Archive for the ‘Bethesda’ Category

Third-party support for their consoles has been Nintendo’s Achilles heel since before the Nintendo 64 launched in 1996.  While I understand what Peter Hines is saying here, Sony and Microsoft have no choice but to practically grovel at the feet of the 3rd party developers.  If they don’t have strong 3rd party for their console, they don’t have a console, period.  Nintendo is the largest and most storied game developer in the world and have the luxury of being able to rely strongly on their own internal games that they themselves develop and publish.  I wouldn’t say Nintendo regards 3rd party developers as an afterthought, but I can say pretty certainly that the wishes and desires of what they want doesn’t take priority over what Nintendo wants for their console, which is solely driven by the games they plan on making for it.  Nintendo probably should reach out to 3rd party developers more, but they’re not going to compromise what they want for their games for what 3rd parties want.  Not gonna happen.  Nintendo has shown with the N64 and the GameCube that they can survive, and even thrive, with only minimal 3rd party support from the gaming industry.

“The time for convincing publishers and developers to support Wii U has long past. The box is out.  You have to do what Sony and Microsoft have been doing with us for a long time.  And it’s not that every time we met with them we got all the answers we wanted. But they involved us very early on, and talking to folks like Bethesda and Gearbox, they say ‘Here’s what we’re doing, here’s what we’re planning, here’s how we think it’s going to work’ to hear what we thought, from our tech guys, and from an experience standpoint.  You have to spend an unbelievable amount of time upfront doing that. If you’re just going sort off deciding ‘we’re going to make a box and this is how it works and you should make games for it.’ Well, no. No is my answer, I’m going to focus on other ones that better support what it is we’re trying to do.  So you’ve gotta spend more time trying to reach out to those folks before you even make the box, when you’re still designing and thinking about how it’s going to work.”

LINK

Watch the actual video here.

Advertisements

Playing The Elder Scrolls Online will require a monthly subscription fee, as confirmed in an interview with Gamestar. “Going with any other model meant that we would have to make sacrifices and changes we weren’t willing to make,” ZeniMax Studios Game Director Matt Firor stated in the interview, elaborating with a bunch of reasons why he believes TES isn’t a good fit for free-to-play.

“The Elder Scrolls games are all about allowing the player to go where they want, be who they want, and do what they want,” Firor explained. “We feel that putting pay gates between the player and content at any point in game ruins that feeling of freedom, and just having one small monthly fee for 100% access to the game fits the IP and the game much better than a system where you have to pay for features and access as you play. The Elder Scrolls Online was designed and developed to be a premium experience: hundreds of hours of gameplay, tons of depth and features, professional customer support – and a commitment to have ongoing content at regular intervals after launch. This type of experience is best paired with a one-time fee per month, as opposed to many smaller payments that would probably add up to more than $14.99/month anyway.”

LINK