Bethesda is no longer giving out review copies of their games. Bethesda
says, since Doom was so successful. That games like Elder Scrolls Skyrim
Special Edition, and Dishonored 2 will not have review copies on day 1.
That means no reviewer will have Bethesda games review on launch. Meaning
we won't know if these games are actually good. This trend that Bethesda is
trying to set is a scary one, and here is why.
Veteran game designer James Montagna is directing this new project and apparently has a new outlook on game design after teaming up with Nintendo
The game in question appears to be dubbed Auroria on Steam, which shares a plethora of similarities with Palworld.
No offense but Palworld isn't that original either, with that said… ew Tencent no thank you. I love the survival genre but all these half baked early access games have ruined the genre for me.
>Palworld isn't that original either
Can't disagree with that, but it did spin the Pokemon dynamic in a unique way, you gotta give Pocketpair that. Now by doing so, prepare for a ton of Palworld clones, both on PC and mobile.
True, but big pocket people pushing out little pocket people is a huge problem. It's Walmart of the digital world.
Not much that can be done though. Tencent been making clones of what's popular for a while. I don't touch anything they make, except for Don't Starve but i bought that before Klei sold themselves to the devil.
@Inverno: There's a lot that can be done, actually. Just no one is willing to do it. Anti-competitive/monopoly laws literally exist for this exact reason. Governments are just letting big corporations do whatever they want.
Huzaifah from eXputer: "With Larian Studios washing their hands of the IP, what is the ultimate fate of the legendary Baldur's Gate series?"
If anybody's gonna mention BioWare, then look at Archetype Entertainment, they're the new BioWare
or else
Obsidian is still a good choice but not independent anymore.
No, WoTC is pivoting to mobile. They can use Larian's work to justify DnD Go and everyone will accept it.
Correct answer. Most people don't realise that the companies that are still making good games using common sense and a customer focus are generally not American. They are from Poland, Belgium, Japan, or other countries that have not yet become completely corrupted by 'extreme capitalism'.
Before you down vote me into oblivion I am not anti-american. I just don't like greed and corruption which unfortunately seems to correlate with power.
I would guess the next Baldurs gate will probably be filled with GaaS.
Honestly, we're talking completely new engine and none of Larian's built-in stuff with regard to environments and the like that they had from their past divinity game. No one is going to have that just ready to go. So, they need to shop for a dev studio that has a past game that shows what they want.
Obsidian doesn't have that, maybe the closest being Dungeon Siege 3 or Pillars of Eternity, but those are very basic, not as open, very little environment related and altering capabilities. So, we're talking a step way back on what Larian delivered. Zero scene experience to line up with what was done in BG3. Okay conversation tree designs, but still needs more complexity.
inXile has Wasteland 3 as a base model engine, and I think that's better than Pillars of Eternity from Obsidian. But, still needs to be more open world, more environmental effects, and a much heavier rules set adaptation. But, not a bad overall engine as a base, but still a ton of work. Zero scene experience to line up with what was done in BG3. Needs a ton of work on that entirely.
Tactical Adventure did the Solasta game. Really good and more accurate as far as 5e rules than BG3. But, again, if the expectation is similar to what made BG3 a big hit, engine isn't designed for moving the camera, is a bit outdated in graphics, doesn't have in-game scene elements, and needs much better writers/voice actors.
Owlcat of pathfinder games is another choice, even though they've recently moved on to WH40k licensed games. Again, though, the engine is the biggest issue here to match up, but it's a much better option overall than Tactical Adventure. Another question is writers/story telling, as much of their overall story telling bits are very limited with a lot of random worldbuilding elements that are just +\- of some attributes.
TBH, no matter who takes over, it's just not going to be like BG3 much like how BG3 isn't at all like BG1/2. And BG3 was so successful because of how much Larian was able to put in with their engine and how focused they were on players having ridiculous control over the story being told. I just don't see the next BG being the same and depending on what it is, it might be good but I'm not as big of a reach as BG3. It's way more likely players are going to go into BG4 (or its spiritual successor if it moves away from Baldur's Gate and into Neverwinter or something like Plansescape) expecting much of what is in BG3 with more options, new and older characters, and the same level of control over what they're doing. If it doesn't have that, regardless of who makes it, it won't be as successful, IMHO.
Yes, I completely concur.
As good and talented as inXile and Obsidian are in their own specific way of making their particular games, none of them have Larian's attention to detail, dynamic worlds, and reactivity, so even if they end up making a new Baldur's Gate, it's going to be a significant step-down in terms of gameplay if not narrative.
Before the age of the internet, I remember when I would have to wait a month or two AFTER a game came out to read a review on EGM.
I've never had a problem with Bethesda games. Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Dishonored, WET, Rage, the new Doom...I've always felt like I've gotten my money's worth.
Instead of going after a publisher that puts out great (if a little buggy) games, why don't you go after Hello Games for the POS known as No Man's Sky?
"Meaning we won't actually know if the games are good."
I didn't know if they were good when mainstream publications were getting early review copies. I trust the word of the people in this comment section more than I do gaming journalists.
We live in a "pre-order" culture. A majority of sales are made before the games are even released. The money gained from pre-orders is already spent on different elements by the time the game even comes out. One poor review, or miscommunication and suddenly people are cancelling pre-orders, meaning theses companies go into an even deeper hole of loss.
How do you combat this as a company? No early reviews. If most of the sales are going before the game even comes out, why do they need review outlets to help hype their advertisement machine? At which point the sales increase from pre-release reviews are insignificant since you'd have to pre-order the game anyway. The people who don't pre-order will calmly wait for the reviews regardless stimulated by normal advertisement. They aren't losing any sales.
We'll have to wait and see how this affects things on a larger scale for the company, but this is how they are combating the shortcomings of a pre-order environment.
You want to help? Stop pre-ordering games.