top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 157 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

They did their thing. No use of them anymore :)

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 82 points 4 weeks ago* (25 children)

    This game has absolutely horrendous performance problems.

    It baffles me that people are rating this higher than games like KOTOR and Republic Commando.

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    Because people like us in the tactics genre really are used to incredibly buggy and laggy games. XCOM, anything made by paradox - all of that suffers from performance issues and gameplay bugs. It's a bit like buying something from bethesda - you just expect those kinds of problems, which is why it doesn't really influence our rating.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago*

    Also, it isn't that big of a deal in a turn based tactics game to have all the animations be silky smooth or responsive like it is in games with real-time combat. The quality doesn't directly affect the play experience for the most part.

    A turn based game at 30 frames plays the same as it does at 60 or 120. It only doesn't look as good. Can't say the same for other genres.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (14 replies)
    [+] 70 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 children)
  • [–] 23 points 4 weeks ago (6 children)

    The corpo gaming industry, perhaps. I've seen various indie developers have a great time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

    The 0.1% who actually hit it big. Let's not include survivorship bias here :)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

    You don't go into indie to hit big though. You do it because it's your passion, just like any other creative out there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 15 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    I wanted to be in the video game industry when I was younger and followed through with it by learning programming and pretty much everything I could with computers.

    But then while I was in university, the story about EA's working culture broke. How they'd say hours were normal but they might need extra hours during "crunch time", which sounded reasonable until you learned that they just set deadlines such that it was always crunch time. The partners of EA workers did a class action suit against the company and won it IIRC.

    That was enough for me to adjust my trajectory. I realized the suddenly obvious bit: people usually go into the video game industry because they have a passion for video games, which sets them up for exploitation like any other job that many people want to get in to.

    I might still make a video game but I never intend to be a peon in the video game industry.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 58 points 4 weeks ago (6 children)

    This whole industry is job security hell. Man, people decades ago dreamed of being somewhere in the industry. I don't really know now who'd want to be in it knowing how awful job security even is.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 54 points 3 weeks ago

    He went on: "It is a gross but all too common sight to see, another corporate game hitting the top of Steam while the team is left looking for work and cut off from any possible profit sharing.

    And, there it is.

  • source
  • [–] 48 points 4 weeks ago (9 children)

    There go my hopes of a post launch performance patch.

    The game runs like arse even on a 9070XT.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
    [–] 48 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

    Unions. Not just for blue collars anymore.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

    All devs should be entitled to royalties

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago* (4 children)

    Honestly, I don't understand why any studio wouldn't do this. Not only does it mean you can differ some pay until later effectively (obviously you still need to be competitive, because people don't like gambling with their livelihood), but it actively encourages devs to make the best game possible. If they're just working for a salary, they have no skin in the game. Give them a reason to make the absolute best thing they possibly can make.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] 27 points 3 weeks ago* (1 child)

    Yet another certified bruh moment,

    The devs keep getting stabbed in the back by evil greedy CEOs

    I won’t even buy the game then

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 24 points 3 weeks ago*

    Gamerant is saying the studio was low on funds and facing a $20 million dollar lawsuit from a former exec when the workers were furloughed weeks prior to launch, that dozens of employees have already been brought back, and that Bit Locker is claiming to want to bring the rest back.

    This was their first game, and if they do bring back the team members (with back pay) now that the game is a sucess, I would actually be much more understanding.

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    What's the point? You can't even enjoy your laurels. Just fucked the minute release hits so they dont have to pay you. Fucked up. Nobody should work for a game corporation.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 21 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    A wise man once said devs that are afraid of losing their jobs dont go on to make great games. I was going to purchase this game but now ill wait till its on super sale.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (2 children)

    Leveraged buyout. Any dev still on payroll is a liability, and it's not like these guys make Ultimate Team. EA's got a lot of debt to service.

    EDIT:

    Actually, they might not be wholly owned by EA. I'm uncertain of the relationship here. It could just be that the developer stretched their budget down to the last second, before they're paid out.

    Uncertainty around the TTRPG's performance is to blame.

    TTRPG does not apply here. They meant it's a tactics game.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

    I think we're approaching a point where games are going to be made like movies.

    Teams assembled for one project, everyone does their bit, and are then discarded when they're no longer needed.

    Big publishers will probably have a pool of people they can push between projects depending on what's needed. Ubisoft appear to do that, when you look at the credits in their games, there's like 10 subsidiary studios involved. For smaller studios, you'll probably be let go between games until you're needed again. Maybe they'll keep your information and rehire you because you did a good job of hard surface rigging or whatever last time. Maybe they hire an excited school-leaver to sloperate a clanker. Who knows.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 3 weeks ago

    Approaching?

    AAA has been following that model for a decade.

    They don't give a shit about the people that work for them and fire them as soon as it's convenient.

    They fire people and allow them to re-apply for their job because then they don't have to pay continued service rewards.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Major difference is that in Hollywood, you don't hire a bunch of, say, VFX artists for a movie, you contract the company that retains them. They'll generally still have jobs when the movie is over. It's mostly just the cast, director and writers that work on a per-project basis. Games industry is somehow worse than Hollywood.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 13 points 3 weeks ago

    The unfortunate reality of it now, like having to keep your CV constantly updated and ready if ever to be laid off at any time. And it's worse than ever.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    You'll be surprised how many Star Wars games got canned in the last two years. I can't really say because of NDAs and don't want anyone in trouble. The whole industry is in trouble.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

    I was considering buying this as a massive fan of XCOM 2.

    Was.

    I'll just keep playing Cyber Knights: Flashpoint thank you very much.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 7 points 3 weeks ago

    Yeah I'll not be buying this then.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 3 weeks ago

    "Congratulations. Great job. Goodbye now."

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago

    If CEO fire whole team, how will you create a new success?

    Good teams are not conodity.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

    For anyone who wants this style of game, but doesn't want to support this, Xenonauts 2 released version 1.0 a few months ago. It's trying to be more classic X-COM, rather than modern XCOM, like what this game is copying (and simplifying even more). It's easily the best of the genre I've played, and it'll also run on pretty much any system you've got fine.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›