its amazing...

[Codian]

how a small dev team can push out this masterpiece yet the likes of:

- EA
- Creative Assembly
- Dice
- Collosal Order / paradox

only push out turds.

Hast off to the devs on creating something that actually made me go "wow" out loud, multiple times.

[Dirak2012]

You haven't played Below Zero, I see...

[Codian]

Originally posted by Dirak2012:

You haven't played Below Zero, I see...

no but i am buying it next month. very positive reviews on steam and looks similar enough without being a copy paste experience.
also, its a seperate game and does not detract from the quality of the original subnautica

[Steelfleece]

To be fair, Below Zero would be an okay game in a vacuum. It's just disappointing compared to the original. That being said, everything wrong with it can be found in AAA games these days, except they'll also be several times the price plus have either an in-game market or endless list of must-have DLCs.

I'll agree with the OP, seems like recently, sub-AAA games are the real winners. Indy games, small developer games, and games like BG3 that are maybe single-A but outshine the triple-A games anyway. I suppose when you aren't worried about making back your $200m budget and supporting a topheavy multinational developer, you can afford to take risks that may or may not pay off.

[Codian]

Originally posted by Steelfleece:

To be fair, Below Zero would be an okay game in a vacuum. It's just disappointing compared to the original. That being said, everything wrong with it can be found in AAA games these days, except they'll also be several times the price plus have either an in-game market or endless list of must-have DLCs.

I'll agree with the OP, seems like recently, sub-AAA games are the real winners. Indy games, small developer games, and games like BG3 that are maybe single-A but outshine the triple-A games anyway. I suppose when you aren't worried about making back your $200m budget and supporting a topheavy multinational developer, you can afford to take risks that may or may not pay off.

I would be interested to know what disappointed you? I’ve seen several people say they didn’t like it but they couldn’t or would t verbalise what made them feel that way.

In relation to the second part of your post, it’s depressing frankly. I feel like all I am is a target to be gouged and taken advantage of.
From the ridiculous dlc policies being pushed by creative assembly and paradox, the gambling being pushed on children and the trend of broken games being released in order to recoup money, it’s all just.. sad.

[Steelfleece]

The world is smaller and more confined, losing that vast, open feeling the original had. Too much above-water exploration. It's more story-driven, allegedly, but the initial story thread gets dropped like a hot potato unless you go searching for it. No Cyclops, the Sea Truck just isn't a replacement for it. The main character eats and drinks way too loudly. A lot of annoyances like that.

[deepdive0777]

Originally posted by Codian:

Originally posted by Dirak2012:

You haven't played Below Zero, I see...

no but i am buying it next month. very positive reviews on steam and looks similar enough without being a copy paste experience.
also, its a seperate game and does not detract from the quality of the original subnautica

Below Zero a piece of junk.

[penner3]

Originally posted by Codian:

I would be interested to know what disappointed you? I’ve seen several people say they didn’t like it but they couldn’t or would t verbalise what made them feel that way.

If you feel like drinking from the firehose, check out Dragonbornzyra's screed on the topic:

https://steamcommunity.com/app/264710/discussions/0/5456682769550920876/

...I would finish the first game before you do that, though.

[EleventhStar]

nothing amazing about it.

passion project in a small team where you know everybody almost always gets a lot of work done. if you manage to keep scope creep at bay, chances are good you can also make a great product.

9 to 5 going to the office job where you spend half your time in meetings, red tape and dealing with other departments to suck your soul out of the time you actually work on the game, while 10 different managers are trying to outmanage each other and upper management is trying to save a few more pennies for the shareholders and are more worried about complying with regulations. yeah no surprise these big companies aren't very efficient.


it happens in every growing company ever and is not inherently bad. as soon as middle management becomes necessary things just change and only the strongest willed CEOs can keep a semblance of the original company culture intact. you probably know the names of those CEOs as you can pretty much count them on one hand. But even those good CEOs eventually retire or sell the company and usually it's still downhill from there.

[Mohguy]

Originally posted by Codian:

Originally posted by Dirak2012:

You haven't played Below Zero, I see...

no but i am buying it next month. very positive reviews on steam and looks similar enough without being a copy paste experience.
also, its a seperate game and does not detract from the quality of the original subnautica

Honestly, the steam reviews... I don't see much interest in them. Besides, personally, I never leave reviews on games.
If at least Steam had the intelligence to allow a 3rd rating by adding a category ("neutral", "average", or "mixed" for example) it would be less binary and a bit interesting.
Because I think that Below Zero is typically the kind of game that would have received a lot of "average" reviews if that were possible.
But since the game is not a disaster overall, I think a lot of people leave positive reviews by default, even if they are mixed, to not punish the game too much.

And the problem with BZ is that indeed there are changes compared to SN1, it's not exactly the same game, but all the changes (or almost) are bad or useless, and what works was already there in 1.
The problem is not that they tried something a little different (it's good to try to bring new things to the formula), the problem is that they really failed.
There are plenty of topics that compare the 2 games if you ever want more precise opinions

Originally posted by Steelfleece:

I'll agree with the OP, seems like recently, sub-AAA games are the real winners. Indy games, small developer games, and games like BG3 that are maybe single-A but outshine the triple-A games anyway. I suppose when you aren't worried about making back your $200m budget and supporting a topheavy multinational developer, you can afford to take risks that may or may not pay off.

I just want point out that BG3 is not an "single A”, it is indeed an AAA.
It's an indie game but with a huge budget behind it