[vel0city]

Condition Zero and Source released in 2004. Global Offensive released in 2012, eight years later. Counterstrike 2 released in September 2023, eleven years later. Counterstrike isn't the game to point to for re-releasing the same thing over and over.

[utensil4778]

Counternite, fort of duty, whatever. I care so little for this class of game that I can't be bothered to spend the brain space to keep them separate.

Not saying they're good or bad, I'm just not interested in the slightest.

[eropple]

If you can't be bothered to understand the differences, then criticizing consumers for perceiving those differences and being willing to buy them is a real interesting spot to land on.

I don't play those games, either, but I at least understand the proposition that they present.

[johnnyanmac]

Willful ignorance from GP aside, their point is valid. The most played games to this day are decade+ old games that extended their lifetime with multiple re-releases or with an online component. If that's the will of the consumers, there's not much we can do.

[vel0city]

Fortnite has had a single release and is a free to play game. Once again, if you're going to point out games that just come out with a new version to sell it again, you're failing to show accurate examples.

[Apocryphon]

Bethesda is also notorious for taking forever to make Elder Scrolls games. Skyrim came out in 2011 and has not had a proper sequel since. First-person RPG also isn't exactly a glutted sub-genre. Neither of the examples fit the phenomenon they're talking about!

[Night_Thastus]

I wouldn't say notorious. It's only become that way with the latest games. Morrowind to Oblivion was ~5 years. Oblivion to Skyrim was ~5 years. Fallout New Vegas (Obsidian) to FO4 (BGS) was 5 years.

It's really only since then that game development times have skyrocketed as much as they have.

[Apocryphon]

That's fair. The ancestral post's claim of "every six months" is still ludicrous, just not as cartoonishly so. It's not like Bethesda RPGs are licensed pro sports games or Assassin's Creed.

[chownie]

The classic description for this is "being out of touch" with the given media. Not sure if it's something to be proud of.

[anonbanker]

There is nothing more freeing than being "out of touch" with media. I got rid of my TV in 2000, and my life improved dramatically. I stopped playing AAA in 2009, and my life improved dramatically. Indie games, specifically the Godot dev scene, is where the real innovation in gaming is happening. When AAA implodes, you'll learn what you were missing all along.

[Vt71fcAqt7]

It just sounds like you mainly like 2d platformers and open source (which is fine). But Godot isn't nearly the best engine to use for 3D, and arguably may not even the best of the open soucre engines (for example O3DE may be better, although almost no one is using it right now). Most 3D indie devs are using Unity and many are switching to Unreal now just like AAA (for example Palwolrd). I think "out of touch" here means making false claims about something you (not you specifically but GP) don't even care to know about.

[anonbanker]

I develop games in 3D using Godot. It's quite good for the task. Especially 4.3 dev builds.

[Vt71fcAqt7]

If you aren't interested enough to even know what you're talking about why do you make such specific claims about it? Fortnite is completly different from counterstrike. For example counterstrike is a team based game and Fortnite can be played single player. And counterstrike has not had a new release in which current players must buy the new game for 11 years much less every six months. Also, you are wrong when you say you are "not saying they're good or bad" when you said making the supposed re-releases of these games is like putting a "fresh coat of lipstick on the same pig."

[Apocryphon]

Those are all different genres of FPS