Isn’t Bethesda unionized now? Curious to see the diff in the next release.
this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2024
225 points (99.1% liked)
Games
16369 readers
784 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Super happy that strong unions in gaming are becoming a thing. Modern games are absolutely massive undertakings, and well made games provide so much more than just a one-off revenue stream that is often ignored by executives as business exists solely for money at the top.
A union made game that's allowed to take the time it needs to be fully cooked will probably be the most popular/best game in the (any) franchise.
Unfortunately it will probably make 10% the money of some Fallout mobile game they churned out over a weekend that lets you buy a gold vault suit that doesn't do anything for $4.99.
I don't have a problem with companies making money off the free to play (and pay to win) model, but it's sad to see them mistreat the IP that generates a dedicated fan base because the only thing that matters is immediate profit - which will hopefully be heavily mitigated by a union.
Better rested and cared for workers.
Why would being unionised make a difference to the quality of the work? Hopefully it means less insane crunch but it's still up to the higher ups to say "ok good enough" and release before it's polished right? I could definitely be missing something here though.
There's all sorts of reasons being unionized could help create a better product.
Hopefully it means less insane crunch but it's still up to the higher ups to say "ok good enough" and release before it's polished right?
Yes you're correct, but the union beyond just meaning less crunch, also means that the average worker has more pathways to be vocal about problems with the product. They also now have a "nuclear option" of going on strike if management makes a decision regarding the product that the union really doesn't like.
Good points and I hadn't thought about the fact that you can be more vocal about problems at work which should make for a much healthier environment. I'm now also very interested to see how different things are for the next game especially the next one that starts development after this.
SLAMS
I was thinking about how I haven't seen that term used in gaming journalism for quite some time.
in gaming journalism
Wow, you don't read much news I'm guessing. Any and all news publications love to use it as a 'catch-all' term for, "he showed them what for!"
It's a bogus word describing action that the news can't otherwise report, because calling it 'verbal slaughter' triggers people.
If modern journalism had any integrity left, they'd call Trump what he is: a wannabe Hitlerian dictator.
Any publication that tries to curb that, is likely in bed with the money piles the network was given by the accused.
There's not a single goddamn person on the planet that doesn't have some sort of bias, that's journalism 101.
New vegas had tons of crunch to make the whole game in like ~~10 months~~ (a year and a half, thanks commenter) because Bethesda. I trust he knows what he's talking about
Edit: my timeline was way wrong but my point still stands that obsidian was crunched due to Bethesda deadlines
lol it gets shorter every time this story is told. It was 18 months, and it started with a fully complete game engine with tons of finished assets.
For a similar comparison, GTA Vice City was released in October 2002 and GTA San Andreas was released in October 2004 with a 2 year dev cycle. Starting with a complete engine and doing what amounts to a total conversion does significantly shorten dev time.
Also, it’s not like they moved mountains to achieve this. FNV shipped with countless game breaking bugs and would CTD every 10 minutes on my system at launch. It only became playable after the first few patches. GTA SA shipped on disc, with the version that most people played being the initial PS2 version, and that version works quite well. So basically they achieved the 6 month reduction by lopping off the QA cycle.
Was it a short dev cycle even with that all being said? Yes, especially for an HD era game on an engine the team wasn’t as familiar with as the GTA SA team would have been. But let’s not rewrite history.
Bethesda gave obsidian 16 hours to make a fallout game and they made the best fallout game.
Games ALSO take longer to release than ever before.
Maybe...just MAYBE games are too big and complicated for their own good anymore.
Doing a small thing very well is far more impressive than a giant "we need all the standard AAA bullshit no matter what" soup.
There is no way it takes 11 years for a GTA game to be made. Hire more staff, Rockstar especially can afford it.
This looks like powerful orbs generating evil energy vibrations using quantum mechanics. Learn GNU Octave mathematical logic structures to protect yourself against them. Even a simple triangle is enough against a SLAM!
We can choose a sci fi world to live in today. Our world is literally like Skibidi Toilet right now.