this post was submitted on 05 May 2024
964 points (97.7% liked)

Games

32957 readers
1405 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago (2 children)

What does it matter if the game "launches successfully" if it doesn't sustain itself? They knew theyd likely lose their players but they were hoping theyd be special - this game is not successful in the end.

Your entire argument boils down to: they wouldn't have been able to cheat us into thinking this was a good game without sony. If theyre going to take my money and kill the game anyway, it would have been better to not make it at all. That's what thousands of indie devs have to contend with every day.

[–] Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works 7 points 7 months ago

I think his argument comes down to, don't hate the playa, hate the game. Far better for them to have made the game, as it clearly is a good game. The publisher coming in and shitting all over everything is what makes the situation bad. Hopefully, this can serve as more inspiration for indie devs (who do make most of my fav games) and maybe lead to more studios not accepting Sony as a publisher. I can't fault Arrowhead for wanting to make what they love, but I can hope Sony burns to the ground never to rise again.

[–] DogWater@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You're talking like this was premeditated by the development studio......is that really the case?

[–] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Unless there's evidence that AH got a special deal, there's no chance they didn't know this was an eventual requirement.

I've been an engineer in the AA/AAA games industry for almost 2 decades, my job often involves assessing the technical feasibility of games that big publishers like Sony want to invest in/ acquire.

Someone somewhere at AW agreed to shove PSN sign-in requirements in the deal, hoping it would blow over like many games before. (e.g rocket league / epic account debacle). Now the devs are sorry it's not working out and say "their hands are tied", but they must have known this was coming. There are way too many legal ramifications for this to be a random power-move by Sony.

Edit: sony apparently lifted the requirement today

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I'm gonna be honest. It didn't matter to them at the time. Look at it. They made their game and we all played it and loved it. For that time they were on cloud nine. They definitely got what they wanted, for a moment anyway. I can't say I wouldn't end up in the same situation if I was ever more than a shit dev.

Edit: but to add, I'd put huge banners in game saying it was a requirement at login. As far as I know I was never bothered in game for it. And if I was it was too easy to click and ignore.