Ubisoft Scaler promises to help create brand new types of games
Owlcat Games producer Anatoly Shestov reveals his dream project: an SCP game with Owlcat RPG flair and a proper budget.
TNS: Based on its most recent ESG data, Nintendo boasts a remarkably low staff turnover rate of just 1.9%, with virtually no reported layoffs.
It’s unreal that people are downvoting this when they consistently have the best scoring games on metacritic.
Well it doesn’t surprise me. As much money as they make and how they value their employees. It’s a great company in that regard.
Replies(1)Well, when your games remain full price many years after release.
And you make profit off of outdated hardware.
I would be shocked if they couldn't afford to retain their staff.
I didn't want to say anything but drivxr is right.
Nintendo always sells at a profit because they purposely use tech that's always 5 or more years behind. And it's also true their games hardly ever get price decreases.
Don't get me wrong, it's great they kept most of their workforce, but making a point to have your tech specs behind everyone else affords that luxury.
I don’t think it’s their purpose to use old tech. It’s their purpose to make value of software and know their value. Nobody makes games like them that’s for sure. I just don’t appreciate their customer unfriendly policy.
It’s not impossible to take their status. Companies need to have a selection of 8-bit and 16-bit. Now imagine a split screen for 8 player game for SNES Mario kart and selling at $9.99. The problem is that it doesn’t make profit. So many companies won’t invest in “old” technology. Everyone guns for triple AAA modern technology software but honestly we can enjoy modernized 16-bit creative ideas that allows 8-player mayhem. It’s a pipe dream, possible but impossible.
If they ended up kicking people out after all of that stated above, it would be truly shameful.
Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Tesla and Meta are all trillion dollar companies yet they are laying people off in large numbers.
I believe the reason Nintendo layoffs off less workers may be a result of their culture. It seems Japanese companies believe in giving their workers long term or life long employment opportunities and will exhaust all options before laying off workers. This is something we don't see much of in the west unfortunately.
might be something to do with the fact all those companies hire more than 20x the employees than Nintendo
What the hell are you talking about? It has nothing to do with how profitable they are. Its completely cultural, MS and Sony make stacks of cash and still lay folks off. Nintendo chose not to lay off staff for the same reason their execs took pay cuts to increase staff pay instead; because they value their staff and view them as colleagues, and respect them as such.
If Sony weren't so US centric I fancy they'd fare better too, they should get shot of US and European leadership and go back to when Japanese execs were running the show if you ask me!
TNS: Expedition 33 was the wake-up call Square Enix needed, telling it turn-based RPGs are still popular, but that shouldn't have been the case.
True, but if it does get it through their thick skulls, then that works.
Although, the Dragon Quest 1 + 2 HD remakes will be turn-based and (the worst kept secret) Final Fantasy IX remake should be turn-based I would imagine. Let's see if any newer games go turn-based too.
DQIII HD Remake was turned based and very successful. Then there was a really obscure turn based game came Balder's Gate 3. I heard it might have done well.
It won't get through to them though, despite E33's success, they still won't risk going fully turn based for their big budget projects simply because they are still in the mindset that it needs to be action combat to appeal to the mainstream audience. I hope I'm wrong but don't underestimate just how stubborn Japanese execs can be
Ya'll are hyping up Expedition 33 too much. Reminder that FF XVI sold 3 million in a week and it took Expedition 33 approximately a month to get to that (33 days to reach 3.3 million).
While it is true that Sqaure Enix has moved away from turn based games compared to how they were in the past, there is a good reason for it.
Older gamers will know this but during the ps2 era, we were flooded with turned based games from Japanese studios and this created a form of fatigue back then going into the next generation.
When Square released FF13, they received heavy criticism for making the game turned based like every other FF game and not doing enough to innovate. This is why they made FF15, FF7 Remake and FF16 have real time combat. It gave the series a fresh spin and has brought in new fans to the series.
I personally would be happy with either turned based FF or the real-time combat version we see today.
Dang wish I saw your post before I made mine because we definitely feel the same way lol
Yeah hit the nail on the head but its like ww2 games we get hundreds of them then a decade of nothing and people start missing them i think we're going to start seeing them return
Claire, dragon quest even yakuza have seen turn based return
Only need to look at their own game DQ 11 approaching 10 million to show there's a market. And that's not as big of a name as FF
Another article about Expedition 33 and Square Enix and turn-based games? This is starting to sound like propaganda.
The game didn't sell because it's a turn-based game; it sold and is enjoyed because it's a really freaking good game that released completed at a good price without gamer drama attached to it. No Mtx, no wait-until-it's-patched, minimal bloat, a self-contained story, no multiplatform BS. Just a solid original game that absolutely nails what it intended to do.
Maybe try actually listening to the fans who have supported the series for decades. This habit of ignoring your core audience just to chase people who were never interested in Final Fantasy in the first place makes no sense. And when that approach fails, doubling down on it is beyond baffling.
The battle system has never been the main reason non-FF or non-JRPG players stayed away. Gutting the series’ identity to chase a broader market doesn’t attract new players. It just alienates the loyal ones.
Keep going down this road and we’ll end up with Final Fantasy Fortnite abomination or a F2P Battle Royale game.. Oh wait…
*rolls eyes*
This marketing speak is running thin. Cloud or no, that game world isn't going to look any different than what we can already do. You're just increasing data usage, IMHO.
***make bigger and more complex game worlds than ever before, that can be updated in real time and be populated by a giant number of players, creating new social experiences.***
Pipe dreams on creativity that won't go anywhere we haven't seen because we all know how many of those social experiences will involve phallic or patented creations that will lead straight to limiting creativity to prevent it. Let alone most creations will just be things Ubisoft will sell you and not what you create with them. And we already have games that allow hundreds of people in worlds where they can build and create within limited capacities. It's standard in most 3D survival games now.
«Power of the Cloud» marketing fluff is back, huh?
I'm afraid of this, though - «The game is always running and it’s always possible to update pieces of that game». Judging by Ubisoft quality standarts, when you visit "updated area", all you'll see is «Loading new terrain, 0kb / 5gb». And it also might lead to some areas being marked as "currently in development" on release. Don't see any positive things from this tech yet. You already have MMOs and updates-on-the-fly and that didn't cause any increase in quality or broke any new grounds.
Ah s**t here we go again Ubisoft worst pocket milkers in the game.
Nft = fail
Milking Tom Clancy = fail
Sequel after sequel = fail.
Let's see this bomb spectacularly
I wish Ubisoft would just return to making (SP) games instead of jumping on every new bandwagon (MT’s, GAAS, cloud, NFTs, etc etc)
Imagine growing up where your dream is to create fantastic new games for a new generation, you get hired by a big organisation like Ubisoft, and then the suits in charge decide that instead of having you create those great games, they’re far more interested in how many MT’s they can make you shove into whatever you’re making, and now they want to force you to work on cloud-based stuff, which means you’ll have to make creative concessions in terms of ambition, most users won’t be able to enjoy your creation in a flawless fluid manner (stuttering, pop-in, lag, etc), and instead of you creating your world once, as great as possible, instead it is destined to be altered and changed by whichever new developer they hire for that job right after you …
Or you could just get a decent PC, then you own the actual hardware.