411
submitted 9 months ago by Carighan@lemmy.world to c/games@lemmy.world

Personally I would not call Immortals of Aveum an AAA game. 😅

And I mean, that's maybe where the problems lie. This game is all jank and all generics, with no specific thing to present except "OMG LOOK AT OUR GRAPHICS!!!!". Which are also pretty unoptimized, so you end up with:

  • Only a tiny tiny fraction of players can even play it.
  • Then, the game is utterly generic. Despite how it might look to someone not knowing about it, DOOM 2016 and Eternal are quite unique games and have a very well-designed gameplay flow that even differs divisively between the two.
  • The writing is horrible and would make even an MCU movie/series writer question their decisions in life.
  • The magic is still just guns with replaced graphics. They didn't lean into the very premise of the game at all. And all they had to do is play Lichdom Battlemage from 2014 to get some ideas and that game already struggled with the concept. But at least it pulled it off.

Can't really say I'm surprised the game flopped hard. But unlike the dev I would call the underlying idea solid, just not anything about the execution.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 239 points 9 months ago

Big "no one understands my art" vibes coming off that dev. You made a mediocre game for an outrageous amount and released it in one of the heaviest gaming release years in recent memory. Sorry, this year a new IP with a 74% on metacritic doesn't cut it. They say EA dropped 40mil on the advertising for it, but this is litterally the first I've heard about it, and frankly I'm the target audience for this game. I bet this shit was shoved down the throats of Fortnight and Valorant players via tiktok.

[-] Jaysyn@kbin.social 80 points 9 months ago

I had never heard of it either until this post.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 38 points 9 months ago

This is the first time for me as well, and it sounds likely to be the last.

[-] tomi000@lemmy.world 56 points 9 months ago

Same. Those 40mil probably went into someones pocket, not surprising noone is playing the game

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] technomad@slrpnk.net 180 points 9 months ago

Trying to act like it flopped because it's single player... What a joke.

[-] FMT99@lemmy.world 88 points 9 months ago

I think BG3 showed conclusively that no one will ever play single player games no matter how great they are. /s

[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago

but that was like 6 whole months ago. the market is totally different now. /s

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] rustydrd@sh.itjust.works 134 points 9 months ago

The development cost was around $85 million, and I think EA kicked in $40 million for marketing and distribution.

Apparently, $40 million doesn't buy you much in today's market, because I've literally never heard of this game until now.

[-] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 58 points 9 months ago

Probably spent it all on cable TV ads, where their audience ain't at.

Or just blow and hookers.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] twoface_99@feddit.de 120 points 9 months ago

The issue is not the genre "single player (shooter)" itself, but that these big companies just churn out the same generic bullshit and then act surprised when no-one plays it.

AAA studios just don't have the balls anymore to take a risk and develop something unique. And this is their downfall.

Titanfall 2, Metro Exodus, Ghostwire Tokyo, Doom (to name a few) are all excellent first person shooters. All of them have something unique about them that makes them worthwhile.

[-] Hyperreality@kbin.social 43 points 9 months ago

Goes to show that making a good game is still more art than science.

Hell, make a broken or buggy game, if it has the special something it'll still likely become a classic.

Eg. Fallout New Vegas or Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines.

[-] Damage@feddit.it 28 points 9 months ago

Titanfall 2

Titanfall 2 had one of the most acclaimed single-player campaigns, with it being only a few hours long and mostly a showcase to get people on multiplayer, and it was still enough.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 110 points 9 months ago

I would eat up a single player story driven fps no problem.

[-] Archelon@lemmy.world 73 points 9 months ago

Doom (2016) and Wolfenstein TNO both proved that AAA single player story-driven fps can be hugely successful.

They just need to, y’know, not be shit.

[-] Poem_for_your_sprog@lemmy.world 16 points 9 months ago

Doom eternal was amazing.

I never even heard of this, but I wouldn't buy it anyways because EA.

[-] Paradachshund@lemmy.today 14 points 9 months ago

These studios can't quite wrap their heads around that last part.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago

exactly. maybe you guys just made a shitty game and can't accept that.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] TIMMAY@lemmy.world 91 points 9 months ago

I play a lot of games but Ive never heard of this game before this post

[-] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 68 points 9 months ago

"Nobody bought our game we didn't market. Guess we'll stop making an entire genre of games."

[-] Damage@feddit.it 36 points 9 months ago

I mean, it's my favorite genre, so if EA can stay the fuck away from it, that's not a bad outcome

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] JJROKCZ@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago

They claim to have spent 40 million usd marketing it, I saw some people on twitch playing it when it first came out but it looked meh and was priced way too high so I didn’t watch much

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FontMasterFlex@lemmy.world 75 points 9 months ago

I think EA makes games like this to reinforce THEIR notion that single player games are dead so they can use that as leverage to make more "games as a service". If they made things people actually wanted to play, they'd find that single player (yes even shooter) games are still just as popular as they ever were and poorly thought out, poorly executed, and poorly marketed games still suck.

[-] Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world 27 points 9 months ago

Case in point. Baldurs gate 3.

Single player (with optional co op multiplayer) but massively successful.

Not to beat a dead horse. Its just the first example that came to mind.

A huge amount of very successful indie games are single-player and even other AAA games.

They talk about the genre being dead but they forget that most games dont charge you to play them anymore. They make money through in game purchases selling cosmetics and battle pasees.

These game genres could be described as dead by the same criteria if they cost actual money.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[-] TheBat@lemmy.world 73 points 9 months ago
[-] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 59 points 9 months ago

Literally the first I've heard about it as well. Maybe should have tossed a bit of that money at the marketing department.

[-] echo64@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago

They did, 40million of the budget went to marketing

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Toneswirly@lemmy.world 61 points 9 months ago

Peak player count was less than 800 players on steam... Flop is an understatement.

Those 100 workers EA laid off dont deserve to be thrown in the trash; why dont the execs take a nice paycut instead?

[-] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 25 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I think companies that make profits should not be allowed to lay off people. You‘re welcome.

Edit: without cause

[-] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 56 points 9 months ago

Single player shooter's aren't bad or even unpopular right now. But I think people are beginning to realize that anything that has EA's name attached to it is trash and just avoid it on principal.

[-] Badeendje@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Jup, even new iterations of their older IP seem to be devolving instead of taking that which was fun and expanding on it.

Maybe they should use all these behaviour experts to investigate why people keep playing games instead of figuring out how to maximally predate on your customer base.

Ubi does the same. I found the last farcy so Uninteresting that I stopped playing somewhere mid game. And the first signals from their pirate game are also not encouraging, while I know many people that looked forward to it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 50 points 9 months ago

Orrrr it was a mid game with almost no marketing.

[-] peak_dunning_krueger@feddit.de 37 points 9 months ago

"a AAA single-player shooter in today's market was a truly awful idea"

https://store.steampowered.com/app/2009100/Immortals_of_Aveum/

1.1k reviews 75% positive

https://store.steampowered.com/app/379720/DOOM/ (2016)

125k reviews 95%

Git gud, EA, and make an actually competing product.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] _sideffect@lemmy.world 49 points 9 months ago

Of course, Doom doesn't exist right

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] SteefLem@lemmy.world 34 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Is this a single player shooter? I thought it was multi player? And theres nothing wrong with single player shooters “in todays market” look at jedi fallen order great game and singlr player. But a shit game is a shit game single or multi.

[-] Hyperreality@kbin.social 19 points 9 months ago

It's worse than shit, it's mediocre.

At least people talk about shit games, which means some people buy a copy just because they're curious.

Mediocre stuff? No one's interested.

[-] Aielman15@lemmy.world 29 points 9 months ago

I'll go counter-current here and say that it was a fun game. IGN review sells it really well, and I had fun while playing it. I'd say the main problem of the game was releasing in a year already full of big-name releases, and a marketing campaign that was too quiet - I'm honestly surprised it cost $40 million, because I only heard of the game by pure chance.

[-] Carighan@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago

Yeah I will say, it's painfully generic and I hate the MCU-style humor, but it's not a bad game per se. It's just in no way shape or form triple-A, except for looking rather snazzy.

The worst offense to me though is how there's no magic in the game. Just guns with weird graphics. They managed to not make the magic feel like, well, magic. That's the big flaw of it to me. Everything else is minor by comparison. Still, not a bad game, just not a good one either. At least for me.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 25 points 9 months ago

"a AAA single-player shooter in today's market was a truly awful idea"

Fucking what? Why? What in the actual fuck?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Defaced@lemmy.world 24 points 9 months ago

I tried the demo, it has a lot of problems outside of it being a AAA single player shooter. The "magic" system is just reskinned guns, the story is nonsensical at times, and the movement is stiff and slow. It's like they never play tested the game and just said it was done one day. That's not even mentioning the almost ten minute walk around the city at the beginning doing nothing but following what I will assume is a non critical character to the plot.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 23 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I play a lot of single player shooters. One thing they all have in common is that I know they exist, which I'm thinking could potentially be part of the problem with this one. Based on reactions in this thread it seems like a lot of people are in the same position I'm in, where the first they hear of the game is when it's being pronounced a flop. I'm getting big The Producers vibes.

[-] Talaraine@kbin.social 21 points 9 months ago

Someone stole $40 million of EA's money and didn't advertise another horrible cashgrab?

"I'm not even mad, I'm.. impressed!"

[-] mrfriki@lemmy.world 18 points 9 months ago

I'm very into shooters and this was a hard pass because it looked like a generic and boring Call of Duty re-skin and I'm not into that game.

Maybe the problem is not the current AAA or shooters landscape. Maybe it is more about the quality and the fun your games are.

[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago

Because EA games is weak. It’s all retreads of ancient franchises or bloated games with no risks taken.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 9 months ago

I would love an AAA single player shooter. If it is done well and fun. So no chance EA could do it

[-] JCreazy@midwest.social 15 points 9 months ago

This is the first time I've ever even heard of it.

[-] steeznson@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago

This game was the most AA shit I've ever seen. In the PS2 days it would have got a 7.5 average from most reviewers then it would have had a not-insignificant number of people pick it up.

They are delusional for thinking a UE5 asset flip is a AAA game.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 15 points 9 months ago

And I mean, that's maybe where the problems lie. This game is all jank and all generics, with no specific thing to present except "OMG LOOK AT OUR GRAPHICS!!!!".

This is exactly what AAA gaming is. Some guys in suits dictate projects to make money. There's no passion behind them. They can't do anything unique or interesting because it may not make money. They just make safe games, and they're generic and boring as hell.

[-] Mango@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

If you don't have a vision, don't try to turn money into more money by making a game. Everyone loses. Dumping money on assets doesn't make your trope copy/paste any better than the other million cheap Chinese clones on an app store.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024
411 points (94.6% liked)

Games

32561 readers
698 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS