What Went Wrong? - Biomutant
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 май 2024
- Patreon → www.patreon.com/wickedwiz?fan...
Twitter → / wickedwizard15
Twitch → / wickedwiz_twitch
What Went Wrong with Biomutant? Another not so astronomically terrible game but instead a disappointing end result for many fans. Biomutant is a Kung Fu fable set in a post apocalyptic world which is ruled by rodents.
There is so much to do in Biomutant but a lot of it feels basic and the game overall becomes quite repetitive. Questing is most just fetch this talk to that. Combat is easy to cheese with kiting even though it's quite comprehensive with all the unique move sets to unlock. It's kind of unbalanced, you'll become too powerful early on so most of the loot you find is useless. And so on.
Is Biomutant worth it in 2022? It's not necessarily a bad game, it's just a bit lacklustre and was clearly an ambitious project from the start. I expected more from a game with a triple A price tag.
0:00 - Intro
0:31 - What is Biomutant?
2:20 - Development
17:21 - Review 
Приколы
![All That Remains - Divine [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/01rW8JxwpO8/mqdefault.jpg)
After having 20 hours worth of footage coming out as staggered as this. It's time to buy a new GPU.
dayum 💀
sad
I blame my graphics card thing always bugs out 😤
What's better pancakes or waffles and why?
At least Graphics cards are now selling at MSRP, for the most part.
"They would end up doubling the map size"
That was it. That was the moment they fucked up.
4x4 to 8x8 is quadrupling too, not even doubling. Effen madmen
they really could have kept the 4x4 and released the updated size as dlc or something, that way they could work on the core game and not trying to make sure there's something to do on each part of the map.
An 8x8 should be decent but the game is too spread
@@DrexSux yeah I soon I as I heard they mad the 4x4 into 8x8 I knew they screwed up. As you pointed out, it sounds like only twice the work to make because it's twice the size, but, in reality, they just quadrupled their workload for map creation, fitting in map-related features, adding side quests and minibosses, etc. Were was over their heads there
@@thegeneralgamer4921no it's literally 4 times the size, 2x would only make it 8x4. it's fairly basic math
"A small but passionate team trying to build a full-scale rpg" Ahh, i see what went wrong
to quote Josh Peck: _oh, DO YA!?_
Small teams can do great things with enough time
@@EdibleFuture I mean sure, but high risk high reward. They should've scaled down a bit. Many people prefer compact, tighter games anyways, bigger isn't always better.
@@EdibleFuture They can, but building a full blown open world rpg takes an amount of resources that a small team isn't going to bring together in decades. Its a bit of a running team on this series.
Only more red flags would of been if they said it was an MMO
4x4 to 8x8 isn't doubling, it's quadrupling: 16 square kilometres to 64 square kilometres.
Doubling perimeter, quadrupling area
Actual loser
@@tekekaki yeah but in that context the area is what matters and what its about
@@baadlyrics8705 perimeter matters
It is doubling, though. Twice.
This game is pretty much the textbook definition of "scope creep". They really needed a project lead who had the authority to say "Alright, feature freeze! No more new stuff, we need to take what we have and make it work correctly now".
I can't say I disagree. The game was fine, I liked the art style, I liked the combat, I liked the world they created but man it went on WAAAAAAY too long. At about 75% of the way, I just wanted to get it over with.
Lmao Star Citizen can learn a thing or two
Never take tips from Warframe 😂😂😂
Hearing "They decided to double the world size" honestly makes a lot of sense. A mostly empty world was my main gripe. I'm always in favor of a small condensed world than an open empty one
It was actually 4x the size from 16sqkm to 64sqkm
People always miss the main issue, it's movement speed.
Everytime your speed doubles, the world halves in size. So there is no difference between a condensed world or a world that's kinda empty with blotches of content, as long as travel between the blotches is accelerated.
People would've had such gripes with the world of Elden Ring if there was no riding mechanic.
As a dev you have to balance: Size, density AND player speed, not just the first 2.
The Witcher 3 is mostly empty, but travel between blotches is fast enough and experiencing the size of the world is good world building and immersion.
Then there are other factors, like distractions during travel time. Such as views, dialogue or music all of which are extra effort to make work in a game.
World design is fucking difficult and should not be taken lightly
@@Reac2 What you are saying is that the density is relative to the player's movement speed, making the question shift from "how close do we have to put things?" to "how much time does the player travel between each thing?"
@@DeadGuye1995 I agree on the fact that the 3 pillars you describe are extremely important in making a good video game, especially a good action video game, I do believe that video games are much more than that.
Myyabe it's because I'm getting older, but I find myself more and more engaged with the "frosting" of game than the mechanics themselves.
When I look at the game I enjoyed the most and most importantly the ones that I remember the most years after playing games, I mainly remember games with strong elements of storytelling, ambiance and surprising interactions, even if the game doesn't offer much in terms of tangible gameplay.
To cite some exemples, I'm thinking about games like Firewatch, The Stanley Parable, Papers Please, Soma, Darkwood, or more recently Signalis.
All of these games are fairly lacking in at least one the "Reaction Time, Pattern Recognition, Problem solving" trinity you described, but they are among my favourite games of all time because the "frosting" itself carried them
@@Reac2 don't forget about quick travels spots, if there are too much of them near places that are quest related you wont even need to travel much after unlocking it fully, the witcher 3 was great on that, didn't exactly show where are the quick travel spots and since they are common signs you might as well not even see, and the quests are usually out of the cities where they are, not forgetting how you can end up finding bandits, some monster's nest, hidden chest or accidentally find one of the witcher equipment quests, if exploring is not rewarding and the quick travel takrs you to do the door of the quest why even explore
The game should've been like 3 times shorter or just become linear. They took the "bigger is better" approach with the open world and tons of quest and tribes but they didn't have the resources to fill that much content in a varied way, they fell into the trap so many open world games fall.
Linear games often make for a tighter experience.
I would agree, about 50 hours in I felt like I was just doing the same thing over and over again
I'll admit, the game could be more full and have more variety, but I love the game as it is. Is it my favorite game to play? No, but I'm never bored while I play it
100%.. I went ahead and picked it up on sale but once you realize the world is utter filler and the bases can be defeated with a conversation choice it falls flat.. I honestly think the crafting is the best element of the game.. it would be nice to see what their next game is
@@Boxxcutter I totally agree, my issue though is that I never tried talking to them and just ran in killing everything so I never really found out about the "chat and get them to stand down" aspect when I was playing. But I think what makes the game so great for me is being able to craft whatever I want and kill things with it and how different parts do different things. I do hope that maybe they'll come out with some world upgrade where they'll have more to do instead of just having filler. I think that would be nice. Whether it's DLC or if they just toss it in, I'll be happy either way
If I had a dollar for every time I heard a small team of people followed by made a bad game I’d have enough money to make a small team and bad game
What's your point, you think small teams all make bad games? Big teams make bad games too.
There's nothing wrong with small teams, the problem is them trying to make a big team game without a big team.
@@NihongoWakannai woosh
@@NihongoWakannai I think it means that small teams often bite off more than they can chew
It's sheer logistics isn't it. Most of the time, you do need a huge pool of talented people to make a polished game, although I do acknowledge small teams has made great games before. However, that seems to be the exception, not the rule. As much as we cherish a triumphant underdog story, reality often doesn't jive with it.
@@NihongoWakannaiWhen small studios are too ambitious with either not enough budget, workforce, or even care to deliver on those promises/ambitions make bad games. Baldurs gate 3 is proof that small-ish teams can make absolutely incredible games.
The clip of Charlie playing CyberPunk and reading "is this game worth it?" Then seeing the car slowly fall down on him kills me every time 😂
was perfect timing right there xD
Didn’t it also clip him through the ground and send him into the “ocean” or am I thinking of a different launch day cyberpunk clip?
"Does that answer your question?"
@@imoorzy Different clip. In this car falling on him nothing happened to him, it just nudged him aside slightly
Glad they fixed the game tho. Didnt get to finish it before I lost my old Xbox account, but I had a 60+ hour playthrough with the gorrila arms and it was so fun
It’s a shame, just by watching gameplay this game seemed to really have the potential to be something amazing. The visuals and art style already looked great, and some of the combat mechanics looked cool as well, like when we saw a player’s attack break the enemy weapon. Just imagine what could have been if things just went a bit differently.
When I saw this game I thought it would be one of the coolest games, I really hoped this would of turned out well
@@bolitboy1grand833 agree, also "would have"
@@Chris3s I’m talking in past tense
I still have the game and I enjoyed playing it with making a few characters. After a total playtime of around 125 hours, I got my money's worth and while I still like it, I am playing other games right now, like Skyrim and Fallout games with mods. Biomutant got mixed reviews for a reason after all. It's sad that nothing more was done to improve it.
I am hoping for a Biomutant 2 but I'm not going to have high hopes either.
@@bolitboy1grand833 No he's right, "would of" is a mondegreen, it's supposed to be would have
8:05 "They would end up doubling the map size from 4x4 to 8x8km."
Technically that would quadruple the map size from 16km² to 64km² which is a really significant difference in work that needs to be done.
I can barely get any frame of reference to how big the characters are so the km number doesn't mean anything. are they like dog sized? human? bigger than human?
Good point, way more than 'double'
@@lasskinn474 from what i could find online the characters are around 3 feet tall.
Which would mean a bit taller than half the height of the average human.
Because this video is a trash take and poorly done. This game is amazing. Could care less what overdemanding AAA fans think about it.
@@joshualabranche4540 some fanboy is maddddd
honestly, I'd say the biggest issue was not having an open alpha/beta/demo. If they got that mass amount of feedback at the start then a lot of these issues could've been avoided rather than having a very small testing group. You have a small testing group, you get a lot less feedback over a much longer time frame and then you end up with delays, bugs and an overall disappointing game
I was thinking the same thing, especially with the narrator thing. I feel like they would've scrapped that early on if they had that feedback and it would've been a MUCH better game imo because the story would actually have personality instead of one monotone narrator
They definitely shot themselves in the foot being so isolated. They had good intentions to avoid known problems, but went too far and fell for more cliche issues
i think they knew it was a turd and figured an alpha/beta/demo would out them and kill their game. It seems like they farted out a half finished game and still wanted full price for it.
No. Biggest issue was it was effing boring on every level. Couldn't be asked to play it longer than 5 hours.
Closed is often better than open
No man’s sky has probably the most impressive development I’ve seen from a company. Started out crap and is now an actual gem of a game.
is it actually good? i have it for ps4 from like 2017, got bored of it and stopped playing. Is it better now??
@@riptide6041 new ships, planets, missions, enemies. Better biodiversity on said planets. I just redownloaded it last night on steam. Look up the last few updates, it’s pretty dope.
@@riptide6041 The guy before me understated it a lot. It’s a completely different game now, it is everything that was promised at launch and more. Most importantly, its online community is absolutely vibrant and active. You should check it out
@@riptide6041the game is still getting updates, expansions and new content to this day i highly recommend getting back into it
@@riptide6041No. It's a worse minecraft. The only people talking about it are the diehards that have been playing it since it came out. If you didn't like it then, you won't like it now. It's not good and not fun.
The game was very underwhelming... the hype killed it
Narrator killed it for me
@@olenhol2przez4 then turn him off….
I had no hype, game was just boring
Im sure hype didnt help it, but the game is just...not great. I went in with no expectation and i was still dissapointed.
I hadn't even heard of this game so maybe I'd like it. I don't ride hype trains.
"they decided to expand the scope" oh god, that's always what happens and that's always why these things fail.
Especially the map size. A bigger map has so many way to go wrong.
Feature creep is real :(
It can be great and work really well!
But usually as an expansion ...
Take Sifu. Super linear but awesome. Not everything needs to be open world
Otherwise known as Peter Molyneux Syndrome.
The bit that really baffled me was the fact you can pick up absolute tons of customisation items for your vehicles, but you can only use those vehicles in that specific area and by the time you're mopping up the collectibles you're probably moving onto another area anyway. It just seemed so pointless.
This game actually looks really close to great they definitely were on the right track
Honestly, it sounds like most of the problems would have been fine if they hadn't suddenly felt like quadrupling the map size.
The gane was solid other than empty map
8:08 they aren't doubling the map size, they're quadrupling it! That's actually insane to think to do that in one year...
Indeed, doubled the dimensions, quadrupled the size.
Yeah, it would be double if it was played on a 1 dimensional plane (side scroller of some sort), and then the inverse is true if they somehow had more dimensions...all about how many dimensions are getting doubled, each one doubles the landmass when it is doubled on its own.
@@Xokoy no shit sherlock
Should have just made the game denser instead of larger.
@@Xokoy planes are still 2 dimensional but I see what you're saying with how traditional sidescrollers usually don't go up too high
A bit sad really, it doesn't seem like the company did anything really unethical or morally dubious, nor was the product a bug riddled mess. The only sin they committed really was mediocrity at full price, rather than say charging $30, a lot of the weaknesses would be easier to overlook since the game isn't broken or bad fundementally.
They wont have priced it, the publisher would
Yeah, but honestly even at a lower price, TIME is a resource, mediocre just isnt good enough. Theres dozens of genuinely amazing games being released each year. You have to step up the bar if you want to compete. even at 30, I feel people would still be disappointed at the experience, especially with the length of the game.
Some times less is more, if it was smaller and more condensed, people would like it more, it wouldnt have to get repetitive in order to fill out its content/playtime. halve the game size, focus in on equipment and combat moves, add more stuff thats part of the core of the game and, maybe itd be better.
As is, its mediocre, and thats just not good enough in todays competition.
Just to clarify, I was being subjective, all your criticisms and disagreements are 100% valid.
It'd be cool if they called it "Borderlands Zero Dawn Ripoff Copy - Full Price"
@@lukafireman as someone who played both horizon zero dawns, explain please since i dont see it
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I thoroughly love Biomutant. I truly enjoy playing around in the world, messing with different builds and weapon styles, and finding all the cool little secrets. It's also one of the VERY few games I find worth replaying. It's a lot of fun, and that's what games are really about.
The crafting is fun
and the price isn’t even that bad, it seems people want to ignore how expensive games actually have become. i haven’t seen a new game under 80$ in many years. it’s been like 10 years since 50$ was a high price to put on a new game.
@@carrained 80$? Games just became 70$ in the last few years, unless your using a different currency from me, which is entirely possible 🤷♂️
@@awes1332 I actually am and I’m not sure of the exact dollar it translates too 😅 So to make it a bit clearer: The game I wanted 8 years ago was way more expensive than I liked, and now (and since about 4 years back?) games cost 1/3 more than they did then. Except for Watchdogs: Legion and Fenyx (they both cost half of that game in 2015) I haven’t been able to buy a completely new game in a long time because of that price. Like a new Assassin’s Creed, Tomb Raider, Uncharted, Forspoken, Hogwarts Legacy and all of those hyped up games, they’re all so expensive when they’re released.
@@carrained also same, i get all my games on sale for like 20$ or less 💀
The problem was them abandoning the project instead of improving it. The game had huge potential.
Agreed. Hello Games has changed the expectation of development teams. If any company abandons a project to pursue another, what would make one think the same decision of abandonment won't repeat. It's no different with dating, contractual work, etc.
Have you played the game recently? What the founder did was borderline fraudulent, agreed. But the game devs never stopped working on the game, improving upon it continually. They have added every promise they made into the game and have gone far beyond it. So many devs just abandon projects nowadays, since it is far easier to rebrand and repeat. Hello Games should be held up as an example ALL game companies should be following. It's not a fluke when you put time and effort into building a quality product. Compare that to the likes of EA Games, Infinity Ward, and other AAA games that have turned most beloved franchises into disguised slot machines. What other game company spent the last five years rebuilding the same game to make good on their customers, instead of abandoning the game for another project or charging for DLC?
Continuing development after release is a huge gamble, I don't blame them for cutting their losses.
@@RParis-ov2rq I never played it in the first place; I watched a lot of stuff about it though.
@@BillyWitchDoctorDotComa little lay but it wasn’t too bad the voice lines were atrocious though and the narrator was annoying
I imagine that massive increase to the map size was very impactful in making the world feel kinda empty and repetitive.
You said it went from 4x4 to 8x8 - that is going from 16 to 64 square kilometers- much more than double
one might even say it's quadruple the original size
agreed, if they went with the smaller option but made the map packed with content it would be way more enjoyable
impactful
4 TIMES THE SIZE.... OF OUR PREVIOUS MAP
@@alicedruitt4805 But can I climb that mountain?
This what went wrong is oddly, one of the most all-rounded, comprehensive game review I've ever watched. Hope you do more of these for more mainstream games too. Will look forward to them!
I personally love the game, and I really hope they add some juicy updates and DLC. They game was off to such a great start before becoming repetitive!
Yeah. The first about 24 hours of my play through was me being amazed with the game and comparing it to Breath of the Wild. And after that I realized it didn't have much to offer past what I had seen. Good premise, but it didn't fill the world it built for itself.
The combat, scenery, and music though? Excellent and I would LOVE to see a more fleshed out version of this game
LMFAO
@@mooredaxonwhere
It actively punishes you for exploring by locking things by quest activation/progress. Meanwhile Immortals Fenyx Rising let you find quest items ahead of the quest being given and adjusting the quest dialog to having found or fought the enemies.
I played this turd like I would any game to give it a shot and it actively punished me by wasting my time. Awful game
Wow, it's very obvious that the team was extremely talented, even if things did go wrong. I hope these folks are all doing well. So many beautiful aspects and designs.
that's the sad part of nowdays industry - lots of great, if not marvelous artists and animators, but lack of level and game mechanics designers, that create fun gameplay.
@@Rin8Kin yeah, problem is that good game design is very delicate and time consuming and less fun to develop since everything has to fit together
it's much easier to add shiny random puddle deep features that are all isolated from each other - it's gonna sound great "on the box" regardless, it's gonna sell just by looking interesting
Talent also means knowing what you are capable of, nothing went wrong it was just them quadrippling their work while not quadrippling the team. Awkward how lots of game devs are a bit detached from reality. Not to mention, a bigger map needs details or its just boring.
They could have finished the game the way it was originally planned and extended it with expansions while making the base game 20€. People would have a nice average-sized experienced instead of a big bad one they had to pay lots of money for.
@@PuellaMagiHomuraAkemi Teams being too small for the project just seems like a universal problem now. I've been following Total War Warhammer 3 for a long while, and crud, the staff working on it are just obviously incredibly exhausted. It's really heartbreaking to see the way that the major publishers are behaving these days.
@@deathrabbit8710
TW Warhammer 3 was a scam and still is an early access product. All the trailers and such were fake and made up while the game is a complete disaster and no matter who develops, those fake trailers continue and sadly people believe them...
Also you cant compare other games to this here because on Biomutant the team brought it upon themselves, it was their own bad decision and not the one of a publisher. Like I wrote, they developed into the blue. Its like working on a project while you wont know where the end is or how it looks like - you can do that if you do something like dwarf fortress but not otherwise so its not an industry problem, this was just the problem of a bad team not knowing when to stop. They should've probably hired a project manager or something.
Essentially the world just had little reason for interaction. Imagine having this huge themepark to explore and enjoy, except there's almost no rides at all and the only one that does exist is pretty repetitive after one or two rounds of it. That's basically this game.
Almost sounds more like a huge themepark with lots of rides - but they're *all* rollercoasters. Sure some are bigger than others, so there's a bit of variety in that, but in the end it's all basically the same, even if they are technically different rides.
Flashbacks of playing Theme Park World on PS1, and only having one or two rides for a good part of each park's life.
I noticed it when my Brother was playing Biomutant. I immediately noticed the repitiveness, not just in the quests, but also in the world design and structures. I asked him if it had any side quests because, in my mind, for a world that took an interesting concept, it never seemed to take enough time to flesh out the stories that builds up that concept via interesting side quests and more variety in how main quests are complete.
I dunno, people love this concept whenever Sony does it 🤣
i had a glider and a backpack with a helicopter attached to it and a very quick Mount... i had no issue getting around at all
A map half the size of the finale one would have been a dream. Instead we got a whole lotta world with not really a whole lot to do. I got so bored near the endgame I rushed it as fast as I could.
A really great game bogged down by over ambition.
A small team doesn't have to be bad. You just have to have someone dedicated to product cohesion, and sometimes that's a bit much to justify a single person for a small team when you're looking at budgeting.
But you HAVE TO do it, and companies just haven't figured that out. They think a team lead is enough.
I played Biomutant for the first time like last year, so hype wasn't a factor for me. I actually walked away from the game multiple times, then came back to it, thinking I'd give it another shot.
Eventually I just gave up, though. What good there was, and there IS a fair amount to like, was just overwhelmed by a few major issues.
What I thought I'd be playing: A post-apocalyptic Jade Empire crossed with Kung Fu Panda.
What I actually played: A special crossover episode between Captain Planet and the Care Bears, explaining the dangers of pollution in the most patronising way possible, as narrated by a Stephen Fry impersonator who accounts for 95% of all spoken dialogue in the entire game.
I kept trying to finish the game but it just... sucked. It felt lifeless and just not enjoyable.
Also the morality system was ridiculous. I've never seen a game where the dark path meant literally just killing random NPCs for zero benefit to yourself lol
" A post-apocalyptic Jade Empire" would actually be the sickest game idea.
@@xkidgey Killing a random NPC, rescuing a captive then punching them in the face, and asking what an ingredient is in a cookie recipe are all equally evil acts in Biomutant
No, I'm not joking about the recipe.
Literally asking what the ingredient you're meant to find is (how it's made, IIRC), despite being presented like a normal dialogue option and, yknow, being a perfectly reasonable question, gives you Dark points.
@Baxi Except all of these besides Diablo were bad because they were rushed out the gate despite being ambitious as hell and having resources. Companies like CDPR and Bethesda never faced the budget issue according to what 's out there about the failure of these games. The bad product was the result of crunch culture and an aggressive deadline. They're not scams, they're an unfortunate reflection of a game development culture that values having a game out during the holiday season more than they value having a good game that people would actually buy and enjoy. In some cases it's also because of the game developers being inexperienced and yet being tasked with something a more major studio would make, such as Fallout 76, which was not made by Bethesda's main branch, but a smaller branch that made nothing but mobile game spinoffs prior.
Yeah, I played a couple hours of this and it just felt like a real “Jack of all trades, master of none” situation. There’s crafting, looting, shooting, fighting, factions, upgrades, a morality system, and your standard open-world postapocalyptic setting, but I just kept waiting for… *something* new and interesting and didn’t really find it.
Jack of all trades is a compliment.
@@muddashucka9743 Jack of all trades, master of none and what is there was mediocre at best
@@JakenTheGreat Jack of all trades, master of none isn't the full saying.
@@muddashucka9743 I'm aware. "Jack of all trades, master of none. but oftentimes better than a master of one." Which Is why I prefaced my original point saying that what is in the game is mediocre, therefore hardly better than a game that masters one good concept
@@muddashucka9743 the "full version" of the phrase is a lot more complicated than you think. look up the wikipedia page, each section of the phrase got added sometime after the other
each version of the phrase is equally valid when said on their own, and i find trying to devalidify them by saying it's not the full quote doesn't really hold water
The stuff that really gets me about this game is the way that the dev teams needed to vote on ideas if it was worth putting into the game, showing that the team had conflicting ideas that in the end don't mesh well in the game, from what I have watched it feels like multiple different ideas just clashing and not able to meld together in a cohesive way
I dont think the voting is a bad idea in a vaccum, but realistically these are all decisions that should have been solved in pre-production and not while working on the game.
I was so hyped for this game, I even pre-ordered it. I refunded at the very last minute trying to give the game a chance. Everything just felt so unpolished and janky. Then I interacted with the NPCs and it was pretty bad as well. The issues kept piling on and it was just too much for me.
I dropped it in about 15 mins
@@rykehuss3435felt like I was on ice the entire time, zooming everywhere
Expanding from 4x4km to 8x8km is actually quadrupling the map size (from 16km² to 64km²)
It also seems like it was one of the things that hurt the game the most.
@@planescaped Scope Creep killed a lot of promising games, unfortunately.
@@MechMK1 kills more than just games too. Ever declared war on the very concept of terror?
@@thallan Not at all relevant, and incredibly out of proportion in a conversation about fuckin Biomutant. Even if I agree with you, this ain't the time or place.
@@hirocheeto7795 I saw a word I knew and took the only other context I knew it in. Yeah literally any other example of scope creep outside of games would've been better but I don't know of any
I heard "Not much pre-production" and immediately knew how this went wrong. A detailed and lengthy pre-production process is the key to making a well thought and enjoyable game. As well as this it allows the developers to understand the scope of their project and whether or not they need to lessen it or expand it accordingly.
It can also kill it though. If you start with a passionate team who do 2 years of pre-pro, looking at 2 to 4 years of full production, those first two years do a lot to suck the creative and motivational oxygen out of the room. It depends on the personalities involved.
Having absolutely no pre-production will kill a game. How can you design an environment to use systems that haven't even be created until the end? How can you design enemies with weaknesses to skills no one has thought up yet? You end up having to go back and constantly redesign things you already have done, or even worse, not do that and leave systems of the game disjointed and with no depth. It's alright if you throw in a few systems later on, but you cannot base your game around adding the systems in as an afterthought. It's even more egregious if story elements tie into gameplay systems that you throw in later, and will lead to blandness, and repetitive, boring events.
@@BrandanLee pre-production is necessary. In Game Design it is essential that you make the world and story fit around your mechanics but this isn't possible if you are designing on the fly, making mechanics to fit a world is what causes feature creep and incoherent and inconsistent gameplay.
Until you personally work on many products and watch the myriad ways they can go wrong, you will continue to assume there is a right way and a wrong way to develop a game successfully. Once you do, you know you can under plan, and over plan, take criticism and feedback or ignore it completley in tiny amounts or in full direction, and none of it ultimately can be said to be the thing that determines success or failures in every situation.
The only way to survive is to pay attention to each production.
Some need to get started immediately, and that short cycle will make a game that will be played for 30 years and spawn franchises.
The next will require 4 years of careful planning and 4 more years of production, and it will get critically panned across the board.
You just don't know until it's you in the drivers seat.
Some programmers love extreme programming as a discipline. Other want a clear software design. Some artists work better with lists of tasks and others want to wing it.
When you assemble a team, or inherit and existing one, it's your job as producer to learn how your crew best executes their mission statement. And sometimes it's better to realize these people will never work out and cancel before you make the brutal mistake of finding out the hard way.
@@BrandanLee Pre-production does not kill creativity. Creativity thrive during pre-production, people just throw ideas left and right and what not stick will go out of the window, what remain is a very clear path to the development. The developers will walk this path exploring every meter of it instead walking in the dark.
Game developers have to understand how important is the writing and they have to understand coding does not equal game development. A guy with high level creativity with zero level computer coding can be one of the most valuable member of the developer team.
You are wrong here.
"there was an issue with the next gen consoles not really being able to play in 4k..."
I just had a bit of a reality check listening to that sentence and realizing how many first world problems the gaming sphere is surrounded with. All things considered, this launch sounds really solid.
Never forget the cube law. If you increase an objects size, it's volume increases by a factor of 2.
4X4 doubled isn't 8x8 that's quadrupled.
Basically them doubling the world size tripled how how they needed to fill it with. Not doubled.
The lack of random encounters in the late game was the most problematic. World was just empty.
But I finished it 100% and overall I liked it. So it could be amazing but was just good.
That for sure, but also even on the hardest difficulty, the jbe released post launch, it was just too easy. I had a broken build about 4 hours in and only got stronger. But I also enjoyed the game as a whole and think it had a lot of potential.
Yeah this game is actually pretty cool I hope they make another one
This was my main issue, for some reason the was just dull
I agree, I think this game at the start was really fun, but you soon got op gear and it became really easy. In addition, later on it just felt empty and repetitive, and even though I love the design and the world, there was no reason not to just fast travel. If they had added more uniqueness to the bosses and tribe war and general map locations I think this game would been awesome.
i would like to point out that expanding the map size to 8 by 8 made the area go from 16km^2 to 64km^2, making it 4 times larger and much harder to populate
Triple A games spoiled us , and they have problem with filling their maps !
@@salemb9961 farcry 6 for example...the city is lifeless and dead...but yes that's because I've been spoilt by RDR2.
Dont make such a statement, theres people that will argue with you cause they dont understand simple math lol
They shouldn't ask Todd next time for advise.
*FOUR TIMES THE DETAIL*
While not bothering to work with a bigger team, its a death sentence for the game pretty much.
That's almost twice the size of Skyrim's map, and that game had a lot more people working on it
8:06 This isn't doubling. I know "4x4" to "8x8" sounds like doubling, but it's actually quadriple the size of the original since 8x8 is just 4 4x4 tiles.
This game also had a reverse power creep issue.
You'd level up and upgrade your gear, then you move to the next area and said gear is immediately made useless with new drops and enemies that were way stronger bullet sponges.
THQ Nordic seems like a pretty nice publisher, never heard about them being overly pushy with release dates nor restricting creative freedom. As far as I know they are one of the few good guys.
This seems true, and in general they handle things responsibly. As in, despite not selling bazillion copies, games like Biomutant and Darksiders III still are reportedly healthy profitable. The 'old THQ' or the likes of EA would've spent so much on celebrities, marketing and CEO bonuses that for them, the feat would've been impossible. I'm actually delighted that they now own some of my old fave IPs like Alone in the Dark - perhaps for once we can get a great successor or a reboot.
@@PenguinDT was just about to mention Darksiders III. Though I wasn't personally a fan of the Dark Souls-esque direction they took with the game, I have no doubt in my mind that game was 100% the creator''s vision come to life, unaltered. I'll always prefer a flawed but pure final project over a polished, 'market-researched' product.
That make children games
Checking back - the Alone in the Dark is actually a thing and looks great.
Pfft, they release tons of awful ports though. I’d love to hear from the devs who work on that shovelware, because those not only release broke they will stay broken forever. Much like a licensed game. So I have to wonder if they’re not also underpaid, rushed and then dumped.
This outta be interesting, as Biomutant was one of those games where everytime I saw footage of it it looked pretty good... yet that reception.
It's weird, you can even watch someone reviewing it and tearing it apart on every level, and half the footage, even though it shows exactly what they're talking about, still looks really good and potentially fun to play.
@@LowbrowDeluxe I was thinking the same thing. As I was watching I kept thinking, THIS LOOKS GOOD. Sad
@@LowbrowDeluxe yeah, the presentation certainly isn't one of the things that went wrong
Fealt the same. Honestly, if the games was much cheaper ($20 base price) I feel the reception might not have been as critical. Damn shame, but I can't convince myself to pay Triple A price for an okay Indie Game feel.
I bought it for $20 on steam I think it’s still on sale at the moment
I was pretty excited for this game when it entered my radar a couple years ago but completely forgot about it for a while. I just grabbed it yesterday as one of the PS Plus monthly games and am still kinda excited to check it out
I actually think there must be some sort of fame system in the game or something because early on I couldn't persuade anyone to do anything, but after doing a bunch of quests and killing world eaters I noticed it was happening everytime. So maybe there's just some hidden systems in place that give the charisma checks a huge boost or something.
I think the biggest mistake was THQ Nordic charging $60 for a game that's $30 or $40 at the absolute best
Few days before Launch Date. There was a $3 pre-order glitch where you pre-ordered / buy the mercenary DLC through EA Desktop app and receipt says DLC purchased, but APP says you pre-ordered the base game. Some even asked for refund of the DLC fearing the glitch will failed, and got the refund and game was still added to their account for free lol. You can read stories on reddit.
@Blackst4lin We can call that the Iphone effect, they mindlessly buy practically the same thing every year just with a different campaign and some maps
@@timothymarcoux6569 You can, at least, resell your iPhone.. CoD on the other hand…
@Blackst4lin Most people play CoD online so for 70 bucks, it might last them a year or so. But for a game like biomutant, you spend a month or two on it, and there's not much reason to replay :/
@@Alex_Shai even that is ridiculously overpriced. I can’t believe it’s become industry standard it’s straight robbery these days
My biggest complaint was the part where they made you choose who to bring along with you on the ship. Told you to choose carefully but it literally didn't matter
It seems like in the game, they make you make a lot of decisions that you don’t really understand much yet
@@orenblack313 oh ok, that actually makes sense now that I think of it because I chose to team up the bad side-the guys who want to let the ‘worldeaters’ eat the world-but the mission I am on right now is to kill the first world eater 🫤
@@orenblack313 Mm yeah. I think it’d be a little bit more fun if it was online and you could play with friends or team up
@orenblack313 yeah, I thought it was at first but no
I really wanted to bring the firework guy but he refused because my character was too nice for saving the prisoners.. It does matter what you do in game.
Man... this is very nostalgic i remember seeing this game on a magazine many years ago. Thought it looked cool tho i did eventually forget about it. Years later im now seeing this!
Just gotta point out that expanding the map from 4x4 to 8x8 isn’t doubling, it’s quadrupling. 4x4 -> 4x8 is doubling.
Ah, that's the saddest kind of failure. A well-made project that was badly planned. Just full of well-executed, but ultimately pointless work. If they had released it for $20 in 2018 with what they had originally, I think it would have been way better.
I think feature creep really screwed this game over. They wanted to stay as an indie studio, but make a AAA game. maybe they should have made it AA like Kena or hellblade. A game that is fairly small, but is focused, and looks incredible. The repetitive nature might not be so bad if they kept it small, and refined core mechanics.
I can see other issues, but I think feature creep is a big one. I do respect the devs for trying their best, and I wish them the best for their next game.
Feels like the alternative bad ending for no mans sky really, a small team who tried to reach too big for their own good, but instead of trying to redeem themselves, they just gave up (from what we know currently at least), p sad honest
@@neophyteredglare961 To give them credit, no man's sky was open ended from the beginning, so there was room for changes and reworks. This one seems like it's problems really baked into system, so it's less feasible. I could be wrong on that though, I'm no programmer or designer.
@@TuShan18 yeah
I really hope we get a sequel to post-apocalypse new-world magical-tree rocket-raccoon-crafting furry combat vehicle game, or that another company makes a similar game with character customization options.
@@TuShan18 Figured that'd have made for a good expansion pack once they filled the 4 x 4 map with plenty of content, having done most of the development and getting a hang of the game engine's quirks, also having done all the graphical design that needs prepared before going ahead with developing them, would no doubt have made for quite a good comeback a year or two down the road after the initial release anyhow whilst giving them more focus on a system that felt more rewarding whilst also being less repetitive gameplay-wise!
You have a small mistake in your math. Increasing the size from 4x4 to 8x8 doesn't double the map, it quadruples it from 16km² to 64m². So the issues of overestimating what they can built is even bigger.
Every piece of gameplay I see of this game makes me really want to play it
It's fun, don't listen to the heard minded haters.
dont, it sucks
One thing i'm quite puzzled by is this idea of it being a "kung fu" game but all the footage is more or less just shooting. I also feel like that the design of the world eaters doesn't really justify the name. They look not really threatening, they could've leaned more into the messed up mutation angle or something like that.
“WORLD EATERS” …… am I missing something or are they only big enough to eat a model planet
I remember seeing some original trailers showing different characters brandishing different weapons in a martial arts style. Like throwing stars, whips, bo staffs, swords, dagger. And it really DID come off as game about Mutant Furry Animals. I have no idea why the rapid fire firing arms made an appearance.
honestly if they wanted to do kung-fu or hand to ha d combat they should've limited gunplay
The combat is really slow and boring if you use anything else than fully automatic guns.
In addition to that the game has a feature where if a larger enemy follows you too far (about 20-50m) from it's desiganted area it turns around and tries to walk back immediately restoring most if not all of its health. Since most big enemies have charging attacks that you have to dodge so guess how often this happens if you don't gun them down quickly.
I think that the closest game I would compare this too would be sunset overdrive. It would have managed expectations much better.
biomutant was another example of how hype can kill. expectations are so hard to manage in the gaming industry and it sucks that this title didn't get to be awesome like we all hoped
Edit: wow so many likes thanks you guys 🙂 smash like for milk 🥛
No amount of hype could be good for This games narrator
As someone who bought the game on a whim without ever even hearing about it before hand. Hype didn't kill this game, bad gameplay, story, and writing did yeah the graphics are nice but that's about it. Plus the whole narrating bit didn't make any sense why not just go with full on voice acting? It really did more harm then food
I had never even heard of this game before, believe me high expectations didnt kill it. I had none and the tonal whiplash and just general uninteresting story, wacky gameplay etc. killed it.
It's just not good, which is a shame. Doesnt mean you cant like it obviously.
Couldn't agree more, gameplay was floaty and unreliable, the narrator's vocabulary became annoying after 2 minutes and the story was next to non-existant adn more annoying than anything.
@@darthgamer6239 I wouldn't even say the graphics were nice. This game looked outdated by a decade on release.
This game looked so cool. Shame it just didn’t blossom.
I did thoroughly enjoy Biomutant tbh 🥺 I liked the overall vibe and although it def wasn't perfect I enjoyed the exploration and the combat!
My only big quip with combat is that guns are just the most powerful option no matter which class you pick, which feels a little sad
Tf is that emoji lmao
A lot of respect to the parent company for letting the devs go at the pace they needed to. Even if the game didn't release to meet expectations, but the industry should encourage such practice. Certainly there is value to hard deadlines, but there is also value in patience as well. Such a shame that the game didn't deliver.
Having too much time also hurts projects.
Because the game failed the parent company is gonna be less willing to have a laissez faire approach in the future, thanks Biomutant!
The publishers killed this game, they over hyped it and have put a waaaay too high price tag on it.
Game was still a lot fun for me
I never understood deadlines for video games. A lot of bad games are bad because of the time limit.
@@TheDanishGuyReviews Because the longer a game takes to develop the more it costs. Whether it be keeping adverts up & developing new ones, or just continuing to pay the salary and benefits of the devs intended to be temporary for the time.
I, somehow, spent over 100 hours in this game. I like to get my money's worth, I guess. It's not a bad game, but it has mixed reviews for all the right reasons. That being said, I didn't hate my time with it, and I think back to this game more often than I really care to admit. I made a longer review for the game on Steam, but really the primary things I could criticize were the story, the dialogue, and like you said, how skin deep a lot of the mechanics felt. I feel like if given the right amount of time and content post release, this game could've easily become another No Man's Sky; iffy at first but great later on. Unfortunately, after the first two major bug fix patches, the game felt abandoned. This game had more potential than a lot of games at the time because, despite being another open world game to toss into the ever growing pile, it still somehow felt like it was doing its own thing. I occasionally want to go back to playing it through again on NG+, but then I remember there's really nothing new to experience with it anymore. There's a ton of untapped potential here, and despite its faults I did enjoy it, but it's really the definition of a one and done game.
Excellent video, it's nice to see someone who isn't just blatantly hating on the game because it's what the cool kids are doing, or trying their damndest to defend it because doing so goes against the grain. You called it like it is, and that's getting harder to find nowadays.
@Baxi Fallout 76 came out before cyberpunk, also all of those are big studio or publishers while Biomutant is a much smaller studio compared to those other publishers, so they seemed to care.
@Baxi Then why did you write "(the start)" at cyberpunk?
@Baxi It is possible to enjoy your time with something while still taking note of its faults. I'm not claiming Biomutant is an amazing game by any stretch of the imagination, but as someone who did take the time to experience everything the game had to offer, I can see a clear amount of passion that was poured into this project. The main issues with the package as a whole came from a small and inexperienced dev team that ended up way in over their heads. The games you listed are mostly games built around microtransactions and/or shameless cash grabs. Biomutant didn't feature microtransactions or feel like a cash grab, it felt under baked, sure, and it could've been leagues better than it was, there's no denying that fact.
Also, claiming "every game that has come out in the last 3 years" is a scam game is a bit disingenuous. You seem like you're just playing the wrong games. There's a laundry list of amazing games that have come out since 2019.
@Baxi This is essentially an indie game, which means a much smaller team then most games. And I myself LOVED Biomutant. What you can do in game is a lot deeper then if you only look at the surface. The movement options you have I learnt to move about a lot better the second time through that I Played. I worked on 100%'ing the game.
Its a good looking game too with its graphics, which is nice to see an Indie team do. Honestly worth the price of admission if you give the game a chance. Most bad reviews are from people who just didn't like simple things that honestly would be easily fixed if mods/updates did happen, it would be quite easy to make this game a top 10 game if some more work was put into it.
@Baxi unlike those titles, Biomutant is not scam. It just..mediocre
13:05 I remember watching a friend play this game when it released, and I remember watching him do a quest and then come back for the next one and the npc that actually gives the quest had despawned...
There is constant mention in the video of “team size” and how it’s not equal to the cost. More team members on a software project doesn’t always equate to quality, as specific aspects of a project cannot always be parallelized that well. training takes a while for onboarding. This is something managers of software engineering projects get wrong as well, and is a topic heavily talked about in Fred Brook’s Mythical Man Month book.
As for the cost: games are getting more technologically advanced than before. Yes the studio might be an indie studio, however they have to foot the bill for expensive dev kits (more so compared to big studios, as big studios can strike a deal). A lot of the new game engine features might not be documented, requiring constant research for how it works (looking at you Unity ECS support). Game engines also like to change large aspects after each update, requiring a considerable amount of work to update it. New GPUs might hit the market with hard to use features, but are important for optimization and performance etc. Game development, much like software development, isn’t easy and takes a considerable amount of time.
One route the game studio should have taken was the route of documentation. In game game development, this could be in the form of a GDD (Game Design Document) and subsequent documents. You may be wondering why documents are important, and why a studio should devote time to them instead of “coding”. This is exactly the reason, as without documentation there’s fragmentation on what’s being made and how it all works. Milestones will also be visible to all team members involved, allowing for clear delegation. The importance of documentation is often also overlooked by managers, who often use “LoC” as a metric of progress.
I just want to say you’re not just making quality videos for your fans but you are recording the history off these games. These videos are an archive of “what went wrong” and they will be here for anyone to learn from for a long time. It’s probably a push to say you’re doing a public service but you are still teaching people events that they would never have known without your effort
Definitely I’ve learned about a few games I never knew existed that had massive followings because of this channel
You're reaching a bit my guy
Along with Wiz, Matt Mcmuscles’s “Wha Happun” series does a great job covering more retro video game flops and their history. Bravo to these two (and Crowbcat for really big titles) tbh for essentially becoming an archive and deep dive on a game’s development
Especially since it goes over how things turned out this way and not simply blaming devs for making a bad game. I learned a lot about how often the devs aren't even responsible for it, but rather executives and publishers. Except when the devs are overambitious, but that leads into basically every single crowdfunding nightmare situation.
*of
Man that switch from 4×4 to 8×8 during development wasn't even a red flag that was a crimson missile
Did they even know basic math.
Doubling the side can sound nice in marketing, but...
It is logistic trap. Area is now four times larges, as your workload.
You either dilute everything or you need 4 X time to develop with same standards.
It looks like the team really needed more formal project management. They needed a definition of done, what counted for a minimum viable product, and an actual due date for the magnitude of their vision. Someone needed to be “the bad guy” and shoot down some of the extra features creeping in.
I feel like if they just made a second game, resused everything from the first, but focused on the story and the tribe interactions, it would be fantastic. This is the only game you've covered that looks like I'd actually want to play
Please keep making these "What went wrong?" series of videos. This and "Death of a Game" are really good pieces of content and very enjoyable to watch
Dude is just copying Mattmuscle series that his been doing it for years nothing new here
@@iwouldntlikemeeither it’s still good content and this topic is not just tied to one youtuber..
@@iwouldntlikemeeither Everyone is copying everyone.
Failures, or perceived failures, in the game industry are seemingly an obsession for a lot of watchers.
Wouldn't say Gamer's(tm) necessarily revel in negativity but it reliably gets more engagement out of them than positive stories and that has been for some time. No one person can lay claim to that.
@@iwouldntlikemeeither There have been reviewers doing that since 2005 also.
This isn't exclusively thier format or idea ethier
@@iwouldntlikemeeither Ah classic RUclips cynicism, don't care.
It just goes to show that even if you have a team that's insanely talented and hard working who doesn't feel rushed to finish their product and left on their own devices, you still will face the consequences of poor planning and scoop creep. I hope this negative press doesn't discourage them too much and they continue updating the game and add more content
Creep is due to poor planning. So it's ALL poor planning. Scope creep with great planning isn't noticeable. Plenty of games had massive scope creep but also excellent planning that at the end of the day, nobody brings up the creep.
Lol..that's not how games work anymore... they've dumped it and moved on...same as marvels avengers...anthem...Babylon's Fall...back 4 blood...and redfall is gonna go the same way. That's why I never buy games at launch anymore.
I mean, if No Man's Sky was able to rise, this game might be able to do so as well
@@oldstyle5114 it won't. No man's sky issue was unfinished code not badly written code.
Well the ironic part is that they didn't want to have management, but management would've saved them. Things like planning and scope creep are part of a project manager's job to do and handle, or at least make sure it is done and handled. As an ex-manager I knew as soon as he said "yeah we just do what we want and keeps what works" that they were screwed...
I bought the game 3 days ago and I can say it's a good game. I just played 6 or 7 hours and I like it very much. There were no major lags. The open world is great, the fighting mechanics also. Crafting is funny too. I would give it a 2nd chance
Its weird how the higher your mutation levels went the more your elemental weapon chooses got slimmed down to just radiation weapons and bio weapon drops from fire, ice, electricity, bio and radiation.
Me and my dad played it in alpha, and that was an amazing stage of the game. Sadly, it somehow felt like it declined after all those years in development hell, and was spat out as a much emptier game than I remembered
I honestly really enjoyed this game. Sadly see no reason to replay it though :/
Same, I put a solid 70-80 hours into it. It does kinda devolve into a "explore & loot" style of game towards the end but it was quirky and the combat was fun and the world was vibrant and beautiful.
I have nothing incredible to say about Biomutant nor do I have anything horrible to say about Biomutant. It's a good casual "RPG."
That's quite an accomplishment for a 13-15-hour game. To be fair, I didn't hate the game.
@@alexubel "accomplishment"
I don't see much of reason to replay many games to be honest. I'm out to play as many games as possible and experience as many different stories and gameplay designs as possible. Not spend my time replaying the same 5 games for the rest of my life. Like Dark Souls or Elden Ring would be games that I may replay eventually, once I beat the thousands of other games that are out there.
@@derekgardner1861 Point?
Biomutant definitely felt like it was trying too hard to be everything, and the weirdly placed flashback sequences feel like they should have been the actual introductory tutorial sequences ala Fable. It also feels half baked in the sense of like, the main character touches some toxic goop and their hand mutates into a poison arrow frog hand, suggesting, especially by the name of the game, you could mutate further, only for that to not matter at all and you just have a slimy frog hand just because.
you dont like frog hands? o.o ..... what about kitty?
Shame it turned out like this. I was actually really excited to see this game ever since it's announcement.
I've had this game for month in my library and went back to it when my Steam Deck arrived (btw. most of the time it runs great on it). Knowing, that the team behind it, is way smaller then most Triple AAA title studios, it is really fun IMO. Compared to many other Open World games of the past years, it is a fresh IP, most of the time great combat (yes, sometimes to easy and not comparable to something like Devil May Cry), the story is most of the time fun (beside the narrator. I think it deserves way more attention, compared to big titles, that where crap after the release in "early access" with a multi million budget and way more people working on it. Most of them flooded with in game shops and the mindset of a cash-cow DLC monster.
As someone who came into the game without having come across any of the pre-release hype in the preceding years, the sense I got from it is that the game had been meant for a younger audience. The morality system, for instance, felt very black and white, with little nuance to it.
The narrator, too, felt almost like being talked down too. Not insultingly, but enough to make it feel aimed at a younger audience.
ikr, the games story was way to childish, it's like it was designed for literal baby's to play....WTF!
and the fact that the silly little sprites popped up to bash you over the head that bad us bad and good is good every single time you do anything to shift morality
I've really come to loathe all these "morality" systems in games. They end up being so bland and binary. And it punishes people that make choices based on what THEY want to do. Think Dishonored. That game punishes players with a "bad ending" if they want to use all the assassin's abilities! what?
@@randalthor6872 agreed. I think a "reputation" system like Fallout New Vegas is a better idea, as it still lets your actions have consequences, but it isn't a debatable, watered-down "morality" system.
This is an example when you have too much creative freedom. Things keep piling up, the original scope loses focus, and the end results more or less is anti-climatic and disappointing. Another one is Star Citizen. That game may have not been released yet, but the scope of it just keeps on going and going, to the point it is just gonna implode on itself.
I don't understand why devs, time-after-time, forgo creating smaller sandboxes with more interactivity and depth. 'Bully' taught us this years ago.
because the industry is obsessed with "bigger means better" and its why 90% of video games suck.
I got this one as a free PS+ monthly game and platinumed it. I had fun at times at least in the beginning, but as a full on completion it was VERY repetitive, one side quest and at least one area was bugged out of completion. I really didn't find the meaning why it was so much filled with loot or why every place needed to have I completion status. Most of the SUPERB loot was absolute horseshit at the end, I get the idea that you want to have loot but not every freaking abandoned house and even towns. Killed a lot of fun for me, because my competition soul stopped me to try to complete every area, until I realized its pointless, because there are bugs.
It's sad to hear that they screwed up when the initial reveal garnered so much hype. If they were intent on keeping their team small they should have focused on what they could achieve instead of aiming too high and missing the mark. If you are going for a big open world then the gameplay will have to be interesting enough to ward off the sense of repetition. Having a large quantity of things to do can become very stale if the variety of the tasks is lacking, and it sounds like they weren't able to nail that down.
Personal opinion big or small game and big or small team, it could have worked. The lack of QA testing beyond just the devs and some friends/family means they weren't catching on they were about to take an iceberg until they hit it, and by that point they've sunk. QA can catch it's empty as they're not focused on does the new gun work but finding what's broken/feels missing and reporting it.
I think what doomed this game is that it was too ambitious for such a small team. Even so, the game looks really good and has a very distinct artstyle; you can tell the devs are very talented. It is really a shame it ended the way it did, but I hope it was a learning experience for them.
A talented team would have produce a good video game
Talented people don't make bad games.
@@jeremydeskel788 as a guy who's been a part of two successful startups and watched others fail, your take is idiotic and reductionist. Successful people face countless failures on their way. Talented teams can fail. Good business ideas can fail. Good games can fail. Talented people can produce a bad product. You have no idea what you're talking about.
@@jeremydeskel788 talented people in any field make awful products constantly. its the merits within those products that show their talent
@@chimken135 I dont even know why you guys keep posting these bullshit message under mine
You claim talented, gifted people, almost only make bad product, which is just totally wrong, video games industry shows it very clearly, just a simple name, Shigery Miyamoto ;
When talented devs are working on a IP, the final product is indeed very good, once again, a quick look at video games history would teach you ;
But your issue is, as most people, you probably never enjoyed a real masterpiece, a game made from the bottom of the heart of multiples talented people ;
Even heard of game like omori, crosscodes, chained echoes, ftl, valkyrie profile and a lot more ?
Yeah, it's definitely something else than these shitty AA and AAA games with no soul, where devs are more interested by their agenda and what is happening on twitter than playing their own games.
I won't keep arguing, you're just a bunch of casual that never had the curiosity nor the chance to play a real masterpiece, made by talented people.
from there, please refrain from giving your useless pov, thanks.
@@jeremydeskel788 In development, you can do your job really well but other people can goof up. A project can have a lot of merit in a lot of places but fail at being good for a lot of reasons. Closing out a project also needs someone to manage the triage of features vs delivery. Usually someone has to do the hard cuts to what to deliver vs what can be done. Doing it well will make it seem this is what you intended all along. Doing it poorly means you tried to deliver too much and you have to fix a low post launch or you deliver too little and stakeholders will be unsatisfied. There are people like Leslie Benzies who are experts at closing things out. While others like Ken Levine who are notorious for not being able to close things out well and going way over budget. And others are notorious for releasing broken things they fix later like Cyberpunk 2077.
The difference between Anthem and Dragon age: inquisition I hear is that a couple of people internally stepped up at a key time in Dragon Age. Took over leadership and closed out the project while no one was able to for Anthem, a lot of the same people. Talented teams also needs talented management and leadership that sets good goals. A lot of talented developers are grinding hard with bad leadership and shipping mediocre stuff.
I really liked this game at its core, but honestly the tribe quests are what killed the fun for me. The repetitiveness wasn't that bad, but what was bad was getting the unique weapons from them, and said weapons being way weaker than the weapons you craft yourself and being unupgradeable. Nothing worse than having a cool new toy but using it is just a massive downgrade.
Yes sir good point
I enjoyed what I played of Biomutant. As many have said the world was very big and beautiful, but also very empty and it was a chore going anywhere within game. One of the things I didn't like though was that you didn't really have to choose where to spend your skill points, you got so many by default and could just end up getting everything and your choices didn't really matter.
I can't remember, at least as far as in recent memory, ever wanting a game to succeed more than this one.
It was one of the few that I had been fully on board with and followed development as much as I could, and one of the few that I truly felt bad about not turning out very well.
This game shows how important managing a game is. Giving creative freedom is great, but at some point you need to reign it in a bit and streamline the whole thing
If they would have kept it smaller, it really could have worked and kept them from having a lot pressure and work.
Keep some of the good ideas for a sequel if it sells or something, but dont bloat and overcomplicate it.
Rein* reign is what a king does, reins are what you control a horse with. "rein it in" is an adage derived from the latter, not the former.
Kinda sad to see so much yet still so little. It's clear they did add more creativity to the game but then that took away from the actual gameplay and story.
Their own folly was too much creative freedom which at most times isn't a bad thing but as you said they also needed to be like a DnD DM and not let things go fae wild
@@KainYusanagi ok
@@KainYusanagi No one asked butt monkey.
"They bought the rights to the IP"
...and right then and there my heart sunk lower than the Titanic.
Whenever I see a game with such potential fail this badly on Steam, I always think of one solution....open a Workshop and let the modders at it. We will definitely add some content to it!
I was VERY cautious seeing the first info on this game and the initial gameplay stuff made me even more nervous for this game.
The visual looked and still look amazing but the actual game underneath looks kinda tired, boring and a little confused with what it wants to be.
Edit: Oh yeah, the enemy designs, they looked quirky but uninspired with a lot of pre-release footage showing different re-skins of bosses, which is never a good sign.
@Baxi Ah, you are new to the games industry and their tactics, I see.
This sort of thing has been going on for literal decades.
I can't believe they tricked so many people with Cyberpunk but I'm guessing they were either consoomers or zoomers who didn't know any better.
I would really love a Biomutant sequel. The weird and unique character design, vibrant and unique world, combat were all spot on, like really really good. I hope they hire good writers and build upon the foundation they already created with this game.
What do you even make a sequel about, then? Can't focus on the protagonist's past since that bit is hilariously cut and dry, the tribe system simply doesn't work, and presumably the canonical ending would have to be the destruction of the World Eaters since that's the only way the universe can continue.
I got about half way through the game when I played it, and I agree with your assessment. In my opinion, they would've been much better off if they kept the original map size and focused on a more concise and dense experience. Too many things are half baked
FYI, moving from 4x4km to 8x8 is quadrupling the map size, not doubling it.
When you talked about getting 'lucky' and finding a uber weapon. That was my experience with the game, I found an uber super-duper artifact gun and completely abandoned my Psy / melee build I was working on and treated the game as a looter shooter. I've actually been considering re-installing and replaying it as melee only, just for the challenge.
Another story of developers not exercising restraint and making sure that they only put into the game what they were certain they could finish. Lots of time wasted on half-baked repetitive systems that just make the game bland overall. They should have made the game world a bit smaller, with fewer but more polished and fun systems to play with.
Remember, this isn't the first time this has happened with Stefan Ljungqvist. He did the same thing with Drake of the 99 Dragons, and it was also a mess. Fitting that he used to work for Avalanche Studios prior to creating his own developer team, Experiment 101.
Having never heard of this game until this video, it look pretty interesting to me. As a person who has put hundreds of hours into mab bannerlord, which is basically just an olympic sized kiddie pool in terms of depth, I could see myself having a good time if the gameplay loop is satisfying. Maybe i’ll pick it up on sale someday
I was one of the gamescom players who got pretty hyped for the game. I still really wanna see this idea and scenario executed properly. Could be so cool
I might be one of the few but I absolutely LOVED this game. It certainly had problems but had so much heart and so many great ideas. I really hope this dev team either makes a sequel or a new rpg and hone the skills they clearly have to make a truly great game.
i love the game too!
Did it stuttered that much for you too as well as the incredible low FPS as we see in the footage from this RUclipsr? it looks unplayable
@@PuellaMagiHomuraAkemi I don’t remember ever noticing it stuttering or having low FPS.
@@Lunchb0xGamez
I see, weird footage then that has been used
I loved it too.
Kind of a pity, that one. There was definitely some promise there, just a few key aspects that really killed it:
1: Lack of narrative vision. The game is built on the principles of "Hey, imagine if..." and "Wouldn't it be neat if there was...". Mind you, that's not the worst way to come up with a game, but it does not much for the narration. There's a good chance that it would have been better if they didn't even bother with an overarching story line beyond the actual setting and made it more of a sandbox game where you discover the history and principles of the world you live in as you go.
2: Hype bloat. The incredibly enthusiastic response to their marketing and the acquisition by THQ Nordic encouraged them to widen their scope for the game. Now, of course if you have more ressources available, there's nothing wrong with making use of them, but you need to be mindful that you don't stretch your meaningful content too thin, lest the map feels empty of loaded with filler. Which is sadly what happened. They literally quadrupled the size of the map but didn't really add enough to the game to justify such a major expansion and because the game was bigger, it got bigger marketing and a bigger pricetag and in the end it felt like they underdelivered and overcharged.
3: Too little access to meaningful feedback. It's understandable why devs do not always want to open their playtests to the public, they don't want to give off wrong impressions through an unfinished product, but there are just issues that could have been avoided if enough people just told them "Hey, this thing here is a bit repetitive and gets boring after a while" or "Why does that thing work this way, that doesn't really make a lot of sense?" or "Could this part be slimmed down a bit? Cuz right now it's rather tedious" or "It feels a bit frustrating that you get all of those choices when they don't actually have any meaningful outcomes" and that didn't happen.
And it's really a shame because this is a game and a dev team that one genuinely would like to support. No crunch, no microtransactions and there definitely was a lot of talent involved, but alas, it just didn't fit 100% together and the game that came out of it wasn't as good as it could and should have been.
Here's hoping that the poor critical reception of the game didn't just kill the studio, because I'd love to see the kind of thing they'd be able to do after learning from their mistakes in Biomutant.
I remember being so wowed by the visuals coming out for this game. But immediately being put off by the tone of the game when playing.
Like, watching this video and seeing the gameplay made me ask "why did I put this down?" And remember the strange Stanley parable narrator implemented and remembered all of the question marks forming in my head.
Ultimately, I gotta try it again. I believe I do remember the narrator being an option that could be turned off and It does very much seem like this team was passionate about this project
You can change the narrator language or turn it off. Maybe give it a go again.
I’ve just finished the game. I think I put around 22 hours into the game and I’ve largely enjoyed it! I think the last 5 or so hours I noticed the repetition, the fact i hadn’t and didn’t need to explore full areas of the map, I barely brought any skills/spells because there was no point and that it was really becoming a bit of a slog. If you have a PlayStation I’d recommend giving it a go while it’s free because it is fun but don’t expect a goty experience
Did you deactivated the narrator's voice?
I changed mine to Japanese, it oddly sounds fitting, plus there's subtitles so it feels like I'm playing a game by a Japanese studio
The biggest thing for me, the thing that needs to be done right to hook my interest long enough to complete a game's story, is the choice of "narration instead of dialogue". Kevan Brighting (the narrator, who's most recognized as the narrator for Stanley Parable) did an outstanding job as the narrator in Biomutant. I can't fault him at all. The problem lies with the choice of doing narration instead of the characters being voiced individually. I get that it would cost more, but sometimes it's worth that extra expense. And that's especially true with Biomutant.
I couldn't immerse myself into the world because I wasn't talking to the characters. I was listening to someone tell me what the characters were saying. That just felt off. Kind of a "audio uncanny valley" feel.
But to compound that, it was the sentence structure that just felt off. "Feels like it would be better to be outside." Who feels that? What feels that? That's not a complete sentence!!!!! And that's constant throughout the game, from start to finish. It takes the player out of the world. The goofy and quirky names for objects is great, adds to the "other worldy" feel. But the incomplete sentences, like someone just started talking mid-thought, is extremely jarring and distracting.
All the rest of the game I didn't really have major gripes with. There were things I liked and didn't like, just as with any game. But the choice of narration instead of dialogue just kept me from ever being able to actually immerse myself into the world. So I walked away without feeling anything about the game beyond "yea, i played that".
I think for those two tribes, they could have done this: For the good guys, you have to fight a world eater, and for the bad guys, you'd have to find one, and attempt to transport it safely to the tree, while getting attacked by several of the good guy soldiers. I think it'd be better, or at least...different.
yeah I was thinking something similar, where you'd have to just defend it from attacks. Like if a tribe made a giant machine to attack the world eater, so it'd be a similar boss fight, but still a different fight/experience without having to change too much
When talking about a faction that wants to Save the Tree of Life and one that wants to Destroy the Tree of Life to start anew, I'm not the only one thinking of Clamp's X series, right? The Dragons of Earth wanting to destroy the world to start anew, while the Dragons of Heaven are trying to preserve the current world.
13:13 the prom with those games is that they should have been delayed at least another year, but fans wouldn't accept that, so a half-finished game was released.
Both games became much better when the devs were allowed to take the time they needed to actually finish them.