I don't know, let us ask CDPR why they are investing a gazillion dollars in a single player Cyberpunk game based on an old tabletop RPG.If you're an AAA studio executive, why would you invest $50m into a series that is 1) single-player, 2) doesn't have a great revenue tail, and 3) just underperformed on its last game when you could instead put that money into a Marvel cash cow game as a service that might make you hundreds of millions and be a consistent stream of long-term revenue?
If I were Square Enix I'd take the Private Division approach and greenlight some lower-budget sequels to franchises like Deus Ex and Thief and that ridiculous library of JRPG IP that's just sitting there doing nothing, but shareholders and executives don't care about hitting singles or doubles - they want nothing but home runs.
On a related note, I always thought that the whole prequel angle for the rebooted series was kind of a strange misstep from the very beginning. I mean, you have a series fundamentally driven by conspiracies that the player gradually unravels and then you choose to present a story where the player already knows where it is going to lead – always seemed a bit pointless to me (though Human Revolution still turned out to be quite a good game in the end).
Still, they probably should have retconned Invisible War out of existence instead and continued the story as a sequel to the original Deus Ex.
Because CDPR is significantly smaller and has a drastically different business model than Square Enix. For one, paying Polish wages means being able to make bigger games at cheaper costs. CDPR is also run by savvy executives who understand video games and know how to appeal to a massive audience of hardcore gamers, unlike most publishers, which are generally run by people who don't play or care about video games very much. And CDPR is likely aiming for Cyberpunk to sell tens of millions of units, which is a massive risk and one that most video game companies don't have the appetite to take.I don't know, let us ask CDPR why they are investing a gazillion dollars in a single player Cyberpunk game based on an old tabletop RPG.
I don't think there was anything wrong with the Dev, they made a great game in HR and improved the gameplay mechanics considerably for MD - the issues with the game (length, abrupt ending) stem from publisher meddling (SE).
Yeah what CP2077 is going for looks absolutely bonkers.Crazy to think that in the post Cyberpunk 2077 world Deus Ex will be the underdog cyberpunk rpg but CDPR is really that far ahead of the competition.
Given the uncertain state of the IP, what are the chances Square sees renewed interest with 2077 being the next hotness?
I think the idea is the next Deus Ex team will be able to point to Cyberpunk and its sales numbers and say "we're trying to make THAT you IDIOTS" lolWhat...? I mean, maybe they have something under development, but if they're just waiting around to see how Cyberpunk does, that would lead to way too long a dev cycle to capture any its hype. The idea of a game like that (ie, something with 3-4 years of dev time, minimum) trying to ride the coattails of another game is like...what?
100% agree. Maybe an old man Jensen cameo at most. I want a whole new kind of protag, make us a MIB or something.Deus Ex will come back next gen. but they've got to drop Jensen. Enough already.
If you're an AAA studio executive, why would you invest $50m into a series that is 1) single-player, 2) doesn't have a great revenue tail, and 3) just underperformed on its last game when you could instead put that money into a Marvel cash cow game as a service that might make you hundreds of millions and be a consistent stream of long-term revenue?
If I were Square Enix I'd take the Private Division approach and greenlight some lower-budget sequels to franchises like Deus Ex and Thief and that ridiculous library of JRPG IP that's just sitting there doing nothing, but shareholders and executives don't care about hitting singles or doubles - they want nothing but home runs.
I think it is a bit of a stretch. Keep in mind that it is only Jensen's story that is unfinished. And I just somehow doubt he is that popular of a character. As for the global conspiracy side of things, they were already clearly setting up the beginning of the original Deus Ex in Mankind Divided. That story already has both an ending in the original DX and a follow up in Invisible War.Plus it's an unfinished story, so there's an extra incentive there? That's a bit of a stretch though.
If you're an AAA studio executive, why would you invest $50m into a series that is 1) single-player, 2) doesn't have a great revenue tail, and 3) just underperformed on its last game when you could instead put that money into a Marvel cash cow game as a service that might make you hundreds of millions and be a consistent stream of long-term revenue?
If I were Square Enix I'd take the Private Division approach and greenlight some lower-budget sequels to franchises like Deus Ex and Thief and that ridiculous library of JRPG IP that's just sitting there doing nothing, but shareholders and executives don't care about hitting singles or doubles - they want nothing but home runs.
Cyberpunk 2077 is pretty edgy, I agree.
Why would you say something so wrong on the internet?The "new" Deus Ex doesn't deserve to come back. They've fucked up the original storyline at least twice now. Just let it die.
Don't forget Kingdom heartsSquare Enix is only good at pushing Final Fantasy, it'd be a colossal waste of time and talent to make another one when it's guaranteed not to sell.
Invisible War was good though.Deus Ex >>>>> Human Revolution >>> Mankind Divided >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Invisible War