What happened?

"

Aynix wrote:

You are listing ONLY MAINSTREAM GAMES and thats your problem. Stop looking at trash mainstream games thinking its only games that exists. You are looking at the worst of the worst and complaining that there are no good games.

"Mainstream games" made by indie devs. Giving to your statement they should be great since it's a indie game right? Nice strawman attempt here since you also just listed mainstream games in your post, or games like ark which used to be a mainstream game for a year or two after release lol. In this case every game is mainstream since everything gets some attention across the internet in one or another way. There's no non mainstream game cause every game was hyped at some point, cause that's just a natural thing that people get hyped about a game, even if it's a just a trailer of a indie game.

"

Dude, Soulstone Survuivors is from last year.

Kinda sad the game is out since one year, had prob a couple of thousand sold copies and yet is still in early access even with the existing budget? Giving the look it looks like nothing but a weekend project with the boys but no further interest to use existing founds for further improvements. Kinda sad giving that this is not their first game by the way, so they have even more founds for sure.
A simple small group of people with some coding knowledge could put you something better together in a year of dev time lol. But so much about how great indie games are. Sure maybe a fun game for you, still not a outrageous killer release.

"

Stop listening to streamers/critics what game you should to play. You know why mainstream games are garbage?

Jokes on you I don't listen to any streamer or the opinion of others. I buy or download a game if it looks interesting to me, or shows of some fun potential in trailer or game play footage. I give it a shot and decide for myself if I find it good or bad. Sometimes I quit after a couple of hours and get a refund cause I don't enjoy it much, sometimes I play it for a bit longer, sometimes I finish the game after a bit of playtime with some decent enjoyment. But in the end I still wonder why like 99% of the games are so heavily lacking small in content compared to what they used to be. Cause money is clearly not the lacking component for game devs. It's more the willingness to be fully dedicated to the game, cause most devs simply see the gaming industry as an easy money maker these days. Which is honestly smart cause people pay a slot of shit for cheap stuff, but also just sad as consumer cause all you want is a great game without lacking content and what not.

"

Thats exactly why AAA games will get only worse and indie/small games will get better.

Hence we got a lot of trash amongst indie games? Games with a good budget after a decent start of a couple of sold copies but not a single interest to improve the game much further?
It's just a problem across every type of game, 3A, normal games and small companies. 99% Of the games are solely developed to earn money without the interest to offer anything great or near perfect. Some of the games are good, still nothing close to what games used to be for price value and the amount of content/hours you can yield out of them.

Real talk: talking like indies and AAA are terribly different is kinda dumb

Most stuff steam recommended me coming from indie devs were plain bad... Its dumb to think only AAA games are good, but its just as dumb to claim only indie devs dont suck, for every rimworld, factorio or thea awakening there are hundreds of stinkers. Indie is only "safe" if you stick with products with exceptional reviews(both in rate and in number) and well written wiki pages. Also dumb is claiming AAA industry cant make good stuff, the resident evil remakes were super good, the fighting game community is getting some super solid titles(outside SF6 that is rather divisive) and even activision(who have to carry a certain developer in their backs) produced sekiro that is quite nice

Theres a reason games like baba is you are virtually unkown despite being quite exceptional: Good indie games made by really small devs tend to get buried under the mountain of shovelware. Ever since the american crash back when atari fell, indie devs were already mostly shovelware factories with some diamonds you had to dig very deep to find

And really, whats even the line between a "indie" and an "AA"? Developers like Falcom, they have a strong ongoing series, but the graphics on their games would be considered outdated 15 years ago. Are they indie because their games are obviously restrained budget? Or are they AA because they have a serie with multiple titles?

What about GGG? Its a developer with a quite sucessful game, but ultimetly, its still a developer with a single title on their belt... is GGG indie despite having a game that ranks on top 100 most played on steam for years? If not, can you seriously consider a developer with a single title on their resume an AA, or even an A?(and in that vein, where you guys would place larian studios?)

"

Aynix wrote:

Maybe those you buy, I dont buy garbage. For past 10 years I play pretty much only indie/"small" games when not playing PoE and they were always peak quality, even if it was early acess" they already were better quality than AAA games on release.
.

Give me an example, i will gladly google it for bugs and if i find nothing i admit defeat.

"

kuciol wrote:

"

Aynix wrote:

Maybe those you buy, I dont buy garbage. For past 10 years I play pretty much only indie/"small" games when not playing PoE and they were always peak quality, even if it was early acess" they already were better quality than AAA games on release.
.

Give me an example, i will gladly google it for bugs and if i find nothing i admit defeat.

If you want a game without ANY bugs at all, that doesnt exists and you know it. Nothing in this world is perfect. But there are plenty of games that if they have bugs, they are very minor and quickly fixed.

@Pashid
Wont waste more time on you. You jus hate for sake of hating and live in the dreamworld of the past where "the games were better" (they were not).

"

Aynix wrote:

@Pashid
Wont waste more time on you. You jus hate for sake of hating and live in the dreamworld of the past where "the games were better" (they were not).

You already did by sending in a @ respond lol

I live in 2023 like you and I just enjoy whatever decent the market has to offer.
Sadly just trash in most cases but you gotta take whatever is offered.
I would prefer to play some better games tho cause for me they used to be better and offered more, sorry you clearly never made the experience to enjoy good games on a long term cause you only stick around in games for a couple of hours before you move over to the next product, which also doesn't last long. Endless chain of jumping between one unfinished and rushed indie garbage to another one. Almost like the games don't really offer you a: much or b: don't really catch your interest to stick around for more hours.

If that's your gem sure have fun to jump from one game to another after a few hours of palytime but I don't have to do the same as you as I do like to enjoy games on a longer term, with more meaningful content and all, which is simply not really offered anymore these days and only a thing in rare cases. Like the last game that felt really great was BG3 but that's about it for the last few years.

Anyone who played mmorpgs of the past knows that they used to offer tons of more content than any mmorpg these days. Everyone who played other genres knows that they used to last longer than 50-100h and had way more content than any indie game or other new game will ever offer these days. But let me guess you're in your early 20th or even younger and you never had the chance to enjoy any of the old stuff. That would explain a lot tbh. Honestly I feel bad for you that you never played any good games other than your weekend product indie games.

But yea this is also my last post for you cause you also just live in your own little "dream world" with your delusion of indie games being all perfect and the great gaming innovation, which is not true cause most indie games ain't anything else but a weekend project to do nothing but cash in your money. Most of them don't even grow larger after some earnings and they just turn quiet without any further improvements. Growing indie companies are just rare as fuck, not because their products are unknown and hidden, no it's because their product is just not great enough to actually catch the attention of many players. Hence they just get a layer of dust and barely any attention cause close to nobody really bothers to play a unfinished or unpolished product, or junk that sits in early access since years even after a decent amount of sold copies.

Most AAA games or normal games ain't much better in this term as they also lack content and shit, but at least they do give you some better performance, professional graphics, animations and all the neat stuff which makes the game already feel a bit better than any indie game. And they also don't just use some overused free unity assets everyone can set up something with in a couple of days.

"

Aynix wrote:

If you want a game without ANY bugs at all, that doesnt exists and you know it. Nothing in this world is perfect. But there are plenty of games that if they have bugs, they are very minor and quickly fixed.

And yet you have nothing to show. Also keep in mind that the less complex the game is the less bugs will it have. Still waiting for that example.

"

kuciol wrote:

"

Aynix wrote:

If you want a game without ANY bugs at all, that doesnt exists and you know it. Nothing in this world is perfect. But there are plenty of games that if they have bugs, they are very minor and quickly fixed.

And yet you have nothing to show. Also keep in mind that the less complex the game is the less bugs will it have. Still waiting for that example.

Likely Soulstone Survivors, the endless early access game without any large complexity, content or whatsoever. Be a shame if something that simple had many bugs. It's that simple that you could even run it on a shitty phone

Well i kinda know its pointless runt because i challenged their beliefs and thats something you cant change if the opponent doesnt want to. But its worth a shot. We dont need more bitter doomsayers on this forums you know.

"

kuciol wrote:

"

Aynix wrote:

If you want a game without ANY bugs at all, that doesnt exists and you know it. Nothing in this world is perfect. But there are plenty of games that if they have bugs, they are very minor and quickly fixed.

And yet you have nothing to show. Also keep in mind that the less complex the game is the less bugs will it have. Still waiting for that example.

How about you post the game you last played that had so many bugs that you need to talk about how every game is buggy mess nowadays. Personally I dont rememebr when I experienced any major bug, that made the experience worse, in any of the game. (maybe except PoE). I could go to my steam list, list first 100 games I played and I could say that those 100 games had "no bugs". If it had any bugs, I didnt even notice them, so they dont exist to me.
If some minor, trivial bugs are runining ur experience with the game, well, thats unfortunate for you.

Halls of torment liked to crash from time to time, but i dont care much about it. You are the one claiming that indie and old games are better, the burden of proof is on you.

I dont care that the games have bugs, i dont care if they are cashgrabs because they always were. I care only about my enjoyment i get from playing them. Old and indie games are nowhere near as complex as AAA games today so they wont be as buggy but they still are. They are not better you just dont have expectations towards them or you remember only the good ones. We also have such gems today. Just look at BG3, FF16 or if you want something older you have Skoro, Elden Ring, Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Total War Atilla, Medium, Stray and many many other that you conviniently miss. Its not games that are worse, its your attitude that makes them feel worse