SuntannedDuck2

Nope I'll go the Pocket PC or PDA route before i get a gaming PC handheld.

It has appeal but eh, I'm not fussed.

The AAs are efficient in Xbox controllers designs over the years and even then you can replace/add any battery pack or USB cable it if you want.

Rechargable, Alkaline, etc., it's up to the user to know that/use them.

The Xbox controllers allow for a lot to work with. Why would i complain if it gives options? So of course I picked the yes top option on both. I don't game enough on a 360/One to complain, nor do I a Wiimote. The only controllers I use batteries for and even then maybe a PS2 IR wireless one if I feel like it. They work well enough for the time I play. So never gone, oh no AA batteries. I'm fine with them.

I take them out of the controllers too, imagine that, that's how they last, and don't leak, besides getting cheap batteries.

People just go oh AAs, money or laziness, when they seem to ignore the battery pack, sure it's more money but you also don't need to if you cable it. Imagine that. They give you options. Whoa. XD

Nintendo/Sony's yeah good luck. I do cable my controllers and my PS3 ones aren't as bad, my PS4 one last like 30minutes to an 1 hour, Gamepad doesn't but goes flat just sitting there so eh, handhelds last well sitting around or powered, can't say for GameCube Wavebird but Wiimotes or Xbox 360/One or others aren't too bad with AAs, but even still, if you want enough battery removal or being flat to low use case over time and hard to remove, by all means.

Part 2:
Does it make things particular for businesses wanting money and customers trying them out sure. But in some cases we can't tell gameplay by footage can we, many games are repetitively samey gameplay wise these days but that' doesn't always apply either.

People want to give the games a go and if there is no demo or cough GAME TRIAL behind the subscription access then yeah your getting lower tiers or whatever else.

People are accessing them as the full game or part of a game demo/game trial regardless of platform's offering of access to them.

REPEAT: If customers change their mind how they get games it's unfortunate, but if your game isn't very convincing, or is but people are unsure and footage or trailers isn't enough, how else are they supposed to experience it?

I buy games but I also look at footage constantly, look at menus to see what progression/game modes are like, many footage DON'T do that so I sometimes have to look more or buy it to find out which is annoying.

But that's more with older games, with modern ones I have to be able to check or wait for them to get cheap or just not buy them at all if I think they aren't really going for what I'm looking for and following others in making boring games. But those that are great, sure they seem to have enough compelling there worth experiencing.

Ok stuff, lot I don't care for, to none at all.

Well, not like I didn't expect that anyway.

They better handle some things of gameplay or story or presentation or what these are going for.

The names are familiar or new and the rest is just who cares trailers, marketing and boring direction of games, as usually.

They can say 'look we have a volume of things' but if most of it isn't substance, just style, why would I care?

That's modern gaming's problem, substance doesn't seem to exist, just style and blandness to execute personality or gameplay ideas that aren't repetitive and boring.

Decent coverage of old Xbox IPs, not just a who cares wrap up of the brand.

They will probably do something bare bones anyway. Even game anniversaries have been boring Xbox or other platforms/IP holders.

For being noticed then just a simple upload to the Xbox Store sure. But finding it or playing it is another matter. The saves files are still there even after they try the games on Gamepass.

Grid Legends went to PS+/Gamepass or EA's service. Like I mean it was $30 by that point. I bought it physical as I wanted it that way, didn't make me go oh I should have waited. I wanted to support it still. Indies it varies but if flops or good games go to Gamepass late, were still either paying for the sub, not at that point in time or under a certain prices or full price anyways. Like I mean are they worth much not really at certain points.

Many others on the services are cheap disks now, varied discounts Xbox store, PS+/PS store, etc. how much were audiences caring anyway? Exactly. When they see/hear about them, how much they are worth, how long in the service, digital/physical purchase or only gamepass and never continued or finished the game in time before removed from service.

My $30 didn't do much, Balan my $20 new when it was flopping didn't do much but my full price wouldn't have either would it. I still paid $20 new then $10 used/pre-owned. I still contributed. But I could guess flops too, many I was interested in, still contributed in a way.

If customers change their mind how they get games it's unfortunate, but if your game isn't very convincing, or is but people are unsure and footage or trailers isn't enough, how else are they supposed to experience it?

Also what about all the Soundcloud/Bandcamps and others out there? Many users do. Enough sales sure, but not like ads do a lot for them either on Spotify, Soundcloud, etc. types out there of users licensing to songs.

I care more for the DVDs/blu-rays then I do streaming service slop anyway with garbage television, alongside ok tv shows/movies mixed in, but most I don't care for.

But I also don't care about any single to maybe a few PS/Xbox IPs of 2013+ anyway, I dropped off to go more into collecting and odd modern third parties only in 2017. So is either of them getting my money, PS4/Nintendo yes via digital, via physical they aren't really at all other then maybe Switch due to some 1st parties/odd 3rd parties. But mostly it's digital PS4/Switch now. Only used Xbox One games. No PS5. Have access to the consoles sure, not touching them, not mine and I don't want them anyway.

So I"m not their target audience, so like they care anyway. I'm 1 out of millions of customers. I don't count to them anyway. XD

I get from a business perspective but even still. The companies offering their games know what they are getting into. Customers know. They either change to what they experience/how they do or they treat it different ways.

I don't use gamepass, I also don't buy digital on Xbox either. i look at footage for any physical/digital game, screenshots/trailers aren't always enough, but the footage in reviews, let's plays/walkthrough and more can also be too focused on in-game, not menus, modes and other details I want to see, they only show further in game (for racing or shooters or others that's annoying, for other genres it's not so bad) and that can annoy me a lot too.

The deals are made clear between them and Microsoft. It's clear why they appear there. IF it doesn't work out, they move on.

Sony has their deals/offerings of PS+ or not.

Fair, always good to have more showcasing/features like this for access/filtering.

Doesn't change that their filtering still needs MANY MORE options then what they currently offer. It's just sad.

There is a reason when I use GT6's car search or a Windows file explorer or Xbox OS or any others in games/console/PC, etc. I just navigate it myself per file or folder, not use the quick access stuff, because the search filters or otherwise are still terrible in functionality or lacking a filter for what I'm after to apply. They either don't work or the filter options I'm look for aren't there.

That and they could also make back compat not annoying to find either. In the storefront or in filters or any other aspects of the OS/menu navigation. Search features, etc.

I avoid their website but sometimes have to use it because on the console it's annoying to find, I just got to wikipedia or just put a disk in and see what it finds then caring to look them up, sometimes I just keep the wikipedia page offline when out so I don't have to keep looking things up.

@Kaloudz I respect the effort as it can't be cheap, or it's a challenge to do runs around the tracks, audio and more. It's amazing use of tech and making the games what they are.

But there is only so much of that I care about when I care more for event variety or other details more. Not the technical details as much.

It has for years, Motorsport 5-7 were decent but down in quality despite all the things they were pushing and down in popularity too I think.

Otherwise yeah Horizon always made sense why, it's not as tied to a thing most people don't care about, unless into those cars/tracks or the sense of motorsport why would you bother with it?

I don't care for motorsports but I still enjoy these types of games, Horizon to me was just boring missions of the modern era and insert location to set it in. Pass.

I don't play open worlds for their locations, I do their missions/movesets and progression, if they suck, I don't buy them. Which happens a lot.

PGR used streets, locations and track design or car selection or progression/event types well. It's why I never got bored of it.

The walk around dealership of 2, the garages of other entries, the menus, the Geometry Wars inclusions. It's personality was so good. Even PGR2's career/arcade did go too far for restrictions people hated it that want their quick race easy fast car access but it was so well designed you wanted to progress in it. Not FM6 that's kind of like PGR2 but worse and even then gives out candy cars. It's a joke. FM5 & 7 at least handled things a bit better.

But anniversary games always suck anyway, or they happen to have the worst ideas in the series, that line up with the anniversary date timing.

Horizon I got bored by the first game. I hadn't played Burnout Paradise back then but have now, and even then I found Burnout Paradise/NFS Carbon or others way more exciting then Horizon due to their structure and good ideas back then.

Modern era games don't have compelling mechanics, event types or otherwise just cars, fair destinations and the other stuff I never cared about in them that are so forgettable yet important, the festivals and other stuff.

At least NFS Prostreet was a decent game tackling it, the others, aren't.

Unless it's gameplay exciting then pass. Like very other year, generic trailers, not that exciting use of trends and other garbage included.

There may be some decent but still not that exciting.

@Kaloudz That's where I find Wreckfest or others fit in, no licenses but fair approach.

Thing is I just find them just as weak of execution but that's just me, I see the appeal but I've played better from OG Xbox to 360 era, WRC3's career mode was so good or Dirt 3, or any other OG Xbox exclusive or 3rd parties, or even many PS2 exclusive 3rd party games with great mechanics/progression that just doesn't happen anymore.

To me modern racing games feel like when you look at the many multiplayer modes in a shooter but go yeah we will have 2. Repeat it for the campaign and however structured for multiplayer. That's why I find them kind of boring.

So if the amount of work isn't on licensing but just art/physics then yeah that's why I get disappointed in many modern racing games even those without licenses.

Wrecreation gave me NFS Hot Pursuit 2010 then Trackmania, if it lands sure, but to me the trailers/ads have been disappointing. Even Wreckfest 2 just looks like more of the same but many racing game trailers also are hard to tell what is going on.

I barely can find menus in gameplay footage for racing games as people constantly show the cars/tracks so it makes things annoying to tell what a game has of content.

@AverageGamer There are many that are, use their sim rigs and so on. Even then to me 5 to 7 weren't great but I at least had some interest in them. 6 was eh to me in structure, but 5-7 had some fair ideas. 8/2023 just seems like the most flat.

When it's live services, ok 3rd parties or esports games, yeah racing looks kind of an eh space these days.

Not all but some of us do feel like this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVry84ACu0k&pp=ygUWcmF5Y2V2aWNrIHJhY2luZyBnYW1lcw%3D%3D

Not all of us are sports/car brand loyal/nostalgic. But many likely are.

GT/Forza are cheaper then the esports ones that cost per asset, at least with GT/Forza you get enough content in the base game and free updates. So business wise I can respect them, gameplay wise I can't.

Even then Forza doesn't even have a Vision GT 'making prototypes for the car makers' type things either so it has less to deal with there. Just the licenses or types of cars they want to add, make events for, etc. for it's live service model.

While the rest of us racing game fans prefer older games for their gameplay depth and not the latest cars, but what you could DO with the cars. It's why I'm not surprised some youtubers don't just feature old games for nostalgia, or look up older games they never heard of or make challenges is they can make content out of it then the scripted, update drops and more space of modern racing games. But they could be more gamers then racing fans so there is also that.

But then again seeing Indies making games with no license but referenced or copy paste of the real tracks/cars but tweaking things yeah.... You can see the motorsport/car fan ones for sure easily. Or the nostalgia type ones.

The think i find weird is even when you have arcadey ones with no licenses they are just as bland as sims.

Some may praise them I find them mechanically/progression wise the most boring in years, just as much as open worlds or RPG lite modern games with basic movesets.

But that's more my mindset, no one shares that as much. While 20 years ago I can get sims and arcade racers with more progression, mechanics and thought put into them to experiment.

Wreckfest to me is a lesser Flatout. Easy access progression like NFS Shift 1, ok vehicle variety but seemed lacking still to me (kickstrater aside). 2 and Wrecreation to me look like they want competition and don't stand out at all of ideas/direction. I find them very disappointing and generic.

FM 1&2 have a region system that Ride 4 tweaked well enough yet the AI in many of Milestone's latest games suck and are pro level only EVEN ON EASY AI, no joke Ride 4 is unplayable for me, so was MotoGP16 and that has dirt bikes/rally cars and those are playable, the motogp bikes are not. If other devs have better ideas even from Forza series, yet Forza Motorsport just 'tries' to capture an audience and does the bare minimum or it's interesting angle got rewritten and didn't work it's unfortunate.

The upgrades angle was awkward and the credits/position feature was fair but even then MX vs ATV games have done this without credit payouts for years. So it was a fair tweak but didn't do much.

Project Motor Racing is also trying some ok new region and other ideas. But also wants that esports pie I bet.

While others that are esports like have content that takes years to make, modes/cars no one uses and costs more for each asset of cars/track that some people don't even use and are janky. Yeah it's a joke.

Good on the team if they can keep it going but yeah content is looking pretty generic and unappealing, I'll wait till the game is cheap and near complete and still be bored with it.

GT7 as much as I hate it, at least it has event variety, many racing games suck with modes/event rules types and I just get bored with them. I still don't own GT7, GT Sport I got very late cheap, it was 'ok' but even then I played a fair amount of it and even then it was more fun to write up a wiki page about it's restructuring for offline then playing the game.

So no Quake 4, fair, Hexen being available is pretty cool.

Unfortunate for the team but yeah, we barely heard anything about it, a logo/general view of things that didn't tell us much at all.

Also the Warthunder, Warframe, etc. issue of naming that this, Concord and many others have didn't help me to remember this game's title either.

Pretty cool. I have more so around 30 to 40 Xbox One games and more so 100+ PS4 games (not fully sure due to having many on the shelf but others stored in console tv stand shelving along with PS2, Wii, PS3, 360 besides the other odd shelves for those).

So yeah when I have around 100+ for PS4, but maybe a bit less then that for PS3/360 with collecting, and less than that for each other platform in the 5 to 50 or so I think range for some platforms yeah it varies for sure.

But got a 5TB PS4 drive and that's with mostly smaller 20-50GB games, only a handful of the big 60 to 100GB ones, not many of those at all. Not all my PS4 games are on there but a fair amount.

The 360 back compat I have are either installed (some of) or folder tagged in the game library menu/app to keep track of them. Took me 2 hours and the Xbox One X struggling with so much menu jumping in and out, cancelling downloads, removing disks and so on even if it's less than 100 360 games.

Scouting for Chinese game deals I guess. Fair but good luck. They can try and make whatever they can happen to make deals with the platform or get an idea what they are offering over there but even then.

There are plenty of markets Xbox/Microsoft do not offer gaming in, compared to Windows or any other platforms for general space of a Microsoft products/services.

Let alone Sony's coverage or Nintendo's to other countries/markets. Xbox seems like they have the least coverage and need to expand as best they can.

Otherwise not much to say here.

Like I care, many games haven't been that great on PS/Xbox, expanding markets to try and make deals with is totally understandable and good luck with that but otherwise eh.

Both platforms and games/deals have been underwhelming.

If they can pull it off.

Offer decent mechanics based on some superheroes or other Disney IP then sure.

Otherwise I don't see a need, just use whatever license, I don't care for these games unless the gameplay is good, many of them aren't so I don't care.

Many SW games have been eh, many Marvel games have been eh, many Disney games have been eh.

I'm not interested.

When Donald Duck PK or Monster's Inc Scare Island let alone returns (not touching) older SW games (when they were executed well and not badly) or others were more appealing you know your Disney/Marvel/SW/etc. games suck.

I got my SW Clone Wars 2002 vehicular game and finally played through it to the end, I'm happy, I haven't seen anything great happen these past few years.

I'd rather see something else but if it's Quake 4 then sure why not. I have Quake 4 but I'd say it needs to be more widely available these days for people to experience not just Doom 3 or Doom 3 VR.

3/Arena would be nice but they have Champions for that don't they? Regardless of people's opinions on Champions.

Is Nightdive capable? I mean they would need to have enough for a modern online presence, can they do that? Or however a publisher does for that sort of thing. Or just a good enough multiplayer experience without online then people complain it has no online?

4 makes sense to handle then 3 which is cool to have but a lot of effort to really make work in the modern era for some remaster studios.

If it has like a bot match thing or fair bot match campaign sure, I'm ok with that for Unreal Tournament PS2 and UT3 on PS3. But I am more interested in Unreal the none multiplayer ones if I can get access to them.

When the Evercade offering is more appealing. Yeah this sucks.

I get we got Rare Replay, but I want something just as interesting, not this bare minimum.

Also after the layoffs situation, I don't take to buttering us up or garbage anniversaries for games, consoles, companies, whatever.

I just look at you funny and laugh or get mad, companies are a joke, do better, not make me laugh at you/get mad at your waste of time excuses.

Worthless celebrations and not good ones at all.

Give us Pocket Tales, give us literally anything more interesting then this.

I want other gimmicks for the controller, not 100 different controller designs or whatever game tie ins, I don't care. The share button was a fair but not exciting benefit. I don't care about controller/console artwork designs, give me engineering ideas, not boring artwork on console shells/controller shells, it's so boring.

Impulse triggers are still around and good but I want something else. Whether motion controls or something new to add to them. Make something different from Sony/Nintendo's offering.

Even the Switch 2 mouse laser was so dull and unappealing. It's position sucks, the joycons are too thin and it looks like it's awkward to use or will be used for boring use cases then interesting ones. Just offer mouse support and offer other gimmicks come on. The engineers are not trying hard enough at all. Stop making boring controllers and put effort in seriously. Gaming sucks in game design and technology use.

It's different but I don't know.

Even Aragorn's Quest (picked up week ago or so now), seems like a prior attempt to use the IP for a family audience or other audiences in the case of Tales from the Shire and I get that, it may have some fair ideas, but it doesn't really work I think. Not so much theme wise for me just gameplay wise or trend wise I find them getting pretty weak at times.

A LOTR cozy game is fine in Hobbiton or wherever but even still.

I assume even The Hobbit video game of 6th gen is better then Aragorn's Quest.

Whatever works for them. Whatever is big enough, appealing enough to the PS/Switch userbase really.

South of Midnight when will that go multiplatform?

Hellblade 2 is right? Or has already?

Starfield whenever that does.

Gears of any kind besides the 1st game remade again. Any Halo? Forza Horizon 5 makes sense for licensing reasons or latest. Motorsport 8 or 2023 won't I assume to give it a shot, even if why bother really. Also will it get an offline update I doubt it and they just get rid of it. Sigh.

Age of Empires 4? As only 2 Definitive edition made it to PS5.

Any others not remembering that haven't yet.

We won't see other Xbox One or otherwise IPs go will we? State of Decay 2? Crackdown 3?

I mean anything within the past few years can be clear of PC or PS5 but anything older it's just unclear. Due to engines, or interest at all. Let alone customers remembering.

Sunset Overdrive or any Insomniac PC VR games aren't going to PS5 any time soon.

Well seeing how Modern Warfare even Bad Company 2 was and BC1 wasn't surprised me. Can't say for MP but campaign wise BC1 and BC2 was like comparing Dog Island/Petz, one is one way as a quest based game, the other is another as a pet in a room to play with game. As in BC1 was more Battlefield style, BC2 was a COD campaign of structure and fair destruction elements.

The kind of thing that made me mad with Resistance 2 being so altered of some aspects and then 3 was better and stuck to what it should have been not a trend following excuse developers. Same with Spiderman, Sunset Overdrive was way better and it's direction, Spiderman was the most I played for the lab puzzles/2 side missions game I have ever played. Story good, gameplay so boring and formuliac.

I myself don't see much here. I'm more for gameplay gimmicks, I don't see any. Sure destruction but we have had that for years in different entries, in certain ways. I don't see much going on here to make me care that much.

The personality is 'fine' but the gameplay could be like the past ones but refined, or it could have you go to which locations or whatever dialogue.

But if the MP maps/modes are still pretty modern structure and less depth (not that I play MP anyway), or the campaign is generic, I don't care what personality it has or what it tries to do to compete, be bit of old, bit of new BF PS3/360 era or PS4/Xbox One or fit the 9th gen, I still don't care about it EA/Dice.

Engines do play a roll and using them or expanding on them or just in general how particular they can be while avoiding licensing fees from UE or others past their sales point (or how each agreement works for engines).

But not as much as game design/staff balancing or leadership also do. How they work around that, main teams, outsourcing, etc.

I think they captured enough of what they wanted to, old Halo 1 style flare, modernising things, fitting in with trends for the open world or multiplayer structures, it makes sense enough what they were going for, it may have rough edges or that may be a player's perspective. But I think they captured enough of the vision or whatever it ended up as in the end to be worked into something despite delays, leadership, outsourcing, core teams, etc. efforts on the game.

If people liked it by all means. I myself didn't find the open world formula like the ones I enjoy (aka Gravity Rush, Sunset Overdrive and Infamous Second Son, so as it doesn't fit those, I wasn't going to buy it/play it anyway).

I hated Halo 5 but played it late. I have no interest in Halo Infinite at all. The campaign doesn't interest me. I wouldn't have been an additional sale but even still the game design appeal I look for just wasn't there.

That and the disk was useless as it was partial as well.

Wake me up when fhr swap mechanic from.BF2 MC happens, destruction looks fine but isn't as compelling or a NEW BF game. It's need a gimmick. I'm not very interested here.

2042 using aspects of older games besides whatever else new was something I guess. But eh.

I haven't seen much impressive at all this gen at all.

Was fine enough with the idea, I didn't really use it as I'm on Xbox One, have access to a Series X, I don't use it personally, but others do but not the disk games.

But I respect the feature, as I do like the idea. Offering more then just a put disk in back compat and offering upgrades as another option is nice to have. Or whatever digital and the option there.

It's like having a crossbuy experience and it's nice to have. Especially as other than Iconoclasts for PS4 to Vita I don't really have many crossbuy games at all. Helldivers 1 I just got lucky the code still worked and it triggers on Vita as available from my PS4 copy that happened to be the special edition for such a thing.

I appreciate the feature, but even then I haven't used a single PS4 to PS5 upgrade. Or Xbox One Smart Delivery, as I still use an Xbox One, I have a few 2020+ era Xbox One games but not many, I have more PS4 versions with PS5 upgrades on the box art mentioned. But I'm not using a PS5 at all, have access to it from people around me, not using it.

Others around me are and they buy the PS5 versions physical/digital instead of using the PS4 disk/digital upgrade license.

I can see why people don't but to me I just haven't upgraded it yet so I may use them in the future, but unless PS5/Xbox Series have compelling games I don't care to use them.

I even then only think I have Red Dead Redemption 360 in the Xbox One case as one of those back compat things that Smart delivery is similar to. Otherwise I have mostly OG Xbox or 360 games that are regular copies. Even then the way 360 DLC would work was weird for some games and seeing with the above commenter it seems Xbox One DLC also had issues. But then again I don't have many GOTY editions or DLC on disks either like Borderlands 1 or Fallout 3 for me, even if I got a GOTY copy alongside it might as well who really buys DLC disks? (Borderlands 1 had an Aussie DLC disk and a US copy game, still gave me the Aussie digital game but even still). Even then getting ReCore Def edition for free when I re added my disk copy to my console (still owned it physical of course never sold it) was cool.

I have used my PS4/Xbox One more then I have my PS3/360 in cross over gens.

But I still use all my old consoles/handhelds, and I was still using a PS3/360 about maybe 2 or more years into PS4/Xbox One gen, not the whole gen like this time around because games/consoles features don't interest me at all. Quick resume, cards, load times, haptics, VR2 and more are 'ok' but not that compelling and the RT/HDR/etc. are just graphics technologies I have no interest in, learning how they work, sure, but I'm a gameplay first type, so no, games have no compelled me with gameplay reasons to buy them.

I have used a PS5/Series X, but barely. But I barely used my Xbox One either, only on occasion more as I've had it as my own to use but even still.

Never used, not touched my Xbox in a bit now.

To me it seems to offer more info but seems very busy or in your face like PS does for their trophies/news and things.

Also just having a console in a dim state has achievement notices pop up, it's annoying and stupid. If they still do that.

I wouldn't likely use this, I am not an achievement/trophy type, I have gotten a few that are within reason for me to go for, but not on Xbox and again not the type of person that cares to go for them. Or be pushed to go for them. I play a game when I feel like it or if the mechanics/level design are good, not using the platform for long because the platformer holders want us to. I play more retro games then I do modern era stuff anyway.

Unless I really care for PS4/Xbox One/Switch 1 console Indies or AA/AAA or older releases on them sure, but otherwise it's PS3/360/Wii U/handhelds and older consoles most of the time.

Fair, I didn't know it was PS4/5, Switch 1 and PC. But it takes time for studios to make for each platform, so now that they have the time/resources, they can make it for Xbox/Switch 2, pretty cool.

I haven't played it yet, have bought a digital license of it for PS4, but I was intrigued by it.

Not heard of nay of these but they seem fair, not my type of games but very cool for what they are going for.

Abiotic Factor seems like ok of a multiplayer game.

Soulslikes don't interest me so pass on Wuchang, and Wheel World has a fair mix of ideas/style.

Otherwise none, but they are some interesting games still.

I mean sure not as many consoles as Xbox One but the audience for a game like this or from that studio prior wasn't that large yet did go to Switch 1 and I assume PlayStation later.

I don't have experience with their games or vaguely remember this game. But I have come across them through articles. I'm not likely their audience but whatever they have to deal with/those interested by all means.

So I mean, as if that audience isn't still niche and still excited for a game like this on Xbox, or those that want to support the studio, interested in the game, etc.

I get it takes time, sure the sales, resources, etc. But even still. Not all on Xbox are Gamepass only, some do buy on the Xbox.

I myself don't buy digital on Xbox but at the same time I can see the appeal for sure.

Even then I am still using PS4/Xbox One longer then I did my PS3/360 into the PS4/Xbox One gen as to me I don't see a reason to upgrade, I haven't seen any gameplay mechanics compelling games just typical games, graphics focus and a few ok ideas ones but they either flopped (name and particular ones and I either have a PS4 copy of it or if it was PS5/Xbox Series only third party it flopped but have it on those consoles from people around me that did like Forspoken, Immortals of Aveum, Atlas Fallen not sure how that sold) or I know I might not like them due to past releases in those series (Ride 5, WRC23), or they will go cheap as racing games anyway, so to me it doesn't matter. I have access to the consoles from people around me so I just don't care for them. They get used, while I use my N64/PS1 (no GameCube, OG Xbox or Dreamcast, but have every other handheld/console) to PS4/Xbox One/Switch 1.

Fair feature. I wasn't that big on it with Switch 1, but was Wii or Wii U. PS I don't have it at all other then the yearly round ups, Xbox either.

Folders/groups off topic:

======================

But I found myself using the library/groups on Switch 1 a lot more then I did on Xbox One. PS4/Wii U I used them a fair bit but they function differently so I can't make genre categories or what peripherals support (touch screen, gyro, I don't have a surround sound group as didn't care to, but I have probably about 30 or more based on genres, anime games, fan service ones, digital, physical,, first games in a series, sequels, and many more) and random group types on those like i can Switch 1/Xbox One.

So I have come to appreciate them a lot more then I used to compared to preferring PS4/Wii U folders but making whatever groups and re-assigning a game to them then 1 folder they can go in, does make the Switch 1/Xbox One groups really interesting to use.

========================

Back on topic:

So having a clear idea how much I have say Soundcloud in the background (or say I forget to close the eshop as I hate how I have to round about close it compared to every other app, it's like Windows 8 task manager app closing all over again, the way to go about it on an Xbox One/Series these days compared to prior OS/prior use of the store app) or any games I play actively is fair, I have gaps between playing my Xbox One or 360 so it would be interesting to know (of course this will be Xbox One/Series most likely but even still).

So the game publisher that had one of their staff tell us to just get used to not owning DVDs, and the Crew is the reason for this petition as well as many others?

I enjoy Ubisoft trying different types of games but not all of them appeal, and especially if their formulas get in the way.

Also if true they blamed Star Wars for Outlaws failures? It was Ubisoft's fault, their game design, messaging, marketing. If any movie/other brand staff said things of how they are allowed to fit Outlaws into the rules they set sure, but otherwise it's on Ubisoft.

Yeah uh GT Sport (GT PSP to GT6 had memory card or even per profile I think it was save file checks to avoid car duplication, makes sense, was still annoying, so you had to delete your save all the time, forget moving it to another PSP or PS3, I don't think it was hardware ID checked as I used different profiles same PS3, different PS3, memory card moved on PSP to check these, I can't say for digital copies either only physical)/Suicide Squad beat them to a offline state update, there is no excuse, if they can update games regularly, they can add offline status patches.

If they have licenses/a focus to keep it on store fronts, it's fine, small amounts of money sure, but still available.

We aren't expecting support forever, we aren't expecting classic MMO style approach.

Playing UE3/Brink bot matches. or Shadowrun tutorial.

It's called leaving the game available for sale or delisting but keeping the game (depends on the license), or adding an offline mode and people can still buy it on PC, physical console, digital console eshops if it isn't too much of a licensing hassle.

People will advertise games all the time even after they are over, singleplayer, multiplayer servers cut, bot matches, whatever the case. Games come around and get found out about.

Others you end up with Piglet's big movie games as a Resident Evil style game and people put the price up because of whatever nonsense can be said about a game. Will Chicken Run get expensive too because it's like MGS. XD

Many don't want LAN/fan co-op at all just publisher run servers, to waste money and have control.

They can try to make people buy the newest, or ignore past projects, but some people wanted those old projects, and be fed up and not buy their later projects, how many that effects can build up over time. Maybe 1 leaves, 2 buy the newest project, sometimes 2 leave, 1 buys it, but sometimes many don't like the direction, game design, story, etc.

It's not always nostalgia, it's quality, it's direction, people are playing old games not just because of MTX, it's knowing their product purchase was wasted, it's because of what was better.

Not everyone treats a game the same as a streaming service show that was bad or good, or moving games space off streaming when it varies for Sony/Xbox/Nintendo.

I enjoy old trends because I found their directions interesting for mechanics, I don't modern trends. I am very picky of modern games.

A fair service but to me the app always opened for any videos I already had that weren't related to the service at all. Unless confusing it with another one, which I may be.

I barely even knew it was a service app.

Still 360/PS3 to Xbox Series/PS5. What a long time to offer such digital tv/movies on consoles for the audience that did go for them.

I would just use whatever media player really but otherwise I always used my physical tv series/movies in an Xbox One/360 or PS4 as I prefer the menus, I am not a fan of PS2 artefacting (could just by my PS2 or how I position the AV cable or it connected to a HD 3D TV too, or the modern DVDs I am putting into it also) or the PS2/PSP/PS3 menus at all.

Even then the Xbox having tv/movies longer then PlayStation did seem fair, but I can see why it isn't going to last. At least they aren't removing the licenses, or at least not yet.

I never used a PSP for media (I have a few songs on there, never converted videos to it, tried on Vita as it's less effort but removed for space, was cool though even if volume limits are what they are too on there even besides AVLS) much but people did use the PC to PSP connection instead of the apps for comics, music and so on too.

I used some disks on my PC with VLC as still got a working disk drive there.

Even then who rents or digitally buys compared to just viewing? I never would bother with a digital rent/license buy of something on Xbox, Youtube or any other services. I just get physical, watch whatever others are that are into streaming services but I am not that active in tv/movies to watch really unless it's of actual interest.

Like I looked at a few anime on the Xbox One when browsing the storefront and it seemed ok, but I don't go out of my way to search for them I just did that 1 time out of curiosity. I put a game OST CD if I want to test CD apps/playback that's about it really.

Otherwise I watch my anime physical. Research digital.

Most people use streaming and move on from a series, or physical media or they just go with videos via a USB or whichever other app/'source experiences' instead. It's why I was surprised Microsoft left it as a thing for so long and went yeah we can get rid of this to save money/work around licenses.

I mean when you have a VLC or other media players why not use those.

Well to me Ghost of Yotei even if of no interest to me seems to be putting the SSD use well for the young/old idea, I like that. It's what I wanted Rift Apart to do, but it just replicated PS3 2009 HDD use again and also poorly.

To me games are trying to work around the tools while having mixed ideas, leadership and mentality they themselves have as staff or leaders make a challenge, which I am not surprised. I myself don't even care for HDR or RT, I have learned the differences from SDR and baked in lighting, subtly but even still I don't care. So if games are just being too much focused on graphics, the design is all over the place of worlds, the stories are hit and miss, gameplay is so basic either to be accessible or they don't have time to make it, so at that point why even bother. Gameplay is so basic I am so put off by many games at this point.

Plenty of OG Xbox/360 era games were more exciting of mechanics in many genres, nowadays they don't even have a strong hook, oh we have insert this license, insert this decent world, nothing actually exciting. I literally buy shooters, platformers, racing and more genres like tactics, hack n slashes off of gameplay ideas. Psi Ops/Fracture are a lot of fun 6th/7th gen shooters.

The fair mix of rocks, trees, grass and other objects is also noticeable (Star Wars Outlaws canyons or dust and other things weren't that convincing I find, Indy did an ok job of hiding natural light behind trees in the beginning area, I can't say for the rest of the game) in it of environment details in games, I don't care for that but I get why they offer them.

Also the fog in the Yotei showcase, you can see the mountain, looking at Horizon Zero Dawn you can tell even if intentional the fog in the mountains they can barely show, in Yotei it has fogs but it's also still able to be seen through, an interesting detail and large coverage of land for render distance like that is insane.

Even Valkyrie Elysium I noticed PS4/5 the grass objects being less on PS4. So yeah some games even if linear scale like that did (also had a lot of particles that game but the Wanted Dead/other team did a fair job with Elysium I think), but many western devs do like to show off environments and Yotei seems to do that.

Xbox I don't have enough reference of games in showcase or otherwise. I can't remember, but there probably is some out there that may.

Racing games vary of course in car models/track details, sounds, physics/CPU wheel data I don't even care about then focusing on decent progression that isn't boring and terrible let alone more that isn't just boring racing and repetitive. XD

I mostly care for more the young/old and other gameplay changing benefits of Yotei to utilise the console.

If we see others offer more enemies on screen, particles and more then sure but to me I don't know what to expect with current geming other then mechanics being so weak.

Xbox I can't say for sure as I don't play or have interest in any they have offered at all. So I don't know what they offered towards power of the console other then the GPU usage being probably fair for some things above the regular PS5.

They all seem to be fair uses of the hardware, but I don't know for sure.

I have no interest in GTA 6 at all, it will have fair execution of things sure, but I still don't care.

But they have Candy Crush Solitaire (got an ad for it, not that I care, Microsoft has had Solitaire games for years), they make tons of money, right?

Do they need AI for every generic puzzle game for casuals? Compared to any other types of mobile stuff they consider in the future AI can't do as well?

@Lup It's why I have a Switch, for any Vita ports, 1st party niche games or any odd Indies that don't port as much or may later. I was surprised how many Switch Indies I have that I don't always find a PC listing or mobile listing.

To me Switch was fair for the console gimmicks, the Switch exclusive Indies (some are Switch/PC but I prefer Switch instead) or any AA Japanese games that do consoles but usually do more so on handhelds. Especially for many I've researched over the years it made sense to go with Switch for them.

On occasion they go to Xbox but rarely and did usually for Gamepass for a brief time. Like seeing Danganronpa on Xbox was cool but at the same time it had been 10 years, it had been to Xbox last.

Or the Vita ports/other odd games that go to Switch/PC, but if they were PS4/PC and no Switch (the few that did and many nowadays go between Switch/PC or all 3 Switch/PC/PS5, odd PS4 release digital then physical) then they likely stay PC instead and I can understand why due to what type of content or audience they want to target.

Xbox has it's benefits but yeah we all know we have Xboxs for their uses of games, apps, etc. and the PS/Nintendo/PC for their libraries of other types of games, audiences that flock to them for those and policies.

Never been against having different consoles for different things.

I don't know what to think of this. Even if I'm sort of off Halo and Gears, or would like to see other IPs, the other IPs are kind of eh, so I guess Halo/Gears it is. Forza Motorsport 8/2023 wasn't in the direction I wanted so eh and it's ended so there is that. At least I got Forza Motorsport 1/2005 and enjoying it to complete my FM collection with 1 to 7.

Sure remaking the multiplayer, maps, services, etc. I mean we got Reach multiplayer with the 360 remaster even.

They don't want to maintain/offer crossplay or anything with MCC it seems just go eh a reboot of the campaign, why not. It's less work and they want to make an impact/test their use of the engine. I mean 343 started with 360 anniversary so.... Why not again. Better this time though? Maybe?

I think having Gears for it's multiplayer was fair. They don't need to offer everything as complete. Multiplayer is challenging and recapturing the singleplayer is fine by me.

But? Will it have split screen co-op I doubt it? If it's online only then yeah pass. Singleplayer only otherwise.

Is it all on the disk if they do a disk release? Many Microsoft releases over the years have been terrible disk releases, even Infinite was a partial and was a pain/a worthless disk release. I wasn't buying it. I didn't even play Halo Infinite, I played 5 like a few years ago, and hated it/never played it at launch, so I played it with a different mindset when I chose to play it. It was ok.

But here? I mean are we to expect padding to make it a lengthy campaign? Will they fix the padding the original had and better work around it? Or is it just as accurate as possible even it's issues?

I would be fine if it's close enough to the original, maybe a few tweaks sure, tweaks always benefit, how they execute it of course but still in need of changes or fixes, but if they have to pad it out as people want their length/money's worth then yeah I'd say pass.

Make the new areas or changes count for something.

Make gameplay changes that benefit or additional levels/areas, use the flashlight more, have fair camo/ammo secrets or skulls or whatever, besides the graphics.

Understand how to make the most of indoor/outside Halo levels, level pacing, and more.

Even then Halo 1 is very padded with samey locations/asset uses and pathing that can be confusing for a first time play, not so bad on repeat playthroughs.

I don't know what to think. It gave me Eternal Cylinder vibes with the art style. I know it will be a very different game though.

Is it an adventure game, is it action adventure. No clue. It looks nice. It's very Double Fine but I have no clue what it is.

I have not played many of their games, but i picked 'look forward to' as to me even if I don't play it I look forward to whatever they are as they are very creative. Respect.

Even the most failed games or consoles I still care about more then them being cancelled and never seeing them actually in action. I think many still had great ideas, I don't care what is popular and generic. I care what they attempted, did it land, they tried but it didn't or didn't get the marketing or wasn't appealing to THAT audience but was another audience.

I would still rather pick up a Virtual Boy/32X or others, then I would a PS5/Series X, because they were more interesting. Cancelled games like Eyedenify or Starcraft Ghost or others.

Many games or console hardware/peripherals were always more appealing to me those that got cancelled, not even because they were cancelled. Even the failed ones had ideas I found interesting of Virtual Boy, PC-FX, Playdia, Casio Loopy, Wonderswan, Lynx, Neo Geo Pocket, GP32, Jaguar, 3DO and more. Interesting ideas, business practices varied and yeah. Some didn't need to offer what they did or be executed how they did but you could still see something there. Wii U is still more potential or exciting then a Switch to me. The Switch is just a continuation of cabled/docked handhelds or PC devices. Who cares. Other then Joycons, Vita ports and not as used IR or other features. It's the most boring tablet with ok ideas and modern era boring games besides the few that are decent, not many niche B grade games to it either that many 5 to 7th gen had as those are gone, a few revivals but even still. The Xbox has Impulse triggers but otherwise a pretty hit and miss library.

Even tech demos/games as well that were cancelled. Many of my favourite games aren't AAA, they are AA/B grades. Because of their gameplay ideas. Ambitious teams that do good enough and more interesting ideas, some are still rough but even still.

Bad direction can be that but that's not on the studios' main staff that's the publisher demands or leadership. IF they were forced to make a game in a direction they aren't used to, then why would I blame the staff.

If they can adapt, or were wanting to sure, seeing Nightingale after Mass Effect Andromeda procedural generation (then changed to what it was), yeah that staff don't get the survival game community all that well. Some can, others don't. Those that make nostalgic games may land but it varies. I'm too gameplay focused, so to me if people say the games suck I disagree because I don't care what personality, if it's gameplay and the personality matches it's still a good game to me not personality and saying oh it doesn't match this and that. Well it doesn't need to. I base on quality not familiarity/references or what may have a vibe, that's not useful, I go by quality as this is more definable and it shows more in it.

Not just the money, the time, the careers, but just seeing something release is still appealing.

I would take this as a, uh duh, and a well this is what they have done to themselves. They needed to manage it better, but better leaders if it was them not the staff having a 'can do this better and better and better' mentality.

Just release it and take time to add updates. Or just release it, add updates and make the next game. But nope. They take too long, and waste time, money and meetings/work achieving nothing.

Current Rare aren't an experimental studio (very few can be anymore, surprised Double Fine even are still alive, Travelers Tales had Lego and dropped their unique games entirely, no idea what they are up to now, other examples can apply) like the past staff were, but even still. Can they even do a regular game anymore? Are they too live service deep or modern game design deep at this point?

Even Hytale they went eh lets do this, but it was also Riot or the C#/C++ engine team, that just made it take longer. They should have just released it in Java, made the add on elements over time and been fine but nope. What a waste. Even Minecraft was smart enough even if annoying to go Java, other platforms, legacy console, rework to Bedrock so less time wasted on each console unique version but try to add parity and instead they went eh Bedrock parity, not Java parity but good enough.

Very odd glitch. Not encountered, not used my Xbox One in a while, not seen that issue on the Series X either.

Has it? I haven't seen one yet. XD Seriously I haven't. Bad management, eh games leadership or staff/HR and others. All boring execution, boring modern era gaming. Business practices or game design.

Xbox audiences are very particular, small ones enjoy what comes over, but it's not a lot, Microsoft have tried, but it makes no difference either. I don't know if they can change mentality of users either. Other then design elements that suck, they never will change and I know they won't change them but besides that.

Oh ABK purchase, eh, no old CODs, no Pitfall, nothing interesting there, oh more money for Microsoft & removing layoffs. Ah, impactful sure. Defining in a good way no.

Boring IPs that are 3rd party follow the leader design (but have appeal for some reason, shrugs, gameplay wise they are boring, but people eat up that personality/it was on another console/came over or something, I don't get it, even with how much I barely use my Xbox, even if I didn't have one I wouldn't go oh this forbidden experience of Xbox on PS/Switch XD, I don't even care for PS/Xbox IPs over the years), boring OS navigation/art direction. Hit/miss business practices.

I have collected consoles I missed out on/ weighed up what they had, I still wanted them/games for them. I still see reason in an Xbox even if it's pretty eh.

Gamepass games that I don't care about. I have no subs to any of the console maker's services (people around me do, I still don't use them, I don't care for PS5/Xbox Series services, controllers, games, any of it, they are ok, but not wow factor for me, not upgrade worthy, I used a PS5 for 2 games.... that's it, the rest I can wait for and even then those 2 games were just eh, decent at best of prior formulas, some racing ones have 'ok' ideas but not that great and everything else is just PS4/Xbxo One game design I already haven't liked for 10+ years since 7th/8th gen other then niche games more and more that were good), why would I if the quality of life that's dumb behind a paywall (PS+), cloud storage (Xbox offers for free, no need to sub for unless like One Drive higher tiers, but still enough on free tier), beta access to MP games I don't care for or games selection is so eh.

Other then what Hi Fi Rush or South of Midnight, along with Japanese AAs on Gamepass briefly. Even those are pretty whatever.

I haven't seen a defining moment since the 360, actual games/design I like, OG xbox/360 or just 5th to 7th but more 5th to 6th gen and partial 7th, even lesser 8th, none at all 9th. Good or bad ones.

Xbox One had what the PC/Games for Windows Live problem then back tracked for Xbox One, hasn't for PC as it's already in full effect. It was solved but still.

But besides what back compat that's decent but many licenses didn't appear, that's up to third parties or no Halo as MCC does it already for that. It was ok. Not much Microsoft can do that. Got PS side but even those IPs/licenses will be limited too.

To me I haven't seen a defining AA, AAA, Indies or otherwise for Xbox or many places, in a while. It's been just down hill.

I still keep the console as sure the apps Nintendo/Sony don't offer is great, even if it's Windows storefront it's more useful for Xbox use cases. The impulse triggers...... Quick resume..... digital only applicable but still cool....... That's it.

Yeah not a lot to say about Xbox at all, it's 'there' but it's pretty boring.

Nothing for me here, but still fair projects.

It says a lot when they still have to make it not look like an alpha build because it's not attractive enough to players/investors, but have to make it look good enough of some systems working as they want to show it off. It's just so stupid.

I am sick and tired of outsourced CGI trailers, and all this other stuff, I want to see alphas. Even seeing Bodycount's alpha looks amazing, I still enjoy the final game despite how scaled back it was, but even still the alpha looked good enough even if not as impressive as the other 'we dressed it up' games of the era, but that's expected.

I want to see alphas, betas, demos, enough spoken up about games, not this we try to give the illusion of it being on the right track when they are far from it. It's just stupid I don't buy into illusions.

It's not completely Killzone 2 trailer lying as all animation, but it is still a working enough to be 'close to what we wanted' but still a lot of animation/art assets being enough of what's there.

I mean it's not Halo 2 and isn't finished enough comparable is it? Then the game ended up as good as it was despite how troubled it was?

Ok this just seems sad, seems like a Tango situation, a 'you have finished a project, are starting a new one, good bye'. Which is just dumb. Microsoft looked at the sales and went hmm this did good, this studio is a hanging off from the purchase then the main ones we want, get rid of them.

Because just get rid of the ones that help with Doom/Wolfenstein IPs I assume and like Raven dump them as the main studios are more important, get rid of the assist studios. That's just mean.

Projects that waste too much money and are in development hell, sure, those that underperform even though we hear differently, sigh.

But ones performing but 'not enough' or 'business politics' is just silly.

I guess a 'we bought what we did, kill the ones hanging off the sides' huh, very disrespectful to see.

They have the talent/reputation to go their own way again (if they even want to after something like this) sure but it's just odd.

IF it's a device to bridge the cap of APIs/dev kits, by all means, whether Steam, Xbox, any other store front.

I mean not like Windows 8, Phone, Xbox didn't try to at some point. Why not again?

Make things easier then too segmented. Make releases easier to go about doing so but still keep the strict hardware a console always has been besides upgrades sold as a package.

Sure store licensing can't be cheap, and sure whatever things go about policies, cuts and more between platforms but I mean sure.

I personally don't care for Steam on a console, I barely use Steam as it is, I don't even buy digital on PC/Xbox anyway really. So the offering is fair but it won't change my mind really.

The layoffs eh, those that were incompetent good riddance, those that struggled to keep up but were really trying, I feel for them, those that are veterans can go anywhere, whatever Microsoft/other demands sure it's tough but they took too long, they wasted time/money, the directions, expectations to meet and more factors of changing their minds or whatever the case, is just yeah, a challenge but I mean if they didn't meet them, it is what it is.

Well Perfect Dark staff/that studio always had issues, why not, if they couldn't work things out it shows you can't have some big deal staff in a room they just aren't going to work. The project wasn't progressing well, might as well end them.

No Xbox project has made me interested in years, Series gen or Xbox One it's past few years either. A few did Xbox One, none Xbox Series. Sure Hi Fi Rush/South of Midnight did intrigue me but haven't played, but the rest seemed eh, and only few I respect and that's from Obsidian who have proven themselves. Even Outer Worlds 2 I won't play as not my thing, but I respect what they are doing a lot, any games with as many interesting ideas as they have shown, I respect, I am really impressed by them.

For those that were useless at Rare, The Initiative, Turn 10 and other assist studios (RIP however many at Raven, but even still) then yeah, get rid of them, for those that couldn't keep up I feel for them, if big staff, they can go anywhere.

Microsoft and others may have expectations but if they couldn't meet those, or couldn't make anything that has a bit of flare of theirs into it then why bother, make something they can execute in a few years, not directions that jump all over the place.

Are big publisher tough, yes but at the same time to me even Indies are just as nostalgically or heavily inspired incompetent to make their own games stand out let alone major AAA ones that have higher expectations and restrictions sure.

So I get it, but I mean if other studios have their singleplayer game strengths, have better dev cycles of project releases, besides the live services, those ones know what they are doing, and Microsoft is happy with them.

For those that can't make a decent singleplayer game, multiplayer game or live service, it shows some of these staff just don't mesh well. Is adapting from what one is used to let alone having to keep up, sure, but at least meet enough of that to be kept afloat.

If the staff constantly of leadership or other staff, change their minds, leadership are too much to handle which can happen, or any number of them are incompetent to get something done in time. Not just the reasoning for retakes of art or level design aspects or programming/animating, etc.

Unless they do well enough with Sea of Thieves to give more staff a chance or fit in another tiny project sure.

But otherwise they kept dragging their feet not knowing what to do with it, so good riddance. Live service or not. Better direction/money/time to be spent, they didn't do it, it's on them.

Well lines on charts or not. If they are useless staff with not worth contributions, projects not working out of length, money spent on them, difficulty with working out ideas or changing their minds all the time with directionless execution, good riddance. I won't miss them.

If Obsidian can have better staff and project releases for it's audience in such times, if the live service teams that do well are staying and whatever else of other studios agreements with Microsoft for the singleplayer/live service, support studios then sure. Otherwise get rid of the useless staff in any of them.

If Sony can have their direction that stands out, Xbox studios are all over the place and Sony makes them up a cut of period and to get it out, make the most of the time/budgets, and better coordinates them.

Xbox/Microsoft needs to as well, or they expected the leaders to or the staff do, but it seems that didn't happen, or else yeah they get cut off. Sony's removals were disappointing too but I can see why even if they were studios I cared for that went away, sigh. Xbox's, yeah many of them were incompetent so I have very little sympathy to any for them.

If they couldn't keep up those ones I have sympathy for, but it depends on how much they were keeping up, but the useless that didn't contribute much or couldn't settle on execution, needed to do better. But I don't know what the expectations or deadlines were either.

It depends what the studios/publishers expectations were set they had to meet, how they contributed to the projects, which staff it was in which departments. If they couldn't meet them, sure, if they were making it a hassle to get anything done, with decisions here and there, or not keeping up execution to meet expectations, then good riddance, we don't need them. Get rid of useless staff.

If some happen to try but got caught in layoffs, then I feel sorry for those staff, as that can happen no doubt.

If people with a high enough reputation, they can go anywhere, just remember they may be veterans but they still have to work out what they want in a new studio if they create one, budgets and more, compared to other big publishers/studios they can move over to.

But even more so what were the other staff or those people doing that it took too long to make something work in those projects, at those studios?

Have better ideas, settle on those ideas, not change your mind constantly or have awkward staff.

If publisher demand changes, sure that's a pain to deal with, but if it's staff being incompetent, as in the really bad ones, good riddance, they need to be better at things not wasting time/money. But the ones that tried to keep up but couldn't those people I feel for.

I don't care how heartless that makes me sound I still care for those that tried, versus those that just couldn't settle on ideas or those that were useless. Because that's wastes, everyone's time and money, and they need to do better not be all over the place.