The sad truth is that the game would never have been made, but for the episodic development. Hitman is a niche game that always returned investment while never lighting up the balance sheets. They tried with Absolution to make it a AAA generic game and it was awful. The new one at least *was* a Hitman game. The always-online thing makes no real sense and is a major issue, but I don't think the episodic nature is.
The end result is that the devs delivered a complete game and met every promise they made. I don't think it's fair to rail against episodic games while accepting Early Access, Kickstarter or anything of that nature. Even with the episodic development, IO still didn't do well enough to please owners at Squeenix, so now they're downsizing and being sold off.
I have no issue at all with the episodic delivery. I can understand that players want to pay money and get a complete game, and I can also understand that it can be weird to play a bit of a game each month for several months. However, without this system, the game would never have been made and so for that reason alone, I accept it without issue. Telltale do episodic games and get lots of love so the system of development is clearly effective and can get good results.
Hitman is never going to sell 5mill copies. It simply won't. So for modern AAA publishers, they are less interested in games that cost less and make less. They throw 8 zeroes at Tomb Raider, 7 zeroes for other titles and they want blockbusters. I don't know why the Quest for the Blockbuster is still their only goal. Greedy shareholders should settle for steady growth and reliable returns with occasional blockbusters, instead of releasing fewer huge budget titles that flop with one success every blue moon.
The end result is that the devs delivered a complete game and met every promise they made. I don't think it's fair to rail against episodic games while accepting Early Access, Kickstarter or anything of that nature. Even with the episodic development, IO still didn't do well enough to please owners at Squeenix, so now they're downsizing and being sold off.
I have no issue at all with the episodic delivery. I can understand that players want to pay money and get a complete game, and I can also understand that it can be weird to play a bit of a game each month for several months. However, without this system, the game would never have been made and so for that reason alone, I accept it without issue. Telltale do episodic games and get lots of love so the system of development is clearly effective and can get good results.
Hitman is never going to sell 5mill copies. It simply won't. So for modern AAA publishers, they are less interested in games that cost less and make less. They throw 8 zeroes at Tomb Raider, 7 zeroes for other titles and they want blockbusters. I don't know why the Quest for the Blockbuster is still their only goal. Greedy shareholders should settle for steady growth and reliable returns with occasional blockbusters, instead of releasing fewer huge budget titles that flop with one success every blue moon.