Support NeoGAF

[T.v]

That was my take as well. They obviously can make this game. The issue is that everyone blew off Lost Crown and The Rogue and so they're probably canning it. Pretty sad.

Can they? 6 years for a remake is ridiculous.

 

[BigMeanieHead]

We know whats happening. Activists have hijacked the industry and as a result we have incompetency and mediocrity

Nothing will change until they them are fucking gone and we get developers with talent and passion that care for videogames

Same thing that happened to movies. Idiots got in charge and hired other idiots. DEI is a big part of the problem. Instead of capable people getting the job they stuffed their studios with purple haired clowns.

That sounds more like what you *wish* the issue was because you have some axe to grind.

But its unproductive because you can't objectively verify that "activists" you dont agree with comprise gaming and said "no prince of persia!" lol it even sounds silly.

What is realistic is...late stage capitalism is rearing it's ugly head into gaming as a whole, so just like the film industry...anything that isnt guaranteed to be a profit, is considered a risk. And it is more profitable to create a service based game and not waste resources on a single player game that may cost more than it makes.

in the early days...before digital content and updates, releasing games constantly was the way to make money, Hence why you saw more output. That is no longer the case now. Couple that with the fact the price of games stagnated a generation...

So when you understand capitalistic evolution, this all makes sense. But if blaming "activists" gives you an excuse to continue any sort of biases you have...have at it lol

 

[Sephimoth]

blue haired whales

/thread

 

[Hawkeye2890]

Idiocracy situation. Boomers created the industry and most of the classics. They have all retired.
Gen X was able to keep things going but not quite at previous levels. Now millennials and their "modern values" have completely fucked the industry with no ability to tell stories. Hope maybe with Gen Z.

 

[Begleiter]

Bad management, talent being burned out with crunch or fired to keep costs down, poor communication, inability to scope games correctly, there's a lot of rot in modern games companies. Ubisoft just has it worse.

 

[BigMeanieHead]

blue haired whales

/thread

Again...Wild that that is your conclusion instead of clearly seeing this is about profit. Are we going off of what we *wish* the issue was based off of "feels"? or...are we having an objective discussion?

Like the film industry, anything that is not guaranteed a profit is a risk.

Prior to digital, games had to be released constantly to make money, Hence more output. But it is no longer profitable to engage that way, it is far more efficient and profitable to make money off of one game, which was impossible before.

PoP was a risk that ubisoft didnt care to take. Simple. Late stage capitalism.

Using culture war rhetoric is easier though I get it lol just a little intellectually lazy.

 

[Sohurmk833]

That sounds more like what you *wish* the issue was because you have some axe to grind.

But its unproductive because you can't objectively verify that "activists" you dont agree with comprise gaming and said "no prince of persia!" lol it even sounds silly.

What is realistic is...late stage capitalism is rearing it's ugly head into gaming as a whole, so just like the film industry...anything that isnt guaranteed to be a profit, is considered a risk. And it is more profitable to create a service based game and not waste resources on a single player game that may cost more than it makes.

in the early days...before digital content and updates, releasing games constantly was the way to make money, Hence why you saw more output. That is no longer the case now. Couple that with the fact the price of games stagnated a generation...

So when you understand capitalistic evolution, this all makes sense. But if blaming "activists" gives you an excuse to continue any sort of biases you have...have at it lol

The corporations aren't risk averse at all.

If that was the case there would be no DEI hiring at all.
There would be no woke content which clearly pisses of millions of gamers.
There would be no mass investment in live service games of which like 90% are a failure.
And there certainly wouldn't be everyone and their mother investing billions in AI.

We don't have a lack of original content in entertainment because companies are risk averse. We have a lack of original content because the new breed of DEI hire simply isn't capable of creating anything original.

 

[BigMeanieHead]

Idiocracy situation. Boomers created the industry and most of the classics. They have all retired.
Gen X was able to keep things going but not quite at previous levels. Now millennials and their "modern values" have completely fucked the industry with no ability to tell stories. Hope maybe with Gen Z.

Nothing to do with profit eh? If it were only what you were speaking of...we'd still have the same output as the ps2-360 era in terms of releases.

Notice that the industry got far better at making money than before. Notice that rockstar is still making even better games with these "new millenials", yet still barely releasing anything....

So maybe just maybe...that isn't what's happening here. maybe it's about money.

 

[John Bilbo]

While today's news about the cancelled Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time remake hit hard and might be disappointing for many of us, it also gives us an opportunity to celebrate the game that started it all. Not just a classic, but a masterpiece that deserves to shine brighter than ever.We're happy to say that we'll be hard at work to bring the original Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time into the GOG Preservation Program as fast as we can!We know how much this world means to you. While the future is always changing, the greatness of the past is something we can control. We are pouring our hearts into making sure the original Sands of Time does not just run fine. We will make sure it is the best version you have ever played.To the Prince of Persia community:We see you, we feel this moment with you, and we stand with you.Long live the Prince!

 

[Wass0o7]

Correction what's wrong with western AAA Devs, China and Japan are doing fine and indie Devs are thriving

 

[Sephimoth]

Again...Wild that that is your conclusion instead of clearly seeing this is about profit. Are we going off of what we *wish* the issue was based off of "feels"? or...are we having an objective discussion?

Like the film industry, anything that is not guaranteed a profit is a risk.

Prior to digital, games had to be released constantly to make money, Hence more output. But it is no longer profitable to engage that way, it is far more efficient and profitable to make money off of one game, which was impossible before.

PoP was a risk that ubisoft didnt care to take. Simple. Late stage capitalism.

Using culture war rhetoric is easier though I get it lol just a little intellectually lazy.

blue haired whales > focus on woke DEI shit at expense of all else > no one buys > no profit

It's a visual remaster IIRC, they could probably shit this out in a year if they had talented staff.

 

[BigMeanieHead]

The corporations aren't risk averse at all.

yikes.

they are indeed:

• Risk-averse to unpredictable returns
• Risk-averse to new IP
• Risk-averse to small or mid-budget experimentation

But they are not risk-averse to:

• Financial speculation (AI, live service, acquisitions)
• Trend-chasing
• Portfolio gambling where failure is expected and absorbed

So the risk you are speaking of is when a company is willing to centralize and financialize the risk

If that was the case there would be no DEI hiring at all.

Hiring practices do not determine:

• Monetization models
• Release schedules
• Scope creep
• Live-service mandates
• Shareholder return targets
• Studio consolidation
• Executive interference

Those decisions come from:

• Executives
• Publishers
• Investors
• Quarterly earnings pressure

There would be no woke content which clearly pisses of millions of gamers.
There would be no mass investment in live service games of which like 90% are a failure.

Exactly.

Live service exists because:

• One hit can subsidize 20 failures
• It promises recurring revenue
• It appeals to investors, not players

That's financialization, not creative confidence. They make more off of that one shitty live service game, than they would have if it was a shitty single player game.

And there certainly wouldn't be everyone and their mother investing billions in AI.

Corporations invest in A.I. because that is certainly the #1 projected thing to invest in, in 2026...

it's being pushed because it reduces labor costs and weakens worker leverage. It certainly isn't a risk, it's an investment towards their benefit,

We don't have a lack of original content in entertainment because companies are risk averse. We have a lack of original content because the new breed of DEI hire simply isn't capable of creating anything original.

If you are unwilling to address profit, business, and capitalistic structures that affect what we are seeing today; and instead want to attribute blame to groups of people that we can't objectively verify are singlehandedly "not capable" of creating original content; then this is just a "feels" conversation.

you can't discern what you *wish* to be reality versus what is actually happening.

 

[HYDE]

We know whats happening. Activists have hijacked the industry and as a result we have incompetency and mediocrity

Nothing will change until they them are fucking gone and we get developers with talent and passion that care for videogames

Papi sabe. Winner chicken dinner!!

 

[Gonzito]

Papi sabe. Winner chicken dinner!!

Send me the money for the dinner to Paypal papito

 

[BigMeanieHead]

blue haired whales > focus on woke DEI shit at expense of all else > no one buys > no profit

It's a visual remaster IIRC, they could probably shit this out in a year if they had talented staff.

Then read my post above this one and counter it. Nothing I said there is incorrect. But i'm willing to see an attempt.

 

[Sephimoth]

yikes.

 

[BigMeanieHead]

Are we ignoring that i followed that with:

they are indeed:

• Risk-averse to unpredictable returns
• Risk-averse to new IP
• Risk-averse to small or mid-budget experimentation

But they are not risk-averse to:

• Financial speculation (AI, live service, acquisitions)
• Trend-chasing
• Portfolio gambling where failure is expected and absorbed

So the risk you are speaking of is when a company is willing to centralize and financialize the risk

weird that you left that out...

 

[HYDE]

Send me the money for the dinner to Paypal papito

Just cause I'm bilingual, doesn't mean I'm a rich gringo Papi.

 

[Sohurmk833]

If you are unwilling to address profit, business, and capitalistic structures that affect what we are seeing today; and instead want to attribute blame to groups of people that we can't objectively verify are singlehandedly "not capable" of creating original content; then this is just a "feels" conversation.

We can easily identify the exact people responsible for dozens of massive media franchises going to shit the last ~ decade.

Perfect example: Star Wars

We know exactly who produced the movies. Who directed them. Who wrote them. etc. We also know their political affiliations because they made them public.


And funnily enough, those bad late stage capitalists from other countries like Japan/China/Korea etc. don't seem to have quite the same problems that their western counterparts have. What's your excuse for that?

 

[BigMeanieHead]

blue haired whales > focus on woke DEI shit at expense of all else > no one buys > no profit

It's a visual remaster IIRC, they could probably shit this out in a year if they had talented staff.

This also doesn't make any sense because then output wouldn't be affected.

Are we like...unwilling to admit profit incentives affect these things primarily or do we have ulterior motives here? lol I feel like this is a pretty obvious assertion lol.

 

[BigMeanieHead]

We can easily identify the exact people responsible for dozens of massive media franchises going to shit the last ~ decade.

Perfect example: Star Wars

We know exactly who produced the movies. Who directed them. Who wrote them. etc. We also know their political affiliations because they made them public.


And funnily enough, those bad late stage capitalists from other countries like Japan/China/Korea etc. don't seem to have quite the same problems that their western counterparts have. What's your excuse for that?

sure, now we are having an interesting discussion!

Japan, Korea, and China all operate under state-influenced or coordinated capitalism, not pure shareholder-first models like the US/UK.

So basically,

• More long-term planning
• Less quarterly earnings panic
• Stronger publisher–studio identity
• Greater tolerance for niche success

Wheras Western AAA is dominated by:

• Publicly traded megacorps
• Private equity
• Constant growth expectations

Same system stage, different wiring.

sufficient?

 

[Majima Everywhere System]

Customer acceptance of long timelines has helped. It's prestigious to release a game that took 7 years to develop.

The fast PoP releases turned into the Assassins Creed factory, sadly.

I think a lot is up for grabs if devs want to release solid 20 hour titles for $50 every 2 years and focus on marketable concepts like handsomeness, boobs, swords, guns, etc.

 

[The Mad Draklor]

1. Embrace DEI/wokeism because "modern audience"
2. Inherent anti-meritocratic aspects of such ideology cause departures of the competent and hiring of the incompetent, leading to brain drain
3. Development stalls, delays pile up
4. Management's solution is "hire moar people". Problem is they only hire more incompetent people
5. Development hell issues predictably continue
6. The "modern audience" turns out to not exist
7. Products flop or get cancelled

Meanwhile, the competent ex-employees were able to land on their feet, some of them even flourishing (Expedition 33).

 

[Sephimoth]

This also doesn't make any sense because then output wouldn't be affected.

Are we like...unwilling to admit profit incentives affect these things primarily or do we have ulterior motives here? lol I feel like this is a pretty obvious assertion lol.

Of course profit incentives matter. But it's circular. Profit forecasts are based on past sales and sales depend on trust and quality.

Everything was going well until the blue haireds and DEI incentive funding entered the chain.

Do you agree woke/dei culture had a negative place in the process?
Or would you (and the rest of ResetEra) like us to conveniently forget these companies picked a side and got shat on?

 

[Sohurmk833]

sure, now we are having an interesting discussion!

Japan, Korea, and China all operate under state-influenced or coordinated capitalism, not pure shareholder-first models like the US/UK.

So basically,

• More long-term planning
• Less quarterly earnings panic
• Stronger publisher–studio identity
• Greater tolerance for niche success

Wheras Western AAA is dominated by:

• Publicly traded megacorps
• Private equity
• Constant growth expectations

Same system stage, different wiring.

sufficient?

If all companies are state influenced in Japan then why does Sony have very similar problems to western companies while Nintendo for example basically doesn't have them at all?

Factually they are 2 very differently run companies. While Nintendo upholds traditional japanese values Sony very much embraces the typical western brainrot we also see at Microsoft, Ubisoft and the like.

 

[BigMeanieHead]

1. Embrace DEI/wokeism because "modern audience"
2. Inherent anti-meritocratic aspects of such ideology cause departures of the competent and hiring of the incompetent, leading to brain drain
3. Development stalls, delays pile up
4. Management's solution is "hire moar people". Problem is they only hire more incompetent people
5. Development hell issues predictably continue
6. The "modern audience" turns out to not exist
7. Products flop or get cancelled

Meanwhile, the competent ex-employees were able to land on their feet, some of them even flourishing (Expedition 33).

sigh I'll repeat

Hiring practices do not determine:

• Monetization models
• Release schedules
• Scope creep
• Live-service mandates
• Shareholder return targets
• Studio consolidation
• Executive interference

Those decisions come from:

• Executives
• Publishers
• Investors
• Quarterly earnings pressure

you guys need to leave the culture war stuff we can't even objectively verify at the door if you really want to understand the root of the issue...

instead we are analyzing things based on our biases and feels...

 

[kruis]

2003- Prince of Persia sands of time remake is out. (banger)
2004- Prince of Persia warrior within is out (BANGER)
2005- Prince of Persia two thrones is out (banger)

Now ubisoft in over 5+ years cant make a remake of a game THEY THEMSELVES CREATED.

I know modern gaming is more expensive and takes longer but bro there is NO WAY they are this bad dude

The worst thing is that when the Sands of Time remake was announced in September 2020 it was supposed to come out a mere four months later on Jan 21, 2021. In other words: the remake by Ubisoft Mumbai and Ubisoft Pune was just a few months away from going gold. That team in India must have worked on that remake at least for a few years.



And then that game was put in the freezer, the remake was later moved to Ubisoft Montreal and then ultimately killed. What a bunch of incompetent clowns ...

 

[Sohurmk833]

sigh I'll repeat

Hiring practices do not determine:

• Monetization models
• Release schedules
• Scope creep
• Live-service mandates
• Shareholder return targets
• Studio consolidation
• Executive interference

Those decisions come from:

• Executives
• Publishers
• Investors
• Quarterly earnings pressure

you guys need to leave the culture war stuff we can't even objectively verify at the door if you really want to understand the root of the issue...

instead we are analyzing things based on our biases and feels...

Pretty sure executives are hired too. I mean even most CEOs are hired at some point.

 

[Dr. Samuel Hayden]

DEI + retarded suits

 

[The Mad Draklor]

sigh I'll repeat

Hiring practices do not determine:

• Monetization models
• Release schedules
• Scope creep
• Live-service mandates
• Shareholder return targets
• Studio consolidation
• Executive interference

Those decisions come from:

• Executives
• Publishers
• Investors
• Quarterly earnings pressure

you guys need to leave the culture war stuff we can't even objectively verify at the door if you really want to understand the root of the issue...

instead we are analyzing things based on our biases and feels...

Okay, ecosse_011172

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

It's the obsession with chasing the "modern audience" and less talent compared to the past.

 

[Danjin44]

Thankfully most of games I enjoy are Japanese games so happy with most of modern games I play.

With western game in other hand I'm losing interest on them with each generation.

 

[SScorpio]

The corporations aren't risk averse at all.

If that was the case there would be no DEI hiring at all.
There would be no woke content which clearly pisses of millions of gamers.
There would be no mass investment in live service games of which like 90% are a failure.
And there certainly wouldn't be everyone and their mother investing billions in AI.

We don't have a lack of original content in entertainment because companies are risk averse. We have a lack of original content because the new breed of DEI hire simply isn't capable of creating anything original.

Exactly

 

[BigMeanieHead]

If all companies are state influenced in Japan then why does Sony have very similar problems to western companies while Nintendo for example basically doesn't have them at all?

Factually they are 2 very differently run companies. While Nintendo upholds traditional japanese values Sony very much embraces the typical western brainrot we also see at Microsoft, Ubisoft and the like.

good question. But...

If Western "values" are the cause, why are Western indies thriving creatively?
Why do diverse teams consistently produce innovative games outside the AAA system?

clearly this isn't a value situation, but a structural one.

sony for example is a Publicly traded global conglomerate; that is
Deeply embedded in US capital markets with multiple unrelated business units (film, music, games, hardware).

whereas Nintendo is a:

• Family-controlled legacy company
• Games are the core business, not one vertical, with minimal debt.

we know that Sony's worst decisions are

• Live service mandates
• Studio acquisitions
• GAAS investments
• Chasing Western blockbuster scale

you can clear every "DEI Hire" tomorrow and these incentives would not change. that is...being objective, not entertaining existing biases.

 

[BigMeanieHead]

Of course profit incentives matter. But it's circular. Profit forecasts are based on past sales and sales depend on trust and quality.

Everything was going well until the blue haireds and DEI incentive funding entered the chain.

Do you agree woke/dei culture had a negative place in the process?
Or would you (and the rest of ResetEra) like us to conveniently forget these companies picked a side and got shat on?

My problem is, as a person that formally debates, and looks for root causes in things without emotion...

saying "it's the blue hairs" is not an argument, it's a post hoc assertion. It assumes causation without showing it. I wouldn't do well in debates if I used that lol (not that i'm here to try and debate you, I enjoy the conversation tbh)

There's a timeline problem as well with this:

The decline in trust and quality predates the DEI backlash narrative.

• GAAS push started early–mid 2010s
• Microtransactions normalized before all of this
• Studio consolidation and closures accelerated long before 2020
• Franchise bloat and sequel fatigue were already widely complained about in the PS3/Xbox 360 era

If DEI were the root cause, the downturn would align cleanly with its introduction.
It doesn't.

Also, I enjoy these subjects about capitalism and it's impact; just because I'm not agreeing that blue haired people are the primary cause for all things bad in gaming, doesn't mean you have to try and tribalize me into a "resetera" space or something. We're just talking mannn. Everything I'm speaking about is clearly about...business.

 

[Physiognomonics]

Real talk: because from corporate point of view this will mostly appeal to a subset of the fans of the original i.e. you are not expanding the market with it. Remeber that Ubislop is in super GAAS mode, it's either super good niche games like the PoP or Valiant Hearts or mega GAAS, nothing in between. My guess is PoP remake was too costly for them.

THey don't want to take creative risks to earn a few millions. Like all the others big players right now (except Nintendo) they want to create a billions dollars franchise they could sustain for years without risks.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

Again...Wild that that is your conclusion instead of clearly seeing this is about profit.

Again.
If they're all about profit, and good with numbers… why greenlight projects that they supposedly should know very well won't make a profit?
People good with numbers and obsessed about profit don't let a project be in development for 5-7 years and then figure out the final product won't make a profit a month from release. That's headless chicken behavior. DEI or not, you need some absolute morons in very high positions to get such results.

DEI will usually result in bad, clueless projects being pushed forward and out of the gate in complete disregard of profit projections. But at least those projections do launch, and don't get cancelled at the last minute, because a bunch of clueless morons firmly believe that the product is good, even when anyone with a brain can (and does) tell them that it's bad.
What Ubisoft is doing here makes even less sense, if the final goal is profit.

 

[BigMeanieHead]

THey don't want to take creative risks to earn a few millions. Like all the others big players right now (except Nintendo) they want to create a billions dollars franchise they could sustain for years without risks.

bingo

 

[TheChumpNation]

I could be wrong, but would it really be that difficult to spend $20m and remake an 8 hour, linear, single player game?

Sell it for $40, you'll sell a million or two, profit?

I genuinely think that strategy would work so long as they don't start tampering with the original and turning it into a "modern audience" monstrosity that turns off the people who would otherwise be interested.

Only investing in projects you hope will make billions forever, despite a hilariously high fail rate for said projects, is completely illogical. Are publishers really run by the equivalent of lottery ticket gamblers to this extent?

 

[SScorpio]

My problem is, as a person that formally debates, and looks for root causes in things without emotion...

saying "it's the blue hairs" is not an argument, it's a post hoc assertion. It assumes causation without showing it. I wouldn't do well in debates if I used that lol (not that i'm here to try and debate you, I enjoy the conversation tbh)

There's a timeline problem as well with this:

The decline in trust and quality predates the DEI backlash narrative.

• GAAS push started early–mid 2010s
• Microtransactions normalized before all of this
• Studio consolidation and closures accelerated long before 2020
• Franchise bloat and sequel fatigue were already widely complained about in the PS3/Xbox 360 era

If DEI were the root cause, the downturn would align cleanly with its introduction.
It doesn't.

Also, I enjoy these subjects about capitalism and it's impact; just because I'm not agreeing that blue haired people are the primary cause for all things bad in gaming, doesn't mean you have to try and tribalize me into a "resetera" space or something. We're just talking mannn. Everything I'm speaking about is clearly about...business.

Gamersgate and Feminine Frequency were in that mid-2010s and when people started noticing. But it was happening before that.

Activist hacks got jobs, and ended up leading to the hiring of more so they multiplied. Yearly franchise fatigue is a different thing. That was due to too much of the same thing continuously coming out. Where now a simple remake of something that already existed can't make it out.

 

[BigMeanieHead]

Again.
If they're all about profit, and good with numbers… why greenlight projects that they supposedly should know very well won't make a profit?
People good with numbers and obsessed about profit don't let a project be in development for 5-7 years and then figure out the final product won't make a profit a month from release. That's headless chicken behavior. DEI or not, you need some absolute morons in very high positions to get such results.

DEI will usually result in bad, clueless projects being pushed forward and out of the gate in complete disregard of profit projections. But at least those projections do launch, and don't get cancelled at the last minute, because a bunch of clueless morons firmly believe that the product is good, even when anyone with a brain can (and does) tell them that it's bad.
What Ubisoft is doing here makes even less sense, if the final goal is profit.

good question/ response. I figured that question would come up, as it should. We just disagree on the "causation".

Because...which DEI hire has the authority to cancel a $200 million project?

Because creative staff don't approve budgets, or control timelines or Decide launches/ Override marketing commitments.

Executives do.

Unless...you want to leap and say they are all DEI too, but then we're doing more post hoc assertions; and twisting ourselves into a pretzel because we "really really want it to be the people we don't like", when there is more evidence of other causes.

"why do they cancel projects/ People obsessed with profit wouldn't act like headless chickens"

They absolutely do, because they're not obsessed with long-term profit in these cases, they're obsessed with:
Quarterly results, Stock price, Personal career survival, Internal KPIs etc

Those goals often conflict with:

• Product quality
• Player trust
• Long-term brand health

This is a textbook agency problem, not DEI.

What looks like irrationality at the product level is often rational behavior at the career level.

 

[SScorpio]

good question/ response. I figured that question would come up, as it should. We just disagree on the "causation".

Because...which DEI hire has the authority to cancel a $200 million project?

Because creative staff don't approve budgets, or control timelines or Decide launches/ Override marketing commitments.

Executives do.

Unless...you want to leap and say they are all DEI too, but then we're doing more post hoc assertions; and twisting ourselves into a pretzel because we "really really want it to be the people we don't like", when there is more evidence of other causes.

"why do they cancel projects/ People obsessed with profit wouldn't act like headless chickens"

They absolutely do, because they're not obsessed with long-term profit in these cases, they're obsessed with:
Quarterly results, Stock price, Personal career survival, Internal KPIs etc

Those goals often conflict with:

• Product quality
• Player trust
• Long-term brand health

This is a textbook agency problem, not DEI.

What looks like irrationality at the product level is often rational behavior at the career level.

They aren't the ones doing the cancelling. They are failing to produce results at their jobs leading to the cancellation. When the people who do the actual work bail from the industry due to a hostile environment, you end up with only people who are laser focused on a cause than actually producing the game they are supposed to be developing.

 

[hussar16]

I am thinking there is a wide term gaming scam going on where game directors and developers want to drag projects further and stretch the time as long as possible and in turn earn more money and have easier schedules and what not.it just seems like that is happening everywhere. Ubisoft canceled a remake in working for over 5 years. How do u not produce a remake in 5 years with good quality

 

[CentralScrutinizer]

Dear Ubisoft, just port the fucking games. Why bother remaking?

 

[hussar16]

Lack of organizaiton and hubris, pure and simple.

Those AC remasters Ubisoft releases some years ago... whoever worked on those should feel ashamed!

Developers and directors are just basicly funneling out money out of these companies .trying to stretch limits for as long as possible and not have to work as hard. The people in gaming companies today are only working for money not passion anymore so they want to stretch the game devlopemnt to get the most out of it and bonuses.

 

[hussar16]

Bloober didnt create Silent Hill 2. They made an amazing remake.

The talent is still there at Ubisoft. They are making some gorgeous looking games still. The problem is the management. Ubisoft's CEO's son was literally cancelling games he didnt like and running his mouth in meetings with creative leads.

This is all on management.

Let's not act like developers and directors also are not using this for their own goals to stretch the devlopemnt as long as possible to earn more money

 

[Fake]

DEI and activism have a cost. The bill arrives.

 

[hussar16]

Again.
If they're all about profit, and good with numbers… why greenlight projects that they supposedly should know very well won't make a profit?
People good with numbers and obsessed about profit don't let a project be in development for 5-7 years and then figure out the final product won't make a profit a month from release. That's headless chicken behavior. DEI or not, you need some absolute morons in very high positions to get such results.

DEI will usually result in bad, clueless projects being pushed forward and out of the gate in complete disregard of profit projections. But at least those projections do launch, and don't get cancelled at the last minute, because a bunch of clueless morons firmly believe that the product is good, even when anyone with a brain can (and does) tell them that it's bad.
What Ubisoft is doing here makes even less sense, if the final goal is profit.

Because game directors green lit the projects so they have money coming in for years. They basicly live off the projects even if it doesnt make money it dont matter to them because they earned their cash stretching the game devlopment in the meantime its a job

 

[RafterXL]

DEI and activism have a cost. The bill arrives.

This is the answer and the fact people want to keep pretending it's not is so fucking annoying. Btw, the PoP remake was taken away from the Indian studio they had making it so that French cucks could make it more modern audience palatable, and now that the tides have turned Ubisoft realized that shit won't fly in 2026 and they cancelled it.

This was the design was before it sent to France to be re-done, with a little graphical polish this design is excellent:

And this is what the French developers did to it when they took over:

What the fuck is this shit?

Anyone notice a pattern here? Yet another western developer turning another prized IP into garbage? Funny how it only happens to these woke companies and people still can't acknowledge that the problem is the problem. They want to dance around and pretend it's a million other things. No...it's one thing that's cause a million other problems. Wake up.

This game was going to suck shit and I'm glad it's cancelled. And god forbid they ever touch the sequel, could you imagine?

 

[BigMeanieHead]

They aren't the ones doing the cancelling. They are failing to produce results at their jobs leading to the cancellation. When the people who do the actual work bail from the industry due to a hostile environment, you end up with only people who are laser focused on a cause than actually producing the game they are supposed to be developing.

well, Which decisions, specifically, are "DEI hires" making that lead to a game being cancelled after years of development?

Because "DEI hires":

• Don't choose engines
• Don't set scope
• Don't approve timelines
• Don't decide when to ship or cancel
• Don't control budgets

how many DEI hires do they have? what percentage are also just as talented as anybody else? why would the untalented portion outnumber the talented? They still go through a vetting process and interviews correct? see, there are alot of unverifiable questions that lead to this being post hoc reasoning again, It assumes the cause without evidence and ignores everything we know about how AAA development actually fails.

it comes off as "I want it to be this reason, therefore it is this reason". Identity defense instead of objective analysis

This explanation can't be tested.
If a game fails, it's blamed on DEI hires.
If a game succeeds, DEI gets ignored or credited to "old talent."

Baldurs Gate and Hogwarts legacy for example were as LGBTQ and gay as you can get....yet....