Skyrim is Getting Re-re-released: Anniversary Edition

[Deleted member 24505]

I thought it was a free upgrade for those who already own the previous legendary edition or w.e it was called.

If it's not, i'm not buying the same game twice.

 

[Octopuss]

Probably my favorite game of all time, and the single player game i spent more hours in by very far.

Is this the time they finally remove the bugs. I played it for the 1st time (i know!) 4 years ago, and i was finding bugs, searching the net and resolving them with tips from 2011, 2012.

You need the Unofficial patch.

 

[Frick]

I blame you (yes you) for going back to it again and again and since launch saying it's such a great game when it isn't. Also I blame you for the "but you can mod it!!!!!!" mentality which is just bs.

 

[robot zombie]

"but you can mod it!!!!!!"

The best part about this is that the modding scenes are shrinking. Skyrim modding has a strong foundation, but it's a lot smaller than it used to be. A ton has been learned about the engine. But I can bet there are very few experienced modders out there with a lot of faith in much more really being improved. The engine itself has performance limitations, and the years just add up. They are probably also feeling a little nervous right now, as "upgrades" like this break mods. Special Edition flew because they really did improve the engine a lot. As far as I can tell, this is just SE with mods preinstalled. If you want to mod I'm betting the going recommendation is gonna be a clean slate with SE or LE. The last thing you want when you start modding is to have 70+ mods built in to the game to conflict with them. IDGAF what kind of extra QA they have to go through, it's a convolution in the game files all the same. And bethesda isn't known for its stellar QA lol. That CC content can bork your saves too. Hope they've fixed that! For their friggin sakes lol.

It'll sell on consoles, for sure. I think that's who it's most for.

 

[Vayra86]

Like in music, talent reaches the peak and declines again. We are past the peak now me think.

Yeah, the decline in music is extremely audible... damn...

 

[Bomby569]

I still don't get it, Rockstar would be swimming in money if they made GTA6, Todd would be swimming in money with ES6. They have so much money it's just a question of hiring good people (and don't treat them like shit)

And i could give more examples like Half Life 3, new proper Fallout, new Command and Conquer, a new Cities Skylines type game, Bioshock, Mass Effect, Silent Hill, ...

Capcom seems to be the ones mastering this thing with Resident Evil, they got some good people, the games are good, they make money easy

 

[Vayra86]

I still don't get it, Rockstar would be swimming in money if they made GTA6, Todd would be swimming in money with ES6. They have so much money it's just a question of hiring good people (and don't treat them like shit)

And i could give more examples like Half Life 3, new proper Fallout, new Command and Conquer, a new Cities Skylines type game, Bioshock, Mass Effect, Silent Hill, ...

Capcom seems to be the ones mastering this thing with Resident Evil, they got some good people, the games are good, they make money easy

A new game is a risk, an investment, and it takes actual talent because you have to innovate and expand on your game concept. Otherwise its going to just be another support hole you're going to have to cater to. So a remaster or remake is much easier, less buggy, and brings in cash too.

And let's face it, its not like Todd ever liked smashing the bugs. Bethesda is very explicit about that, too. 'There will be bugs'. In other words, fuck you, customer, deal with it.

 

[robot zombie]

I still don't get it, Rockstar would be swimming in money if they made GTA6, Todd would be swimming in money with ES6. They have so much money it's just a question of hiring good people (and don't treat them like shit)

And i could give more examples like Half Life 3, new proper Fallout, new Command and Conquer, a new Cities Skylines type game, Bioshock, Mass Effect, Silent Hill, ...

Capcom seems to be the ones mastering this thing with Resident Evil, they got some good people, the games are good, they make money easy

You spend a lot of that money before making a dime.

It's a trap known well in the recording industry. When a label says they're giving you 3 million dollars to produce an album, that's not your 3 million. You're basically in danger until that album is not only out, but has made that 3 million back. That 'making the 3 million back' is what sets the standard for mainstream music, in its own way. Because somebody has to make their money back, and they won't have anyone going out on a limb, risking it. You're the artist. You can do what you want, but can you really? Should you even spend 3 million on the album? Or do you spend as little of it as you can, so it's easier to pay back?

Listen... not my mindset, but it's the whole game in many areas of media. We have these big companies... so huge they're basically mini-empires, who dispense the money to make the stuff. The people who make the stuff hope to get enough money to make what they wanna make, and to have the ability to convince the money people that they will *definitely* have their money. The closer to guaranteed money, the better, though... which usually means the sure sales grab, even if they may be smaller it will be a net profit. Do 10 more things like that and you're actually making some crazy money, assuming you hold a big franchise or two.

Now, that is easy money. Making money of off newer things is harder. I mean, if it's a beloved franchise, one would think it must be easy money. But it isn't, not if the new installment flops. Sensibilities are what they are. Every new installment in a series is a major undertaking. AAA games take literal villages worth of special talents... planning is always a nightmare and it takes a lot of work just to not only conceive of and contain a full vision for a game project, but standardize it across all areas of the project, while still leaving all of your creatives to do what they do best. And for years it will just be money in the air and promises made.

Call me crazy, but this is probably the worst case scenario for anyone with a creative mindset. It's the antithesis to really creating new things. You don't create when your goal is to survive. You don't have the time or luxury to not just use whatever is already accessible to you, making new things only when absolutely needed.

It's just a ton of stuff to go wrong. With the best people, your chances are far better, but every single run is a Superbowl level gambit. And then it can always flop and make your shareholders quite unhappy. Now you've really gotta scrape to get them money, and hope your rep doesn't die in the process. You may lose your ability to make titles on the scale that got you there to begin with.

The whole industry is screwed man, what can I say? But this practice is very much a mark of the times. The ecosystem these companies exist in... the mindset that leadership has at the biggest ones. They really set the stage for an environment where the nail that sticks out gets pounded down as a matter of continuing to exist in that space. Making art just isn't that profitable on its own. It's the non-art things around it that keep it all going and create a space where a few people can sometimes be artists and still make money. If every creative person out there was ONLY making and selling new art and that was all they did or worked on, how much would that all be worth monetarily?

Advancing things forward is risky. The ways to profit may change. It may not go well. Being at a steady point of establishment, up on a plateau is enticing to organizations of people with sights set on steady income. The bigger they get, the more is at stake, the fewer risks they'll take. It's really the opposite of ambition. But it seems like the more money is involved, the less ambitious people get with it. There's an inverse relationship between the money and the creativity. Or at least, that's my take on why the biggest players seem to always do the least, while some little no-name studio will break through with high art on a low budget. Also, why make new, good games when marketing works?