• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Naughty Dog Announces Development Delay on TLoU MP (MP Dev Team 'Significantly Scaled Down,' Bloomberg Reports)

Varteras

Gold Member
Remind me not to hire you if I need work doing on my homes. If a team is struggling in any work environment you put more or better workers on the job, not less. Bit of common sense is it mate?

I wasn't in charge. And these were big projects with the kind of money you can only imagine. Company was very successful too. Shit happens. You reallocate to get shit done. That's efficiency, mate.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Possibly related, but there have been lay-offs at Playstation Visual Arts studio after restructuring of an AAA Multi-player game, no names are given but very likely related to this.

Screenshot_2023-05-27_at_22-48-01_Post_Feed_LinkedIn.png



John was a project coordinator for the last year and half.

 

Varteras

Gold Member
Possibly related, but there have been lay-offs at Playstation Visual Arts studio after restructuring of an AAA Multi-player game, no names are given but very likely related to this.

Screenshot_2023-05-27_at_22-48-01_Post_Feed_LinkedIn.png



John was a project coordinator for the last year and half.

The rumor is that they were working on an Uncharted game too
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
The rumor is that they were working on an Uncharted game.

I haven't read any rumors about an AAA Multiplayer only Uncharted game in any recent leaks, based on the proximity of this Factions news, it just screams like the same project.
 
Last edited:

Varteras

Gold Member
adamsapple adamsapple Considering that VA helps on a lot of projects, if I had to guess this is probably the result of Pixelopus being closed, Deviation's game being canceled, and Naughty Dog's game being on hold now.
 

Varteras

Gold Member
Jesus Christ. Why didn't they just release an updated version of the originals multiplayer. The original was really fun

They probably wanted to try something other than what they had been doing. In different ways, changing things up worked out very well for Guerrilla, Insomniac, Santa Monica, and Sucker Punch. Someone probably came up with the idea of making Factions a whole thing. They got excited and ran with it.

I'm sure the game, as it was, would have been received quite well. But getting high praise at launch doesn't necessarily mean it will last years and bring in a bunch of money. My guess is that the post-launch roadmap and monetization were sorely lacking. Essential for a financially successful live service title. So Bungie made recommendations and now Naughty Dog is taking that to heart.
 

Fake

Member
Was factions supposed to release with TLOU2 or am I trippin? I’m surprised they never got any backlash on that

Yes. But little to nothing backlash because ND got easy pass.

They're supposed to release both the singleplayer and the multiplayer at the same day, just like the first TLOUS on PS3.

But somehow got not only delay, but while doing so with help of Bend Studios they did produce the remake.

There are so much mess into that people somehow 'forget'. Someone here remember that their lord Neil Druckman got acussed of sexual harressment inside ND by two woman?
But who cares anw.
 
Last edited:

Varteras

Gold Member
Possibly related, but there have been lay-offs at Playstation Visual Arts studio after restructuring of an AAA Multi-player game, no names are given but very likely related to this.

Screenshot_2023-05-27_at_22-48-01_Post_Feed_LinkedIn.png



John was a project coordinator for the last year and half.


FuJVJ4nXgAAWnf_


It was apparently a "heavily-stylized AAA project". Doesn't really sound like Factions to me. Could have been Deviation's game. Shit, could have been the Horizon online game. But it mentions an external studio. That could mean any number of things, but I wonder if that means "outside Visual Arts" or "outside Sony".
 

reksveks

Member
FuJVJ4nXgAAWnf_


It was apparently a "heavily-stylized AAA project". Doesn't really sound like Factions to me. Could have been Deviation's game. Shit, could have been the Horizon online game. But it mentions an external studio. That could mean any number of things, but I wonder if that means "outside Visual Arts" or "outside Sony".
Netease was working on a multiplayer horizon game, no?

Sorry ncsoft not netease.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
It was apparently a "heavily-stylized AAA project". Doesn't really sound like Factions to me. Could have been Deviation's game. Shit, could have been the Horizon online game. But it mentions an external studio. That could mean any number of things, but I wonder if that means "outside Visual Arts" or "outside Sony".

Without knowing exactly, it could be anything, the Factions concept they showed a few months back was also a bit stylized instead of trying to look 'realistic'.


25-where-is-the-last-of-us-factions-2.jpg








But then again, if it's the Horizon game with the Sea of Thieves art style, that's probably gonna make some folks here happy.
 

Varteras

Gold Member
Without knowing exactly, it could be anything, the Factions concept they showed a few months back was also a bit stylized instead of trying to look 'realistic'.


25-where-is-the-last-of-us-factions-2.jpg








But then again, if it's the Horizon game with the Sea of Thieves art style, that's probably gonna make some folks here happy.

Era folks seem to think it was Deviation's game. But, like us, they probably know nothing more than we do.
 
Last edited:

Fabieter

Member
Without knowing exactly, it could be anything, the Factions concept they showed a few months back was also a bit stylized instead of trying to look 'realistic'.


25-where-is-the-last-of-us-factions-2.jpg








But then again, if it's the Horizon game with the Sea of Thieves art style, that's probably gonna make some folks here happy.

Ooh boy. If it's the horizon game than It will be interesting how many of those 12 gaas game even release, probably not alot tho.
 
Ooh boy. If it's the horizon game than It will be interesting how many of those 12 gaas game even release, probably not alot tho.

It would likely be for the best. IMO Sony rushed into their GaaS strategy too big, too quickly. The focus should probably ideally be on 3 GaaS titles, at least in terms of big ones.

And those should've been counter-balanced with smaller, quirkier concept games that had the framework to grow into bigger GaaS offerings if they took off (I'm talking stuff akin to a Fall Guys, Among Us etc. Stuff that stands out in the market heavily compared to other FPS, looter shooters etc.).
 

Fabieter

Member
It would likely be for the best. IMO Sony rushed into their GaaS strategy too big, too quickly. The focus should probably ideally be on 3 GaaS titles, at least in terms of big ones.

And those should've been counter-balanced with smaller, quirkier concept games that had the framework to grow into bigger GaaS offerings if they took off (I'm talking stuff akin to a Fall Guys, Among Us etc. Stuff that stands out in the market heavily compared to other FPS, looter shooters etc.).

Not every multi game has to be a service game. Iam sad that sony is canceling alot.

Will this lead to droughts?
 
Not every multi game has to be a service game. Iam sad that sony is canceling alot.

Will this lead to droughts?

Potentially. At least among the 1P single-player exclusive games, we don't know what's due next after Spiderman 2, for 2024. In fact most of what we know may be coming on that front are 3P games like Rise of the Ronin and (maybe) FF VII Rebirth.

I'm sure they (Sony) will have a couple of live-service/GaaS titles for 2024, but ATM there is virtually no clarity on what 1P AAA 'traditional' game will be releasing next year, if any.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Don’t most games with less content then their former instalment usually get shit on?
The game was twice as long. They also announced it would not have the mode well before the game shipped. There were outage threads.

Many recent games have not been knocked in reviews for this.
 

Fabieter

Member
Potentially. At least among the 1P single-player exclusive games, we don't know what's due next after Spiderman 2, for 2024. In fact most of what we know may be coming on that front are 3P games like Rise of the Ronin and (maybe) FF VII Rebirth.

I'm sure they (Sony) will have a couple of live-service/GaaS titles for 2024, but ATM there is virtually no clarity on what 1P AAA 'traditional' game will be releasing next year, if any.

Yea, imo this doesn't bode well.
 

blastprocessor

The Amiga Brotherhood
Live service is pretty meh if we're getting more games like Destiny.



Preach brother.

People laughing at him for speaking the truth is why devs and publishers will just continue to throw more GAAS trash at us. Bunch of spineless cowards unable to criticize.

The reason this game got delayed is because Bungie said it doesn't have enough loot/transactions and other vile shit they love. Nothing to do with the core gameplay.


Wow this guy is thinking what I'm thinking. But live gaming seems to be so popular 😒
 
Last edited:
LOL @ Destiny 2 not being egregious or scummy with monetization. Yeah right. It even vaults off content you pay for.

Also numerous people have said ND has no experience with GaaS, I’ll push back a little on that. Teams are comprised of loads of people with all sorts of experience. No doubt plenty of people at ND have worked on a service game in their past. And the original Factions had lots of service game elements baked in without actually being a typical service game. The clan building and challenges you had to select and achieve to grow your clan are very much like the challenges you see in a battle pass, encouraging you to use different weapons or play styles, and reward you with boosters and sometimes cosmetics, like a service game.

Maybe Sony just doesn’t think a 4v4 TPS MP game really works well as a service game without some sort of battle royale or something.
 

Batiman

Banned
The game was twice as long. They also announced it would not have the mode well before the game shipped. There were outage threads.

Many recent games have not been knocked in reviews for this.
I guess you’re right when it comes to reviewers. But a lot of games suffer from the online negativity when anything is cut from a game that was in the originals. Maybe I’m just not seeing it with this. It has been so long though
 

FrankWza

Member
dude! look: saying a plumber doesn't know how to do electrical work isn't a friggin' insult, or a value judgment. no insult intended. i'm simply saying that they didn't know what they were doing in attempting to make a gaas game. you're right - it's not something they're familiar with, & yet they went ahead & were attempting to do it anyway, & they messed up. it's not an insult or a value judgment. it's simply a statement of fact...

not to mention: if scorcese ever did attempt & fail at making a good real housewives, wouldn't the real issue be not whether or not he was just too talented to succeed, but why the hell was he doing it in the first place? &, in this instance, you'd have to ask naughty dog...
Explaining Gary Oldman GIF by Apple TV+
 
Having a full blown mtx in your game is the best way for people to steer away from your game.

Having MTX for purely cosmetic items that eventually are made available to buy using in-game acquired currency... OMG, how can they be so evil?!? /s

MTXs are in virtually every fucking AAA game. WTF are you smoking?

Destiny's implementation (as described above) is the by far the least egregious implementation of MTXs of any game in recent memory. You can basically ignore them, play the game and then eventually buy all the previous MTX items later on with bright dust you earn in-game for playing. So you never need to spend a dime on MTXs.

Educate yourself.

Yea that doesn't mean that naughty dog didnt get people in with experience in games as a service. Guess what the hogwarts legacy devs never made a open world game before and knocked it out of the park. There are different takes to do stuff.

So?!... ND as a studio has never made a Live Service game before, and MP at that. It doesn't matter if they have a few individual hires with relevant experience, what's FAR FAR more important is the working synergies of the studio, the maturity of their development pipeline, tools, workflows and overall experience with them.

Bungie spent literal years learning the HARD lessons of what not to do when developing and managing a Live Service game --- ask any Destiny fan. Their experience is far more valuable than anything ND can boast of and ND would be wise to take advice from them.

The only thing missing in destiny is a sub.

See above and stop getting your information about how certain games' monetization works from NeoGaf shitposts.

There is even a vaulting system where it takes away the access of paid content. I dont know a single other game where they do that.

Yes... a GaaS that delivers massive quarterly content updates on top of fucking huge annual expansions, cannot simply grow the game content base indefinitely. Despite all the shitposting, the content vaulting decision by Bungie was the right one. Their actual implementation left something to be desired, for sure, but it was right to vault content. No-one wants a D2 game install that's 2.5 fucking terrabytes large on their expensive new-gen console SSD; with most of that data being in-game spaces that are a fucking ghost town because no-one plays them and there's nothing to do in them.

The biggest whiners about D2 content vaulting were the folks who either don't play the game or stopped playing it long before.
 
Last edited:

Fabieter

Member
Having MTX for purely cosmetic items that eventually are made available to buy using in-game acquired currency... OMG, how can they be so evil?!? /s

MTXs are in virtually every fucking AAA game. WTF are you smoking?

Destiny's implementation (as described above) is the by far the least egregious implementation of MTXs of any game in recent memory. You can basically ignore them, play the game and then eventually buy all the previous MTX items later on with bright dust you earn in-game for playing. So you never need to spend a dime on MTXs.

Educate yourself.



So?!... ND as a studio has never made a Live Service game before, and MP at that. It doesn't matter if they have a few individual hires with relevant experience, what's FAR FAR more important is the working synergies of the studio, the maturity of their development pipeline, tools, workflows and overall experience with them.

Bungie spent literal years learning the HARD lessons of what not to do when developing and managing a Live Service game --- ask any Destiny fan. Their experience is far more valuable than anything ND can boast of and ND would be wise to take advice from them.



See above and stop getting your information about how certain games' monetization works from NeoGaf shitposts.



Yes... a GaaS that delivers massive quarterly content updates on top of fucking huge annual expansions, cannot simply grow the game content base indefinitely. Despite all the shitposting, the content vaulting decision by Bungie was the right one. Their actual implementation left something to be desired, for sure, but it was right to vault content. No-one wants a D2 game install that's 2.5 fucking terrabytes large on their expensive new-gen console SSD; with most of that data being in-game spaces that are a fucking ghost town because no-one plays them and there's nothing to do in them.

The biggest whiners about D2 content vaulting were the folks who either don't play the game or stopped playing it long before.

Well how's is thr grind to actually get previous premium skins for free and how much do you pay yearly to get all the content. Its around 100 bucks, isn't it? Thats almost mmo level of pricing without the sick amount of content and service. (Yea I know destiny has alot od content but it's mostly grind tho)

Naughty dog should listen? This sounds hardly like the game ever will make it. And at this point they probably should just focus on their sp output if they can't do service games according to bungie.

Kinda agree with the vaulting but like you said they didnt implement it correctly and didnt communicate it way beforehand right? Well even if it makes sense I never would pay for something with the potential to lose accesss to something I paid for.
 

Varteras

Gold Member
From FigBoy on Era. He's an associate game designer:

Okay, last thing before I dip out of this hostile, hyperbolic, and incessantly pessimistic and jaded community:

The idea that Bungie is slinking through PS Studios, scythe in hand, ready to kill projects at the slightest infraction is absurd.

Bungie was acquired because they know how to not only run a live service game, but how to make money running a live service game. It’s not like they have a ton of IP (though they are working on at least 2 additional titles, one of which was revealed Wednesday). Their value is in their knowledge and experience, as well as their talent as a developer.

Let me tell you a story. Many, many years ago, I worked for a publisher that also made live service games. One of our titles was a hit, but it was reaching the point where that style of game wasn’t making the money it used to, and we needed to expand our offerings.

We released a handful of games after that players enjoyed. One of them, a game from a beloved IP, had an average player score of 4.5, which was great, because players really enjoyed the game. I’m not a big fan of live service games, personally, but even I really enjoyed playing the game myself. It was fun (and I was also a fan of the IP).

The problem was, it wasn’t making any money. Knowing what I know now about live service games, I understand why it wasn’t.

Anyway, the lead game designer, against the advice of the producers and management that it was a bad idea, drastically altered the monetization model, and it was a disaster. The new model was unreasonable, greedy, and completely screwed over our player base that had been playing the game for months, including ones that had been spending money. His argument was that we’d just bring in new players. On an IP that, while popular, still had a narrow, but passionate fanbase. Bringing new fans into the fold would have been very, very difficult.

Our player score dropped from that 4.5 to 2, players left the game, we didn’t get new players to offset it, and eventually we lost the license, shuddered the project. Not that long after that, the whole publisher had to close its doors and I was out of a job (which definitely made things hard for me and my wife at the time, as I struggled to find work; thank god for my severance package and unemployment that helped keep us above water until I landed a new gig…).

The point is, no matter how fun a live service game is, it also has to have a rock solid monetization model if it, and the studio, is to thrive and be able to continue, and the team able to continue to make the games they’re passionate about.

We all know that TLOU is satisfying to play. An enjoyable and entertaining game loop isn’t the problem. ND is great at level design and game feel (from Crash Bandicoot to Jak & Daxter, to Uncharted, to The Last of Us, they know how to make a game that’s fun to play), along with their great characters and story, so I highly doubt that TLOU Online isn’t fun to play.

The issue is with monetization/game economy, long term player engagement, and content generation, the struggle all live service games wrestle with.

Sure, you can study from the outside what successful live service games are doing, but that can only take you so far. How production pipelines are managed and run, as well as analytics and data from player behavior and patterns is where the real value lies, and what studios making successful GAAS games understandably keep close to the chest.

Bungie was brought on to assist ND with that part of the development, because they’re fucking good at it.

They have seen and played and evaluated TLOU Online, whereas we’ve gotten two pieces of concept art and a statement from ND about it being a much more ambitious project than they originally planned. So I think it’s safe to say that Bungie knows a little bit more about the state of the project than we do.

And their assessment isn’t that the concept isn’t viable or fun and should be scrapped, but that there isn’t a solid foundation of long term player engagement, and should be reassessed. They didn’t push for the project to be cancelled, but for the live service aspect of it to be improved and ideally a stronger content roadmap established for their goals of making this project a long term service.

Spitefully rooting for these games to crash and burn and cheerleading people potentially losing their jobs because you didn’t get your way because of a fucking gaming showcase (where the vast majority of games shown were single player 🙄), is fucking disgusting.

Ok, I’m outta here. Peace out.
 

Represent.

Represent(ative) of bad opinions
From FigBoy on Era. He's an associate game designer:

Okay, last thing before I dip out of this hostile, hyperbolic, and incessantly pessimistic and jaded community:

The idea that Bungie is slinking through PS Studios, scythe in hand, ready to kill projects at the slightest infraction is absurd.

Bungie was acquired because they know how to not only run a live service game, but how to make money running a live service game. It’s not like they have a ton of IP (though they are working on at least 2 additional titles, one of which was revealed Wednesday). Their value is in their knowledge and experience, as well as their talent as a developer.

Let me tell you a story. Many, many years ago, I worked for a publisher that also made live service games. One of our titles was a hit, but it was reaching the point where that style of game wasn’t making the money it used to, and we needed to expand our offerings.

We released a handful of games after that players enjoyed. One of them, a game from a beloved IP, had an average player score of 4.5, which was great, because players really enjoyed the game. I’m not a big fan of live service games, personally, but even I really enjoyed playing the game myself. It was fun (and I was also a fan of the IP).

The problem was, it wasn’t making any money. Knowing what I know now about live service games, I understand why it wasn’t.

Anyway, the lead game designer, against the advice of the producers and management that it was a bad idea, drastically altered the monetization model, and it was a disaster. The new model was unreasonable, greedy, and completely screwed over our player base that had been playing the game for months, including ones that had been spending money. His argument was that we’d just bring in new players. On an IP that, while popular, still had a narrow, but passionate fanbase. Bringing new fans into the fold would have been very, very difficult.

Our player score dropped from that 4.5 to 2, players left the game, we didn’t get new players to offset it, and eventually we lost the license, shuddered the project. Not that long after that, the whole publisher had to close its doors and I was out of a job (which definitely made things hard for me and my wife at the time, as I struggled to find work; thank god for my severance package and unemployment that helped keep us above water until I landed a new gig…).

The point is, no matter how fun a live service game is, it also has to have a rock solid monetization model if it, and the studio, is to thrive and be able to continue, and the team able to continue to make the games they’re passionate about.

We all know that TLOU is satisfying to play. An enjoyable and entertaining game loop isn’t the problem. ND is great at level design and game feel (from Crash Bandicoot to Jak & Daxter, to Uncharted, to The Last of Us, they know how to make a game that’s fun to play), along with their great characters and story, so I highly doubt that TLOU Online isn’t fun to play.

The issue is with monetization/game economy, long term player engagement, and content generation, the struggle all live service games wrestle with.

Sure, you can study from the outside what successful live service games are doing, but that can only take you so far. How production pipelines are managed and run, as well as analytics and data from player behavior and patterns is where the real value lies, and what studios making successful GAAS games understandably keep close to the chest.

Bungie was brought on to assist ND with that part of the development, because they’re fucking good at it.

They have seen and played and evaluated TLOU Online, whereas we’ve gotten two pieces of concept art and a statement from ND about it being a much more ambitious project than they originally planned. So I think it’s safe to say that Bungie knows a little bit more about the state of the project than we do.

And their assessment isn’t that the concept isn’t viable or fun and should be scrapped, but that there isn’t a solid foundation of long term player engagement, and should be reassessed. They didn’t push for the project to be cancelled, but for the live service aspect of it to be improved and ideally a stronger content roadmap established for their goals of making this project a long term service.

Spitefully rooting for these games to crash and burn and cheerleading people potentially losing their jobs because you didn’t get your way because of a fucking gaming showcase (where the vast majority of games shown were single player 🙄), is fucking disgusting.

Ok, I’m outta here. Peace out.
What a long winded, bunch of nonsense.

Basically he said: "Bungie stepped in and decided there isn't enough loot, MTX, paid weapon skins, battle passes, and other vile shit in your game, ND. Delay it and add more."


I summed it up in 2 sentences. Why the fuck did he write 40 paragraphs?

He's just looking for sympathy. Dude cant take criticism and its embarrassing. Not built for this industry.
 
Last edited:

Varteras

Gold Member
What a long winded, bunch of nonsense.

Basically he said: "Bungie stepped in and decided there isn't enough loot, MTX, paid weapon skins, battle passes, and other vile shit in your game, ND. Delay it and add more."


I summed it up in 2 sentences. Why the fuck did he write 40 paragraphs?

He's just looking for sympathy. Dude cant take criticism and its embarrassing. Not built for this industry.

I don't think he works for any of the companies involved.
 

FrankWza

Member
but of course - why attempt to communicate coherently when you can just resort to insult...

if your problem is with naughty dog working on a gaas game, you need to take it up with naughty dog, not me...
You are missing the point and pretending to not insult ND with one breath and then doing just that with your next. It can just as easily be assumed that they didn't want to stoop to typical GaaS tactics inside of their usual, excellent development. I wouldn't called that a failure but you're trying real hard to.

Bungie wasn't asked to advise ND on how make a quality game, they don't need help from any studio in the world on that. They were asked, most likely, their opinion on how successful it would be to monetize the game as much as possible. If trying to mask that as a failure or putting that in a bubble where it's interpreted as a failure makes you feel like a success, then by all means, keep it up.

my hot take: following the unprecedented critical/consumer success (& very deservedly so) of the last of us, naughty dog went full-blown prima donna, & this, imo, is just an indication of it finally catching up with them. yes, there are other mitigating factors (gaas, etc), but i still believe them getting high on their own product for years now has ended up taking its toll...

yeah, i'd say that it's very likely, as masters of the universe, they thought that factions would be a cakewalk &, given the nd fanbase thirst, an easy win. as you say, they obviously seriously misjudged things, including their own sense of development infallibility...

it's not an insult or a value judgment

it's not something they're familiar with, & yet they went ahead & were attempting to do it anyway, & they messed up. it's not an insult or a value judgment. it's simply a statement of fact...
 

Pelao

Member
Are we in Naughty Dog's shitty arc? I mean, TLOU2 was pretty divisive, but while I didn't like it, I'm not going to deny that it's very well done from a technical standpoint. But between this and the state they released the remake of TLOU1 in, I can't help but realize that they're fumbling in ways that would have been unthinkable for them before.
 
Last edited:
You are missing the point and pretending to not insult ND with one breath and then doing just that with your next. It can just as easily be assumed that they didn't want to stoop to typical GaaS tactics inside of their usual, excellent development. I wouldn't called that a failure but you're trying real hard to.

Bungie wasn't asked to advise ND on how make a quality game, they don't need help from any studio in the world on that. They were asked, most likely, their opinion on how successful it would be to monetize the game as much as possible. If trying to mask that as a failure or putting that in a bubble where it's interpreted as a failure makes you feel like a success, then by all means, keep it up.
look: i'm not denying, or ruling out, what you suggest. you may very well be correct that the whole gaas caught naughty dog completely by surprise. it's possible. also: i personally have no use for gaas, i don't play online games, & will only be playing the single-player of factions if there is one...

what i am saying: i believe that it's extremely likely that naughty dog & sony had been discussing factions from early on, whenever it was mutually agreed to that it'd be a full release as opposed to packed in with, or dlc for, tlou2, & that they were on the same page as far as expectations were concerned. was it mutually understood from the get-go that the project was gaas? or was it something sony introduced into the conversation at a later date? this's one more 'we may never know'. but this's fundamentally why i feel that, as likely as it is that naughty dog didn't want to do gaas is the possibility that they agreed to it, attempted it, & failed...

all either of us is doing here is speculating. i've never in any way denied the possibility of what you've been suggesting. you, on the other hand, seem genuinely offended by what i'm suggesting, & i'm not sure why. what i think we both can agree on: something obviously has gone amiss with factions, & which party's responsible for how much or how little of this (nd/sony) is currently unclear...

so: how did naughty dog come to find themselves working on a gaas? were they insistent from the beginning that they didn't, & wouldn't, do a gaas? were they participating in creating a gaas willingly or unwillingly, enthusiastically or unenthusiastically? or did sony just suddenly, out of the blue, gaas-light them? this's something that only naughty dog would likely know...
 

PeteBull

Member
Are we in Naughty Dog's shitty arc? I mean, TLOU2 was pretty divisive, but while I didn't like it, I'm not going to deny that it's very well done from a technical standpoint. But between this and the state they released the remake of TLOU1 in, I can't help but realize that they're fumbling in ways that would have been unthinkable for them before.
The TLOU part1 pc port wasnt done by ND, it was made by same studio that botched Arkham Knight pc port back in 2015, and its already fixed btw ;)
Not a fan of story/takes in TLOU2 here either ;)
 
Last edited:
Well how's is thr grind to actually get previous premium skins for free

Bright dust in-game is acquired through means that align with the normal in-game grind. So you don't feel it... like at all. Each season provides seasonal challenges that you do simply because it's part of the seasonal gameplay loop and storyline, which also happen to award a shit tonne of bright dust currency. So you never really feel the need to spend on silver.

and how much do you pay yearly to get all the content. Its around 100 bucks, isn't it? Thats almost mmo level of pricing without the sick amount of content and service. (Yea I know destiny has alot od content but it's mostly grind tho)

You don't have to purchase the seasonal premium content. You can still experience most of the seasonal storyline, gameplay modes and content without paying. So really it's the expansions that are the major cost factor.

That said, $100 for quarterly seasonal content drops that amount to something two whole game's worth, plus an annual expansion that is easily an entire game's worth of content is an amazing deal. D2 players only bitch about the price when the quality isn't there. And that hasn't been the case since year one.

You can complain about pricing, but that doesn't take anything away from the fact that Bungie is one of the best Live Service game developers out there.

Naughty dog should listen? This sounds hardly like the game ever will make it.

That's just hyperbole and your own speculation. They've pivoted on the direction of development. It makes sense when a project is headed in a direction that isn't working.

Considering the projects ND has worked on for the last decade, it's unsurprising that the development of a VASTLY different kind of game would not go 100% smoothly. Creative development is a messy process regardless of the talent of the team, the maturity of the tools, or the shrewdness of the managers. Now throw a game genre that puts your largely SP-focused dev team far outside their comfort zone and it's gonna risk a few project restarts.

Game development is iterative by nature, and sometimes a significant rework is needed to ensure a project's success. This is basically the story of virtually every Rockstar game over the past 20 years. So some dev trouble doesn't mean the game won't make it.

Stop being so neurotic.

And at this point they probably should just focus on their sp output if they can't do service games according to bungie.

You're just being obtuse now.

You know very well that's not what's been reported. You're just writing your own fanfiction now.

Kinda agree with the vaulting but like you said they didnt implement it correctly and didnt communicate it way beforehand right?

I agree. They didn't communicate it well or far enough ahead beforehand. But it's a difficult thing to communicate a shitty thing you have to do for technical reasons to a largely non-technically literate consumer base. Gamers are the worst for only hearing partial information and then rushing off to spread misinformation.

Well even if it makes sense I never would pay for something with the potential to lose accesss to something I paid for.

In my mind, it's no different from time-gated special event content that only persists in-game for the duration of a seasonal event. You could make the exact same logical argument that content is being removed from the game that you paid for. But no one does because it makes sense and is for a reasonable reason. D2's content vaulting was equally so.
 

DenchDeckard

Moderated wildly
Shit, If Sony suddenly decides to Kill all this Gaas shit, what is their release schedule going to look like over the next couple of years?
 
Top Bottom