The criticism in this case is completely bonkers. They reuse assets from previous games, even adding more while developing.
This only means that they have an ever increasing repertoire of assets from all their games, from which the designers can freely choose. And then of course they match the asset to the new game (adding a grunge pass for a zombie game is the example given)
This is the optimal way of doing it. They save time and money and have lots of different assets to choose from.
Tbh, I played it for a few hours, didn’t like it and don’t understand all the fuss about it. Does it get good later?
I was at a point, where I was going through a cave with a castle in the background (it was a few years ago), it was probably some kind of riddle, but I couldn’t be bothered.
Is it worth going forward or did I see enough to just say “it’s not my kind of game”?
https://www.fairphone.com/en/about/about-us/?ref=footer
10 years old and greater than ever.
Also the Fairphone 3 is already 4 years old. So they only need to “be here” another 3 years.
I’ll chime in for the other commenter.
Having ray tracing be “a minimum requirement” is batshit insane. Just make it an option and don’t require it for everyone.
Ray tracing is not that widely available, so you shouldn’t just force it onto your whole player base.
And while this might not sound like an optimization thing, it really looks like they couldn’t be bothered to develop their game with and without the ray tracing features.
Edit: looking more into the numbers, they are all insane.
I don’t really play AAA titles nowadays, but this is aweful and far from optimized. Doom 2016 needed half of that for every single metric!