https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhL1NZugsBk
The very definition of regression.
2006 Vs 2025
-
FemaleSpy
- Posts: 1225
- Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2018 2:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: 2006 Vs 2025
Its so sad...Void99 wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2025 8:05 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhL1NZugsBk
The very definition of regression.
-
Void99
- Posts: 325
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 5:52 pm
Re: 2006 Vs 2025
It is.FemaleSpy wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2025 1:15 pmIts so sad...Void99 wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2025 8:05 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhL1NZugsBk
The very definition of regression.
To think this is from Obsidian, who have a track record of being a pedigree developer...makes you wonder what on Earth went wrong.
My current most prevailing theory is that Microsoft is a huge part of the problem. Their whole Game Pass subscription model. They acquired Obsidian roughly 7 years ago. But it seems a number of studios under MS have been putting out low rate shovelware slop on a repeated basis now.
Like the idea of a new game from one of their studios is not made with the intent of being the best it can be....but rather sustain subscriptions for game pass at the lowest cost with minimal effort.
Crackdown 3, Redfall, Starfield and now Avowed. All seem like Game Pass filler at the sacrifice of genuine passion and TLC put in.
-
Void99
- Posts: 325
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 5:52 pm
Re: 2006 Vs 2025
Good take on the whole Avowed situation, and the main problem with the industry at large.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJwPu4t8UkY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJwPu4t8UkY
-
jaffa
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2023 9:05 am
Re: 2006 Vs 2025
A lot of these development companies are subject to the same pressures as any other entity in the software space.
i.e. Start small and become successful with quality products > do an IPO and get loads of money > use the money to develop even better products > you are now beholden to majority shareholders (most likely VC firms) and have to hire a bunch of C-Level execs > they start interfering with core business functions in order to pump the share price > original key staff get hired elsewhere or retire > your new board uses their superficial knowledge to hire replacements > quality drops, meaning worse financial performance > more interference to shore up share prices > resulting in worse products... it is really just a spiral that has repeated so many times over.
At least with videogames, there is always a vast amount of smaller developers releasing quality stuff each year. Can't say the same for enterprise software.
i.e. Start small and become successful with quality products > do an IPO and get loads of money > use the money to develop even better products > you are now beholden to majority shareholders (most likely VC firms) and have to hire a bunch of C-Level execs > they start interfering with core business functions in order to pump the share price > original key staff get hired elsewhere or retire > your new board uses their superficial knowledge to hire replacements > quality drops, meaning worse financial performance > more interference to shore up share prices > resulting in worse products... it is really just a spiral that has repeated so many times over.
At least with videogames, there is always a vast amount of smaller developers releasing quality stuff each year. Can't say the same for enterprise software.
