Carol

“Don’t complain if a game doesn’t get a sequel if it wasn’t supported at launch”... Do you agree?

184 posts in this topic

35 minutes ago, Beyondthegrave07 said:

I'll give him this; he's technically not wrong. Sales volume is the ultimate driver and paying full price will ensure a game's success (and get a sequel).

 

However (as many of you pointed out), the statement overlooks the issues of quality, marketing, pricing (specifically the timing of price drops/sales), continued support, timing, etc. 

 

Therefore, he can't just blame gamers for not buying the game at full price and point to that as the reason a sequel did not happen. At some point, you have to look in the mirror and ask, "why" the game didn't sell well. 

 

I personally think Sony drops the prices of their exclusives too quickly which has trained many of us to just wait for a sale. In general, I think Sony shoots themselves in the foot for not treating their own IPs with more respect.

Sony isn't dropping anything too quickly. The initial prices of their exclusives are a rip-off. Take for example the new Ratchet & Clank on ps5. It costs 80 euros.

Yes 80 euros for R&C. And if it doesn't make enough sales at launch, we may not see another R&C because we didn't support the dev enough. What a bunch of nonsense.

Almost all games are too expensive at launch from the ps4 era and onwards

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not practical anymore.

 

It made more logical sense to preorder games and buy them on launch back in the PS3/Xbox 360 era, because games were more complete. 
 

Today you can basically guarantee the big AAA games you are buying are practically unfinished at launch. This applies to all companies, from Square Enix to EA to Sony Interactive Entertainment’s exclusives. 
 

I bought Days Gone for under $20, and I’ll definitely say that was completely worth it. Marvel’s Spider-Man was the last game I paid $60 for, and the Season Pass was another $20 - 40 on top of that. While not my favorite PS4 game by a long shot, I enjoyed my time with it. But the game just wasn’t the utter masterpiece and spectacle people were making it out to be.

 

I’m not paying $60 - 70 for one game anymore. Jim Ryan and company charging $70 for new games is not something I appreciate, considering that I haven’t been all too impressed with new, modern AAA blockbusters from a gameplay standpoint. Modern gaming is going the route of Hollywood, refuse to take risks, milk the assets available until there is nothing left. 
 

The TC here, Carol, is a massive Last of Us fan, but even some of the fans are saying the remake is just a big wasted endeavor. I appreciate there has been stuff like the Spyro trilogy remake and I hope this trend continues. 
 

At this point I just don’t find it reasonable to pay $70 for new games. On that kind of money I can just buy a few PS4 games that are around three years old, or sustain a brief subscription with PS Now to try it out. 
 

It’s all presentation over substance, and making money, because that’s what these corporations want.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Days Gone is a Sony first party esclusive and I don't really think had issues on sales exactly because fact it's a Sony's game after all, and even if they had any (well, game was super bugged on launch), this doesn't justify the fact of denying a sequel, that argument can be made with indies or other minor games.

Sure, if they thought it would've sold as God of War or Uncharted 4, then yea we can say Days Gone was a flop as +90% of all games available on PS4.

Edited by Agent_Renegade22
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Buying a game at launch, doesn't mean pre-ordering it.  There's probably a week to a month after release that's critical to a games launch success, that's plenty of time to assess the situation.

 

Frankly, people demand perfect games, and especially now with smaller teams taking on more ambitious projects... that's less and less likely to happen.  It's an unwinnable war for developers.  All software has bugs, all games will get patches.  Even the "perfect" ones.  Truth is the vast majority of games are totally playable at launch, ranging anywhere from great to just "a bit rough around the edges".  At some point, you're not protesting buggy games anymore, you're just grabbing for any excuse you can to not spend money and still take the high road (which is totally fine, but call a spade a spade).

 

The ironic thing, these same people turn around and cry a river when smaller projects and new IP's go unfunded, saying they don't want just the massive, supremely polished blockbusters... when these are the same small teams that make the same ambitious games that get patches at launch, the thing they refuse to actually support lol.

Edited by Dreakon13
3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What should probably be happening to stop this whole being forced to release an unfinished game fiasco is to actually make the game rigorously test the game do quality control on it THEN start advertising.

 

spend like a year hyping it pretend it's not completed and bug free if they must and spend that year going through and making sure check make the dlcs if there's going to be any.

 

This way there's no "deadline" there's no consumers demanding it to be released before it's finished and they can release a quality game without excuses 

 

It would be hard for us gamers to be rushing and demanding and hyping ourselves up ect if we don't even know it exists till it's ready for the world

 

Then we can get a quality product right off we can see if we like or dislike it get some hype going and maybe just maybe we can fix all this issues

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really a poor take from the lead on this project. If this is his attitude towards consumers, it's probably for the best he's not leading the next project either. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Sequels are overrated anyway.  Very few turn out well.  A few notable exceptions are Witcher 3, some of the Fallout games, Dragon Age Inquisition.  But most sequels leave me thinking that they should have just left the original game on its own *cough TheLastofUs cough*

Edited by khaki_pants
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, AJ_Radio said:

Today you can basically guarantee the big AAA games you are buying are practically unfinished at launch.

 

Oh, they're not unfinished! They're ambitious!

 

But anyway, I said this earlier, but I'll repeat with detail now: the people dying for a sequel to Days Gone intersect non-trivially with the people who paid full price for it.

 

The rest of us? We don't give two shits. One bloated AAA open world game isn't terribly different than another one. There's always another Far Cry coming out, after all...

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

Buying a game at launch, doesn't mean pre-ordering it.  There's probably a week to a month after release that's critical to a games launch success, that's plenty of time to assess the situation.

 

Frankly, people demand perfect games, and especially now with smaller teams taking on more ambitious projects... that's less and less likely to happen.  It's an unwinnable war for developers.  All software has bugs, all games will get patches.  Even the "perfect" ones.  Truth is the vast majority of games are totally playable at launch, ranging anywhere from great to just "a bit rough around the edges".  At some point, you're not protesting buggy games anymore, you're just grabbing for any excuse you can to not spend money and still take the high road (which is totally fine, but call a spade a spade).

 

The ironic thing, these same people turn around and cry a river when smaller projects and new IP's go unfunded, saying they don't want just the massive, supremely polished blockbusters... when these are the same small teams that make the same ambitious games that get patches at launch, the thing they refuse to actually support lol.

Well, I did some more digging and this game seems to have sold pretty well. It moved over 100k in the first month, and was one of the highest selling games of 2019

 

https://twistedvoxel.com/days-gone-8th-best-selling-game-2019/

https://www.pushsquare.com/news/2020/01/ps4_exclusive_days_gone_makes_the_list_of_2019s_best-selling_games

 

For a new IP to be well in the top list of sales for the year should have been enough to support a sequel. This isn't on the consumer, it's on Sony.

 

It is also, as I've stated, a gaming industry issue. If you look back at the PS3, there were lots of mid tier games. There were blockbusters, but lots of A-AA games that had smaller budgets and were able to find a niche, but weren't smaller indie games.


We now really have only AAA games with massive budgets, or smaller indie games. Lost is that mid ground. Games are too expensive to make. Maybe Days Gone was too ambitious? If it can be one of the top selling games and still be a 'failure' then that is an industry problem. If mid tier games can't succeed without massive sales figures in the first few months, then ultimately those games probably just can't be made anymore. New IPs really are only going to be viable for a small stable of well established developers, or smaller indie teams.

 

That is unfortunate for gaming

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

14 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

 

Oh, they're not unfinished! They're ambitious!

 

But anyway, I said this earlier, but I'll repeat with detail now: the people dying for a sequel to Days Gone intersect non-trivially with the people who paid full price for it.

 

The rest of us? We don't give two shits. One bloated AAA open world game isn't terribly different than another one. There's always another Far Cry coming out, after all...

 

 

 

Is a game with some bugs really this annoying to you?

 

Days Gone was a fine game, even at launch.  I'm disappointed there isn't a sequel in the works (less so hearing they pitched a different kind of multiplayer coop experience) but you're pushing for a world with only indies and only blockbusters and nothing inbetween.  Jim Ryan would be proud.

Edited by Dreakon13
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dreakon13 said:

Is a game with some bugs really this annoying to you?

 

Nope.

 

Just now, Dreakon13 said:

Days Gone was a fine game, even at launch.  I'm disappointed there isn't a sequel in the works.

 

You are welcome to your disappointment. I feel no disappointment in the lack of a sequel. 

 

5 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

you're pushing for a world with only indies and only blockbusters and nothing inbetween.  

 

Is that what I'm pushing for? I don't think that's what I'm pushing for. 🤔

 

6 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

Sony would be proud.

 

Really? Of me? Then Jim Ryan is an even worse CEO than I imagined (and I imagine him being pretty bad).

 

See, your problem is this: when someone disagrees with any point you might have, you just lump them into the same stack. Like you did right here:

 

1 hour ago, Dreakon13 said:

The ironic thing, these same people turn around and cry a river when smaller projects and new IP's go unfunded, saying they don't want just the massive, supremely polished blockbusters... when these are the same small teams that make the same ambitious games that get patches at launch, the thing they refuse to actually support lol.

 

It's highly unlikely that these are the "same people". 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

14 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

Is that what I'm pushing for? I don't think that's what I'm pushing for. 1f914.png

 

Big games made by smaller, unproven teams are inherently more likely to be regarded as ambitious/unfinished (these are synonymous apparently).  If this is something you're against (in what is effectively a Days Gone thread), then I guess you're for the big polished blockbusters or the harder-to-fail-because-their-ceilings-were-never-very-high indies.

 

If you don't want people putting words in your mouth, don't use snippy, non-descript, passive aggressive sarcasm as a conversational tool.

Edited by Dreakon13
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why pay full price for the game when Sony has given us three different ways to play this game for free?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Quote

“If you want a sequel, buy the game at launch!”... Do you agree?

 

Well I can't logically disagree with that idea coming from a person that was or is directly involved with game production.

Even without it coming from a person "in the know" the statement doesn't sound "wrong".

 

 

Quote

 

Why pay full price for the game when Sony has given us three different ways to play this game for free?

 


 


Who is talking about paying full price for Days Gone now? A dev from the game made a statement about gaming as a whole, not just the last game he happened to make. If I recall this particular line came in response to his opinion on gaming services. 

 

 

Edited by TJ_Solo
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, diskdocx said:

It is also, as I've stated, a gaming industry issue. If you look back at the PS3, there were lots of mid tier games. There were blockbusters, but lots of A-AA games that had smaller budgets and were able to find a niche, but weren't smaller indie games.

 

This has been something I've been thinking about a lot over the last two decades. Why aren't more indies growing into A/AA studios and why are so many AA studios so eager to be bought up and becoming first party when they end up limiting themselves or in many cases eliminating themselves because of AAA sales expectations?

 

There has been so much industry consolidation that has reduced the amount of A/AA content. We should be in a ripe time for Indie studios to move up into A studios. I'm hoping we see more A/AA content coming out as there is a lot of stability in game programming with shared architecture between last gen and current gen and it wasn't a massive shift from PPC architecture to x86 that was before PS4.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Days Gone was broken at launch, which is precisely why I don't buy AAA games at launch. This is pure cope.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"don’t complain if there’s no sequel if you didn’t buy it full price"

- John Garvin

 

:rolleyes:

 

We're not, we didn't, and it's pretty arrogant to assume that was a mistake on our part.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

 

This has been something I've been thinking about a lot over the last two decades. Why aren't more indies growing into A/AA studios and why are so many AA studios so eager to be bought up and becoming first party when they end up limiting themselves or in many cases eliminating themselves because of AAA sales expectations?

 

There has been so much industry consolidation that has reduced the amount of A/AA content. We should be in a ripe time for Indie studios to move up into A studios. I'm hoping we see more A/AA content coming out as there is a lot of stability in game programming with shared architecture between last gen and current gen and it wasn't a massive shift from PPC architecture to x86 that was before PS4.

 

I think a lot of indie's and indie studios are derived of a few passion projects that don't necessarily want to make that jump, especially since doing so may require bigger teams, additional funding and publishers that make it less of a fun project and more of a job.

 

 

Just now, DrBloodmoney said:

"don’t complain if there’s no sequel if you didn’t buy it full price"

- John Garvin

 

:rolleyes:

 

We're not, we didn't, and it's pretty arrogant to assume that was a mistake on our part.

 

 

 

I mean, the report about the unsuccessful Days Gone 2 pitch and Sony's push for blockbusters was a pretty viral story because people are/were unhappy about that direction.  It's kind of arrogant to ignore that because it didn't interest you lol

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this day in age buying a game day 1 is a death sentence

im looking at you cyberpunk 2077 and outriders

did i buy these games, no

did i follow the train wreck that came with it

i certainly did!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

I think a lot of indie's and indie studios are derived of a few passion projects that don't necessarily want to make that jump, especially since doing so may require bigger teams, additional funding and publishers that make it less of a fun project and more of a job.

 

Well sure, but that seems to lump indies into one hive mind. I would think from all the comments that hundreds to thousands of indies come out for the dozen or two AAA games each year. Surely 5, 6, 7, maybe even a dozen of those indie studios each year would work toward advancing their game development experience and that the A/AA market would be growing because of it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Property_Damage said:

In this day in age buying a game day 1 is a death sentence

im looking at you cyberpunk 2077 and outriders

did i buy these games, no

did i follow the train wreck that came with it

i certainly did!

 

I didn't die from buying any of those games day one.
What about the 100s of other games that managed to launch without gamebreaking bugs or issues? 

A game, or any product, failing out the gate is a possibility. Some phones caught on fire, some cars have tires that explode,..some games were Superman64. All exceptions but not the norm.


 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DaivRules said:

 

Well sure, but that seems to lump indies into one hive mind. I would think from all the comments that hundreds to thousands of indies come out for the dozen or two AAA games each year. Surely 5, 6, 7, maybe even a dozen of those indie studios each year would work toward advancing their game development experience and that the A/AA market would be growing because of it.

 

True, I think that barrier of funding is the toughest part.  Unless they self fund themselves into that next tier of studio, which probably means a level of business acumen that not every indie game developer has or are interested in... they probably need a publisher or to be acquired by someone.  What A/AA publishers are out there?  Devolver is probably the biggest name I can think of and they're squarely in indie territory.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont agree. I bought days gone at launch at full price, actually to be more precise i think i bought the deluxe edition, so... wheres the sequel? Oh right. lol

 

What hes saying is buy every new release at full price or youre not going to get a sequel. What a bunch of nonsensical crap to say. What about all the people who supported the game at launch or 6 months after the game got patched and werent nearly as technical a mess as it was at launch? Or the people who got the game via ps plus but is also paying for ps plus? Money is money.

 

They also clearly made a profit with days gone but not enough for sony to greenlight a sequel. Blame sony, not your fanbase. 
 

Oh and if you want people to pay full price dont release an unfinished game. You also cant compare it to god of war which at launch was very polished.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Property_Damage said:

Anybody that bought and played cyberpunk for full price died a little inside, theres no 2 ways about it

People fell for the lies, gave them their money and was hypothetically raped

 

What is wrong with you people? You need to create the dumbest hyperbole for points you can't defend or explain.
What I said stands. There are times when products fail. That is simply a matter of reality and will not change. 

Those failed products don't stop other similar products from working well nor do those failed games completely turn any industry upside down.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Most games these days are buggy at launch . I rarely buy a game at launch. Last game I purchased at launch was RDR2 because it was a Rockstar game.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.