Bethesda
>tries making a sci fi setting instead of tolkienesque fantasy
>fails miserably (Starfield, Fallout doesn't count since they haven't created it)
CD Projekt
>tries making a sci fi setting instead instead of tolkienesque fantasy
>fails, even with help of the guy who created the universe
Ubisoft
>tries making a sci fi setting with watch dogs 3 instead of making alternate history fantasy
>fails
Sony
>tries making a sci fi setting (returnal)
>fails
Why is it that most games which try to have a unique sci-fi setting fail? Why can't game devs create good sci fi settings? Even EA which shits out Star Wars games which is the most popular and a very mature sci fi universe barely manages to make a good game.
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
>unique
what
By unique I mean proprietary, not borrowed from an already existing movie/book/game etc.
Nothing is "unique" you moron, everything borrows from previous stories and/or speculations.
Shut the frick up you pretensious wannabe intelligent smartass, you exactly know what I mean by unique.
End that fraud
Because it's made by people who like pop culture sci-fi and try to borrow popular ideas and add contemporary culture to them.
I enjoyed returnal but I didn't think they were going to try to make some sort of sci-fi extended universe multimedia property out of it
Man, why are you stretching the definition of sci fi? Cyberpunk and Watch Dogs Legion aren't sci fi and you know it.
Wikipedia
>Science fiction (sometimes shortened to SF or sci-fi) is a genre of speculative fiction, which typically deals with imaginative and futuristic concepts such as advanced science and technology, space exploration, time travel, parallel universes, and extraterrestrial life
>Science fiction elements can include, among others:
>Future history and evolution of humans on Earth or on other planets
>New and different political and social systems and situations, including utopian, dystopian, post-apocalyptic, or post-scarcity
>Predicted or speculative technology such as brain-computer interface, bio-engineering, superintelligent computers, robots, and ray guns and other advanced weapons
>Aspects of biology in fiction such as aliens, mutants, and enhanced humans
>Temporal settings in the future, or in alternative histories
Both games are definitely sci-fi, and Cyberpunk is textbook sci fi.
You won this one by copy pasting wikipedia but Im still saying they are not the same thing.
Not really trying to win anything here, but if you're associating the sci fi genre with space settings like most people do nowadays, you're just wrong.
>nOtHiNg Is UnIqUe
>seethed the chud as he lost yet another argument online
there's nothing at all believable about modern "sci-fi". science fiction used to be written by people with degrees who understood physics and mathematics, so it used to be a genre that could be taken seriously. these days sci-fi is laughable. you either have moronic "predictive" garbage like black mirror or it's just straight up fantasy like star wars. read larry niven, or arthur c. clarke, or isaac asimov to see just how far we've fallen.
>read larry niven, or arthur c. clarke, or isaac asimov to see just how far we've fallen.
I haven't read Niven, but I've read Clarke and Asimov. I like sci fi literature, and yeah, games can't compete unfortunately. Some movies do though.
Hard science fiction is a crutch for autists who don't understand literature or writing. Clarke and Asimov are both shitty writers whose reputation depends entirely on them supposedly "predicting the future" by droning on endlessly about how religion is le bad because it prevents you from making space elevators or how an elite cabal of scientific pedophiles should run the entire galaxy. I'd rather read pulp about space wizards that actually has some artistry put into it.
cyberpunk's setting is very successful. mike pondsmith is a genius at combining the good stuff from the cyberpunk genre and trimming out the cringe and injecting in his own ideas, and cdpr's artist brought it all into video game form exceptionally well
I like the universe but I didn't really enjoy the game, and after the recent update and DLC it has just become average instead of a steaming pile of shit.
The Cyberpunk setting mogs Starfield so hard it's not even funny
it's not even comparable, even if the games are both very flawed
Cyberpunk was a massive success.
Keep coping.
Shill homosexual is gonna shill.
Sony didn't make Returnal and the only reason Returnal failed was because they made the MC look like a haggard old wine aunt even though it's consistent with the character
>tries making a sci fi setting (returnal)
moron
Asking a capitalist studio who answers to gambler paypig investors to make a fantasy world which isn't connected to the Current Year in some obvious ways (something too detached from reality could be controversial and make people feel weird), and which isn't dumbed down to appeal to mental morons who play cod and fifa, is pointless. It can only work when they use an existing world like CP2077, but the developers caused the issues by not having enough time to complete the game, not Pondsmith.
The problem is they don't try to make anything unique. Everything is either a blatant rip off, generic trope, or remember berries.
Show me a single unique thing that Starfield tried to do? You have a futuristic setting with advanced technology and 90% of the NPCs are Black folk, the population is still talking about 2023 level politics like gender and pronouns, and they somehow have FTL travel, but all of the other technology is modern day 2023 with generic Ridley Scott style Alien interiors. You are also the Drago,,,Starborn. It's the most sterile and focus tested garbage that anyone could have shit out.
Returnal literally failed almost entirely because it was a PS5 game
If they didn't market the frick out of the the fact that the mc was an ugly hag they could've gotten away with just making a 3d shmup roguelite not-metroid
>t-the setting is bad
no you moron
the settings were fine
the problem with all of those games was they were untested, unoptimized low-effort cash-grab trash
>the settings were fine
>starfield
No, the settings were very far from fine. If you really think that Starfield's setting was fine you either have really low standards or haven't actually played the game.
>Bioware
>Tries making its own sci-fantasy setting instead of begging lucas arts for more star wars licenses
>succeeds totally
It's time for devs to accept that hard sci-fi has no place in vidya and embrace Science Fantasy
Science fiction is a type of setting that benefits immensely from scale, since the lack of scale just leaves you with boring mundanity stretched out very thinly, distances are longer, timeframes are longer, human activity is less involved, actions taken by individuals have less impact, everything on a micro scale is boring.
But on a macro scale you can create things that are impossible in other kinds of settings.
Sci-fi needs spectacle.