Fluent Vents about the state of the gaming industry! (Pillars of Eternity related)

[ChaosTheory]

And reduced likelihood of the game's developer and/or publisher deeming it worthwhile (or even surviving) to produce further titles in the series/genre.

There's a stark difference between not condoning buggy launches and not supporting the developer whatsoever until a 75% off Steam sale hits.

So I walk into a car dealership, see a car for sale that I want, but I am not allowed to test drive it or even look inside (I get to watch videos and teasers tho). Yet, I really want the car because the sticker says it has all this wonderful stuff included and the videos and teasers are awesome. The car is so wonderful/awesome, in fact, that they are not offering any discounts whatsoever because it is the "must have" car of the year with all the latest and greatest chrome mufflers and shiny knobs.

I end up buying the wonderful/awesome car only to find out it has no seats in it. Or a radio. The steering wheel only turns one direction, and the windshield is on backwards. These are things I assumed were included or done right, considering all the wonderful/awesome stuff I heard about it. Yet I'm told this is a brand new model, very complex, these things will be fixed "later" and extras like the seats will be shipped to my house in a couple months (for an additional fee, of course). Come to find out, about the time the whole car is finally put together and fixed, the dealership is planning on putting the wonderful/awesome car on an amazing sale!

After buying a few wonderful/awesome cars this way, I decide that I'm going to wait until they are completed and on an amazing sale.

I'd imagine they will still make wonderful/awesome cars if folks stopped buying on day 1. Perhaps if enough people hold off, it may even improve how cars are made. *shrugs*

 

[DArtagnan]

So I walk into a car dealership, see a car for sale that I want, but I am not allowed to test drive it or even look inside (I get to watch videos and teasers tho). Yet, I really want the car because the sticker says it has all this wonderful stuff included and the videos and teasers are awesome. The car is so wonderful/awesome, in fact, that they are not offering any discounts whatsoever because it is the "must have" car of the year with all the latest and greatest chrome mufflers and shiny knobs.

I end up buying the wonderful/awesome car only to find out it has no seats in it. Or a radio. The steering wheel only turns one direction, and the windshield is on backwards. These are things I assumed were included or done right, considering all the wonderful/awesome stuff I heard about it. Yet I'm told this is a brand new model, very complex, these things will be fixed "later" and extras like the seats will be shipped to my house in a couple months (for an additional fee, of course). Come to find out, about the time the whole car is finally put together and fixed, the dealership is planning on putting the wonderful/awesome car on an amazing sale!

After buying a few wonderful/awesome cars this way, I decide that I'm going to wait until they are completed and on an amazing sale.

I'd imagine they will still make wonderful/awesome cars if folks stopped buying on day 1. Perhaps if enough people hold off, it may even improve how cars are made. *shrugs*

You can do whatever you want, of course.

But if you think that cars and games are the same in terms of what it takes to make them - and ensure they're free of issues, then you're deluding yourself.

Sure, customers could all band together and refuse to buy games with bugs.

That would result in simple games made by developers terrified of taking chances. Why? Because creating huge and complex RPGs is NOT possible without bugs upon release. They don't have the resources to test for all possible game states, as it's simply impractical. Games like this are too complex - and you NEED thousands of testers for feedback. It's the case with all big RPGs and it's not always about lazy or incompetent developers, it's about reality. After all, they're the ones doing all the work - and we're just paying for games. It's very easy to think of games as a "product" that should just work, like a coffee machine or a hammer. But games that take chances or reach any level of complexity work very, very differently.

If you want an industry full of simplistic, yet polished and bug-free, games - then I can certainly appreciate your position.

Personally, I want to support complex RPGs with interesting mechanics - and I'm willing to invest early, because I don't mind paying a reasonable price for a game that might take extra time to fix. That's because I suffer from having long-term memory, and I understand that sometimes it's not about the short-term solution. It's about investing in the future and supporting something I want to hold on to.

Does that mean ALL games are eventually fixed and polished? No, but most actually end up fully playable and reasonably bug-free - and if you use your experience to guage when to invest and when not to invest, then you'll be supporting your own agenda.

In short, you'd be doing something smart instead of something that works against your own interests.

 

[fatknacker50]

There's also that Might and Magic title dte don't want me to mention. So I won't, at least not explicitely. But it was the one before the current one, and at the same the one after the one before the one before the current one. That's the most buggy game I've ever layed my hands on, even worse than the intentionally buggy goat simulator.

Pibbur who still managed to complete it.

Stop stealing my thunder, *mumbles* bloody MMX

 

[ChaosTheory]

You can do whatever you want, of course.

But if you think that cars and games are the same in terms of what it takes to make them - and ensure they're free of issues, then you're deluding yourself.

Sure, customers could all band together and refuse to buy games with bugs.

That would result in simple games made by developers terrified of taking chances. Why? Because creating huge and complex RPGs is NOT possible without bugs upon release. They don't have the resources to test for all possible game states, as it's simply impractical. Games like this are too complex - and you NEED thousands of testers for feedback. It's the case with all big RPGs and it's not always about lazy or incompetent developers, it's about reality. After all, they're the ones doing all the work - and we're just paying for games. It's very easy to think of games as a "product" that should just work, like a coffee machine or a hammer. But games that take chances or reach any level of complexity work very, very differently.

If you want an industry full of simplistic, yet polished and bug-free, games - then I can certainly appreciate your position.

Personally, I want to support complex RPGs with interesting mechanics - and I'm willing to invest early, because I don't mind paying a reasonable price for a game that might take extra time to fix. That's because I suffer from having long-term memory, and I understand that sometimes it's not about the short-term solution. It's about investing in the future and supporting something I want to hold on to.

Does that mean ALL games are eventually fixed and polished? No, but most actually end up fully playable and reasonably bug-free - and if you use your experience to guage when to invest and when not to invest, then you'll be supporting your own agenda.

In short, you'd be doing something smart instead of something that works against your own interests.

I'm not talking about a few bugs— that's to be expected. And I'm not even talking about PoE, as it really isn't that bad. I'm mostly agreeing with what the OP is referring to regarding the (increasing?) trend of releasing unfinished games with significant issues and/or missing content.

It's just really bizarre that the gaming industry can get away with releasing products this way but very few other industries could without going under. More importantly, some now apparently feel that by supporting this bass ackwards system, they are somehow saving the game producers who wouldn't otherwise give us nice games. That's like giving a crack addict more crack and saying you're doing it so that he has more time to quit…

 

[sakichop]

I'm not talking about a few bugs— that's to be expected. And I'm not even talking about PoE, as it really isn't that bad. I'm mostly agreeing with what the OP is referring to regarding the (increasing?) trend of releasing unfinished games with significant issues and/or missing content.

It's just really bizarre that the gaming industry can get away with releasing products this way but very few other industries could without going under. More importantly, some now apparently feel that by supporting this bass ackwards system, they are somehow saving the game producers who wouldn't otherwise give us nice games. That's like giving a crack addict more crack and saying you're doing it so that he has more time to quit…

I'm sorry but your car analogy is terrible. For one thing cars do have "bugs".

I had to take my truck in because the weather striping was loose and it whistled anytime I went over 60. I also had it stall on me do to a faulty sensor and had to have it towed to the dealership at my expense. they fixed both for free but the tow cost me $90.

Cars also don't get installed on PC's with thousand of different hardware configurations, then throw it the endless amounts of software configurations, people not maintaining their pc's, old drivers, bloated HD's, viruses and simple user error.

Really i'm shocked as much stuff works as it does.

You have people out there that have no idea how a computer works, just installing and uninstalling things at will and then wondering why stuff doesn't work.

It would be like someone complain online that thier car is a pos because it keeps stalling and won't run but the problem is they bought a stick and have no idea what a clutch is.

I'm not say that dev's should get a free pass or that we should be happy with what ever we get but it's not that easy. There's no way to test for every possible scenario.

It would be great if they could just make a game and test it on every possible configuration to make sure it works. I'm sure they are making that game right now but no one knows about it because it will never release. Maybe it's Grimoire.

 

[Luckra]

Because creating huge and complex RPGs is NOT possible without bugs upon release. They don't have the resources to test for all possible game states, as it's simply impractical. Games like this are too complex - and you NEED thousands of testers for feedback. It's the case with all big RPGs and it's not always about lazy or incompetent developers, it's about reality.

I also want to point out that even if they had an army of testers to list all the bugs in the game they can't fix everything. It's very common in game production to tag some bugs for a fix post launch as you have limited ressources and a fixed release date with a lot riding on it (marketing costs, editors putting pressure, etc.). Obviously we are not talking about game breaking bugs here.

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

I loved Drakensang for being the most bug-free game I had ever played - even if they did some fixes to that indeed.

However, for Drakensang 2 I was there at an "beta test weekend" for fans - and took that testing seriously, although I must say that it encompassed only the first chapter (until that decision between future party members).

One curious thing I see at SWTOR currently is that they have the PTS, on which there is a build of the upcoming pa5ches / content,
but because this build is a fork, they don't take player criticism into the release of that. Even already fixed bugs sometimes come back.
What's so curious is for this is that players constantly write bug complaints and balanmcing complaints about that PTS build into the PTS forum there - but the developers just don't seem to listen - not in the sense that the bugs the players complain about are not immediately fixed in the live build there.

And class balance ... Oh my. The Assassin (and the mirror class) is so much overpowered that it has become a true FOTM class - that class dominates PvP in SWTOR completely - well, apart from Sorcerors, maybe (and their mirror class).
People had seen it a long waay coming, back on the PTS of 3.0 , then. But nothing happened. And that's 3 or almost 4 ? months ago. The devs did - nothing.
And now it turns out that the people responsible for Warhammer Online are now responsible for SWTOR PvP.

That is a completely new level of "buggy software".
Because MMOs tend to be fixed and tinkered with all of the time.

The only game that left a similar impresion of "constantly tinkering" with me was Larian's DOS.
The speed in which they released patches was ... simply astonishing to me.

 

[ChaosTheory]

I'm sorry but your car analogy is terrible. For one thing cars do have "bugs".

I had to take my truck in because the weather striping was loose and it whistled anytime I went over 60. I also had it stall on me do to a faulty sensor and had to have it towed to the dealership at my expense. they fixed both for free but the tow cost me $90.

Cars also don't get installed on PC's with thousand of different hardware configurations, then throw it the endless amounts of software configurations, people not maintaining their pc's, old drivers, bloated HD's, viruses and simple user error.

Really i'm shocked as much stuff works as it does.

You have people out there that have no idea how a computer works, just installing and uninstalling things at will and then wondering why stuff doesn't work.

It would be like someone complain online that thier car is a pos because it keeps stalling and won't run but the problem is they bought a stick and have no idea what a clutch is.

I'm not say that dev's should get a free pass or that we should be happy with what ever we get but it's not that easy. There's no way to test for every possible scenario.

It would be great if they could just make a game and test it on every possible configuration to make sure it works. I'm sure they are making that game right now but no one knows about it because it will never release. Maybe it's Grimoire.

My illustration was not to point out that cars don't have bugs. It was to show how ridiculous it would be for other industries to use the same business model— release an unfinished product and use those profits to finish it months (sometimes years) later. Yet gamers have become so accustomed to it that they now defend that practice as somehow being in their best interest.

Boggles my mind.

 

[DArtagnan]

My illustration was not to point out that cars don't have bugs. It was to show how ridiculous it would be for other industries to use the same business model— release an unfinished product and use those profits to finish it months (sometimes years) later. Yet gamers have become so accustomed to it that they now defend that practice as somehow being in their best interest.

Boggles my mind.

It IS in our best interest, if we want interesting and complicated games.

The thing is that you think there's a way to release huge and complex RPGs without bugs.

The point we're making is there IS no way to accomplish that. Well, except if games didn't cost money to make and we didn't mind waiting 20 years for them to get released. Which would mean much, much fewer games available.

Ok, there's an alternative - and that's a heavy dose of luck, because that's what separates the serious bugs from the less serious bugs.

Now, if you think you have some insight that will allow developers to avoid these bugs, which would be pretty amazing as bugs happen to every single game that's beyond tic-tac-toe and it's always been like that.

The very simple truth is that you and Fluent simply don't know what the hell you're talking about, because you don't understand what's involved when it comes to developing software with this level of complexity, with limited time and resources available.

I'm sorry, but there it is.

Your car analogy is worthless, because cars and complex RPGs are worlds apart.

 

[Thrasher]

One of the BIG difficulties of the PC platform is the user base diversity. Really tough to test it on multiple os's, and hardware and drivers.

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

One of the BIG difficulties of the PC platform is the user base diversity. Really tough to test it on multiple os's, and hardware and drivers.

I agree, but why don't firms then keep older hardware just to see how it runs on that ?
I often have the feeling as if QA centres are often filled with cloned PCs.

 

[Kordanor]

You would need thousands of PCs to do so. So there is not really a practical way.

That said the issues occured on PoE are not Hardware based for the most part.

 

[ChaosTheory]

The very simple truth is that you and Fluent simply don't know what the hell you're talking about, because you don't understand what's involved when it comes to developing software with this level of complexity, with limited time and resources available.

I'm sorry, but there it is.

Well if you say so. I guess I'll just take my toys and go home.

 

[txa1265]

My illustration was not to point out that cars don't have bugs. It was to show how ridiculous it would be for other industries to use the same business model— release an unfinished product and use those profits to finish it months (sometimes years) later. Yet gamers have become so accustomed to it that they now defend that practice as somehow being in their best interest.

Boggles my mind.

Thing is - please name the number of people who have died due to bugs in computer games? None? Oh - maybe the scale and scope of potential problems is SOMEWHAT different.

Making a physical product that is invasive to a human body obviously requires the most stringent control and oversight, then other products that can cause direct harm, indirect harm, and so on. Software for control systems that can cause harm is also very high ... stuff like video games? Um, absolutely trivial whether it is perfectly functional.

Not even in the same universe.

 

[sakichop]

My illustration was not to point out that cars don't have bugs. It was to show how ridiculous it would be for other industries to use the same business model— release an unfinished product and use those profits to finish it months (sometimes years) later. Yet gamers have become so accustomed to it that they now defend that practice as somehow being in their best interest.

Boggles my mind.

I don't think people are defending it, at least I'm not but i do need to be realistic. As I said in my last post the sheer number of different hardware and software configurations and pc conditions are just too many to ever test all of them.

Also are we talking about unfinished products or bugs. Those are not the same thing to me.

If were talking bugs (or defects) then I would say other industries do use the same business model.

I don't know about you but just about every new car I've owned has had a recall. My Av receiver needed 2 firmware updates to rid it of flaky behavior, My directv receiver was terrible until about 3 or 4 updates, My HDTV that I bought when they first came out is inferior to the ones they make now, should they have not released them until the technology was more mature. I own several tools I've had to send in for warranty work and on and on.

Seems things that aren't 100% are released in all industries not just games. Maybe you cut the other industries an unfair break and are harder on games because your more passionate about them?

As far as it being in my best interest. I believe it's better to have them support it for months or years than to leave it unpatched.

Anyway I don't thin it would be ridiculous at all for other industries to use the same business model, as they all ready are and have been for a while and there's a lot less variables in making a product vs software.

 

[ChienAboyeur]

I don't think people are defending it, at least I'm not but i do need to be realistic.

Crowdfunding supporters defend the model implicitly as the crowdfunding model is about releasing unfinished products (in the video games department)

As I said in my last post the sheer number of different hardware and software configurations and pc conditions are just too many to ever test all of them.

Also are we talking about unfinished products or bugs. Those are not the same thing to me.

From the opening post:

Fix the bugs before release, but if you can't iron them all out, patch them as you go. But balance tweaks, changes to the core game elements, forget that, man. Save all the constant, weekly patch crap and release an "Enhanced Edition" a few months or a year down the line. The bottom line is - AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE TO COMPLETE YOUR GAME AND CALL IT FINISHED. This constant tweaking of balance and core game elements is nonsense. It's like putting your game on constant life support. Pull the plug and move on!

If were talking bugs (or defects) then I would say other industries do use the same business model.

I don't know about you but just about every new car I've owned has had a recall. My Av receiver needed 2 firmware updates to rid it of flaky behavior, My directv receiver was terrible until about 3 or 4 updates, My HDTV that I bought when they first came out is inferior to the ones they make now, should they have not released them until the technology was more mature. I own several tools I've had to send in for warranty work and on and on.

Seems things that aren't 100% are released in all industries not just games. Maybe you cut the other industries an unfair break and are harder on games because your more passionate about them?

As far as it being in my best interest. I believe it's better to have them support it for months or years than to leave it unpatched.

Anyway I don't thin it would be ridiculous at all for other industries to use the same business model, as they all ready are and have been for a while and there's a lot less variables in making a product vs software.

What is the entire models that went recalled or only a few? Video games: the reproduction is identical, everyone receives the same product. Material goods like cars, all are different and some have significant differences that qualify as defects. Standardization can only go that far.

The car industry avoids releasing cars in similar stages as crowdfunded video games. Releasing a car that way could mean endangering the life of people driving it.

Core elements in video games are delivered unfinished, non working etc

Cant release many other items with those standards of release.

 

[ChaosTheory]

Taking into account this trend in gaming, the bottom line for me is…

1) If I know a company will continue to add significant story content to a game for months or years after it is initially released, I am less inclined to buy it day 1.

I'm not someone who will play a story-based RPG over and over again, because once I know the story and how things turn out, I am really not interested in doing it again. And I have no fundamental problem with post-release DLC and expansions if they are continuations of the story. The issue, for me, is when they keep adding to the middle game. I learned this tough lesson with ME3's Citadel DLC, which apparently was really entertaining, yet since I'm not interested in rehashing the game to see it, I missed out. DAI's recent Jaws of Hakkon is yet another reminder…

2) An increasing amount of recent games I've played on release have had major, sometimes game-breaking bugs.

Most of us in this thread aren't disputing that it is happening, but the sticking point is: why? I blame the developers (who then blame the publisher, and if there is no publisher, then they blame the budget) for releasing an unfinished product. Others here claim that the complexities of modern game production makes it impossible to release a game properly. I thoroughly reject this notion, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

Is it possible to release a perfect game? Of course not. Is it possible to release a playable game that at least has its core systems balanced and working? It should be expected. I realize that in the 80's-90's you had outright unplayable games, but those were few and far between. Playtesting was part of the production cost, now playtesting is called "early access".

These days, the big issues (and many more smaller issues) are generally corrected within the first few months. So again, why play on release?

3) If you wait for a completed, less-buggy game, you can also pick it up on sale!

Since I blame the company for releasing unfinished games, just like I would blame any company that sold me an unfinished product, I don't feel sorry for them for losing money from folks like me who are more inclined now to wait. I'm not looking for a 75% Steam sale, but 20-30% is worth waiting for considering most games I'm interested in are $40+.

So am I contributing to the downfall of modern gaming by doing this? No, I'm simply participating in smart economics. Pessimists will say that "no one will take a chance anymore on cool, complex games" or "game companies will go out of business", but I believe it will spur further innovation from game producers. Necessity breeds invention.

 

[DArtagnan]

Others here claim that the complexities of modern game production makes it impossible to release a game properly. I thoroughly reject this notion, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

I don't think anyone here has said that.

It's (practically) impossible to release a huge complex game like Pillars of Eternity without bugs. The severity of the bugs could be reduced, but it would cost a lot more and take much more time. Often, it's sheer bad luck - because serious bugs can crawl out of the woodwork with absolutely no warning, because of very specific player behavior that's all but impossible to predict and test for.

Believe it or not, it's extremely hard to think of every single thing when testing a game, including remembering to double-click as well as drag-and-hold in every single location at all times - while checking every single possible change when you do.

Even if you have a thousand people testing your game, you will find that a very specific set of actions, performed in a very specific way, at a very specific location is simply…. overlooked. No one thought of it - or someone missed what happens when you do.

You can only test for so many of the most likely conditions, before you run out of time and resources. It's really that simple.

It takes a certain level of insight to understand how expensive and time-consuming it is to test for all likely game states when you have thousands of them, and again - you seem to lack that kind of insight.

You think it's somehow possible to ensure a game like Pillars of Eternity is without serious issues and perfectly balanced, with the kind of time and budget involved, and I don't. You can try and you can get lucky - but you can't ensure it, almost no matter what resources you have available.

So, I'll agree to disagree - without the slightest doubt in my mind that you're completely wrong - and the only reason your "smart economics" approach will work, is because there are so many other people willing to face reality while supporting developers.

 

[joxer]

The issue, for me, is when they keep adding to the middle game. I learned this tough lesson with ME3's Citadel DLC, which apparently was really entertaining, yet since I'm not interested in rehashing the game to see it, I missed out. DAI's recent Jaws of Hakkon is yet another reminder…

If you did play Citadel, you'd see that it feels like a postend material aka a proper game ending. It could and should have been a standalone DLC that would, ofc, take in account your ME3 savegame to determine which sidekicks survived.
Dunno why Bioware did it like they did, instead of making it an aftermath, in ME3 if you go for it before helping Miranda, you'd skip all the "important" sidekicks chatty.
For Jaws of Hakkon I have only one thing to say and that is I'm not replaying the game nor buying DLC till they patch the bears annoyance.

Is it possible to release a perfect game?

It is: Dishonored.
Of course, maybe you'd hate the fact you're playing a mute and then the game wouldn't be perfect. If you can live with the fact your hero is not superman's twin brother but has flaws, you'll adore this bugfree game where DLC's are a spinoff story that don't mess the main game at all.

If you wait for a completed, less-buggy game, you can also pick it up on sale!

I'll have to disagree.
In all cases where the game was released as bug-o-rama, you should have started praying the modding community makes a fixpack or an unofficial patch. No waiting or discounts ment that the game was thoroughly patched in the end.
Another thing, Bioware Points, needed for ME3 DLC you mentioned, are never on sale thus waiting for their discount won't bring you a complete game!

 

[akarthis]

Forget video games. Do you buy anything else unfinished or "in progress" at full price?