Well like I said, I haven't seen any statistics and I don't know how much the AH maintenance costs, so your guess is as good as mine. I still believe Blizzard was making a profit there.
While I haven't seen any statistics about it, I'm pretty sure a lot of people play Diablo 3(I'm one of them), and I've seen that the real money auction house is quite full with items.
Even placing an item on the AH gave Blizzard a cut(and more when it sells), so it seems reasonable to me that they still make money off of it.
I have to say I'm impressed. Blizzard was probably my favorite developer in the previous decade and a half, but they just seemed to get too greedy in recent years. While their games were still good(in my opinion), it always seemed to me like making a truck-load of money was on higher priority than to make a high quality game.
But closing the AH is clearly something that makes them lose profit, since they take a cut from every sale, but they still decided to close it to please the community, and that is not something trivial I think.
@Pre_ordered_PS4 Makes me feel sad that you'd put Resident Evil in the same category with Silent Hill. Resident Evil was pure jump scares, but Silent Hill genuinely made me feel terrified at some points.
forwarding is what does it for me in a horror game. I remember playing the first Silent Hill only at night and with headphones on, and for some reason I couldn't get around how to lower the volume, so I played the game with really high volume. That little radio you find in the game almost made me shit my pants more than once.
You walk around in a dark place, then your radio starts making an almost hushed static noise. You stop and look around, ready to fight, but you don't see anything. The static is becoming stronger, meaning that something is getting close and the whole process is very slow. You still see nothing and you almost lose your shit with panic, not knowing where this is going to come from. That's true horror in my opinion, you can lose your nerve without even seeing a single creature.
A good sequel is one where you find the good and bad points from your previous game and improve upon them in the next one, and maybe even try to innovate and push your game a bit further. Most of these design decisions happen before a single line of code is written, when the developers are brainstorming ideas, and it's based on feedback and lessons learned from the original game.
When you start development of a sequel before the original game has even been released yet, this design idea simply doesn't happen. And when you are being limited by time(since it has to come out in a specific time frame), you will never try a big game innovation, since it will take much more time to do. So eventually all you see are tiny bits of improvements(if any) instead of a proper sequel.
Sure it could be enjoyable, but you always get cheated out of seeing how the franchise can actually evolve.
First of all I didn't claim anything(Note that nice "I think" part at the start of my sentences), I was simply writing my opinion.
2nd, I really can't see how you can say that partially naked chicks attract sales is foolhardy, considering what you see in almost every commercial ever made.
And to better clarify my point was that this developer seems to think that whether there are sexy girls in a game or not is an actual consideration for a gamer as to whether they'll play the game or not(Not the sole consideration, but still one) - and I find that offensive to gamers, since we are not all 13 year olds who do stuff just so they could see boobs.
I also didn't say I thought it was offensive towards women, you misread.
Because during The Witcher's development, CDPR didn't announce the fact that you can bang women with large breasts during the game. It was in the game, but the developer didn't even bother to mention it since it's not really a highlight of the game(from their perspective).
Mevrick's comments