Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Square-Enix sells all of its Western game studios and their games to Embracer

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 264 posts

Re: Square-Enix sells all of its Western game studios and their games to Embracer

#131

Post by bentcorner »

swarnie wrote: post #10

I'd be interesting to see the full list of IP they've sold. The article only gives three examples, one game I've never heard of, one recycled shooter from the 2000s and then there is Tomb raider - a series with twenty instalments, already milked to dust for pre-sequels, squeals and reboots more times then seems fair. Clearly someone thinks they can squeeze a few more dollars out of people here but personally im not s…

Eidos Montreal's recent work with Guardian's of the Galaxy is really well done and I think overshadowed by the absolute failure of Crystal Dynamic's Marvel Avengers game.

I think they'd succeed with a GotG 2 or another 3rd-person action adventure game with a different IP.

Re: Square-Enix sells all of its Western game studios and their games to Embracer

#132

Post by smcl »

vinkelhake wrote: post #108
marginalia_nu wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Human Revolution mainly fucked up its infamous boss fights. Beyond that, it's a decent Deus Ex game. Like it's not the greatest ever, but hard to say it's worse than Invisible War. A lot of what made the original good was unraveling the conspiracy. That's a trick you can only do once, and I think in large, that's why the sequels (including IW) don't have the same impact.

Yeah the boss fights in DX:HR came as a kick in the groin for players who focused on stealth. I'll just note that the Director's cut release revised the boss fights, expanded the arenas and added ways for stealth players to deal with them. The Director's cut can also be played with commentary which I think was implemented really well.

Ooooh I'm gonna have to play thru with the commentary after I'm done with Elden Ring (and Nier Automata, and System Shock 2 and Ghostwire Tokyo and some other things I have lined up). What's the experience with commentary like?

Re: Square-Enix sells all of its Western game studios and their games to Embracer

#133

Post by Volundr »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #115
morelisp wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Nier was even more interesting (formally experimental, better writing - at least in English translation, deeper characterization) and sold poorly. I guess the lesson if you want to make an art game is to make half an art game and the other half ass.

The gameplay of the original Nier is dogshit though. That leads to poor reviews, which leads to poor sales.

Not sure I'd say dogshit but not near as smooth as automata.

Plus the story of the original game took a looooooong time to get going combined with the ability to lock yourself out of the true ending without knowing or discovering it for like 75% of the game is definitely going to limit the audience.

Re: Square-Enix sells all of its Western game studios and their games to Embracer

#135

Post by giobox »

brimble wrote: post #112
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I greatly prefer Tomb Raider 2013 to any of the Uncharted games I've tried (2, 3, and some of 4). TR2013 is laser focused on cinematic platforming and awe-inspiring set pieces, with much less conventional shooting. I've played through the game several times over the years, and I always come away thinking it's an underrated title. TR2013 doesn't push any boundaries, but it does execute a standard formula mor…

IMO 2 and 4 are easily the best Uncharted games. I wouldn't recommend 1 or 3 at all, despite 3 having a plot that should have really appealed to me. The first one mostly suffers from unrefined mechanics making it a slog, but they fixed that in 2. But, 2 and 4 are very different. 2 is a solid 3d action-platformer, while my favorite parts of 4 were when it basically just became a "walking simulator"-type game for long…

> I had to root for him to fail because clearly this humanity-on-the-brink would be better off with one fewer self-interested mass-murders around making things even worse. That's... not a great way to motivate the player.

Isn't the question of the players morality vs the "enemies" core to the entire concept of the game though? I think the lesson the game is trying to teach is exactly that: by what standard is the protagonist actually any "better" than those he regards as enemies? By the end of the game, I think doubting the main character is hopefully exactly the point - he isn't a good person either. In a completely lawless world such as that inhabited by the characters, I think this makes sense to explore.

Make the central character a likable, non-mass murdering fellow and this huge central theme of the game disappears - The Last of Us is harrowing by design, I'd argue, and its commitment to being harrowing is what sets it apart as a game in a sea of relatively emotionally shallow "AAA" titles of the same era.

Re: Square-Enix sells all of its Western game studios and their games to Embracer

#136

Post by mplewis »

newsclues wrote: post #58
marginalia_nu wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cruelty Squad nails it though, despite having LSD visual projectile vomit aesthetics.

Visual vomit for real, that looks grotesque!

Yes – and it's something you'll never get anywhere else. The artist behind it is passionate and thoughtful about this precise style.

Re: Square-Enix sells all of its Western game studios and their games to Embracer

#138

Post by brimble »

giobox wrote: post #135
brimble wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO 2 and 4 are easily the best Uncharted games. I wouldn't recommend 1 or 3 at all, despite 3 having a plot that should have really appealed to me. The first one mostly suffers from unrefined mechanics making it a slog, but they fixed that in 2. But, 2 and 4 are very different. 2 is a solid 3d action-platformer, while my favorite parts of 4 were when it basically just became a "walking simulator"-type game for long…

> I had to root for him to fail because clearly this humanity-on-the-brink would be better off with one fewer self-interested mass-murders around making things even worse. That's... not a great way to motivate the player. Isn't the question of the players morality vs the "enemies" core to the entire concept of the game though? I think the lesson the game is trying to teach is exactly that: by what standard is the pro…

Maybe, but it was kind of a problem when I was already like "is there a way to progress the game but have this guy not accomplish what he wants?" on like mission 1 (past the prologue)—there was no build-up to it, I thought he was wrong and should fail immediately. And they might have gone for some kind of turn-around on that when the girl comes into the story, so that I start wanting him to succeed, but then, I also didn't like her and didn't care if anything involved with that worked out, either.

I think I quit right after the game had me murder a couple soldiers for bad reasons. I already have several GTA games I can play, which, thanks to tone and expectations, aren't frustrating when they ask me to do that kind of thing. My head-canon is that the soldiers instead shot everyone there and that was the good ending for the story.

Re: Square-Enix sells all of its Western game studios and their games to Embracer

#139

Post by dayvid »

oneoff786 wrote: post #53
levesque wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I the only one that can't stand these games? They are so restrictive in their gameplay, so linear! It feels like watching an interactive movie more than playing a game.

Linear games are better in my opinion. Linearity isn’t the problem though. Mario is linear and very fun. Tomb raider just sort of takes away you doing anything. You have no real agency for a lot of it. Just told what buttons to press indirectly and then you do it.

They require different design skillsets or experiences. Elden Ring and Zelda are designed to be more non-linear and they work, but have completely different strengths and focuses vs. a linear approach. More based on creating an engrossing world and mechanics that allow you to play most sections out of order and create your own adventure vs. the control you have over story nuances when you make a linear title (e.g. Half-Life 2).

Re: Square-Enix sells all of its Western game studios and their games to Embracer

#140

Post by dayvid »

Loughla wrote: post #64
oneoff786 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linear games are better in my opinion. Linearity isn’t the problem though. Mario is linear and very fun. Tomb raider just sort of takes away you doing anything. You have no real agency for a lot of it. Just told what buttons to press indirectly and then you do it.

There's linear gameplay and then there are linear games. Linear games are preferable, for many games, because there is a story that you can impact in meaningful ways, but with 'an' outcome. That outcome will morph or change based on inputs you make and decisions you make throughout the process. Linear gameplay is boring, in that you don't get any agency. You are simply completing a series of steps to feel a sense of…

I'd say RE4 was a very well done linear game with solid gameplay. It definitely influenced a lot of games moving forward.
Post reply on HN