- 0 Posts
- 211 Comments
Do you say the same for Epic Games Store exclusives?
Yes, actually. If they funded a game, like with Alan Wake 2, then whether or not they make it an EGS exclusive is their prerogative.
there is no pro-consumer reason that the GOG fixes could not have been given to everyone that already owned the game on Steam as a free update
I disagree. GOG invested time and resources into patching the game. Tacking the word ‘pro-consumer’ in there means nothing. They’re a business. They shouldn’t be expected to give away their work for free to customers of a competing platform.
I don’t care if 2% or whatever goes to GOG for their fixes
That much is clear. You seem to want something for nothing. Pirate the GOG version if you’re so desperate to play without paying for the work that went into fixing it, but don’t frame it as some kind of pro-consumer protest.
It’s as much as anyone outside of GOG can know, based on interviews like this one.
The exact contents of the deals is not public information and no doubt differs for each game, but the overall process has been reported on.
Oh, well that’s the easier part to understand.
Before they even start on any technical work, the GOG legal team contacts the owners of the game they want to sell (e.g. SEGA, in the case of Alpha Protocol) and they negotiate a deal to update and distribute the game.
Things get complicated when a game has joint owners, or when it’s not clear who owns a game, but otherwise it’s as simple as that.
If you’re interested in a specific example, here’s an interview with their technical producer on how they updated and rereleased Alpha Protocol in 2024.
Lots of insights!
Console certifications only check that a game is functional and meets platform requirements (like achievements, peripheral support, accessibility).
They’re there to ensure a game works and won’t brick any systems or steal bank details etc. They don’t typically check that a game is ‘good’, since it’s so subjective.
Unless you’re aiming for a specific path (when replaying, for example), I do find it’s much more satisfying when an RPG allows you to fail and then follow through with the consequences, without just hitting a hard stop or making you feel like you got a lesser experience as a result.
But it does rely on trust - I need to trust that a game is designed to do that before I commit to playing in a way where I don’t immediately reload a save when I fail a skill check.
Curious what about this new publication makes you label it a tabloid? Based on the description so far it doesn’t sound sensationalist at all.
You’ll find reviews, criticism, and opinion stories, as well as articles about how games are made and marketed. You’ll get investigative reporting on the people who make games in an era when “DEI” is on the wane. You’ll read historical deep dives on the games and creators that paved the way, especially those that didn’t get due credit way back then.
I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad take, but it’s worth pointing out that lots of games miss internal deadlines and waste time ‘spinning their wheels’ but still turn out good or even great. The difference is that you don’t usually hear about it, whereas here some of the team are obviously pissed enough about the crunch that they went to the press.
Crunch is always bad and is an indication of poor project management and/or unrealistic expectations, but issues with scope or major reworks aren’t always a death knell either. I’ve seen plenty of games go through that and come out the other side better than before.
Demo in this context isn’t a consumer-playable ‘demo’ in the sense that most people understand; it means a playable internal build with specific targets for what must be included. Internal demo milestones are often linked to project funding and approval to move forwards, so there is a tangible risk if they fail to deliver.
Presumably the current state of the game is behind where it needed to be to deliver that demo, so they’re now crunching to finish it on time.
You missed out the very next bit, which seems equally as important:
Normally, I’d write a game off under such circumstances, no matter how much or little it cost to make or buy. However, Diffusion’s developer, who goes by Aynekko, has stated that the voices are “currently being rerecorded” with human voice actors. These will be added into Diffusion “for the next or after the next update”.
No excuses for slop voiceover - especially when it’s apparently shit quality too - but at least it sounds like they’re replacing it. Just wish they’d not bothered with the AI to begin with, and it does call into question their creative vision overall.
I don’t think Netflix care about WB Games at all.
‘We actually didn’t attribute any value’ to Warner’s game studios, Netflix boss says about the acquisition deal (Source)
Title makes it sound like the game got renominated for the same award against the creator’s will, which is not the case.
It was originally nominated for best debut indie, but the creator pulled out because it’s not actually their first game.
The fan-voted award is completely separate and the creator even promoted the voting link to the community.
People who came to Steam later on probably don’t realise that when it was new it barely fucking worked.
Downloads crawled, games refused to launch because of authentication issues, friends/chat was offline for literally months, etc.
The only reason it became widely adopted was because Valve forced you to use it if you wanted to play the latest CS or, later, HL2. Everyone hated it.
‘You can’t fire me, I quit!’ but the bad version