If the main problem people have with this game is the objective, then I guess they would have a problem with Plague Inc: Evolved too, as in that game your purpose is to kill the entire world (not just infect, kill). You are causing a lot more pain and horror in that game than the guy in Hatred, you just don't have to watch it up close. Is pressing a button to launch a nuke at a city a better thing than going on a killing spree with an assault rifle because you don't have to watch the suffering you cause? I personally think both are wrong in real life, and equally I'm okay with both in a game. It's no more violent than other games on the market, and there already exist games with a similar objective. I think it would be silly to ban this. It doesn't really do anything that other games haven't done. I really wonder how many people that claim that the objective is the main problem of the game have said the same about Plague Inc (I'm guessing not many).

I think you would rather take a jerky turn than a turret like turn if your life depended on it. Nothing realistic about how you turn with a controller, unless you are using it to turn some kind of machine in the game. You also have the option to use a controller on PC, but usually not vice versa.

Pretty much the only advantages over the PC is that if you want your opponent to have the same handicap as you (playing with a controller in a FPS) and a slightly easier setup. The console is also cheaper, but then again depending on your gaming purchases, the console might not be that much cheaper in the long run, since PC games are in general cheaper than the consoles games, especially if you take advantage of sales.

It's not like the only advantage of the PC is potentially better graphics and framerate.

Mods

Control options (I can use KB/M, Xbox controller, PS controller, or some other controller)

More choice of where to buy games digitally (not being forced to buy from one store) and generally cheaper games

Backwards compatibility (Can play pretty much every PC game that has been released. Can also play pretty much all console games up to at least PS1/Nintendo64 era without to much problems)

Not being forced to pay a subscription for being able to play games online (I know not every consoles does this, but both the new major consoles PS4 and Xone force you to do it if you want to play games online)

Obviously much better for all non gaming related stuff

PC = open and flexible. Consoles = closed and limited.

So yea, I guess you could say that the PC is somewhat the elite system since it can do everything that the consoles can do (and more) but not vice versa (if that's not a good argument for what elite is I don't know what is). Only reason I have a PS3 is to be able to play some exclusives that don't exist on PC.

Have anyone played the Game Dev on Win8 yet? My company just got bankrupt =(. That game is so hard. My company got killed by making TES game for massive license fee.magicalclick

I think the problem might be that your company wasn't named Bethesda. It's kinda like if a new Starcraft would be made by another company than Blizzard, it might turn off plenty of people. Making a Call of Duty or Gears of War clone might make some money, but it's also a bit risky since the clones usually get overshadowed by the originals, and the people figure out they just want to play them instead of the clones. A new IP is probably your best bet.

Of course any type of new IP won't do. It has to be cinematic and look great. Make sure most of the development budget goes to art and animation. AI and all that **** doesn't matter too much, as long as the enemies can shoot and take cover, that's enough. Just make sure there are a lot of scripted sequences and simple but decent looking linear levels, the scripting will usually just put the enemies in place behind a cover, so enemy pathfinding shouldn't really be much of an issue. No one will notice the poor or average AI in the trailers anyway, since they're mostly scripted. Spend most of the budget just making cool explosions and stuff breaking in the background. More explosions > Game length. Hire some cheap writer for your game, it sounds better to be able to say that you specifically hired a writer for the story. It doesn't really matter if he's good or not though since his story is gonna get simplified a lot, so the audience can easily forget about it in the middle of all the action. Multiplayer is always good, so make sure you put that in the game, even if it it's single player focused. Some innovation is good to seperate it from the others so it won't be seen as just a clone of some popular franchise, but not too much. Preferably some innovation that makes the game easier to play and looks cool, like some super vision or something, we don't want to frustrate the player with challenge. Then optionaly you can add some hard difficulty so we can get some of the hardcore crowd too, just make the enemies bulletsponges, strip the character of abilities, and make the AI get an unfair advantage like see through walls and stuff. But balance the game with normal or easy difficulty in mind, not the other way around. Make the game end on a cliffhanger, making it easy to make a sequel, because you will want a sequel, a LOT of sequels, and DLC, plenty of that too. Don't release the first game with a DLC. You will want to look like a good guy when compared to the other **** publishers at first, but for the sequels you can do all the **** **** you want without worry, especially after the 3rd game since by then you will probably have an established franchise.

Then there is marketing, this should get equal or higher budget than your development. Make a few awesome trailers, with lots of cool action going on, and some dubstep in the background. You might also want to make some wierd intelligent looking trailer that doesn't really represent the game at all, but people will totally buy into it, so that's all that matters. Also it's fine that the trailers look better than the final product (this will help very much with preorders). The game will need some nice preorder bonuses too, and preorder tiers. Give the preorder people some TF2 hats, some cool exclusive gun or map, and maybe some game that most people own already. Might want to add some advertising also to some popular snack and soda too. And by the way, don't forget to make some empty bull**** promises and talk about how next gen your game is.

Now the cashcow should be ready for milking. The cash must flow. And don't worry about a few naysayers on the internet that will stop buying your game. Tons of people will happily let you screw them over, again, and again, and again... And when the cow runs dry, you can just make a new franchise and start the trailer with "from the creators of *insert your former cashcow game*...".

Not that I have played this Game Dev simulator, but this pretty much sums up what would typically makes a very successful game today.

Paying for idkfa...

I'm guessing they'll soon release idclip and iddqd, as 2 seperate dlc for 10$ each.

I'm mostly a PC gamer, but I own a PS3 too. If the game is available on PC I usually prefer it there. I bought the PS3 mostly to play exclusives that aren't available on PC. I chose PS3 rather than Xbox since I think it's a better combo with the PC rather than the Xbox. To me there are more interesting and varied exclusives on the PS3 than the Xbox.

I guess some would argue that COD is a mindless shooter, but I think I know what you're talking about.

Serious Sam is probably one of the first things that come to mind. It also has co-op.

There is also Painkiller, and Bulletstorm. Think the new Painkiller will have some co-op, and pretty sure bulletstorm has some co-op as well.

Arcane makes some very interesting games, and Dishonored looks really cool, however I am a little afraid that the game will prove to be too easy thanks to plenty of awesome powers. Like from what I have seen you are able to blink around endlessly, with only a rather short cooldown to worry about. But other than my concerns about the difficulty this is probably one of the most exiting looking games this year.

So anyone playing on the hardest difficulty care to comment on this matter?

Analysts... it might as well say "some random guys on twitter wrote...", that's how much credit those so-called analysts have.

I can't say it is. If there has been revolutionary step for indies lately, it would be kickstarter. Steam Greenlight can be a good thing for indies though, but it feels like it was released a bit to early. It's a bit of a mess, and anyone can submit a game there which can be a bit of a problem, with some people submitting some **** games that don't exist or a game they didn't make.

They kinda need some ways to filter the garbage out. Like having the option to filter out anything with less than a certain number of votes (500-1k maybe). Sure you could say that most people would just use that, and some good projects would go unnoticed. However I think if a project is good enough it shouldn't be too hard to get at least 500-1k votes with a little word of mouth and some forum posts here and there recommending and linking to it, and from there on it would more people would see it, because it would become seperated from 100s of crappy games / fake games, and instead be among games that at least exist and also probably look somewhat decent (and are actually put out by the developer and not some fan).

Personally I really don't care much about WoW (stopped playing after a little after Burning Crusade), but it's not hard to realise that this game isn't dying anytime soon. The numbers will diminish, but that will most likely happen slowly, it's still going to be the most active MMO you can get for plenty of years to come. The game can loose half it players and it still has much more players than any other MMO out there. I wouldn't be surprised if the game still has plenty of players even 10 years from now. Wether people like it or not, WoW is just too popular to just suddenly die.