Unfinished Game Releases

Lycanking

Lycanking

New member
I am annoyed. The state of the gaming industry with regard to the 'big fish' (EA, Activision, Bethesda, etc) is shocking in one particular way. There is a distinct culture of deadlines over finished product. How can you release a game that is cripplingly sub-par that will require a patch within a few days of release and already has DLC available within a week of its release. How would you like it if I sold you a car with the seats missing? You could still drive it but it's gonna be a rough ride. This must be one of the only industries where unfinished products are sold and it makes me pissed. But what can you do? Say 'No! I won't go and buy the new COD!' Like that's gona happen. I feel helpless in the face of bad service. What do we do? Throw in the towel and find a new hobby, or only buy games from certain developers? The reliable ones at least.
 
The main problem is the expansion of Broadband and the ability for developers to do this, in the old days they built a game, ran it through tests etc... As it was difficult to get patches to consumers, also back then it was easier to develop games from your garage and it took a couple of months. Nowadays with the big budgets and the massive amounts of consumerism going on games need to ship faster, be better and just be there, developers know they can meet their deadlines and fix any bugs with a patch later as there is a wider range of ways for them to get these patches to people. I prefer it this way as in the old days if there was a massive bug in a game you lived with it and sometimes it was game breaking.
 
There is only one way to deal with this... to not buy the titles.
Some developers are more prone to releaseing unfinished products, Obsidian come to mind, and while for the msot part titles released on the PS3 and Xbox need to pass Sony & MS's quality control. PC does not have anything like this, which is why a console title may often need a single update while PC titles require massive patches.

Unfortunatly this is part of the industry growing up, it is no longer about 4 guyz in a basement designing something. This is a multibillion dollar industry and missing a deadline could cause a publisher to drop the project resulting in devs having no money to finish the titles.

There are however studio's out there who go out of their way to polish a title before release, Bungie, Rocksteady, Naughty Dog, Santa Monica ect are all know for releasing extremly polished and bug free games.

Like i said in the beginning. If a game is buggy dont buy it, that is the only way to show the industry quality still matters to us.
 
You make a good point but the interweb has made it easier for Devs to just patch whatever problems occur after release. But I agree: it does appear that deadline overshadows quality and proper testing in some cases. But not everyone can be kept happy. Ie: GT5 has been delayed and delayed and delayed. Why? Probably 'cos something is not working (or 100%) and they want to get is as good as it can be before release. Now, people are complaining 'cos of all the delays.

What is even more off-putting is where titles show minor flaws (think the Audio static problems on Orange Box PS3), and the devs make no attempt to rectify the issue with a patch. Then it is more a case of "Thanx for giving us your money, now leave sucker". My response is to just not buy games from developers I know had issues in the past without some research.

There are certain Dev's whose games I wont buy, regardless of what reviews say. One being THQ (save SVR). Except for SVR, imho, their titles blow in the quality dept. Need proof? Check out Bulletwitch and Bloodrayne. Eish!!
 
Last edited:
symbolofmylife said:
You make a good point but the interweb has made it easier for Devs to just patch whatever problems occur after release. But I agree: it does appear that deadline overshadows quality and proper testing in some cases. But not everyone can be kept happy. Ie: GT5 has been delayed and delayed and delayed. Why? Probably 'cos something is not working (or 100%) and they want to get is as good as it can be before release. Now, people are complaining 'cos of all the delays.

What is even more off-putting is where titles show minor flaws (think the Audio static problems on Orange Box PS3), and the devs make no attempt to rectify the issue with a patch. Then it is more a case of "Thanx for giving us your money, now leave sucker". My response is to just not buy games from developers I know had issues in the past without some research.

There are certain Dev's whose games I wont buy, regardless of what reviews say. One being THQ (save SVR). Except for SVR, imho, their titles blow in the quality dept. Need proof? Check out Bulletwitch and Bloodrayne. Eish!!
Click to expand...

Remember THQ is a publisher, not a dev.

Do you know what Halo Reach's first update did? It rebalanced the MP, you know how they did that? Server side, we did not even have to download anything on our side. Thats how you release a game, but Reach had a 3 year dev cycle and not all devs have the capital to only release titles once every 3 years.
 
I understand the money issue from the dev side but I still feel that quality is a critical part of any product and it is being sacrificed in favour of lead times. Take less of a profit and invest more into QC and I think that the gaming world would be a much happier place.
 
I agree with all the point above. They are valid. But also take into consideration how much more goes into video games nowadays than 5-10 years ago. Sure, back in the day if a developer released a buggy game they got in huge kak for it, but at the same time there wasnt so much of a variety of PC specs etc. Developers are in it for the cash, and if they can make the same game run "averagely" across three platforms then they make money. Hence why games that are exclusives are so polished.
 
Terak said:
I agree with all the point above. They are valid. But also take into consideration how much more goes into video games nowadays than 5-10 years ago. Sure, back in the day if a developer released a buggy game they got in huge kak for it, but at the same time there wasnt so much of a variety of PC specs etc. Developers are in it for the cash, and if they can make the same game run "averagely" across three platforms then they make money. Hence why games that are exclusives are so polished.
Click to expand...

There you have a good point. Cross-platform I would imagine is a major bugger for devs. Hmmmm, so exclusive only or wait a few weeks before getting a game so the patches are out seem like the two best options to me.
 
Lycanking said:
There you have a good point. Cross-platform I would imagine is a major bugger for devs. Hmmmm, so exclusive only or wait a few weeks before getting a game so the patches are out seem like the two best options to me.
Click to expand...

Thats how I do it. I own a ps3 and an Xbox, i get exclusives for both and then check out multiplats to see on which system it runs best then get it for that.
 
Its funny when developers release a game on time you moan

When polyphony delays GT5 to sort out the bugs you moan........

Guess its just human nature to moan........
 
Viking said:
Its funny when developers release a game on time you moan

When polyphony delays GT5 to sort out the bugs you moan........

Guess its just human nature to moan........
Click to expand...

Rocksteady delayed Batman AA by 2 or 3 months and look a the result. Brink was delayed by Splash Damage from November release to a Feb release for polishing. GT5 has been delayed for 3 years.... yeah then the consumer is going to get cranky coz everytime the hype goes up and then its delayed.

Delaying a game for even 6 months to make sure u release it in the best possible condition I have nothing against that, coz it will be worth the wait.
 
The internet has changed gaming (wrt to this issue) in two ways...

1. Devs can release early and patch

2. Devs can delay, have fanboys moan and hurt their sales.

It's a lose/lose situation for the devs unless they have a HUGE following and a guaranteed hit.

EDIT: Even then, one of those two factors can still come into play...
 
Viking said:
Its funny when developers release a game on time you moan

When polyphony delays GT5 to sort out the bugs you moan........

Guess its just human nature to moan........
Click to expand...

Would not have an issue if a game is delayed cause it ain't yet fit to be played. I'd much rather wait than have to deal with game crippling bugs. I think its those who jump than gun and preorder to save a buck that end up moaning when a game is released later than expected.
 
The only way the devs/publishers will learn is a mass boycott by the gamers, but sadly this will never happen as there are simply too many fanbois and gamers in general who will buy the product no matter what. Some because they don't care and many because they know a patch will fix things.

Now if it was simply a patch, fine. But what gets my goat is the whole new thing of DLC. I understand broadband opens up great revenue for devs/publishers by releasing DLC every 2nd week or month, but they prices they charge is not fair. Years gone by, you would get expansion packs that yes, would cost a bit more than DLC today, but they included WAY more content than todays' DLC.

I understand it's all about making money, but somewhere you kinda wish, hope and pray that these fat cats might realise that maybe they should look after their customers just a little bit better. Just maybe.
 
That's exactly my issue: The fat cat ideology. The nature of the industry is that publishers distribute through third party retailers and hence are not directly accountable to the consumer. Take the Activision facebook page and this whole issue with COD. They say WE the consumer must stay CALM cause they buggered up. I think that they should be grovelling rather than shouting for calm from their great height.
 
EA hasn't releaced a single solitary fully developed game since C&C renegade, who the developers are is irrelevant, there all part of EA and thats whats going to happen with every last game they make. So I simply don't buy EA games.

Also somebody said THQ doesn't produce quality. Well...
Company Of Heroes
Titan Quest
Warhammer
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
Frontlines

Just a few examples
 
Last edited:
Raven Gold said:
EA hasn't releaced a single solitary fully developed game since C&C renegade, who the developers are is irrelevant, there all part of EA and thats whats going to happen with every last game they make. So I simply don't buy EA games.
Click to expand...

Why is who the developer is irrelevant? EA, unless its an EA studio like EA Shanghai or something, is just a publisher with a great many developement studio's under its umbrella. Thats like saying all Universal movies are crap just coz Doom was shit.... instead of say this and this film studio is kak for releasing it.
 
OmegaFenix said:
Why is who the developer is irrelevant? EA, unless its an EA studio like EA Shanghai or something, is just a publisher with a great many developement studio's under its umbrella. Thats like saying all Universal movies are crap just coz Doom was shit.... instead of say this and this film studio is kak for releasing it.
Click to expand...

Give me the name of any EA game in the last 7 years that has zero bugs on the PC version at releace?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top