Doesn't really matter. Wolf2 had a MASSIVE budget and produced mediocre results. KCD had a decent budget and sold like hotcakes. Investors will notice the trend. And turning a blind eye to the obvious pandering doesn't make you special. "NO, UR JUST AS BAD AS THE OTHER GUISE" is a shit tier non-argument. Sorry mate. Keep developing games, tho.
Can people stop using money and profit as an example of quality game? If money would be only thing that matters. Mass Effect Andromeda would be totally awesome, while Vogel's games would be total crap. (And Sims would be a pinnacle of game design. Which they kinda are, but only from theoretical point of view of person who studied post gradual education in game development and AI. Which for these who are normal means he probably means it was crap but for these with post-gradual it has some qualities they are using in incomprehensible dissertations about art and whatever stuff... Something like movie critics.)
KCD was released as technological disaster with some redeeming qualities. And that's it. Would it be viewed to be as extraordinary as Vampire Bloodlines were 10 years later? Probably not. Would it be better than Mafia? That's the question, when it will be viewed 10 later as better game, it would mean these developers improved themselves, and it wasn't only they had more money to throw at wall and hoped it sticks.
(Of course I'd prefer if Troika would survive as charity organization paid by government, and releasing quality freeware. But it's what it's. Players needs hope for decent games that made in spite of current profit based societies.)
