suck is forever
Why is the consumer just expected to roll over and take it when a game sucks instead of the responsibility being on the publisher to release updates until the game resembles what was originally advertised? Games aren't on ROM cartridges anymore, you can still improve the game after it's released.
Look, No Man's Sky set the precedent for what you're supposed to do when your game sucks at launch. And we should expect nothing less from game studios with ten times the person-power and money.
Gabe was talking about the making of Half Life, back when you shipped your disc and that was that. And the game was, apparently, crapola.
Same kind of deal with the original Deus Ex. It was a spaghetti of poorly interacting systems until the devs were able to make it all click together.
Gabe was talking about the making of Half Life, back when you shipped your disc and that was that. And the game was, apparently, crapola.
There were patch and updates back in the day. The problem was that not everybody had a good internet connection or a connection at all, during the 90's.
Games like Daikatana and SiN were flops due to bugs that required patches to fix.
tbf that's a lot easier to say when you're the president of one of the richest companies in the industry. I don't disagree, but not everybody has the resources to just keep developing forever, and that's easy to forget too.
It's often enough AAA with tons of money that force insane crunch to hit a release date and still have buggy, uncompleted games.
Counterpoint: Star Citizen.
I'm not being snarky there. If there are no deadlines and unlimited feature creep, you get Star Citizen. Or rather, you never get Star Citizen except as a janky hyper-monetized pre-alpha.
Yes, landing is difficult.
There is delaying to release a higher quality product and delaying while having features creep... Not the same thing.
Nah star citizen was a scam first, game second. If it ever produces a game it will have been purely incidental to continuing to run the scam and milk those whales
I kind of believe Chris Roberts himself is just an overambitious perfectionist. He pulled the same kind of bullshit with Freelancer, which only released because Microsoft put its foot down.
I can also believe that a lot of the top people around him are grifters feeding his ambition and perfectionism to keep the gravy train running.
Either way, they got my Kickstarter money so the only entertainment I'll ever get from that game is opining about it like I know anything.
That's my take too, though "overambitious perfectionist" still sounds too flattering for what a bumbling narcissist he is.
He even put himself directly into the fiction's lore as
but bigger.https://starcitizen.tools/Chris_Roberts_(lore)
The real question is... Can indie games publishers afford the delay of a game?
Valve was a completely new company then. They weren't going indie, but Sierra didn't pay them for the remake of Half-Life. In the documentary they talk about financing it by creating Half-Life: Day One.
Chet Falizek, a dev who led L4D and a couple other games at valve talks about this a lot on TikTok, now that he's running an indie studio. He's a cool guy, would fit in on .ml or something for sure.
Joke on him, often game gets delayed under this exact pretext and it suck anyway.
I think it becomes a mixture of too early and delaying.
Some games clearly need another year to finish but they delay it for half a year and wont allow more for themselves
While this was true in a pre-Steam world, it hasn't been true for a while.
See Terraria (which didn't suck, but was lackluster compared to how the game is now), No Man's Sky, Cyberpunk 2077.
I don't have a problem when small studios do it for games like Terraria and No Man's Sky. It keeps them solvent without having to attach themselves to a big publisher.
I do have a problem when a giant, established company does it, as is the case for Cyberpunk 2077.
Whenever I hear this quote I also think of the developers/publishers. They need to have a good reputation so people buy their games.
I think that's why EA, Blizzard, Ubisoft, Activision, etc sales have gone down. I will not say that gamers react fairly when it comes to unfinished game releases, but it takes one bad game to ruin a developer. Especially when you consider how small the margins are or if they are publicly traded. Even developers with good games have recently been going out of business because it's not sustainable.
I also think of their legacies. Especially in a post-steam world, a game with a good legacy will continue to sell for much longer. I don't think a game like Watch Dogs ever got rid of the stink surrounding it, even though it isn't a bad game to go back to nowadays.
