|
How did Umbrella expect to get the BOWs back in the box to reuse as weapons anyway? Zombies are disposable, but some of the other ones look fancy - and pricy.
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 09:40 |
|
|
OldMemes posted:How did Umbrella expect to get the BOWs back in the box to reuse as weapons anyway? Zombies are disposable, but some of the other ones look fancy - and pricy. I mean in fairness, so are missiles and those don't get reused.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2018 21:05
|
|
|
OldMemes posted:How did Umbrella expect to get the BOWs back in the box to reuse as weapons anyway? Zombies are disposable, but some of the other ones look fancy - and pricy. We see in various games that Umbrella (and other companies) developed ways to control or shut down BOWS using drugs or training.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:We see in various games that Umbrella (and other companies) developed ways to control or shut down BOWS using drugs or training. Hunters are pretty much the only practical B.O.W. to put on the market. Well, they were, until we found out in Gun Survivor that Mr. X units can be mass-manufactured. Other tyrants are kind of rare. It's actually pretty remarkable turnaround period that Hunters were ostensibly still in testing around July (there's a small Hunter combat testing room in RE0) and by the time Code: Veronica rolls around in December, Wesker's managed to train them to go after targets found by those weird scouter things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 00:37
|
|
|
They somehow mass produced a yellow zombie that has no left arm and it's right arm stretches. That zombie is dangerous because it can slap you from like 10 feet away. And they called it Bandersnatch.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
I don't believe Umbrella really thought a lot of things through tbh
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 01:55
|
|
|
Remember in one of the Gun Survivor games they managed to grow and then lose track of a creature that is too big to actually fit through any of the doorways in the facility.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 03:32
|
|
|
Dang, it is criminal that Chris' partner in RE6 is this mayo rear end cracker rear end white boy instead of Sheva, Jill or Josh 
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 06:14
|
|
|
People criticize RE6 for a lot of reasons, but one thing almost everyone agrees on is that Piers sucks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 06:18
|
|
|
Neither of us know anything about the other campaigns other than who the main character is, so I think my buddy and I were both expecting it to be Jill and were really surprised when we hit a cutscene in Leon's campaign and met Chris and that Jabroni. I'm curious who Ada's parter is, now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 06:21
|
|
|
fadam posted:Neither of us know anything about the other campaigns other than who the main character is, so I think my buddy and I were both expecting it to be Jill and were really surprised when we hit a cutscene in Leon's campaign and met Chris and that Jabroni. I'm curious who Ada's parter is, now. it is her imaginary best friend, agent
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 06:43
|
|
|
Agent is real and strong and my friend.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 06:45
|
|
|
Agent is a very polite man who doesnt want to get in the way of Ada's theatrics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 06:54
|
|
|
Convex posted:I don't believe Umbrella really thought a lot of things through tbh Umbrella didn't have the chance. The writers hemstitched it together after the fact, but every bioweapon in the series is either a complete accident, a mutated test subject, or a proof of concept until the Tyrant, and it was only a prototype at the time of the "mansion incident." Umbrella kept working on it and got it more or less controllable, but then the company folded entirely in 2002-2003. Every actual attempt to sell the viruses or the BOWs as actual deployed weapons has either ended in failure (Dead Aim) or is a black-market operation, conducted after Umbrella's dissolution. When we've seen BOWs used, so far, they've been treated as bombs (the Hunters that destroyed Terragrigia in Revelations), they've only been controllable via a kitbashed implant that kills its user after a few days (the Lickers in Damnation), or it's just been spreading the raw virus somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 20:58
|
|
|
Even what happened at their last facility in Europe (Umbrella Chronicles), Wesker snuck in and released everything for shits and giggles before Chris and Jill showed up. Their last stand fell right on its face before the his guys ever got there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
agent is the best character in 6 because he can't actually interact with any objects. so if you have to turn a crank or hit a switch, the person playing ada needs to do it. why is this good? because you can spam thumb up emotes while your partner does all that stuff.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2018 22:41
|
|
|
gimme the GOD drat candy posted:agent is the best character in 6 because he can't actually interact with any objects. so if you have to turn a crank or hit a switch, the person playing ada needs to do it. why is this good? because you can spam thumb up emotes while your partner does all that stuff. Agent is also awesome because where Ada does all kinds of kung fu zip line poo poo to get around, he’s just...there when she’s done. He’s like a playable creepy Watson.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2018 06:26
|
|
|
The best part of the game is when you co-op as Ada and you're on that Bus in Chapter 3 that you avoid instant death chainsaw attacks by grappling away from. Agent can't do that 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2018 06:52
|
|
|
Lunethex posted:The best part of the game is when you co-op as Ada and you're on that Bus in Chapter 3 that you avoid instant death chainsaw attacks by grappling away from. Some things really shouldn't be co-op enabled, and that's one of them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2018 19:24
|
|
|
ZogrimAteMyHamster posted:Some things really shouldn't be co-op enabled, and that's one of them. Truthfully it's not that bad. You can stun him if you both shoot at him a lot, which is really not something Ada should be doing alone. But it's just funny when you happen to miss out on the fact he can't grapple so he just gets thrown off the buss or impaled.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2018 12:44
|
|
|
lol you guys weren't kidding when you said the Ada campaign was pretty half-baked for co-op. This is incredibly low effort.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
I don't think it even had Agent at launch, it was solo-only until a patch.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2018 00:34
|
|
|
That’s why it’s low effort, yeah. Capcom just threw it in after some time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
I wonder what exactly lit a fire under Capcom’s rear end to put in serious effort for RE7 and the remake of 2, after it seemed like 5 and 6 would be a sloppy slide into overbudgeted action movie schlock
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
I think the past half-decade of poorly received sequels started to catch up with them on the profit side. They must have spent a lot of money making three (four?) fully fledged campaigns in RE6 and the returns likely didn't reflect the investment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
I don't think it's just effort vs not effort, something like RE6 which is ambitious in some ways feels similar to a lot of movies and whatnot that didn't quite land. Being less good (subject to taste) doesn't mean they weren't trying. And Resident Evil 5 I think was pretty solid, less ambitious than RE4, pretty safe sequel in the action direction, but I think a good game for the time. I'm hyped for the RE2 remake, but let's not count our chickens just yet. I pre-ordered it so I guess that's some chicken counting, but it may not be amazing. But then again maybe it will be. Should be fun times. RE2 remake looks like a mix of RE4 style gameplay to some degree and a crowd pleasing setting for us RE2 fans. I guess they have had some feedback and time to figure going in a fan-pleasing direction makes sense. Which they probably did feel they were doing with RE6 as well, I'm not sure much has changed for them necessarily, but this does look like it'll be a better game. And probably harder to mess up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
Also I’m pretty sure RE5 made a poo poo ton of money. RE6 did as well but they expected a lot more out of it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
Never trust rich people, but also especially never trust rich people when they say they didn’t make enough money.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
Caesarian Sectarian posted:Also I’m pretty sure RE5 made a poo poo ton of money. RE6 did as well but they expected a lot more out of it. RE5 was literally the best selling game of all time for capcom before monster hunter world http://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/finance/million.html RE6 is right behind it as well, and was #2 for a long rear end time funny enough, REmake2 has a larger team than RE6's, so idk if you can really call that a scaling down see: https://twitter.com/cvxfreak/status/1064576909340639232
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
Fereydun posted:RE5 was literally the best selling game of all time for capcom before monster hunter world Man, I remember when it was a big deal when Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory had 150.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
Fereydun posted:funny enough, REmake2 has a larger team than RE6's, so idk if you can really call that a scaling down With that kind of investment I wouldn't be surprised if they are working on a RE3make at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
Kibayasu posted:Never trust rich people, but also especially never trust rich people when they say they didn’t make enough money. Yeah gamers need to understand everytime they say a game underpreformed they really mean didnt didn't sell 10 million copies day 1.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 07:50
|
|
|
the live services trend has made the publishers even more insane than they already were, part of the reason the second diablo 3 expansion got cancelled is they couldnt figure out how to continue monetizing it hell even with the sales of RE5 and 6 capcom was unhappy about them and that was before live services, for awhile capcom was really and truly out there with their expectations. it didnt kill RE at least and maybe has shifted some but i thought they were gonna dead space the series when they talked about sales expectations not being met on their top two selling games ever
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
Part of the problem is that big AAA games have gotten much more expensive to make and the sale price of games hasn't really gone up in years to match so publishers are pushing hard on monetization like DLC and microtransactions to make their money back. Not that I'm defending any of the shady poo poo publishers are doing. The RE2 remake looks expensive as gently caress, I'm expecting Capcom has something planned to make more money back than just the initial sales.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
Are they expensive because of need or bad management is the question? Are they actually expensive? Do we have concrete numbers for any game?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
I imagine the expense comes from having to make sure that the latest games look have to better and be bigger and more complex. Making the amount of quality art you need for a AAA game has to take a long time which costs more money. Or you throw more people at it to make it in less time which also costs more. The current consoles may be easier to develop for than ever before (by them basically being PCs rather than having some ridiculous custom processor like the Cell or the Emotion Engine) but the additional power allows games to look better which costs more. And that's not even going into stuff other than graphics which I don't know poo poo about. Of course there are probably plenty of games that get even more expensive because of bad management as well like you said.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
RBX posted:Are they expensive because of need or bad management is the question? Are they actually expensive? Do we have concrete numbers for any game? It's because of need. There is no question. An average AAA video game in 2018 requires the input of several hundred people for two to five years, and a million dollars in video game development is roughly equivalent to hiring eight people for one year. Go look at the credits screen for something like Insomniac's Spider-Man and take note that every single person on that list was being paid enough that they could afford to live in or near Burbank, California. There's also an "arms race" in AAA where you can't get away with chiptunes and the free early Unreal Engines anymore. You've got to have a full orchestra; you've got to keep iterating on your engine and going for the best graphics you can manage; you've got to include whatever features and extra modes are considered obligatory in your demographic at that point in time. There certainly is bad management, with Telltale as a current handy go-to example thereof, but that usually leads to bad games and mistreated employees, rather than simply inflating a given project's budget. Big games are expensive to make, and it's mostly because a big project requires the participation of a lot of people. Black August posted:I wonder what exactly lit a fire under Capcom’s rear end to put in serious effort for RE7 and the remake of 2, after it seemed like 5 and 6 would be a sloppy slide into overbudgeted action movie schlock They said point-blank after the first couple of weeks of reactions to RE6 that they were going to take a hard look at RE going forward and change direction. RE6 wasn't exactly a financial failure--it's still Capcom's third best-selling game of all time--but they wanted the kind of once-a-decade hit they got with Monster Hunter World, because they'd taken some significant losses following the Fukushima quake in 2011. RE6's biggest problem is basically that the marketing people had way too many hands on its wheel. RBX posted:Yeah gamers need to understand everytime they say a game underpreformed they really mean didnt didn't sell 10 million copies day 1. The sheer degree to which game enthusiasts don't or refuse to understand the business and development sides of the industry has been a pain in my rear end for the last four years. I cover this business for a living, and the difference between what gamers think happens and what actually happens is mind-blowing. I can tell people point-blank that this actually is my job, and some schmuck whose entire professional experience is really liking Tekken will still try to explain the business to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
AAA games since 2010 regularly cost $100+ million dollars (Destiny was like 500 mil iirc) to make. This means they are getting more expensive than Marvel movies (which are generally more expensive than other movies) But that ain't why game companies cry about profits. It also has nothing to do with games costing the same, because A) they are actually cheaper than ever B) many more people are playing them. No they are crying about projected profit. They are looking at profits of other insanely popular games and compared to them their profits are not big enough. You can bitch about microtransactions but WOW's been milking people for 14 years now. People will say poo poo like I paid 60 bucks and spent 60 hours on this therefore I got my dollar's worth, so you have games inflated with procedurally generated quests. They see modding, so they'll sell you alternative costumes as a preorder bonus or DLC. They see that people are spending most money on online games, so they'll make their games online. Lootboxes get people to spend money? There are lootboxes everywhere now. Basically with big investments like these, they are looking at what they COULD be making if they put their money somewhere else instead. RE6 made them money but they could be making bigger bank making a pachinko machine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 22:00
|
|
|
Wanderer posted:They said point-blank after the first couple of weeks of reactions to RE6 that they were going to take a hard look at RE going forward and change direction. RE6 wasn't exactly a financial failure--it's still Capcom's third best-selling game of all time--but they wanted the kind of once-a-decade hit they got with Monster Hunter World, because they'd taken some significant losses following the Fukushima quake in 2011. RE6's biggest problem is basically that the marketing people had way too many hands on its wheel. That would make sense. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 22:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 09:40 |
|
|
Wanderer posted:It's because of need. There is no question. An average AAA video game in 2018 requires the input of several hundred people for two to five years, and a million dollars in video game development is roughly equivalent to hiring eight people for one year. Go look at the credits screen for something like Insomniac's Spider-Man and take note that every single person on that list was being paid enough that they could afford to live in or near Burbank, California. I mean but is all that necessary? I don't care about any of that you listed and I doubt a majority does. Graphics can stay the same for 3 more years and 99% of people will be just fine. Fortnite, Overwatch, League, Dota, Counter Strike, CoD none of them are pushing graphics ahead, had crazy music (except Overwatch), and narrowly focused on what worked for them. All you're telling me is they need to do exactly what Capcom did: Relax, lower the scope, and focus on what fans actually want and not what they think they need. Final Fantasy 15 is a prime example of everything wrong right now down to pushing the losses off on other actually good games that did what I said. Vic posted:But that ain't why game companies cry about profits. It also has nothing to do with games costing the same, because A) they are actually cheaper than ever B) many more people are playing them. It's this, I am not fooled by any of the crying or whining by any publisher. They're doing just fine and will always be fine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 23:02
|
|