simply gargantuan? Did they make a game of sneezing into each other’s coffee and lose a few years to the kitchen camping meta? All equally possible.
Gabe starts looking like Game-Gandalf more every day
He hit hard that Santa Clause.
I was gonna say, maybe he knocked Santa off a roof or something.
Gandalf the Burger King version
You are the reason we don’t get a Half Life 3 ya know?
I still believe we will se HL3 one day.
I loved Half-Life and played through it several times to get all the details. However, watching the 25 year anniversary about it is about as boring as watching the anecdotes from some old rock band describing their amplifier setup in the 1970s. I’s interesting in some technical historical way, but it also seems soo out of touch with what’s happening today. These guys aren’t going to put out a new banger.
Bad take
Your analogy sucks because knowing your tools, even old ones, is important in both of the fields you’re talking about. Funk and soul are using old music tools to create new and unique sounds in their genres regularly (see vulfmon). You apparently just hate the history of music/gaming or have no interest and that’s fine, but you are a FOOL to think these tools can’t still be used today. Low fidelity is a choice you can make that has no actual bearing on the final product’s quality overall (See Lethal company).
I didn’t find this boring whatsoever. It was great seeing the creation process of such a foundational game.
What does this have to do with modern gaming? It’s a retrospective.
Not sure whether or not it was the same team, but Half-Life: Alyx was incredible
I would definitely call half life alyx a banger.
and most people don’t realise how it ended, but keep bitching about hl3
Most people don’t have VR gear, and it’s a VR-only game.
Well, then they should shut up about half-life until they’ve played all the half-life already released.
🙄
Can’t stand this Miyamoto quote. Not only it’s contentious at best (think of all the terrible games the kept getting delayed), it’s factually untrue since the mid to late 2000s when online patching for games became common practice across the industry.
I think there’s a kernel of truth to it. A poor first impression followed by a subsequent recovery tells us that a game could have been good at launch, but was rushed out for various reasons. This practice of forcing the public to pay to be beta testers for a half finished product should be punished.
And nothing’s going to erase a garbage launch. It will always have been garbage and the shit launch will always be a part of the conversation about the game. Hence why we still talk about it even in games that have recovered.
You can’t patch history.
I agree with the first impression aspect and I believe it’s important to get the release right because of it, but the phrase deliberately implies a bad game will always be bad which just isn’t true. “Bad impressions are forever” would be more accurate.
Praise be unto papa Gaben.
HL2 EP3 any day now boyz.
I also liked ‘the narcissistic injury of the level ignoring me’ as an excuse for unrealistic hit decals.
I didn’t care for his ‘so what?’ attitude about someone pointing out they were unrealistic - because the game’s supposed to be immersive. If you want an effect and the excuse doesn’t fit, find a different excuse. What else would justify the mechanic you’re trying to convey?
Someone complained about the hit decals from a 25 year old game being unrealistic? I don’t blame him for the “attitude”; this was among the first games to have such a thing. That shit was cutting edge for the time and it blew our minds. Not even Quake 2 had hit decals, IIRC.
Half-life was hella immersive for the time. People take everything for granted nowadays.
He was describing a discussion with one of his fellow devs, 25 years ago.
deleted by creator
And a canceled game is never bad
I should call her
Tell your mom she still owes me for the Uber.
deleted by creator
Not sure why we’re arguing this quote with the same two games over and over. Nms and cyberpunk are great games, but they’re a rarity.
Game Dev crunch is a plague in th industry, we suffer as consumers who cop bad releases on release. The whole industry could learn from its roots and delay things for a better initial product.
Defending the current practice of redevelopment in post is almost consumer gaslighting.
I think a big difference with both is that they’re not big multiplayer titles that are looking to make money with cosmetics.
If a multiplayer focused game is shit at launch, it won’t get a good user base and then it’s as good as dead.
Both Destiny and Destiny 2 had really poor launches. Then they cleaned up their act and we’re very successful and had thriving playerbases. Light fall and this past year notwithstanding…
I fucking loved the Forsaken expansion and felt that it was worth the money. I got Black Armory not realizing it wasn’t an expansion like Forsaken and was so fucking disappointed. I eventually quit because they kept making the game worse.
Destiny 2’s been a real roller coaster. Forsaken was the best it ever was, so you haven’t missed much imo.
I would even say NMS is a good example of this sentiment. The game has been good for years now and has had tons of free updates. There’s a lot of people out there who just don’t care and you can see this in forums whenever the game makes news. People still show up to decry the game for how terrible the release was.
Public sentiment on the game and the studio is still pretty mixed
Plus, the base game itself should be good. It shouldn’t need updates. Post-game launch updates should be enhancements, not fixes.
Seriously, we need to return to pre-internet console mentality. You put out an N64 game, it better be goddamn finished. Companies rely way too much on “ehh can just patch it”.
I mean, modern games are many times more complex so the idea of putting out a “finished” game these days is more like “this is an acceptable level of bugs/most players won’t hit this.” The problem is that the acceptable level has shifted way too fucking far in the wrong direction to the point where in some cases we’re barely getting an alpha, much less a beta. In general, I have no problem with companies putting out good games that get better, like tuning for performance so you get better FPS, it’s player on lower spec machines, etc. I don’t like the idea of paying to be a beta tester for two years, and not getting the good game until way later.
I’m not arguing in favor of companies putting out shoddy gamesor the practice of games needing patches to fix glaring issues, but suggesting that the 90s and early 2000s were the days of totally flawless games seems like a result of survivorship bias.
We remember the great games from those days, but there were mountains of shovelware games releasing with all the problems we see today.
Even many good or great games from those days have problems that either remain unfixed, or have only been fixed years later by fans.
I’m not defending the need for post-launch patches to fix glaring issues and I’m not defending crunch, but suggesting that buggy releases and crunch haven’t been with gaming since the earliest days of the industry seems like putting on rose colored glasses. There is a lot to damn about the current industry, but painting the root days of the industry as free of those same issues just to make the comparison seems unrealistic.
The fact that it’s only the same two games is more of an argument against than for, honestly. With all of the awful launches people can think of two games that were redeemed.
That’s bad.
Preach Gaben!
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
HL3 gang remembers
Halflife 3 is going to be amazing you guys
I can’t wait for my great grandson to play it
Here you dropped this: "great "
I’d settle for an Alyx 2 at this point.
No more Alyx after that though!
Hollow Knight: Silksong is gonna be perfect.
(Actually, knowing those devs, it might.)
Their problem is they already made a perfect game. Now they have to do it again. Doing something perfectly once can be chance, doing it twice is massively more difficult.
Confirmed!
Valve can’t count to 3 though.
Expect after the Steam Deck 2 for its successors to be Steam Deck 2: Episode 1 and Steam Deck 2: Episode 2.
Yep. I consider HL:Alex to be HL:3. It’s that good.
But I still want another HL game.
Capcom had years of jokes on exactly that point with the Street Fighter series, but they eventually did release Street Fighter III.
EDIT: For those not familiar, here’s the relevant portion of the series timeline:
Street Fighter
Street Fighter II: The World Warrior
Street Fighter II: Championship Edition
Street Fighter II: Hyper Fighting
Super Street Fighter II: The New Challengers
Super Street Fighter II Turbo
Street Fighter Alpha
Street Fighter: The Movie (the video game)
Street Fighter Alpha 2
X-Men vs. Street Fighter
Street Fighter EX
Street Fighter III: New Generation
To be fair to Capcom, they did release Ace Attorney 3 quickly and it was the peak of the franchise.
Steam Deck: Alyx
Just stay away from the knockoff Steam Deck: Kill the Freeman.
That was the Steam Deck 64GB: Kill the free space (with shader caches)
My Deck64 was turned into a 1tb before you could even buy them like that though. For anyone who had extra 2230s lying around and was going to use a screen protector anyways it was a no brainer.
I modified mine too but I tried to go the 512GB SD card route first and just install everything on that. Yeah still filled the internal storage. 1TB SSD is worth it. Now i just use the SD card for emudeck+roms.
It would be free marketing if they went with that approach. I can already see the headlines: “Why the ‘Steam Deck 3’ is called the ‘Steam Deck: Episode 1’ and other 5 things with origins on the memeverse”