This game looks way more interesting and better than any game from Atlus

[MUVEEER]

How does it happen that a small studio doing better than a genre giant who's been cranking out the same anime stuff unchanged for like a decade?

[Azzurra]

maybe it's just more suited to your tastes, atlus games aren't intrinsically bad either

[Axelhander]

Atlus is fine. Don't got to crap on them to enjoy Expedition 33.

[Nightmarian]

Originally posted by Azzurra:

maybe it's just more suited to your tastes, atlus games aren't intrinsically bad either

I liked Metaphor way more than I thought I would. I hope they release a series-sequel like Persona and polish it a lot more this time like the more recent persona games. I did hear Metaphor was one of the last games they were making on whatever engine they were previously using.

Anyway, the reason is because AAA studios are owned by CEOs and investors who don't play video games or even actively hate them. They're businessmen looking for investments.

Indie studios usually stop at the top, which are passionate artisans and gamers who have an invested interest in the success of their game beyond monetary returns.

AAA devs are what happens when a passion-hobby industry becomes successful and draws those looking to milk it. Like, for instance, modern Youtube and social media, neither of which are very organic or social anymore, just manufactured for the algorithm.

If you honestly think EA or Ubisoft's CEO and investors play video games, I got a bridge to sell you.

[Senki]

because there's actual passion and effort put behind this one, at least from the looks of it because nobody can play it yet

I never understood the hype behind Atlus jrpgs, they are extremely boring and tedious for me.

[Azzurra]

Originally posted by Nightmarian:

Originally posted by Azzurra:

maybe it's just more suited to your tastes, atlus games aren't intrinsically bad either

I liked Metaphor way more than I thought I would. I hope they release a series-sequel like Persona and polish it a lot more this time like the more recent persona games. I did hear Metaphor was one of the last games they were making on whatever engine they were previously using.

Anyway, the reason is because AAA studios are owned by CEOs and investors who don't play video games or even actively hate them. They're businessmen looking for investments.

Indie studios usually stop at the top, which are passionate artisans and gamers who have an invested interest in the success of their game beyond monetary returns.

AAA devs are what happens when a passion-hobby industry becomes successful and draws those looking to milk it. Like, for instance, modern Youtube and social media, neither of which are very organic or social anymore, just manufactured for the algorithm.

If you honestly think EA or Ubisoft's CEO and investors play video games, I got a bridge to sell you.

I think that video games are still a business in any case even for a small independent studio. The difference is the budget and the expectations in terms of return on investment, which are not the same for a double or triple A.

"Indie studios usually stop at the top" this phrase seems to me to be rather utopian tbh, I think that most of them stop because of a lack of budget(or continues to develop in the best of cases), because it's worth remembering that sometimes making an excellent game isn't enough to sell

Of course the "greedy investors" and "evils CEO's" are to blame at a certain level but I think that the public is just as guilty, how many beautiful games have flopped or been ignored despite the passion of their developers ? how many times have people been taken for cash cows and asked for more ?

Fortunately there are still some brillant games released by AAA studios, and of course by indie developers as well but I think it's worth pointing out that for every masterpiece that stands out there are countless others that crash and disappear in the shadows

[Nightmarian]

Originally posted by Azzurra:

Originally posted by Nightmarian:

I liked Metaphor way more than I thought I would. I hope they release a series-sequel like Persona and polish it a lot more this time like the more recent persona games. I did hear Metaphor was one of the last games they were making on whatever engine they were previously using.

Anyway, the reason is because AAA studios are owned by CEOs and investors who don't play video games or even actively hate them. They're businessmen looking for investments.

Indie studios usually stop at the top, which are passionate artisans and gamers who have an invested interest in the success of their game beyond monetary returns.

AAA devs are what happens when a passion-hobby industry becomes successful and draws those looking to milk it. Like, for instance, modern Youtube and social media, neither of which are very organic or social anymore, just manufactured for the algorithm.

If you honestly think EA or Ubisoft's CEO and investors play video games, I got a bridge to sell you.

I think that video games are still a business in any case even for a small independent studio. The difference is the budget and the expectations in terms of return on investment, which are not the same for a double or triple A.

"Indie studios usually stop at the top" this phrase seems to me to be rather utopian tbh, I think that most of them stop because of a lack of budget(or continues to develop in the best of cases), because it's worth remembering that sometimes making an excellent game isn't enough to sell

Of course the "greedy investors" and "evils CEO's" are to blame at a certain level but I think that the public is just as guilty, how many beautiful games have flopped or been ignored despite the passion of their developers ? how many times have people been taken for cash cows and asked for more ?

Fortunately there are still some brillant games released by AAA studios, and of course by indie developers as well but I think it's worth pointing out that for every masterpiece that stands out there are countless others that crash and disappear in the shadows

Selling a product will always involve the art of business, but there is a huge difference between someone who sales a product they barely know anything about other than its viability as a product and happens to be art and an artist selling craft they're not only proud of but enjoyed making and have a passion in.

By stopping at the top, I meant that the owners of indie studios are usually also head devs, so you don't get worthless middle and top execs and investors.

The reason Baldur's Gate 3 was so successful was because the guy calling all the shots was Swen, the owner of Larian. You know, the guy who dressed in up in fully body armor because it was his childish dream and who jokingly got upset at the playerbase because they picked a boring option during one of the panels from hell and who had all too much fun revealing the bear smex, something no AAA developer would ever think to do even for the lols due to market risks.

"Brilliant" AAA are not made, they are bought and leashed. EA bought all its studios. Sony bought all its studios. Microsoft bought all its studios.

Proving my point clearly and sharply; businessmen whose only contribution is money and the expectation of increased returns. If a AAA game ends up being good, it's purely by accident that a CEO or investor didn't fumble in and ♥♥♥♥ all over it.

And that's happening less and less, hence the miserable state of the gaming industry you keep hearing about.

Warner Bros made BILLIONS with a singleplayer harry potter game, yet wished it had been live service despite 3 live service games using their IPs flopping hard + other industry examples.

This is the madness of business tycoons, not passionate creatives.

[Azzurra]

Originally posted by Nightmarian:

Originally posted by Azzurra:

I think that video games are still a business in any case even for a small independent studio. The difference is the budget and the expectations in terms of return on investment, which are not the same for a double or triple A.

"Indie studios usually stop at the top" this phrase seems to me to be rather utopian tbh, I think that most of them stop because of a lack of budget(or continues to develop in the best of cases), because it's worth remembering that sometimes making an excellent game isn't enough to sell

Of course the "greedy investors" and "evils CEO's" are to blame at a certain level but I think that the public is just as guilty, how many beautiful games have flopped or been ignored despite the passion of their developers ? how many times have people been taken for cash cows and asked for more ?

Fortunately there are still some brillant games released by AAA studios, and of course by indie developers as well but I think it's worth pointing out that for every masterpiece that stands out there are countless others that crash and disappear in the shadows

Selling a product will always involve the art of business, but there is a huge difference between someone who sales a product they barely know anything about other that its viability as a product and happens to be art and an artist selling craft they're not only proud of but enjoyed making and have a passion in.

By stopping at the top, I meant that the owners of the studios are usually also the heads, so you don't get worthless middle and top execs and investors.

The reason Baldur's Gate 3 was so successful was because the guy calling all the shots was Swen, the owner of Larian. You know, the guy who dressed in up in fully body armor because it was his childish dream and who jokingly got upset at the playerbase because they picked a boring option during one of the panels from hell and who had all too much fun revealing the bear smex, something no AAA developer would ever think to do even for the lols due to market risks.

"Brilliant" AAA are not made, they are bought and leashed. EA bought all its studios. Sony bought all its studios. Microsoft bought all its studios.

Proving my point clearly and sharply; businessmen whose only contribution is money and the expectation of increased returns. If a AAA game ends up being good, it's purely by accident that a CEO or investor didn't fumble in and ♥♥♥♥ all over it.

And that's happening less and less, hence the miserable state of the gaming industry you keep hearing about.

Warner Bros made BILLIONS with a singleplayer harry potter game, yet wished it had been live service despite 3 live service games using their IPs flopping hard + other industry examples.

This is the madness of business tycoons, not passionate creatives.

I mostly agree but I'm not as pessimistic as you are, I think there are still a lot of good games coming out (especially from japan with capcom,atlus,From software to name a few big studios ) and that we shouldn't reduce the industry to the western prism but yeah I got your point

[Gannibal Kujoe]

Originally posted by MUVEEER:

How does it happen that a small studio doing better than a genre giant who's been cranking out the same anime stuff unchanged for like a decade?

The game does nothing more than steal from Atlas games, then you say Atlas is worse? They steal their game style, they steal their UI, they steal their atmosphere. All they changed was making it photo-realistic and making the characters European and now they are better than Atlas?

It's unoriginal and plastic looking.

Originally posted by Senki:

because there's actual passion and effort put behind this one, at least from the looks of it because nobody can play it yet

I never understood the hype behind Atlus jrpgs, they are extremely boring and tedious for me.

Yea the passion of stealing Atlus's ideas. Y'all hating on Atlus while praising the game that steal's Atlus's whole framework. European imitation is now innovation, right. Right..... Just like y'all out here ripping off Ghibli with AI, and calling it progress. You rip off Fromsoft, call it a new genre. Pathetic

Honestly do many of you just have no shame?

[Alkpaz]

This looks better than a KEMCO game.

[WolfEisberg]

Lol, we got an Atlas Fanboy here who literally thinks Atlus owns the genre of JRPG despite the fact that game developers been making JRPGs long before Atlas did. Going by his logic, Atlas stole from the JRPGs that came before it.

[Siegnis]

Originally posted by Senki:

because there's actual passion and effort put behind this one, at least from the looks of it because nobody can play it yet

I never understood the hype behind Atlus jrpgs, they are extremely boring and tedious for me.

I would reccomend you to at least try the free demo for Metaphor, if possible. I don't like the persona series because of the whole high school dating sim elements, but metaphor felt like a breath of fresh air to me.

With that being said, it follows the classic atlus fomula of a calendar system and turn based combat, so if that's still not your cup of tea, you'll probably dislike it

[Siegnis]

Originally posted by Gannibal Kujoe:

Originally posted by Senki:

because there's actual passion and effort put behind this one, at least from the looks of it because nobody can play it yet

I never understood the hype behind Atlus jrpgs, they are extremely boring and tedious for me.

Yea the passion of stealing Atlus's ideas. Y'all hating on Atlus while praising the game that steal's Atlus's whole framework. European imitation is now innovation, right. Right..... Just like y'all out here ripping off Ghibli with AI, and calling it progress. You rip off Fromsoft, call it a new genre. Pathetic

Honestly do many of you just have no shame?

Ma'am, this is a Wendy's