|
Your donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » The Escapist - Death to Good Graphics

Default The Escapist - Death to Good Graphics

May 27th, 2009, 13:45
Originally Posted by Benedict View Post


I was just about to do the same thing . . . .

D'Artagnan, assuming you are simply misunderstood, and have seemingly been frequently misunderstood in a succession of threads by a fair number of the regular posters on here, rather than blaming everyone else for not reading your posts properly wouldn't you be better off taking some of the comments on board and trying to avoid being quite so misunderstood in the future?

Unless of course you enjoy the arguments, but then I've already called you competitive once and you didn't seem that keen on acknowledging it
Oh, I definitely don't enjoy arguments like this.

But I enjoy EVEN LESS to be treated like I'm some kind of liar who can't admit when he's wrong.

As it stands, everything points to us not getting each other - because I refuse to believe you're doing this INTENTIONALLY - which is to say, I really hope you're not deliberately ignoring what I'm trying to say.

I'm really sorry that this is going on and on, but I think it's simply unfair of you to paint this picture of me - even when it's most likely based on miscommunication.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#81

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 15,258

Default 

May 27th, 2009, 14:32
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
But I enjoy EVEN LESS to be treated like I'm some kind of liar who can't admit when he's wrong.


Rough summary of thread:

D'Artagnan says something
Everyone else in the thread reads it one way
D'Artagnan tells everyone off for not reading it properly because it's clearly their fault even if that's the way everyone else read it.

I admire you D'Artagnan. Some people might take the opportunity to listen to the constructive criticism and learn and grow and avoid future misunderstandings, but not you, you know that you were right all along and it's all everyone else's fault for not reading things properly.
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#82

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348

Default 

May 27th, 2009, 15:02
Originally Posted by Benedict View Post


Rough summary of thread:

D'Artagnan says something
Everyone else in the thread reads it one way
D'Artagnan tells everyone off for not reading it properly because it's clearly their fault even if that's the way everyone else read it.

I admire you D'Artagnan. Some people might take the opportunity to listen to the constructive criticism and learn and grow and avoid future misunderstandings, but not you, you know that you were right all along and it's all everyone else's fault for not reading things properly.
Rough summary of thread:

An article is posted

Poster agrees and comments on technology being a problem

DArtagnan claims technology isn't the problem, but something else

People start explaining how more content takes more time

DArtagnan says that's not about technology, but focus on the kind of problem he was talking about

DArtagnan posts an explanation for how we misunderstood each other based on semantics

People ignore this post and go on a tirade based on who knows more about 3D modeling

DArtagnan concedes he really doesn't know much about 3D modeling, but that the basics are inescapable - and he repeats that the original misunderstanding was based on semantics

Rest of thread consists of telling DArtagnan he's wrong and can't admit it - and that he needs to learn and evolve.

DArtagnan spends the rest of the thread trying to communicate why his opinion stands and hasn't changed - and repeatedly points to the miscommuncation.

—-

You admire me? How nice - and I wonder if your smileys are meant to entice a reaction or simply "smooth" your apparent bias and dislike. It's not entirely clear.

The only one interested in placing blame here is you.

I don't care who's at fault, I just feel it's my right to explain myself.

It's not about being right - because we're talking about different opinions. The only thing I'm right about is what my point was - and not what you and others seem to think it was. It's as if you think it's OK to tell me what I meant with what I said - and you don't care, in the LEAST, about figuring out where it went wrong.

Besides, only a few people have really commented, and I think that has mostly to do with their opinion of who knows more about 3D modeling - me or the ninja guy. I already said I don't know much at all - and I wasn't talking about the time it takes to do VASTLY more content - but the time it takes to do the same kind of content adjusted for modern technology.

At least we had a developer participating who seemed to understand SOME of what I was saying, and he even gave a great example of how you can use technology to your advantage - instead of going crazy.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#83

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 15,258

Default 

May 27th, 2009, 15:18
It's an interesting discussion, but a shame it has gotten so derailed

On the topic of marketing budget and development budget - it's not as simple as it sounds to say "lets just spend more money on development and less on marketing". And it's most certainly not something that the developer can control. Development of the game and pr/marketing is usually done by two completely different units, each with their own budget. Usually a development house is contracted by a publisher to do the actual development of the game while the publisher handles pr/marketing themselves.

Before a contract is signed the development house will have delivered a very detailed budget that shows exactly how many man months are needed to implement the game, how these man months are distributed over the development period (for example, less staff is needed in pre-production than when the game enters full production). The studio will then typically have a number it uses as the average cost of a man month (based on average salary, cost of running the studio etc) and from this a total cost for the project is calculated. Also a milestone plan is negotiated which details exactly what must be delivered at what dates before the development house is paid the budgeted amount.

I can promise you that *only* costs that are directly related to development of game features will be covered by the publisher. Stuff like slips in schedule, staff not directly covered by the project (cooks, cleaners, receptionists etc), expensive parties etc is *not* covered by the development budget. That money must be taken from the earnings/investments the studio might have.

Right now the whole business is under pressure and a lot of companies goes belly-up. Therefore some studios might be tempted to accept very tight schedules that are in fact overly optimistic. As a result we'll have these so-called crunch periods where the developers have to work overtime to try and reach the next milestone, as defined in the contract. Tired developers makes mistakes… so in the end the studio might be able to meet the agreed milestone, but maybe the product is buggy or maybe the staff is burned out.

My point is that the budget available for making the actual game is already quite high (because of the increased cost of creating acceptable content and acceptable *amount* of content) - and the budget for marketing should be seen as an addition to this, not available for the developer.
KasperFauerby is offline

KasperFauerby

Sentinel

#84

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 438

Default 

May 27th, 2009, 15:27
My point is that the budget available for making the actual game is already quite high (because of the increased cost of creating acceptable content and acceptable *amount* of content) - and the budget for marketing should be seen as an addition to this, not available for the developer.
Thank you for taking this in a new direction.

I don't think, though, that we see the developers as being responsible for how the entire budget is spent. At least, I don't.

I know that the publishers have most of the power - if not all - and I know that it's Microsoft who chose to market Gears of War like it did, and not Gearbox. There are exceptions, however, to how developers FEEL about this lack of control. My sense is that most modern AAA developers have no real issue with marketing controlling the response, at least not judging from people like Bioware dudes who post here on occasion.

Based on my job interview with IOI - where you're placed - it didn't seem like you (not you, personally, but IOI) had a problem with the kind of power EIDOS has over you. In fact, it was kinda celebrated at that interview.

That said, I'm not really saying LESS money should be spent on marketing. But that's because I'm trying to be realistic. I know that this business is ALL about the cash - at least for the publishers (ok, MOSTLY about the cash).

That's why I'm suggesting to spend the SAME amount of money, but instead of marketing all the Hollywood flashy stuff - and this includes what I refer to as obsessive content detail, as in Altair with 2000 animations - use marketing to SHIFT focus away from what's cool NOW, to what COULD be cool in the future. This being, of course, evolved gameplay and mechanics.

I'm suggesting, or rather wondering, if it's possible to "educate" the casual market about gameplay without losing money. In fact, maybe they can SAVE money, but not on marketing - but on development. They could move away from excessive content detail (including all those things I mentioned, like famous voice actors and Hollywood CGI sequences, etc.) - to game design. In theory, this should require less people spending less time - and as such they could spend less money in terms of the overall budget.

As my very first post claimed: Casuals control the market today, and casuals buy what they're told to buy - as long as the voice is the one in market control.

This is the irony, because AAA publishers HAVE market control - because they spend all that money on marketing and media manipulation. If you don't know what I mean by media manipulation - think GTA4 and 10 out of 10 across the board.

So, in a tragic kinda way, developers/publishers are digging their OWN grave by trying to out-Hollywood each other. They keep whining about the realities of the market - but they're actively supporting that reality.
Last edited by DArtagnan; May 27th, 2009 at 15:37.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#85

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 15,258

Default 

May 27th, 2009, 15:43
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I'm suggesting, or rather wondering, if it's possible to "educate" the casual market about gameplay without losing money. In fact, maybe they can SAVE money, but not on marketing - but on development. They could move away from excessive content detail (including all those things I mentioned, like famous voice actors and Hollywood CGI sequences, etc.) - to game design.
You know what, the funny thing is that I actually don't believe it's the casual market that makes these demands.

I personally think it's the reviewers who've become incredibly jaded from seeing/playing too many games (like the comment from one reviewer about how the graphics for Risen was below expectations) - and then us, the developers, who continue to push the limits for several reasons;

First of all because we all believe we have to (because we're comparing ourselves to the next guy). Secondly because, seen from an individual developers point of view, it is incredibly interesting to do so from a professional and technical point of view Not everyone on a game development team is involved in game play. Some are solely technical programmers who enjoy the academic challenge of making the best looking character yet. You might very well say it is a downwards spiral where we're digging our own graves. On the other hand, no-one can afford to test this theory by creating a new game with lousy graphics.

When I talk to people "on the floor" - also the kind of people who are sometimes referred to on this forum as "console kiddies" - they will usually go: "you know what, graphics is nice… but I'm more interested in the game". For example, I have a younger brother who has been brought up with consoles as his main platforms. When I introduced him to Gothic 1 maybe 2 years ago he immediately got completely hooked. I think he has completed G1 and G2 even more times than myself So there goes "dumbing it down for the console kiddies"…
KasperFauerby is offline

KasperFauerby

Sentinel

#86

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 438

Default 

May 27th, 2009, 15:57
Originally Posted by KasperFauerby View Post
You know what, the funny thing is that I actually don't believe it's the casual market that makes these demands.

I personally think it's the reviewers who've become incredibly jaded from seeing/playing too many games (like the comment from one reviewer about how the graphics for Risen was below expectations) - and then us, the developers, who continue to push the limits for several reasons;

First of all because we all believe we have to (because we're comparing ourselves to the next guy). Secondly because, seen from an individual developers point of view, it is incredibly interesting to do so from a professional and technical point of view Not everyone on a game development team is involved in game play. Some are solely technical programmers who enjoy the academic challenge of making the best looking character yet. You might very well say it is a downwards spiral where we're digging our own graves. On the other hand, no-one can afford to test this theory by creating a new game with lousy graphics.

When I talk to people "on the floor" - also the kind of people who are sometimes referred to on this forum as "console kiddies" - they will usually go: "you know what, graphics is nice… but I'm more interested in the game". For example, I have a younger brother who has been brought up with consoles as his main platforms. When I introduced him to Gothic 1 maybe 2 years ago he immediately got completely hooked. I think he has completed G1 and G2 even more times than myself So there goes "dumbing it down for the console kiddies"…
I see where you're coming from.

But I'm not suggesting great gameplay with "lousy graphics". I'm talking about "calming down" and not constantly go BEYOND the steps forward that technology provides.

Like your example of doing pretty great graphics with a relatively small team - at least judging from that screenshot you posted, the game looks great - and definitely not lousy.

You're right that casuals don't make these demands consciously - but they actually control the market in terms of what they're buying. Note my point above about the irony of publishers/developers actually setting this standard by offering and marketing exactly the kind of Hollywood content that's so expensive.

The reviewers are definitely part of the bad equation - and the less said about the quality of gaming journalism, the better. My own point of view is extremely cynical - as I'm convinced everything hangs together by the thread of greed. As in, Gamespot and those like them are controlled by whatever pays them the most money.

The same can be said about Transformers - because everyone seemingly celebrates that kind of movie - and the casual movie-goer buys the ticket. The only ones who suffer are the move enthusiasts and the "gameplay" people in movie terms, which I guess would translate to actors, directors, scriptwriters and so on - who're not particularly interested in all that CGI and those sexy mediocre stars (stars as opposed to actors). Just like in the gaming industry - most AAA movie people are OUTWARDLY celebrating how all this works, and I'm sure Michael Bay is pleased with his cash flow.

My basic point is that it's an unfortunate cycle - and I'm not really trying to place the blame on anyone in particular. In a way we're all guilty - because I know we've all bought and paid for stuff that really wasn't that great.

But I still think it's possible to change all this - in theory - but it requires some rich and brave people to shift the market trends.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#87

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 15,258

Default 

May 27th, 2009, 17:56
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
It's not about being right - because we're talking about different opinions. The only thing I'm right about is what my point was - and not what you and others seem to think it was. It's as if you think it's OK to tell me what I meant with what I said - and you don't care, in the LEAST, about figuring out where it went wrong.
Hate to break it to you, but saying one thing initially (by the interpretation of everyone on the thread except you) and then once people disagree with you pretending that you'd never said it in the first place does sometimes come across as you backpedalling and trying to avoid admitting error. Especially when rather than saying e.g. "Sorry, I can see how my original posts came across like that, that wasn't what I'd meant" you say "That's NOT what I said AT ALL, it would REALLY help if people could actually READ what I'd WRITTEN" like a sulky teenager.

You may have meant it, you may not have meant it, I'm talking perceptions here. Perceptions like:

Originally Posted by Dhruin View Post
If that's your point, D'Artgagnan, you wasted your time and your original post. We all realise the existence of better technology alone doesn't force developers to use it. It's also a different direction to your original post, which suggested the hookers and blow the marketing guys are spending money on is a much bigger expense than art development.
Originally Posted by Naked Ninja View Post
Now, as to the point you are now claiming is what you were really arguing all along,
Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer View Post
You don't - but you argue with 10 people at the same time within several different threads.

Personally, I've given up argueing with you, because you always find some ways to prove you're right and me, I'm wrong.

I don't see any sign of "that could be right", and any sign of accepting any other standpoints.
+ other similar posts from Dhruin + a pm I won't post but given the title of "you're not going to get anywhere with D'Artagnan" I think you can probably get the gist of it, plus other posts in previous threads where others have given up arguing with you.

In response to which you've spent an awful lot of time arguing that everyone else is wrong for thinking what they think. It seems to me like you must acknowledge some element on your part of not caring in the LEAST about figuring out where it all went wrong.

Note - I do follow your arguments and follow what you're saying now. Given how at odds they are with the tone & emphasis of your earlier posts & the way in which you've responded to people suggesting that (even being quite tetchy with Druin who's been nothing but balanced, I admit I've been fairly snarky & sarcastic so I could understand you getting defensive with me), it reads to me (& seemingly others) as a backpedal rather than a misunderstanding.

I am actually busy today anyway, unlike yesterday, so I'm going to heed the advice given and give up on talking to you.
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#88

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348

Default 

May 27th, 2009, 18:23
Originally Posted by Benedict View Post
Hate to break it to you, but saying one thing initially (by the interpretation of everyone on the thread except you) and then once people disagree with you pretending that you'd never said it in the first place does sometimes come across as you backpedalling and trying to avoid admitting error. Especially when rather than saying e.g. "Sorry, I can see how my original posts came across like that, that wasn't what I'd meant" you say "That's NOT what I said AT ALL, it would REALLY help if people could actually READ what I'd WRITTEN" like a sulky teenager.
I'd agree, except that's not what I did. I've admitted errors in public - and on forums - on several occasions, and I think I did that earlier today even on this board.

I know you don't believe I can be who I am and be able to admit my mistakes, but you're wrong.

You may have meant it, you may not have meant it, I'm talking perceptions here. Perceptions like:
I mean what I say - but it can be interpreted in more than one way, which is the problem with language.

+ other similar posts from Dhruin + a pm I won't post but given the title of "you're not going to get anywhere with D'Artagnan" I think you can probably get the gist of it, plus other posts in previous threads where others have given up arguing with you.
Oh, lots of people think that of me. Several people apparently hate my online persona on more than one forum. I find that unfortunate, but it never convinced me that I was doing anything wrong. I'm very happy with who I am - in reality - and though I'm not QUITE sure what's pissing people off on forums, I think it has to do with the language barrier.

Believe it or not, I'm relatively well-liked in reality and quite respected for some reason.

If they give up arguing with me, it's probably because I'm not saying what they want me to say. I don't really blame them if that's their goal. I'm not the kind of person you can manipulate in that way, and I'm nauseatingly confident in my own opinions.

I might not have a "right" to be in your eyes, but as long as I think I'm being fair - I refuse to back down.

Oh, and I'm very fond of Dhruin. He seems very calm and collected - and given his apparent and widespread negative opinion of me and what I say around here, he's been quite pleasant about the whole thing. But I guess it comes as no surprise that I don't share his opinion of me and what I've said, so no matter how unfortunate it is for me to lose the "respect" of a decent guy - I will always choose what I think is right - and I'm MUCH less concerned with my popularity in general.

In response to which you've spent an awful lot of time arguing that everyone else is wrong for thinking what they think. It seems to me like you must acknowledge some element on your part of not caring in the LEAST about figuring out where it all went wrong.
I don't think I've spent a lot time saying that. Only that they were wrong about what I said, not what they think about other things.

I could be wrong with everything I say, but I reserve the right to know what I mean by what I say.

Note - I do follow your arguments and follow what you're saying now. Given how at odds they are with the tone & emphasis of your earlier posts & the way in which you've responded to people suggesting that (even being quite tetchy with Druin who's been nothing but balanced, I admit I've been fairly snarky & sarcastic so I could understand you getting defensive with me), it reads to me (& seemingly others) as a backpedal rather than a misunderstanding.
I've been pretty polite about all these attacks on my person, though.

I admit, my first couple of posts in response to the ninja guy was kinda agressive, but that's because I sensed a "I know it all attitude" and I was annoyed at his ignoring what I said.

I am actually busy today anyway, unlike yesterday, so I'm going to heed the advice given and give up on talking to you.
Sounds good to me.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#89

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 15,258

Default 

May 27th, 2009, 18:51
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I admit, my first couple of posts in response to the ninja guy was kinda agressive, but that's because I sensed a "I know it all attitude" and I was annoyed at his ignoring what I said.
Maybe you shouldn't have gone with guns blazing in your first post then.
You got it all wrong, though.

The advancement in technology is NOT what makes games cost more.

Production values don't really mean development of the engine or game mechanics - it's about how much you pay to EARN more.
ed: in reference to "I know it all attitude"
hishadow is offline

hishadow

Level N+1

#90

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Southern parts of Norway
Posts: 1,142

Default 

May 27th, 2009, 18:57
Originally Posted by hishadow View Post
Maybe you shouldn't have gone with guns blazing in your first post then.
Is that what you call guns blazing?

Maybe if I'd attacked someone, it could be interpreted that way.

It was just me being passionate about the state of the industry, and I didn't attack anyone.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#91

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 15,258

Default 

May 27th, 2009, 23:40
No one responded, and that's probably a clue that nobody's actually interested, but at the risk of being an even bigger bore, I'll go ahead and pursue my own point about how games might be done better without so much emphasis on graphics.

To me it's a question of how much is left to the imagination, and that’s a matter of interpretation. Some players argue that the whole point of a video game is to depict as much as possible and leave nothing to the imagination. That may be a valid point of view, but it doesn't happen to be mine.

IMO, just about everything worth experiencing leaves a lot to the imagination. Tolkien, the author most fans say inspired this genre, certainly left plenty to the imagination. Based on his own comments, he considered it a fault, but I’ve always thought it was his work's greatest feature.

That's not to suggest there's a right or wrong way to tell a story. I think it's a matter of preference, how much gets told (or in this case depicted). But I know what I like, and I'm intrigued when I have my own work to do, imagining what else must be going on in a story.

Computers aren’t just TV sets. They’re not just blank screens. I think we can expect more from them. But not without good software.

Oh, I wish I had a river I could skate away on. But it don't snow here. It stays pretty green. I'm going to make a lot of money, then I'm going to quit this crazy scene. — [Joni Mitchell]
Squeek is offline

Squeek

Squeek's Avatar
connoisseur of tidbits

#92

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,807

Default 

May 28th, 2009, 03:21
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Oh, and I'm very fond of Dhruin. He seems very calm and collected - and given his apparent and widespread negative opinion of me and what I say around here, he's been quite pleasant about the whole thing. But I guess it comes as no surprise that I don't share his opinion of me and what I've said, so no matter how unfortunate it is for me to lose the "respect" of a decent guy - I will always choose what I think is right - and I'm MUCH less concerned with my popularity in general.
I actually like your passion and don't have a "widespread negative opinion" of you. There are, however, occasions where you frustrate the crap out of me.

Anyway, the thread seems to be going somewhere, so let's get on with it.

————————-

I think there's a looming opportunity to back off the graphical arms race and put more resources into gameplay improvements. First, cross-platform releases encourage a "cap" as this console generation stays and second, the financial crisis obviously has an impact on studios, publishers and the public.

One of the big problems I see is it's impossible to get away from (pre)judging a game from screens and videos. During the development, I'll see screens and videos, buyers will see pics on the back of the box. It's inevitable that folks (and we all do it too) are going to be attracted to the best graphics. On the other hand, you can tell me how your new, patented Real AI Dialogue Engine is just like talking to a real person and I'm likely to be interested but cynical until I see the actual result….and meanwhile, people will make judgments on the screens.

This genre is also in a hard place. RPGs inherently require a lot of content - a studio looking to pull back on the graphics can make a cheapo Bejewelled puzzle game and hit it big or an RTS that recycles the same graphics with some scripts on different maps. An RPG with scaled down graphics will struggle against terrain simulators like Oblivion.

It would almost be nice if something forced a capped approach to graphics, you know.

-= RPGWatch =-
Dhruin is offline

Dhruin

Dhruin's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch
Super Moderator
RPGWatch Team

#93

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 11,968

Default 

May 28th, 2009, 15:31
Originally Posted by Dhruin View Post
Anyway, the thread seems to be going somewhere, so let's get on with it.
*restrains urge to respond to D'Artagnan again*

I think there's a looming opportunity to back off the graphical arms race and put more resources into gameplay improvements. First, cross-platform releases encourage a "cap" as this console generation stays and second, the financial crisis obviously has an impact on studios, publishers and the public.
Hopefully other things will contribute too. Graphics cards are becoming a much more material part of the overall hardware spend, they can easily make up 20% of the cost at high spec and god knows how much they cost on laptops. Picking up a computer with the memory & processor speed to cope with anything other than the cutting edge is fairly cost effective but I'd imagine a lot of people will prefer to stay a bit further behind the curve on graphics unless it's something they know they'll want.

And computers seem to be lasting a bit longer as well, a lot of the major updates have stabilised quite a bit. Everyone's had dvd players for years and shows no sign of needing more, sound cards have hit a level where you'd have to really care to feel an upgrade was needed, 2gb of memory has been standard for even medium builds for quite a while.

IMO there'll be a growing market for people with slightly out of date hardware, only heightened by the financial crisis as you say.

One of the big problems I see is it's impossible to get away from (pre)judging a game from screens and videos
I barely look at graphics these days. The internet has completely changed information at least for me (wrt RPGs this site in particular has changed things). I rarely buy anything electronic without researching it on the internet any more, heck I barely even buy books that I haven't skimmed the amazon reviews about. We're no longer forced to make decisions based on shiny boxes with pretty marketing blurb & pictures on the back.

Don't get me wrong, still a huge market of casual wander into shop type people, but the balance between them & the word of mouth crowd is shifting fairly rapidly I'd have thought. Especially when it comes to real graphics pickiness - once frozen with a still shot & condensed to a size that fits on a box the discernable difference between bleeding edge graphics & just competent graphics is minimal. Serious graphics whores could only tell from screenshots & previews, by which point they're online anyway so can pick up other info if they want.

I think there'd be a step change if digital distribution ever becomes the major force it really should be. It should be cheaper to download something than to buy a physical copy from a shop with high rents, for drakensang I looked online and would have saved 5 from going to a shop & getting a full boxed copy! Ridiculous. Once the relative prices start reflecting the different distribution costs properly then more people will buy online & hence be in a position to read more reviews & metacritic type scores.
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#94

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » The Escapist - Death to Good Graphics
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:31.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch