It's not necessarily the boss that stopped them. They may have fired it up, played for a bit and then stopped for any number of reasons.
maybe they borrowed it to see if they'd like it,
maybe they tried it but didn't understand everything and thought they'd put it down till they had more time, etc.
maybe 'they're just finishing off something else first', only for it to lay there amongst the rest of their pile of shame.
Just hiring 'actual talent' has led to multiple lawsuits and a federal investigation, so...
@T4rnished07
But you don't and you'r economy is less, which by OPs theory means MS should ignore the US and go for the $$$ in China.
Just pointing out the absurdity of his comment.
And the US is a minor league country compared to China.
A couple of things;
1. 'dying on that hill' is usually used for an unpopular opinion, not 'I will defend to the death that the game in the series which is the generally considered the best is actually the best.'
2. If you've already died on that hill, fighting till your last breath seems like a given.
The details may have changed but we've had the argument that new games/consoles are all about graphics and pixel counting (polygon counts) but the games are lacking in originality and gameplay for 25-30 years.
Your old school classics are seen with the benefit of hindsight. Rather than plowing through all the dross you're picking out the best and enjoying them. Just like in 10-15 years time, folks will be saying the same about today, picking out a few classics that appeal to...
The other related articles about this game had little attention and zero comments. This one is one of the hottest for the day, purely because it has LGBT in the title of the article and people can't wait to tell everyone how much they don't care.
Didn't know this existed. Thankfully, all the crybabies triggered by a simple phrase have given it some attention.
Rather they're distancing themselves from Activision - who published Destiny.
Books don't stick a 'boss fight' at the end of chapter seven and then prevent you from reading further until you beat it
It's hard not to use MS products in PCs, because it used it's deep pockets to beat out the competition.
Look up the anti-trust cases against them from the 90s.
Because the rest of the world is paying a surcharge because the US has been obsessed with "games cost $60" for so long, and no-one dared to be the first to put it up.
It's probably less to do with people complaining about it, and more that enough people used it that it showed Sony there's still plenty of PS3/vitas out there still be used to make it worthwhile.
Thing is, if two games are coming out and one is getting a load of buzz and scores in the 90s and the other is getting scores in the 70s and comments like 'it's actually ok.' then the average gamer is more likely to buy the former game at full price and the latter when it hits a sale, if at all.
There's a lot of great games about, and they cost a lot in terms of time and money. Why buy an ok game, when there's 'better' games out there.
I mean, they're a huge multi-national company. They do things, primarily, for the bottom line. If the accountants say it's not working they'll drop it.
It's not censoring, it's editing and it happens in EVERY SINGLE GAME OUT THERE.
This decision could have been made before the original game came out and you'd have been none the wiser. Thousands of decisions like this are made with every single game.
Your comment is basically an attack on the author as opposed to the story, such as suggesting she needs to get a life. If you don't understand how that is disparaging then I fear for you.
Do you also understand that your comment doesn't 'stick to the story' either ?
CDPR is worth over $8 billion, the same as Ubisoft. You make it sound like they're scratching around for quarters to keep the lights on.
Cyberpunk was announced 5 years ago. Do you really think a few more months would make a difference to sales ? The Witcher 3 is still selling and that came out 5 years ago.
If this was EA, Ubi, Activision, etc, the comments would be completely different. That's my point.
But, hey, you kneel at the big corporate publisher tha...
I guess you could describe them as independent. They're also valued about the same as Ubisoft.
There is another alternative to crunch, in that you could delay the game. That way, you wouldn't need to worry about getting part-timers up to speed and your full-timers would be more rested and less prone to errors. But, I guess that could put a financial pressure on a small indie publisher..
My hunch would be the way the current licence is setup, they need to do yearly releases. Whereas EA want to move to either a FTP or subscription model so they can rake in even more cash.