Posts tagged Games

EA Shuts Down Cliffhanger Games: Impact on Black Panther

June 4, 2025 · Filed under Industry Talk · Tagged , , ,

Image – Black Panther/EA

Electronic Arts has once again made headlines for its corporate restructuring, this time shutting down Cliffhanger Games, the studio behind the upcoming Black Panther game. This unexpected closure has raised concerns about EA’s long-term strategy and its impact on creative independence in the gaming industry.

The Rise and Fall of Cliffhanger Games

Cliffhanger Games was founded by EA with a bold mission: to deliver a single-player, open-world Black Panther experience. The game, set in Wakanda, was expected to bring deep storytelling, rich world-building, and innovative mechanics celebrating the legacy of the character. However, despite early excitement, EA’s decision to shut down the studio has put the project, and its developers, in jeopardy.

Why Did EA Close Cliffhanger Games?

While EA has yet to provide a detailed explanation, industry insiders speculate the closure is part of the company’s broader cost-cutting measures. EA has been aggressively restructuring over the past year, focusing on profitable live-service games while cutting projects that don’t fit into that model. As a result, narrative-driven single-player experiences, like the Black Panther game, are increasingly at risk.

Another possible factor? Disney’s involvement. Given Marvel’s stringent licensing agreements, the game may have faced complex business negotiations, leading EA to abandon the studio before development costs escalated.

Alongside the studio closure, EA reportedly laid off fewer than 300 employees, including staff from Cliffhanger Games, mobile divisions, and central teams. While EA claims these changes will “sharpen their focus,” the layoffs signal a continued trend of cutting smaller studios in favor of larger live-service projects.

The Industry Trend: Is Single-Player Dying?

Despite concerns that major publishers are shifting toward live-service models, single-player games continue to prove their value with record-breaking success stories.

Take Baldur’s Gate 3, for example. Larian Studios’ RPG dominated Game of the Year awards, sold millions of copies, and demonstrated that deep, narrative-driven experiences still resonate with players. Similarly, Expedition 33 has been praised for its immersive storytelling and strategic gameplay, reinforcing the demand for high-quality single-player titles.

Beyond these, other recent hits include:

  • Elden Ring: Nightreign – The latest expansion has already surpassed 3.5 million sales, proving FromSoftware’s single-player formula remains a powerhouse.
  • Phantom Blade Zero – Developers argue that single-player success benefits the entire genre, as players move from one great experience to another.
  • Black Myth: Wukong – A highly anticipated single-player action RPG that has generated massive hype and pre-orders.
  • New Dungeons & Dragons RPG – Wizards of the Coast is investing in a new single-player action-adventure, signaling confidence in the genre’s future.

EA’s Past Stance on Single-Player Games

EA has historically been skeptical about single-player experiences, at one point claiming that players no longer wanted them and that live-service games were the future. This stance led to the closure of several studios focused on narrative-driven titles, including Visceral Games, which was working on a Star Wars project before EA shut it down.

However, EA has since attempted to walk back these statements, acknowledging that single-player games remain an important part of its portfolio. Despite this, the company’s continued focus on live-service models suggests that single-player titles may still be at risk within its ecosystem.

Industry-Wide Layoffs & Publisher Strategies

EA isn’t alone in restructuring. Over the past few years, Ubisoft, Activision Blizzard, and Embracer Group have all faced layoffs, cancelled projects, and major studio closures. Many of these cuts have targeted single-player development, signaling a broader shift toward monetized live-service models and recurring revenue streams.

However, these decisions haven’t always been well received. Players continue to demand high-quality, standalone experiences, proving that gaming isn’t purely about microtransactions and seasonal updates.

Impact on Developers & Studio Culture

EA’s closure of Cliffhanger Games doesn’t just affect the Black Panther project, it disrupts the careers of hundreds of developers. With this latest round of layoffs affecting nearly 300 staff members, many developers now face uncertainty. However, history has shown that former EA employees often go on to create successful independent studios, offering a creative refuge outside the constraints of corporate decision-making. For example:

  • Ex-Visceral Games developers later worked on hit titles like The Callisto Protocol and other independent horror projects.
  • BioWare veterans formed Yellow Brick Games, focusing on immersive, player-first storytelling.

EA’s restructuring may lead to new independent studios, but it also reinforces concerns that AAA publishers are stifling creative freedom in favor of predictable financial returns.

What Happens to the Black Panther Game?

With Cliffhanger Games shuttered, the future of EA’s Black Panther project is unclear. Based on EA’s past cancellations, the game could face several outcomes:

  1. Transferred to Another Studio – EA may move development to Motive Studios or Respawn Entertainment, which have experience with narrative-driven titles.
  2. Revived in Another Form – The game could be scaled down and repurposed into a live-service Marvel project.
  3. Permanently Cancelled – If EA determines the financial risk is too great, the game could end up scrapped entirely, similar to Star Wars 1313.

Without official confirmation, speculation remains high, and fans are left wondering whether Wakanda will ever get the AAA treatment it deserves.

Final Thoughts

While EA’s restructuring isn’t surprising, its decision to shut down Cliffhanger Games reflects an ongoing industry shift. If single-player experiences continue to be sidelined, gamers may need to look toward indie developers and smaller studios for truly immersive storytelling.

What’s your take? Should publishers double down on monetized models, or do single-player experiences still have a place in the market? Let’s discuss.

Until next time, stay sharp and keep gaming. Panda out.

References

  • IGN – EA Cancels Black Panther Game, Closes Cliffhanger Games
  • GameSpot – EA Cancels Black Panther Game, Closes Its Developer, And Lays Off Additional Staff
  • Eurogamer – EA’s Gibeau Claims It Isn’t Neglecting Single Player Games After All
  • GamingBolt – EA is Proving Everyone (and Itself) Wrong with its Single Player Offerings
  • PCGamesN – After Baldur’s Gate 3, a New Single-Player DnD Game is Officially on the Way
  • PushSquare – Elden Ring Nightreign’s Enormous Success Continues, Now Over 3.5 Million Sales
  • Tech4Gamers – The Success of One Single-Player Game Is A Win For The Entire Genre
  • – EA to Lay off Up to 400 Employees After Black Panther Game Cancellation
  • – EA Cancels Cliffhanger Games’ Black Panther Game and Closes the Studio

Comments (1) »

Call of Duty’s Latest Monetization Scheme: Forced Ads in Loadouts

June 2, 2025 · Filed under Uncategorized · Tagged , , , ,

Image – Call of Duty: Black Ops 6/Activision

Activision has done it again, pushing monetization to new lows in Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 and Warzone. Players are now forced to view advertisements while customizing their loadouts, a move that has sparked widespread frustration across the gaming community.

The Ad Invasion

Previously, in-game promotions for skins and bundles were tucked away in menus or store sections. Now, Activision has embedded these ads directly into the weapon selection screen, meaning players cannot avoid them when adjusting their loadouts before matches.

Every time a player swaps a gun, selects a perk, or fine-tunes their setup, they’re met with full-screen promotions showcasing cosmetic bundles, Battle Pass upgrades, and limited-time offers. The worst part? There’s no option to disable them.

AAA or Mobile Game?

For a franchise that prides itself on premium pricing, this blatant push for microtransactions feels more suited to free-to-play mobile games, not a AAA title that costs between £50-£80. It raises serious concerns about the future of gaming monetization, if a full-priced game can force ads into essential gameplay features, where does it stop?

Some players worry that this could normalize aggressive monetization tactics in future Call of Duty installments, potentially leading to ads between matches, on HUDs, or even in killcams.

The Community Backlash, Again

This isn’t the first time Activision has faced backlash for intrusive monetization. Players previously criticized forced ads in Warzone’s menus, calling them “disrespectful” and “predatory”. The outrage was so widespread that many fans threatened boycotts, arguing that a premium-priced game should not bombard players with microtransaction promotions.

Despite the criticism, Activision continued pushing aggressive monetization, embedding ads deeper into the game’s interface. Now, with Black Ops 6, they’ve taken it a step further, placing ads directly into essential gameplay menus like loadouts.

Activision’s Monetization History

Activision has a long track record of controversial monetization tactics:

  • Loot Boxes in Call of Duty – Modern Warfare Remastered introduced paid loot crates after launch, despite initial promises of a fair progression system.
  • Battle Pass Price Hikes – Black Ops Cold War increased premium pass costs, making progression more expensive for players.
  • Pay-to-Win Mechanics – Warzone introduced weapons locked behind premium bundles, giving paying players an advantage.

These tactics have repeatedly sparked community outrage, yet Activision has continued doubling down on aggressive monetization strategies.

How Mobile Games Paved the Way for AAA Monetization

The gaming industry has been watching mobile games closely, and AAA publishers have adopted their monetization tactics to maximize profits. Mobile games have been getting away with aggressive monetization for years, and now major publishers want in.

Key Mobile Monetization Tactics That AAA Games Are Copying

  • Freemium Models – Mobile games like Clash of Clans and Genshin Impact offer free gameplay but heavily incentivize spending through premium currency and time-gated mechanics.
  • Loot Boxes & Gacha Systems – Games like Diablo Immortal and Raid: Shadow Legends use randomized rewards to encourage spending, a model now seen in AAA games like Overwatch and FIFA Ultimate Team.
  • Forced Advertisements – Mobile games have long included unskippable ads, and now AAA publishers are testing the waters with ads in menus, loading screens, and even gameplay.
  • Battle Passes & Limited-Time Offers – Seasonal content in mobile games has influenced AAA titles like Fortnite, Call of Duty, and Halo Infinite, making continuous spending a requirement for full access.
  • Psychological Tricks – Mobile games use FOMO (fear of missing out), artificial scarcity, and time-limited deals to pressure players into spending, tactics now common in AAA gaming.

The Future of Monetization in Gaming

Looking ahead, gaming monetization is expected to become even more aggressive:

  • AI-Driven Monetization – Publishers may use AI to personalize ads and microtransactions based on player behavior.
  • NFTs & Blockchain Gaming – Some companies are experimenting with NFT-based in-game assets, allowing players to buy, sell, and trade digital items.
  • Cloud Gaming & Subscription Dominance – As cloud gaming grows, publishers may lock content behind subscriptions, making ownership of games a thing of the past.
  • In-Game Advertising Expansion – Expect more intrusive ads, possibly appearing during matches, in HUDs, or even in killcams.

Final Thoughts

Gaming companies are walking a dangerous line between profitability and player satisfaction. Activision’s latest stunt shows how AAA publishers are willing to exploit their audiences, even at the cost of goodwill and game integrity. The real question is: will players push back hard enough to make a difference?

What do you think? Are forced ads in Call of Duty acceptable, or is this a sign of even worse monetization coming? Let me know in the comments.

Until next time, stay sharp and keep gaming. Panda out.

References

Comments (2) »

Diablo 4: Monetization Over Gameplay? A Growing Concern

May 22, 2025 · Filed under Industry Talk · Tagged , , , ,

Image – Diablo 4/Blizzard

Blizzard’s Diablo 4 has been under fire for its monetization practices since launch, but Season 8 has pushed player frustration to new heights. With £112 Berserk-themed skins, slow seasonal progression, and minimal gameplay improvements, many fans feel the game is prioritizing revenue over meaningful content.

Season 8: The Breaking Point?

Season 8 introduced a crossover with Berserk, a beloved anime and manga series. While the collaboration excited fans, the steep cosmetic prices quickly overshadowed the hype. The most expensive skins cost £112, sparking outrage over Blizzard’s pricing strategy.

Beyond cosmetics, players have criticized the lack of substantial gameplay changes. While Season 8 added new boss encounters and minor quality-of-life improvements, many feel the core experience remains stagnant. The seasonal progression system has also been labeled as slow and unrewarding, making it harder for players to earn meaningful rewards without spending money.

A History of Monetization Controversies

Blizzard’s monetization tactics in Diablo 4 didn’t start with Season 8, previous seasons have had their fair share of backlash:

  • Season 1 (Malignant Hearts): The Battle Pass rewards felt underwhelming compared to the cost, leading players to question whether Blizzard was delivering enough value.
  • Season 2 (Blood Harvest): Premium mounts and armor sets were introduced, sparking debate over Blizzard’s pricing strategy compared to earnable cosmetics.
  • Season 5 (Echoes of Hatred): The use of limited-time bundles pressured players into purchases before items disappeared, reinforcing FOMO-driven monetization.
  • Season 7 (Infernal Reckoning): The £75.00 Collector’s Pack, containing little beyond cosmetics, highlighted Blizzard’s increasing reliance on microtransactions.

Blizzard’s Response: A Lack of Accountability?

Despite mounting criticism, Blizzard has largely avoided addressing player concerns directly. While Diablo franchise general manager Rod Fergusson previously stated that Diablo 4 would not follow the aggressive monetization model of Diablo Immortal, players feel that Blizzard has failed to uphold that promise.

Community frustration has led to calls for boycotts, with some players refusing to purchase cosmetics or engage with seasonal content until Blizzard makes meaningful changes.

How Does Diablo 4 Compare to Other ARPGs?

Blizzard’s monetization strategy stands in stark contrast to other ARPGs like Path of Exile and Lost Ark:

  • Path of Exile: While PoE has microtransactions, its monetization is focused on cosmetics and convenience, rather than restricting core gameplay. Players can enjoy the full experience without spending money.
  • Lost Ark: This MMO-ARPG has pay-to-win mechanics, but it also offers earnable cosmetics and progression options, making it more accessible than Diablo 4.

Compared to these games, Diablo 4’s monetization feels more aggressive, with high-priced cosmetics and limited ways to earn rewards through gameplay.

The Bigger Issue: Monetization vs. Player Trust

Blizzard’s aggressive monetization isn’t unique, major publishers across the industry are testing the limits of what players will tolerate. The critical question remains: When does optional monetization cross the line into exploitation?

While Blizzard continues to push revenue-driven strategies, player frustration is reaching a boiling point. Whether the backlash will eventually force change or simply fade as players accept this as the industry norm is yet to be seen.

Final Thoughts: Games Should Reward Players, Not Exploit Them

At the end of the day, gaming should be about experience, creativity, and fair engagement, not relentless monetization. Publishers need to recognize that player trust matters, because when games put profits ahead of their communities, they risk losing what makes them special.

Until next time, stay sharp and keep gaming. Panda out.

References

Leave a comment »

Star Citizen Delays New Ship Upgrade Amid Pay-to-Win Concerns

May 20, 2025 · Filed under Industry Talk · Tagged , , , ,

Cloud Imperium Games (CIG) is once again under fire, this time for delaying its latest ship upgrade, Flight Blades, after intense backlash from players. The controversy stems from the fact that when Flight Blades were first introduced, they were only available for real money, ranging from £7.50 to £33—despite promises that they would also be purchasable with in-game currency.

A Pay-to-Win Problem?

The idea of selling ship components for real money immediately sparked outrage, with players calling it a clear pay-to-win system. Many long-time supporters of Star Citizen, a game that has raised over £640 million in funding, questioned why the studio continues to introduce monetisation strategies that disadvantage those who prefer to play without spending extra cash.

Following the backlash, CIG announced that Flight Blades would be delayed and reassured players that they would eventually be available for in-game currency. However, frustration remains high—many believe ship components should never be locked behind real money transactions, especially in a game that prides itself on player-driven economies.

12 Years in Development—Where Is The £640 Million Going?

Star Citizen has been in development for over 12 years, starting in 2012. Despite the massive funding, the game still lacks many promised features, leading players to question how efficiently the money is being used. Some community members have even called for greater financial transparency, asking whether funds are being allocated effectively to deliver the game’s ambitious vision.

Ship Prices—How Much Are Players Spending?

Ship prices in Star Citizen vary widely, with some costing hundreds or even thousands of pounds. Here are a few examples of current ship prices in Alpha 4.1:

ShipPrice (in-game currency)Price (real money)
Aurora ES423,360 aUEC£40
Buccaneer1,663,200 aUEC£110
Prospector2,929,500 aUEC£140
Cutlass Red2,857,680 aUEC£150
Vulture2,646,000 aUEC£175

Some ships are only available for real money, while others can be earned through gameplay. However, many players argue that the pricing model pressures users into spending real money, rather than grinding for in-game currency.

Monetisation Trends—How Does Star Citizen Compare?

Star Citizen’s approach to monetisation is far more aggressive than many competitors. Games like Elite Dangerous and No Man’s Sky allow players to earn ships and upgrades solely through gameplay, while Star Citizen often locks high-end ships and components behind real-money purchases.

Unlike subscription-based MMOs, Star Citizen does not have a mandatory monthly fee—but many argue that the constant monetisation of ships and upgrades makes it a de facto subscription, where players need to spend money to stay competitive.

Development Transparency—Do Players Really Know Where the Money Goes?

Despite £640 million in funding, CIG has never offered a full financial breakdown of how the money is used. Players often question whether funds are truly going toward development, as new monetisation schemes continue to roll out while major game features remain incomplete.

The lack of a detailed roadmap and frequent delays have led to growing skepticism within the community, with some players calling for a third-party audit of CIG’s finances.

Community Response—What Are Players Saying?

The reaction to the Flight Blades controversy has been overwhelmingly negative:

  • Many feel that CIG deliberately launched Flight Blades as a real-money item before promising an in-game currency version to test player resistance.
  • Others argue that introducing real-money upgrades is destroying Star Citizen’s economy, favoring paying players over those who want to earn items through gameplay.
  • Some defenders believe that CIG needs continued revenue to fund Star Citizen’s ambitious scope, though the lack of transparency remains a sticking point.

Future Risks—Could This Backfire?

If CIG continues monetising ships and upgrades in this way, Star Citizen risks alienating a portion of its player base. Even long-time supporters are starting to question the financial model, and continued controversies could lead to weaker player engagement over time.

If Star Citizen ever officially launches, it will need to offer a balanced monetisation system that doesn’t lean too heavily on real-money purchases—or risk losing credibility as a truly player-driven experience.

Recent Monetisation Controversies—Gaming Industry Under Scrutiny

Star Citizen isn’t alone in facing monetisation backlash. Here are some of the latest gaming controversies that highlight industry-wide concerns:

  • European Union’s crackdown on in-game purchases – The EU has introduced new regulations requiring all in-game items to display their real-money cost alongside virtual currency prices. This was triggered by complaints about Star Stable, a free-to-play game marketed toward children.
  • Major gaming companies facing lawsuits – Blizzard, EA, Epic Games, Ubisoft, and others are being sued for predatory monetisation and addictive practices. The lawsuit argues that these companies target minors with manipulative in-game purchases, leading to financial loss and mental distress.
  • Consumer groups pushing for transparency – European regulators are demanding that premium in-game currencies be displayed in real money, arguing that hidden costs lead to overspending and unfair pricing.

Each of these cases highlights how monetisation strategies are facing increased scrutiny worldwide—something Star Citizen’s developers should pay close attention to.

What’s Next?

As of now, CIG has not announced a new release date for Flight Blades, nor have they detailed how much in-game currency players will need to acquire them. The delay has left many wondering if future upgrades will follow a similar pay-first, delay-for-in-game-currency model—something that could alienate a portion of Star Citizen’s dedicated community.

For now, players remain in a familiar position: waiting for answers while watching new monetisation tactics unfold.

Until next time, stay sharp and keep gaming.
Panda out.

References:

  • Dexerto – EU regulations on in-game purchases: Link
  • Instant Gaming – Cover image Link
  • Springer Journal of Business Ethics – Predatory monetisation practices: Link
  • The Conversation – Gamer perspectives on monetisation tactics: Link

Comments (3) »

Clair Obscur: Expedition 33

May 19, 2025 · Filed under Games · Tagged , , , ,

A Bold Vision from Sandfall Interactive

Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 is a groundbreaking achievement from Sandfall Interactive, an upstart studio founded by an ex‑Ubisoft developer driven by a desire to break free from the monotonous output of big companies. Guillaume Broche, the visionary behind the project, has taken a bold leap by creating something fresh and innovative in a market that often nickel‑and‑dimes its players. With a team composed mostly of junior developers, few could have predicted that this title would emerge as a serious contender for game‑of‑the‑year. Broche revealed that developing a game of this caliber through a large company would have taken years, an astounding insight into how traditional studios can be overly risk‑averse, bogged down by meticulous monetary breakdowns and projected sales figures even in volatile markets. Sandfall Interactive’s gamble has clearly paid off, this is an instant hit destined to be played and discussed for years to come.

Welcome to Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, Where the Old Die Young.
I’ll do my best to keep spoilers to a minimum, though as of this writing I’m deep into Act 3.

Visual & Audio Mastery

The game is a visual masterpiece. Powered by Unreal Engine 5, every environment bursts with vibrant colors and meticulous detail. Each region’s carefully chosen color palette, masterful lighting, and striking special effects combine to create breathtaking vistas. And while the visuals alone are awe‑inspiring, the ambient soundtrack and precisely designed audio cues further draw you into the world, transforming every moment into a fully immersive experience.

City of Lumiere: Day and Night

Your journey begins in the city of Lumiere, experienced under two dramatically different conditions:

  • Daytime: The city pulses with life. Flower petals cover the streets, set against a backdrop of long‑accepted urban decay.
    Light cascades through the architecture, casting intricate shadows that interplay with the blue rock and red petals, a subtle hint at the city’s deeper lore.
  • Nighttime: As night falls, the atmosphere transforms.
    Light reflects off uneven surfaces and water, creating soft, shifting shadows. With fewer people around, an eerie vibe takes over—mirroring the unfolding narrative and drawing you deeper into the mysteries of this richly detailed world.

Diverse Environments & World Map

Exploration in Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 never feels repetitive. Beyond Lumiere, you’ll uncover expansive open areas, labyrinthine caves, and winding tunnels, each with its own distinct personality. A harmonious blend of color, light, and sound in every region compels you to pause and absorb the wonder.

The world map itself stands as a testament to detailed design. Every region’s design mirrors its in‑game counterpart with consistent color schemes, deliberate lighting effects, and subtle audio cues that add layers of depth. Watch as creatures soar in the skies or catch fleeting glimpses of map fragments floating above the ground.

Innovative Gameplay & Combat Mechanics

Turning to gameplay, the mechanics are as innovative as they are engaging. At its core, the game is a turn‑based RPG with a twist: during combat, quick‑time events allow you to unleash extra damage with swift reactions. This fusion of strategic planning with bursts of real‑time action rewards precise timing and rapid decision‑making, creating a thrilling balance of risk and reward that keeps every battle fresh.

Defensive play introduces an additional layer of nuance. You have three options:

  • Dodge: Evade incoming attacks outright.
  • Parry: Time your block perfectly to deflect and counter an enemy’s move.
  • Jump: A hybrid maneuver that melds evasion with a timed parry, effective against specific attack types.

This layered defense system demands acute attention to sound cues and animations, especially since many enemy strikes can one‑hit kill a party member. Each foe employs a unique rhythm, challenging you to adapt and refine your strategy with every encounter. Occasionally, the game offers the chance to launch a surprise attack, a nod to the pre‑emptive strike system of Phantasy Star III.

As you level up, you’ll unlock new abilities by spending skill points to boost core stats like Vitality (health) and Might (damage output). Intriguingly, investing in one stat often amplifies others, creating a ripple effect that rewards strategic planning. Dynamic weapon stats with evolving recommendations and an influential elemental system mean that choosing the right upgrade or element at the right moment can turn the tide of battle. With ample chances to respec skills and attributes, the game encourages experimentation; there’s truly no single “best” way to play.

Narrative Integration: Where Gameplay Meets Story

Every element in Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 is designed to weave gameplay seamlessly into a rich narrative tapestry. The visual opulence of Lumiere, with its stark contrasts between daylight vibrancy and nighttime mystery, echoes the deeper themes of decay, resilience, and revelation. The innovative combat mechanics aren’t just about strategy but also serve as a metaphor for the risks and rewards that define the characters’ journeys. Each battle, each exploration, is not merely a challenge to overcome, but a chapter in an evolving story where every choice carries meaning.

This enhanced narrative integration ensures that as you engage with the game’s intricate systems, you’re also drawn into its lore, a narrative where environmental storytelling and dynamic gameplay coalesce to create an experience that is as emotionally engaging as it is visually and mechanically stunning.

Each character in Expedition 33 boasts a unique playstyle, and mastering them takes a little time.
For instance, one character features a combo hit counter, in which the more hits you land without taking damage, the higher your damage output climbs (scaling from a D to an S rating). It’s reminiscent of the combo mechanics found in games like Devil May Cry. Another character uses a stance system where different moves shift you into one of three stances:

  • Defense Stance: Reduced damage received—but also lower damage output.
  • Offensive Stance: Increased damage output—with higher vulnerability.
  • Virtuose Stance: A powerful mode that lets you deal triple damage, though accessing this stance requires extra conditions tied to the skill in use.

What makes these mechanics even more engaging is how they influence the flow of combat. The combo hit counter rewards aggressive, fluid play, encouraging you to build momentum and stay on the offensive. Meanwhile, the stance system adds a tactical layer where quick adaptation can mean the difference between a successful counterattack and taking unnecessary damage.

The game invites you to experiment with each character’s abilities to discover unique synergies. Adjusting your playstyle on the fly, switching stances or chaining combo hits, creates a dynamic combat experience that remains fresh and challenging throughout. These mechanics not only enhance the overall gameplay but also allow you to tailor your approach to suit your strategic preferences.

There are additional nuances to discover, but I won’t spoil those details if you haven’t yet played the game. I love the variety on offer, and I’ve already set my favorite team for the endgame. Not that I dislike any characters, the variety is one of its strongest points, but I do wish I could use more than one at once in combat.

Character Customization and Story Depth
The character designs in Expedition 33 are amazing, with each sporting a distinctive look. As you progress, you’ll have the opportunity to change their clothes and hair, further personalizing their appearance. Each character’s style, ranging from battle scars to unique tattoos, helps to establish a memorable personality.

Moreover, every character has an individual backstory and compelling reasons for joining Expedition 33. It feels like a series of bombshell revelations as you learn more about your companions, the kind of connection I haven’t experienced with another cast since Mass Effect. Each well-crafted story delivers its own “no way” moments, and with multiple endings available, I’m eager to see how my personal narrative unfolds.

World Exploration and Environmental Depth
It isn’t just the main characters that draw you in; the game also offers a rich exploration of its world. You get help from Esquie, an NPC whose quirky interactions add an extra layer of fun as you transverse the map. Other characters also provide deeper interactions that enrich the overall emotional landscape.

Discovery is a constant thrill here, finding journals from previous expeditions (that failed to find and defeat the Paintress) sheds light on the lore and mystery of this strange world. With talks of a movie adaptation, the lore is set to become even deeper and more enriching.

The world map itself is generously sized and gradually opens up as you progress. Brimming with boss fights, exploratory instances, and hidden secrets, I find myself journeying through each area simply because I don’t want the game to end. Some regions are much higher level than you might expect, you can usually tell by encountering tougher enemies or getting a pre-entry warning for an instance if you’re under-leveled.

The area maps, what I call “instances”, vary in size. Some are expansive, offering multiple paths and hidden corners, while others are compact, linear spaces that still pack plenty of exploration opportunities. These areas are designed to reflect their surroundings; for example, a mountainous region might lead you to a cave with interior hues echoing the rugged exterior.

Every area is beautifully crafted, from the ambient design and atmospheric feel to the unique creatures that inhabit them. With treasures tucked away in every nook, you’ll be compelled to explore each corner, wary of missing out on something extraordinary.

Performance and Overall Impressions
Expedition 33 has quickly become a massive hit, selling over 2 million copies in its first few weeks, yet it isn’t without its hiccups. As with many Unreal Engine 5 titles, there are occasional frame rate drops and moments of slight voice/lip sync misalignment. Some boss parry and dodge timings feel off, and at times, inputs (especially when parrying) don’t register as expected.

Despite these technical issues, my overall enjoyment of the game remains high. Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 encapsulates everything I look for in a game: fun, excitement, deep character attachment, and immersive exploration, a welcome change from many modern AAA titles.

Pros & Cons Summary
Below is a quick snapshot of Expedition 33’s strengths and areas for improvement:

  • Pros:
    • Rich character customization and diverse playstyles
    • Deep, engaging backstories reminiscent of Mass Effect
    • An expansive, intricately designed world with plenty of secrets to uncover
    • A unique blend of action and narrative that keeps you invested
  • Cons:
    • Occasional gameplay hiccups, including frame rate drops and input issues
    • Some technical imperfections (e.g., voice/lip sync synchronization)

Looking Ahead: Future Expectations
While the current experience is impressive, I’m hopeful for future updates that address some of the minor performance issues and further refine combat responsiveness. It would be exciting to see the developers add deeper customization options, more dynamic interaction between characters, and even richer lore as the game evolves. With the strong foundation Sandfall Interactive has built, there’s every reason to expect even greater adventures ahead.

Community Engagement
I’d love to hear your thoughts. Which character or playstyle caught your attention the most? Do you think the game’s approach to storytelling and exploration sets a new standard for indie titles? Let’s get a conversation going in the comments!

Until next time, stay sharp and keep gaming.
Panda out.

Comments (1) »

Bungie’s Latest Plagiarism Scandal with Marathon

May 17, 2025 · Filed under Industry Talk · Tagged , , ,

Image – Bungie

Bungie’s reputation for innovation has taken another hit with allegations of plagiarism surrounding its upcoming extraction shooter, Marathon. Independent artist Fern Hook (4nt1r34l) has claimed that Bungie used her designs without permission, igniting widespread criticism from the gaming community.

The Marathon Controversy

Recent comparisons between Marathon concept art and Hook’s original work have surfaced online, showing striking similarities. Hook, a well-respected independent artist, took to X to express her frustration, stating:

“The Marathon alpha released recently, and its environments are covered with assets lifted from poster designs I made in 2017. Bungie is of course not obligated to hire me when making a game that draws overwhelmingly from the same design language I have refined for the last decade, but clearly my work was good enough to pillage for ideas and plaster all over their game without pay or attribution.”
— Fern Hook (Source on X)

Known for her distinctive sci‑fi aesthetic, melding intricate geometric designs with bold colours, Fern Hook’s portfolio showcases years of meticulous work and a unique visual identity that many now see reflected in Marathon.

Bungie has responded with a short statement denying any wrongdoing:

“We immediately investigated a concern regarding unauthorized use of artist decals in Marathon and confirmed that a former Bungie artist included these in a texture sheet that was ultimately used in-game. This issue was unknown by our existing art team, and we are still reviewing how this oversight occurred. We take matters like this very seriously. We have reached out to @4nt1r34l to discuss this issue and are committed to do right by the artist. As a matter of policy, we do not use the work of artists without their permission.”
— Bungie (Source on X)

Bungie’s History of Plagiarism

Unfortunately, this isn’t the first time Bungie has faced accusations of plagiarism. Over the years, similar concerns have arisen about elements in their games, including:

  • Destiny’s Iconography and Armor Designs: Several pieces of Destiny’s armor and symbols have been compared to existing works from lesser-known creators. While some cases were dismissed as mere homage, others sparked deeper concerns over artistic integrity. For instance, Bungie is currently facing a lawsuit over alleged plagiarism in Destiny 2’s Red War campaign.
  • Halo’s Covenant Design: Certain alien designs in Halo bear strong similarities to works from sci‑fi illustrators who were never credited.
  • Weapon Models and Art Assets: Some of Bungie’s weapons and in‑game assets resemble near‑identical concepts from other games, suggesting this isn’t merely an isolated incident but part of a broader trend. Additional issues surrounding Destiny 2 content vaulting, which complicates Bungie’s defense against plagiarism claims.

Community Response and Industry Impact

The gaming community has voiced strong opinions on the matter, with many calling for Bungie to both credit and compensate Fern Hook for the use of her work. Developers and artists across the industry have rallied behind her, urging Bungie to take meaningful action.

Multiple discussions online have highlighted this controversy as a symptom of a broader issue: large studios often disregard the contributions of independent artists. This situation has reignited calls for stronger protections and accountability regarding intellectual property in the gaming industry.

Fern Hook later followed up on her initial post, expressing her gratitude for the overwhelming support:

“I never expected this level of response. Seeing fellow artists and gamers call this out means the world to me. I just want proper credit, and for people to understand how often this happens in the industry.”
— Fern Hook (Source on X)

As Marathon moves toward release, the gaming community remains vigilant, ensuring that Bungie is held accountable for any further missteps.

The Impact on Independent Creators

Beyond the immediate controversy, the broader implications of plagiarism are deeply damaging to independent artists. For many creators, their work isn’t just a form of expression, it’s also their livelihood. When large studios appropriate designs without proper credit or compensation, these artists lose potential income and opportunities to secure commissions or future partnerships. This financial loss can force talented individuals to struggle for recognition in an already competitive field.

Plagiarism also stifles creativity. Independent artists invest countless hours refining their unique visual styles and building their portfolios. When a major studio borrows heavily from their work without acknowledgment, it sends a discouraging message: original ideas can be exploited without consequence. This not only undermines the artist’s effort but can also deter them, and others, from taking creative risks, potentially leading to a homogenized industry where innovation is sacrificed for familiarity.

Moreover, such incidents erode trust within the creative community. When independent artists see their work repurposed without proper credit, it creates a barrier between emerging talent and established industry giants. This disconnect hinders collaborative progress and fosters an environment where creators feel undervalued and unsupported. Ultimately, for the gaming industry to truly flourish, major players must adopt ethical practices that honor and protect the contributions of every creative voice.

Corporate Vigilance and Ethical Practices

In addition to the damaging effects on independent creators, large companies bear a responsibility to uphold a culture of originality and ethical creativity. To prevent incidents of plagiarism, studios should implement strict internal review protocols. This means establishing multi-level approval processes and dedicated creative oversight teams to ensure that every piece of art or design is thoroughly vetted before inclusion in any project.

Legal checks and comprehensive training on intellectual property rights should also be standard practice. By instituting rigorous internal audits and ensuring that every external work is properly licensed and credited, companies can avoid missteps that lead to accusations, or instances, of plagiarism.

Beyond internal measures, proactive engagement with the creative community is essential. Open dialogue, transparent collaboration, and even direct partnerships with independent artists can help large studios build mutual trust. When companies value and protect the contributions of smaller creators, they not only safeguard themselves against potential legal and public relations issues, but also foster a richer and more innovative creative ecosystem.

Ultimately, embracing these ethical practices can transform a reactive approach to plagiarism into a proactive commitment to originality and respect for all artists, a move that benefits the industry as a whole.

Until next time, stay sharp and keep gaming.

Panda out.

References:

Image – Bungie – https://www.marathonthegame.com/announcement

Comments (2) »

Gaming Is in Trouble, And It’s Time to Talk About It!

May 6, 2025 · Filed under Industry Talk · Tagged , , ,

Remember when buying a new game felt exciting? When studios actually cared about delivering unforgettable experiences rather than chasing trends? Those days feel further and further away.

It has been years since I last reviewed anything, not because I haven’t been playing games, but because I never thought about doing one. However, given the way the industry has been heading, I felt it was time to speak up.

I’ll be sharing my thoughts on games I am playing, have played, or will play. But for now, this post is going to be a rant, because there’s a lot to unpack, and each topic could easily warrant its own discussion.

Gaming’s Decline: Where Did It Go Wrong?

The gaming industry is in massive decline, and there are several reasons for it:

  • Inflated budgets – Games now demand massive financial investments, with productions sometimes exceeding blockbuster movie budgets. Grand Theft Auto VI, for instance, is rumored to have cost over $1 billion to develop.
  • Corporate greed – Many studios prioritize profit over player experience. Nintendo has increased game and console prices for the upcoming Switch 2, further pushing its premium pricing strategy. Meanwhile, companies like EA and Ubisoft aggressively push microtransactions into their games, turning titles like FIFA (now EA Sports FC) and Madden into pay-to-win experiences.
  • Mass layoffs – 2024 and 2025 have seen thousands of job losses across the industry, with major companies like Epic Games, Microsoft (Activision Blizzard), and EA cutting huge portions of their workforce.
  • Oversaturated markets – The sheer number of games being released, especially low-effort live service titles, makes it harder for quality projects to shine.
  • Live service failures – The industry has chased live-service games aggressively, but many have flopped. Look at Concord, another live-service shooter struggling to differentiate itself in an overcrowded market. Ubisoft’s XDefiant, another multiplayer attempt, has also faced hurdles in gaining traction.

But in my eyes, the biggest issue is that developers are failing to give players what they truly want, a good game.

Gaming is meant to be an escape from reality. When we boot up a game, we want to enjoy ourselves, whether that’s through epic stories, lovable characters, stunning environments (not just graphical fidelity), or engaging gameplay that keeps us coming back.

Yet, for some reason, many companies, particularly AAA studios, struggle to deliver this. While we largely understand why it’s happening, this post isn’t about discussing the politics behind it.

AAA vs. Smaller Studios: The Shift in Power

Recently, a friend and I discussed the last new release we bought on launch day. My last buy was Baldur’s Gate 3, a game that quickly became one of my all-time favorites. I’ve poured almost 200 hours into it, which is rare for a game these days. Before BG3, I can’t even remember the last game I paid for on release.

More often than not, I find myself playing through my backlog instead of purchasing anything new. Honestly, if I didn’t have Game Pass, I wouldn’t be playing new games at all until their prices dropped.

This trend highlights a major industry shift, non-AAA studios understand gamers better than the big corporations.

Many smaller teams are moving away from the outdated “what companies think we want” approach, instead focusing on what developers themselves know we want. When a game is made by gamers for gamers, the passion behind it is clear.

For example:

  • Indie Success Stories – Games like Hollow Knight, Hades, and Dave the Diver have delivered incredible experiences despite smaller budgets.
  • AA Games Thriving – Titles like Hellblade: Senua’s Sacrifice and Lies of P prove that mid-tier studios can craft stunning, innovative games without bloated development cycles.
  • AAA Failures vs. Indie Wins – Ubisoft’s troubled releases keep falling well short of the mark, while Larian Studios’ Baldur’s Gate 3 was a massive success, proving that passion-driven development wins over corporate formulaic releases.

These studios are proving to the so-called industry leaders how it should be done, and big publishers aren’t happy about it. It’s hurting them badly. Just look at Ubisoft and EA’s declining stock performance for proof.

The Future of Gaming: What Needs to Change?

We need a shift, a move away from the annual garbage that AAA studios keep shoving down our throats. Gamers are sick of it, and now we’re finally seeing that reflected in player spending and reception.

Just look at Call of Duty and FIFA (now EA Sports FC), both franchises that churn out yearly releases with minimal innovation, yet expect players to shell out full price every time.

The backlash against unfinished launches is growing, too. Cyberpunk 2077‘s disastrous first year proved that rushing a game to market can destroy its reputation, forcing CD Projekt Red to spend years fixing what should have been right from the start.

As the classic saying goes: Don’t bite the hand that feeds you, because if you do, we’ll go support someone else. Unfortunately for some companies, they’ve already bitten off the entire hand, leaving nothing left to sustain them.

Final Thoughts: Hope in the Chaos

The gaming industry is at a crossroads. The cracks in AAA dominance are showing, and gamers are no longer willing to accept recycled, soulless releases. We want passion. We want creativity. We want games made for players, not for profit alone.

As big studios scramble to maintain control, smaller teams are stepping up, proving that when developers listen to their audience, greatness happens.

My heart goes out to those affected by industry layoffs, and unfortunately, I see more on the horizon. But from the ashes of corporate restructuring, I also predict a new wave of independent studios rising to fill the void.

The future of gaming isn’t in the hands of executives, it’s in ours.

Let’s support the developers who still believe in the magic of gaming. Because if we do, the industry might just turn itself around.

But until next time, Panda out.

Leave a comment »