Jump to content

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


Carol

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

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.


im not coming up with anything but facts

you can defend cd project red and all these other multi million dollar and sometimes billion dollar corporations, thats fine

Yup

everything breaks

you are absolutley correct

but will I continue to buy a product for full price from a specific company knowing its going to crash on me the second i start it up

no

fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me

so when i see a company diligently working on a single product for 10, 11 or even 12 years with no other products inbetween, i expect that product went through some serious Q&A

but in reality, it didnt

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Property_Damage said:


im not coming up with anything but facts

you can defend cd project red and all these other multi million dollar and sometimes billion dollar corporations, thats fine

Yup

everything breaks

you are absolutley correct

but will I continue to buy a product for full price from a specific company knowing its going to crash on me the second i start it up

no

fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me

so when i see a company diligently working on a single product for 10, 11 or even 12 years with no other products inbetween, i expect that product went through some serious Q&A

but in reality, it didnt

 

Facts? Hyperbole isn't "facts".

Did you see me defend CDPR and all those other multi-million dollar corporations in my post?  Crazy talk from a person that isn't reading or understanding the conversation.
I didn't say "everything breaks". I said some new products fail at launch. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

What A/AA publishers are out there?  Devolver is probably the biggest name I can think of and they're squarely in indie territory.

 

As I was just trying to look into the answer to this, people largely have a binary complex: Everything must be X and if it's not X, it must be Y! There is no in between!

 

Looks like "indie" is fairly universally used to describe anything that "isn't AAA". The truth is that a lot of what is labeled indie, would be considered AA and quite a bit of what is called AAA would also be AA. Here's an article with examples of AA game developers: https://omnigameplayer.com/12-best-aa-games/

 

But (indie, AA, AAA) definitions have become very mushy and much less apparent over time and if there's anything the loudest people on the internet believe is true is that everyone must choose a side. Everyone must be the same or the enemy and there is no room for mush.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, AJ_Radio said:

 

 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. 

 

 

Aren't these two statements contradictory though?

 

You say you dislike the "Hollywood" route - "refusing to take risks, milk the assets available until there is nothing left" - but you "appreciate there has been stuff like the Spyro trilogy remake and hope this trend continues"?

 

I mean, surely even those who dislike The Last of Us Part II must accept, on some level, that it was "taking risks" - the mere fact that it has such a contingent of people who baulked at content the direction of it is surely proof of that, isn't it?

 

 

BTW - I am a big TLOU fan, and yes, I agree, the remake seems a very strange and rather redundant waste of resources.

 

Edited by DrBloodmoney
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

Facts? Hyperbole isn't "facts".

Did you see me defend CDPR and all those other multi-million dollar corporations in my post?  Crazy talk from a person that isn't reading or understanding the conversation.
I didn't say "everything breaks". I said some new products fail at launch. 
 

Ive played more polished games from shovelware shit companies like ratalaika games than cyberpunk could ever offer us

so ratalaika will get my 5dollars before cdpr gets my 70

 

the topic is buy a game day 1 if you want a sequel

ive stated my opinions on why this statement is wrong, companies will boldly lie to your face to get your money before a game is even finished

and your response was, well things fail at launch all the time

You are accepting garbage

you should take a stand against these things instead of just taking it

i work too hard for my money to just hand it over to someone else who developed a shit product

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

Aren't these two statements contradictory though?

 

You say you dislike the "Hollywood" route - "refusing to take risks, milk the assets available until there is nothing left" - but you "appreciate there has been stuff like the Spyro trilogy remake and hope this trend continues"?

 

I mean, surely even those who dislike The Last of Us Part II must accept, on some level, that it was "taking risks" - the mere fact that it has such a contingent of people who baulked at content the direction of it is surely proof of that, isn't it?

 

 

BTW - I am a big TLOU fan, and yes, I agree, the remake seems a very strange and rather redundant waste of resources.

 


you probably saw but they indicated they are doing the remake because they have resources available with nothing else to work on because the next project is in concept phase and not ready for development resources.

 

I imagine if it is a light lift anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, djb5f said:


you probably saw but they indicated they are doing the remake because they have resources available with nothing else to work on because the next project is in concept phase and not ready for development resources.

 

I imagine if it is a light lift anyway.

 

That's certainly true:hmm:

 

 I wonder if doing the Remake actually might be a way for them to get to grips with what they can do on the new system - there was always a theory that doing the Remaster on PS4 was basically a way for the coders and dev team to figure out the PS4 architecture and nuances with a know property, before tackling a big new project - and TBH, given how Uncharted 4 and TLoU2 came out, if that is the theory behind it, I'm all for it!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a tidbit of information to help put things into perspective as well:

 

Quote

Garvin went on to reveal that he was fired from his position due to his “disruptive” personality.

 

He's entitled to his opinion, but if he doesn't have the facts to back that up in a waterproof jacket, I don't care. I didn't buy Days Gone at all, waited and got it with Plus. And I don't even feel the slightest bit guilty about that. All games at launch already cost plenty of cash, and most are not worth their full price of admission at 70 dollars/euros.

 

Source: https://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2021/04/19/days-gone-dev-on-full-price-games/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

 

As I was just trying to look into the answer to this, people largely have a binary complex: Everything must be X and if it's not X, it must be Y! There is no in between!

 

Looks like "indie" is fairly universally used to describe anything that "isn't AAA". The truth is that a lot of what is labeled indie, would be considered AA and quite a bit of what is called AAA would also be AA. Here's an article with examples of AA game developers: https://omnigameplayer.com/12-best-aa-games/

 

But (indie, AA, AAA) definitions have become very mushy and much less apparent over time and if there's anything the loudest people on the internet believe is true is that everyone must choose a side. Everyone must be the same or the enemy and there is no room for mush.

 

I can accept mush as an answer, but binaries make for a more conclusive discussion. ;)

 

That's a pretty solid list of "a tier above indie, a tier below AAA" games.  Though it's hard to nail down exactly what the formula is there.  Some of it is help from AAA companies like EA and Square-Enix, some of it is nostalgia and big personalities breaking through the mold, some of it are huge Kickstarter campaigns, some of it are just games/developers too good to qualify as just another indie studio.

Edited by Dreakon13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will always support a new IP from PlayStation I have been doing it for years and I understand what the man is saying...but at the same time you have to show that your game is worth the money! A lot of people don't want to buy a game riddled with bugs and glitches which Days Gone was full of when it first released, sure most of the issues with the game have been fixed but first impressions are very important to people and this game clearly didn't give off a good impression. But hey the game is coming out on PC so this game in some way is getting a second chance want a sequel? Then buy it on PC when it comes out on it...that is of course if the game is optimized well and not run poorly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dreakon13 said:

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

 

Does it even matter? The crux of all of your arguments have been nothing but putting words into people's mouths.

 

But since you seem unclear on my points, let me help you:

  1. Claiming that the mass purchase of games at launch in order to hope for sequels to appear is an industry problem, not a consumer one. I don't think it's actually true; I think it's a lot of bitching from a salty dev. But if it is, again, NOT MY PROBLEM.
  2. The idea that there is some mass outcry for a Days Gone sequel anyway is just rubbish. The people who want such a sequel are fans, and I would guess that those fans paid good money for that game. Certainly, there is no outcry from me (who ignored it on PSNow, and has ignored it on PS+) and its certainly not AJ_Radio, who very clearly says he is a retro/indie gamer.
  3. The gaming community isn't divided into people who buy their games at launch, and everyone else.

And I continue to find it humorous that Sony/Jim Ryan would be proud of people who don't hand over full price for a game at launch. You do understand that Sony published Days Gone, right? If they are happy with people who didn't buy it day one (or in the first week/month/whatever new time interval you've created), LOL.

 

But if this still comes off as "passive aggresive", let me clarify the situation: your "arguments" are idiotic. 

Edited by starcrunch061
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

Does it even matter? The crux of all of your arguments have been nothing but putting words into people's mouths.

 

Yeah, a lot of people are passive aggressive, sarcastic, non-descript twats angling for upvotes over actual discussion.  So it certainly does seem to play out this way.

 

 

Quote

 

But since you seem unclear on my points, let me help you:

  1. Claiming that the mass purchase of games at launch in order to hope for sequels to appear is an industry problem, not a consumer one. I don't think it's actually true; I think it's a lot of bitching from a salty dev. But if it is, again, NOT MY PROBLEM.
  2. The idea that there is some mass outcry for a Days Gone sequel anyway is just rubbish. The people who want such a sequel are fans, and I would guess that those fans paid good money for that game. Certainly, there is no outcry from me (who ignored it on PSNow, and has ignored it on PS+) and its certainly not AJ_Radio, who very clearly says he is a retro/indie gamer.
  3. The gaming community isn't divided into people who buy their games at launch, and everyone else.

And I continue to find it humorous that Sony/Jim Ryan would be proud of people who don't hand over full price for a game at launch. You do understand that Sony published Days Gone, right? If they are happy with people who didn't buy it day one (or in the first week/month/whatever new time interval you've created), LOL.

 

But if this still comes off as "passive aggresive", let me clarify the situation: your "arguments" are idiotic. 

 

Thanks for clarifying.

 

EDIT: You misinterpreted a few of my points but I'll probably just leave it alone. xD  Maybe another time when you aren't seething.

Edited by Dreakon13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours 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...

 

 


So I take it you didn’t care about Days Gone in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, AJ_Radio said:


So I take it you didn’t care about Days Gone in the first place.

 

Upon release? Nope. It looked pretty generic, and like I said elsewhere, there’re plenty of places to get generic that works.

 

But as the free title I recently added to my library? Maybe. Probably more than FF VII Remake, at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, djb5f said:


you probably saw but they indicated they are doing the remake because they have resources available with nothing else to work on because the next project is in concept phase and not ready for development resources.

 

I imagine if it is a light lift anyway.


The big difference is time. 
 

Since I’m mostly fed up with DrBloodmoney’s arguments I’m going to respond to his points indirectly. The Last of Us is barely eight years old, whereas Spyro was something people were looking forward to for a long time. Once Ratchet & Clank came in Insomniac basically dropped Spyro. 

 

Both are remakes, which is a big problem I have with Hollywood in general. New IPs are a big risk which is something most giant publishers simply don’t want to do anymore. While I really enjoyed Crash and Spyro, I think most of what fueled them was nostalgia. We can play our favorite marsupial again just like we did back in the day when we were kids, that was the feedback and reaction I got when the Crash N’Sane Trilogy was released. Even Uncharted 4: A Thief’s End included a little Crash Bandicoot purely for nostalgia. 
 

There’s a lot of remakes, remasters and making the same generic games. People that try to do something like Sean Murray did in No Man’s Sky, can be met with the most hostile criticism. Which did in fact happen, so much so to where Sean himself hid away from Twitter and other social media. 
 

That’s the world we live in today, and it sucks. I blame both sides, the people buying the games on one end and the game publishers and developers on the other hand. Cyberpunk 2077 proved just how woke and soft our society is. 
 

All I could do was sit back and laugh at all the people on social media bitching and mud slinging at each other over that.

Edited by AJ_Radio
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. Look at any other entertainment industry such as TV and cinema and they all operate the same way. Movies and show that don't do well at launch don't get sequels. The vast majority of video game and movie sales only make money at launch after a few months the majority of the sales are the games being bought second hand. If the devs don't get the money at launch it's highly unlikely they're going to spend even more money and time into making a sequel.

 

Getting a game for free on PS+ then complaining there isn't a sequel is like pirating an anime and complaining it got cancelled after 1 season since no one bought it.

 

A big thing I see people do is comparing games to Nintendo games where they get sequels years later. Everyone who brings this up forgets that Nintendo games don't fall in price. Pokemon Platinum, for example, a game that is nearly 12 years old, is still selling at price barely lower than it was at launch.

--

Just checked and Pokemon Platinum is £65 from Cex and people are still buying it, that is double the price it was at launch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I’m sympathetic to developers, 2 things:

 

1) This would’ve been a better argument in the days of PS2 and before. Back then games were released in a complete state because patches required another physical launch (which isn’t cost efficient), dlc was non-existant and even expansions were rare. If I’m going to pay full price for a game, with all due respect-I want the full game in a finished state-extras (like alternate costumes, weapons, etc) included on the disc, preferably as a reward for beating the game. 

 

2) I only have as many games as I do because I buy most games second-hand or at a generous discount. I’m simply not in a place financially to pay full price for all the games I want. Sometimes I’ll still pay full price for physical copies of indies (but they’re usually budget prices to begin with) but can rarely justify paying full price for AAA games when I know they’ll likely be available at a significant ($20-$30 price cut, sometimes more) discount within a year. (Unless we’re talking about first party Nintendo titles, which, in most cases excluding the annual “Mario Day” sale, you’re lucky to find at $10 lower than the full list price even 3 years after launch-but then again the vast majority of first party Nintendo titles don’t require extensive patches to fix bugs).

 

TL; DR: Release your games in a complete state and lower prices instead of raising them. That will get me to buy your game at (or near) launch. 

 

I feel bad for the developers though because I know the vast majority of them would rather not rush out their games in an incomplete state. I blame greedy publishers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TimeLordCrow13y said:

1) This would’ve been a better argument in the days of PS2 and before. Back then games were released in a complete state because patches required another physical launch (which isn’t cost efficient), dlc was non-existant and even expansions were rare. If I’m going to pay full price for a game, with all due respect-I want the full game in a finished state-extras (like alternate costumes, weapons, etc) included on the disc, preferably as a reward for beating the game.

 

This +1000, if I could upvote that many times.

 

Sadly, we'll never go back to this because DLC and microtransactions are just far too profitable for corporations to turn their backs to. Everything was slower back then too, we weren't getting games every other week.

 

9 minutes ago, TimeLordCrow13y said:

I feel bad for the developers though because I know the vast majority of them would rather not rush out their games in an incomplete state. I blame greedy publishers. 

 

I don't agree with the Days Gone developer because he entirely missed the point. But it's things like this that make me glad I'm not working in the gaming industry.

 

The crunch culture is real. It's such a rough business. I imagine working at Naughty Dog nowadays is like being under a pressure cooker, with the cover possibly being blown out at any moment. Neil Druckmann's quote "We don't use the word FUN" basically clinched it for me. The guy is a spineless bastard.

Edited by AJ_Radio
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AJ_Radio said:

Both are remakes, which is a big problem I have with Hollywood in general. New IPs are a big risk which is something most giant publishers simply don’t want to do anymore. While I really enjoyed Crash and Spyro, I think most of what fueled them was nostalgia. We can play our favorite marsupial again just like we did back in the day when we were kids, that was the feedback and reaction I got when the Crash N’Sane Trilogy was released. Even Uncharted 4: A Thief’s End included a little Crash Bandicoot purely for nostalgia. 

The only reason I don't mind remakes in this regard (and specifically remakes, not Remasters) is the hope for a spark of inspiration to continue the franchise. The Crash remakes gave us Crash 4. Ratchet & Clank Reboot is giving us Rift Apart. I'm holding out hope we get a proper Spyro 4. It's one of those weird things where, unlike Hollywood, if I love a franchise...keep giving me sequels, that is as long as they remain worth playing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a crazy idea... release a game that's gone through basic testing. After that, do some more testing. Once that's done.... test it.
When you're 100% happy, release the game at a price that's reasonable.

If you cannot succeed in that, don't be a c-unt and blame the consumers.

EDIT: I actually loved the game, but I bought it late. I knew I wanted it, but I'm so fed up of getting excited over a game and it being a broken piece of crap at launch, that I hold off. Seeing reviews, footage, etc... I was right to.

Edited by OpenScars
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read somewhere today there is a petition to get a sequel greenlit. So there ya go. Just like everything else in life these days, whine and bitch, you'll get your way.

 

2020/2021 folks.

 

 

however i do want a sequel ?

I'm sure there are a number of games that the first one was a scale of mediocre to trash, and then the sequel knocked it out of the park.

Link to comment
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.
×
×
  • Create New...