Lex wrote: Remember Polygon’s video of DOOM? It was agonizing to see how the player in the video doesn’t have the grip to play first-person shooters and vigorously uploaded the footage online. I can’t merely grasp what the intention was in the first place. Was it to make it fun for viewers to watch? Or was it in the point of who gets to upload it first? Neither of these choices by the editors themselves thought about the reaction from the people watching. Because showcasing the game is not even on the checklist, if that was their excuse.
Now, the DOOM video is almost a year and a half old already, but it seems that there is another horrifying, or let’s use the player’s word “shameful”, trending display of playing a video-game. StudioMDHR’s Cuphead is a side-scroller shooter platformer, in which the player considers to be “hard” on his hands-on impressions. I was told by one of my writers about this fiasco, and I took some time digging for more details.
The latest game in BioWare’s fantasy role-playing series went through ten years of development turmoil
In early November, on the eve of the crucial holiday shopping season, staffers at the video-game studio BioWare were feeling optimistic. After an excruciating development cycle, they had finally released their latest game, Dragon Age: The Veilguard, and the early reception was largely positive. The role-playing game was topping sales charts on Steam, and solid, if not spectacular, reviews were rolling in.
Its easy they called the die hard fans people in their nerd caves who will buy anything and then went woke to reach modern audiences....insulting the nerds in their caves along the way showing utter contempt for their fan base. very hapy it failed and any company who insults their fan base and treat their customers with contempt and insults, in future, i also hope fail.
It’s disappointing but not surprising to see what's happening with Dragon Age: The Veilguard and the broader situation at BioWare. The layoffs are tragic — no one wants to see talented developers lose their jobs. But when studios repeatedly create games that alienate their own fanbase, outcomes like this become unfortunately predictable.
There’s a pattern we’re seeing far too often: beloved franchises are revived, only to be reshaped into something almost unrecognizable. Changes are made that no one asked for, often at the expense of what originally made these games special. Then, when long-time fans express concern or lose interest, they’re told, “This game might not be for you.” But when those same fans heed that advice and don’t buy the game, suddenly they're labeled as toxic, sexist, bigoted, or worse.
Let’s be clear: the overwhelming majority of gamers have no issue with diversity, LGBTQ+ representation, or strong female leads. In fact, some of the most iconic characters in gaming — like Aloy, Ellie, or FemShep — are proof that inclusivity and excellent storytelling can and do go hand in hand. The issue arises when diversity feels performative, forced, or disconnected from the narrative — when characters or themes are inserted not to serve the story, but to satisfy a corporate DEI checklist. Audiences can tell the difference.
When studios chase approval from a vocal minority that often doesn’t even buy games — while simultaneously dismissing loyal fans who actually do — they risk not just the success of individual titles, but the health of their entire studio. Telling your core customers “don’t buy it if you don’t like it” is not a viable business strategy. Because guess what? Many of us won’t. And when the game fails commercially, blaming those very fans for not supporting it is both unfair and self-defeating.
Gamers aren’t asking for less diversity or less progress. We’re asking for better writing, thoughtful character development, and a respect for the franchises we’ve supported for decades. When you give people great games that speak to them — whether they’re old fans or new players — they will show up. But if you keep making games for people who don’t play them, don’t be surprised when those who do stop showing up
I thought the writing and character development were fine. Sometimes things just dont resonate with people.
The Outerhaven says: $80 video games, Grand Theft Auto VI delay, Polygon and Giant Bomb gutted, and the lack of crossplay in Elden Ring Nightreign in Spectator Mode Podcast Ep. 186.
Former Santa Monica Studio writer Alanah Pearce has shared some insight on the game industry, and it's not great.
AAA has gone downhill as they focus on huge profits. Indie and other smaller games however have been amazing not chasing trends and the next big thing.
In all honesty, a significant majority of indies and smaller games fail. At best a you might hear about 10-20 indies that get attention or do well, but 100s more fail. AAA games can still be the bread and butter of the industry, but greedy executives would kill a good game if it doesn't make them a lot of money
I don’t game much anymore as i used to. Last big game i played was Stellar Blade. Almost didn’t touch the console since.
I don’t have much backlog for the first time in a long time. Maybe others enjoy what’s coming, but I’m losing feeling a little
Nail on the head. AAA has lost the magic and focused on profits and "player engagement". Gaming is an art form, and like always the CEO fat cats roll in to capitalize at the cost of innovation, passion, wild experimentation. We need a major realignment in the industry and it starts with gamers voting with their wallets.
I think that's already happening, we're seeing commercial successes in studios like Larion and whoever made Kingdom Come for example. Double Fine is another good example. Studios who are filled with and run by people who give a fuck that aren't hamstrung by money men. That's the answer and consumers are favouring it more than the soulless AAAs that have been put out. I don't doubt there is talent at Ubisoft for example but when they're told exactly what the end product needs to be by people who don't know what consumers actually want, it's always going to result in the same rehashed but slightly shinier slop.
Exactly. I do believe we are starting to see a shift in consumer habits. The market is saturated with GaaS and battlepasses, seasons, etc. We can't all play the same four games until the end of time. Fatigue is setting in and the industry needs to get back to making new experiences rather than chasing the latest "money maker".
I was wondering whether this is perception or actually happening but it feels to me, as a semi old gamer, there is more choice than ever and as such people are now much choosier about how they spend their time and money gaming. Certainly noticing this when it comes to GaaS as you mentioned, the question always has to be why would I play this instead of what I'm already playing. Anthem is going to have a real hard time prying away people, especially with a premium price tag that screams money men as a decision.
Nah. Devs need to pay the bills. Uninspired games fail, but artsy games usually fail even harder.
Gamers are voting with their wallets, Kingdom Come Deliverance, Expedition 33, games made by passionate developers who are not being controlled by money men are seeing their work get universal praise and selling extremely well. Meanwhile Outlaws and Veilguard are underperforming. I wonder how many people Ubi and EA had working on those games, in comparison Sandbox have just a core development team of 30 and managed to put something out EA and Ubi can only dream of.
The underlying problem though lays with how EA and Ubi execs react to these sort of things. Seems like they'd rather just lay off good developers and focus their efforts on their cash cows as opposed to change their development philosophies.
She didn't even call out Stanfield's PNG file planets when she flew through one. She just 'yelled' something stupid like 'flat earth'. She wasn't even taken aback in the slightest. I am not sure she isn't a part of the problem.
She's always been a narcissist bimbo, I'm even more surprised she's not in only fans yet.
I wasn't sure of the actual number of years just seemed like it wasn't that long ago when I heard that she got a job as a writer there, guess time flies. 4 years being "pretty good" or not is subjective depending on ones perspective. The question might be, was four years long enough to make a discernible writing contribution to a video game based on how long development cycles are these days?
Maybe for some industries. In gaming that's barely enough time to ship a single game.
She left SMS because she needed to go back to Australia to support a parent with cancer.
She quit SM studio to focus on her own stuff, There was a video where she explained all of it.
Okay, explain like the other 50 jobs she's had and hasn't held......
I think she likes to bend the truth a ton on how involved she is and when her lies catch up with her she moves on to start a new batch.
Greed , lack of innovation and agendas
Why do we rave about a good indie game but we avoid a AAA game.
Guys been a tech journalist for 25 years and been covering games for 18
It's embarrassing
I remember my first video game.
That level was disappointing, mostly shooting hardly any platforming. Maybe its just that level but what was shown was mediocre
I never judge people based off their skills at something so mundane as a video game, but I have to make an exception here; that was pathetic. Not only was it just sheer lack of video game skill, it was almost a sheer lack of common sense and basic problem solving. Like, it didn't work the first 5 times, why would you keep using that same exact method another 20? It's not like there was so much on screen that he couldn't just look around and think for a few seconds.
If I had to try and defend him somehow, I'd say he was on something lol
As long as he doesn't review the game and say it sucks, it's all good lol
Meh, I am not going to judge someone's skill at a single player game. Take your time, it's just you and a game. Now if he reviews it harshly because he sucks that is another thing.