• TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      They were probably thinking they could get AAA game quality and indie game budgets, just by injecting a well known license.

      • cavemeat@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I kinda hate that about companies. The ones who make hairbrained decisions are never the ones who pay the consequences.

      • ProfessorGrizzly
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Stray pulled off AAA quality on a tiny budget using something loved by a lot of people (cat protagonist) but it had a number of advantages, primarily you don’t need licensing fees for cats, the dev time was deep into “purely a labor of love” length, and I don’t think it came out near any releases of a superior direct competitor. Any adventure epic right now had to contend with FF16 and people still messing around with Tears of the Kingdom.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think licencing agreements are the death of many games. I maintain that the failure of Cyberpunk 2077 was primarily due to their involvement with Keanu Reeves and I need to bring in revenue to satisfy his Hollywood contract.

    • empireOfLove@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      They were thinking they’ll get their golden parachute regardless of their effort, and the workers will take the fall, just like they did here, so fuck project quality!