somebodyspecial
Honorable
- Sep 20, 2012
- 1,459
- 0
- 11,310
I'd rather have it done when it's done vs. EA and Battlefield 4 crap, which might save me from reading 10 reviews before handing over my cash. How much hate would you avoid (and lawsuits?) if you had taken another few months to FINISH the game for real? I expect a few patches (more?) on an RPG or Strategy game, but a shooter should not come out like the other two as they don't have all the complicated crap going on (story, quests, 1000's of items, spells, units etc). It's tougher to do a game with OODLES of gameplay vs. a shooter with craploads of graphics. The amount of info you have to keep track of and manipulate in an RPG/Strat game, and the balancing act that goes on takes a lot of work so I'm comfortable loading a 1/2 dozen patches or just waiting it out (these days I wait you out anyway, so might as well GET IT DONE WHEN IT'S DONE) until GOTY etc with all DLC that should be in the game ALREADY. Today they charge $100 (20% of the game for launch, then 5 DLC's on top milking you) for the full game that used to cost $50 and last 4-8 times longer...LOL. But someone please explain why a shooter needs so much patching you may be looking at a lawsuit? How beta is your shooter if this is the case? Wait until the games are done. Another 4-6 months on BF4 would not make it look like it was designed for xbox360. It would however, WORK out of the box probably by then...LOL.
Is it comic that a seemingly BETA AMD card launch, is paired with a BETA game for AMD's first Mantle game? If that isn't funny to you (Nvidiots surely are laughing) then it must be SAD to you (AMDidiots?). In either case it's a shame this happened. Both the GAME and the CARD should have been delayed a few months (nvidia wouldn't have released 780TI until you hit with hawaii no matter when it came). You can only take so much bad publicity without it hurting sales. IE BF4 sales down 70% from BF3 which shouldn't be surprising with talk of lawsuits and Dice themselves saying other stuff is on hold as they try to fix the mess (much like Hawaii - like it or not, for all but AMD's true fans, this gpu has a bad rep now for many). You can't sell BETA products and expect paying customers to enjoy the experience.
I don't necessarily agree with a 5yr cycle, but 2-3 is fine and yearly crap just makes me skip a year. Even for sports games I'd rather have one year you make the game, the next you just POLISH the crap out of game play for a year and do a roster update (I don't even need a graphic update yearly - or at most a few new animations/voices etc which is all we get now anyway). I'd be much happier than yearly graphic updates with "the gameplay still sucks". The lack of polish has made me not buy a madden/nba/nhl game in 5+ years. I used to buy all 3 yearly, but now all that money goes to GOG.com while I wait for the one they finally say is BETTER than the last 5. Madden hasn't produced a better game since 2002-2005 (pretty yes, FUN & realistic? not so much). I used to play full NFL seasons, now I barely get through a complete game as scores/yards etc are totally out of whack from reality.
I'm loving that I get 5-10x more games yearly because of GOG.com these days...LOL. If you don't score 75+ at metacritic and have users scores above 6.5 I generally don't even see your game on my radar now. Get gameplay back up to snuff (graphics come last to me if it make the PLAY part suck I'm out in 15 minutes), or never get me back until a possible bargain bin price impulse buy. I don't expect to patch a shooter for a year and I really don't expect to be downloading multiple gigs in patches either. How bad is your game if you're replacing HUGE portions of it monthly (that is a BETA right?)? We are getting so much CRAP these days I am basically a GOTY/Ultimate edition only guy these days and don't touch anything on release and consider the first expansion to many games to be like SP1 for any Microsoft product (meaning required before purchase)...LOL. Many games don't get fixed until an expansion is installed (oddly some use this as a basic sales pitch for the expansions), like you'll get a v2.0 for it which may alter play balancing of the original to the way it should have been ORIGINALLY. It isn't wiser to produce 20 junk games that get poor reviews and sell ZERO units vs. say 10 POLISHED games that sell MILLIONS. Stick to the POLISHED games please.
I really wish some website would RE-REVIEW games after 6 months-1yr to let us know that many are no longer BETA's after a dozen patches and a year. They should at least the big titles that were supposed to be great but seemed like betas that might get far better with patches. There are many games that I never look at again due to the "NEW CARMACK" type mentality of push it out no matter what, and initial review scores being so bad I think they couldn't fix the mess even with patches. But many RPG/Strat games get really good after 6-12 months of balancing etc. For example Heroes of Might & Magic 5, 6 etc...Wouldn't buy on day one (or any strategy game these days), but great after 6 months or GOLD versions. It's really sad when you are in a situation where you're semi-foolish (or have a fat wallet?) to buy a game within the first 6 months of release in many cases. I remember the 80's-90's where games were $30-40 and since not many had a way to get patches, games were FINISHED when shipped in most cases. Patching back then meant shipping a physical disk to someone and if you needed very many, they just yanked the game from shelves like Front Page Sports Football from Sierra (BF4 would have been yanked already in the 80's). I can't wait for big devs to die (EA, Blizzard, etc) and small devs or kickstarter stuff takes over. I'm far more impressed by a Torchlight 2 these days than Diablo 3 stuff as the little guys seem to put out better stuff. They also seem to accept tons of feedback during the game development vs. big devs that seem to just be expensive marketing machines that make SHAREHOLDER games instead of game player games.
I used to buy games based on the company. Then I bought based on following the teams making the games, like following diablo guys as they moved on to making torchlight games. Now I only care about what reviews say FIRST (users & review sites, but more users than review sites as sites are bought off like govt officials) and never get suckered. Worse, I now regularly wait for patching like SP1 for windows. Sorry Carmack, that isn't progress that's destroying trust between the company and the gamer. That's a TOTAL FAILURE IMHO. The words PRE-ORDER are not even part of my vocabulary today (but once were) and the mentality spouted by Carmack here is exactly why I am this way now. I now consider those two words for RICH or STUPID people as I don't have time to play betas nor money to waste on a game you can't return today (if you never get it fixed I'm screwed), and have grown sick of playing games that I finish or quit before they are even fixed. This mentality creates more pirates, not more paying customers. I just refuse to buy your game, but most will just steal it if they deem it not worth BUYING.
Is it comic that a seemingly BETA AMD card launch, is paired with a BETA game for AMD's first Mantle game? If that isn't funny to you (Nvidiots surely are laughing) then it must be SAD to you (AMDidiots?). In either case it's a shame this happened. Both the GAME and the CARD should have been delayed a few months (nvidia wouldn't have released 780TI until you hit with hawaii no matter when it came). You can only take so much bad publicity without it hurting sales. IE BF4 sales down 70% from BF3 which shouldn't be surprising with talk of lawsuits and Dice themselves saying other stuff is on hold as they try to fix the mess (much like Hawaii - like it or not, for all but AMD's true fans, this gpu has a bad rep now for many). You can't sell BETA products and expect paying customers to enjoy the experience.
I don't necessarily agree with a 5yr cycle, but 2-3 is fine and yearly crap just makes me skip a year. Even for sports games I'd rather have one year you make the game, the next you just POLISH the crap out of game play for a year and do a roster update (I don't even need a graphic update yearly - or at most a few new animations/voices etc which is all we get now anyway). I'd be much happier than yearly graphic updates with "the gameplay still sucks". The lack of polish has made me not buy a madden/nba/nhl game in 5+ years. I used to buy all 3 yearly, but now all that money goes to GOG.com while I wait for the one they finally say is BETTER than the last 5. Madden hasn't produced a better game since 2002-2005 (pretty yes, FUN & realistic? not so much). I used to play full NFL seasons, now I barely get through a complete game as scores/yards etc are totally out of whack from reality.
I'm loving that I get 5-10x more games yearly because of GOG.com these days...LOL. If you don't score 75+ at metacritic and have users scores above 6.5 I generally don't even see your game on my radar now. Get gameplay back up to snuff (graphics come last to me if it make the PLAY part suck I'm out in 15 minutes), or never get me back until a possible bargain bin price impulse buy. I don't expect to patch a shooter for a year and I really don't expect to be downloading multiple gigs in patches either. How bad is your game if you're replacing HUGE portions of it monthly (that is a BETA right?)? We are getting so much CRAP these days I am basically a GOTY/Ultimate edition only guy these days and don't touch anything on release and consider the first expansion to many games to be like SP1 for any Microsoft product (meaning required before purchase)...LOL. Many games don't get fixed until an expansion is installed (oddly some use this as a basic sales pitch for the expansions), like you'll get a v2.0 for it which may alter play balancing of the original to the way it should have been ORIGINALLY. It isn't wiser to produce 20 junk games that get poor reviews and sell ZERO units vs. say 10 POLISHED games that sell MILLIONS. Stick to the POLISHED games please.
I really wish some website would RE-REVIEW games after 6 months-1yr to let us know that many are no longer BETA's after a dozen patches and a year. They should at least the big titles that were supposed to be great but seemed like betas that might get far better with patches. There are many games that I never look at again due to the "NEW CARMACK" type mentality of push it out no matter what, and initial review scores being so bad I think they couldn't fix the mess even with patches. But many RPG/Strat games get really good after 6-12 months of balancing etc. For example Heroes of Might & Magic 5, 6 etc...Wouldn't buy on day one (or any strategy game these days), but great after 6 months or GOLD versions. It's really sad when you are in a situation where you're semi-foolish (or have a fat wallet?) to buy a game within the first 6 months of release in many cases. I remember the 80's-90's where games were $30-40 and since not many had a way to get patches, games were FINISHED when shipped in most cases. Patching back then meant shipping a physical disk to someone and if you needed very many, they just yanked the game from shelves like Front Page Sports Football from Sierra (BF4 would have been yanked already in the 80's). I can't wait for big devs to die (EA, Blizzard, etc) and small devs or kickstarter stuff takes over. I'm far more impressed by a Torchlight 2 these days than Diablo 3 stuff as the little guys seem to put out better stuff. They also seem to accept tons of feedback during the game development vs. big devs that seem to just be expensive marketing machines that make SHAREHOLDER games instead of game player games.
I used to buy games based on the company. Then I bought based on following the teams making the games, like following diablo guys as they moved on to making torchlight games. Now I only care about what reviews say FIRST (users & review sites, but more users than review sites as sites are bought off like govt officials) and never get suckered. Worse, I now regularly wait for patching like SP1 for windows. Sorry Carmack, that isn't progress that's destroying trust between the company and the gamer. That's a TOTAL FAILURE IMHO. The words PRE-ORDER are not even part of my vocabulary today (but once were) and the mentality spouted by Carmack here is exactly why I am this way now. I now consider those two words for RICH or STUPID people as I don't have time to play betas nor money to waste on a game you can't return today (if you never get it fixed I'm screwed), and have grown sick of playing games that I finish or quit before they are even fixed. This mentality creates more pirates, not more paying customers. I just refuse to buy your game, but most will just steal it if they deem it not worth BUYING.
Many I'm re-buying (like I'm only after the single and maybe another two of a 5-6 pack) but getting out of DRM on older copies and selling originals to friends with discs and I keep the gog's on a external that's always off (just in case they go belly up one day-don't expect his but do it anyway). I buy enough games at gog (sure this works for steam users too, or both combined) during these 2 weeks at xmas to get me by most of the year and still have a few from last xmas to play. Or they may have been from a few sales during the year as some are just too tough to pass up. 
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram