Is the growing trend of making games episodic really a bad thing?

[ExHaseo]

No, just no. When I play a game, I want to be able to experience the entire game at my own pace. I don't want to play for 10 hours, then have to wait 3-6 months, play another 10 hours, then wait again. It's momentum breaking, and can easily ruin the experience. In this case, you may have really enjoyed those 10 hours, but 6 months later, when the next episode is released, you may have already forgotten what happened. Or you may be playing something else and not want to play it, and then it just sits and you ultimately stop caring. Or you don't have the money to buy the next episode, so you end up not buying it, and ultimately stop caring. In these cases, you wasted your money on playing part of a game.

 

Let's also not forget that games released this way don't have the same development full games do. It works fine (although I still hate it) for the adventure games, because there isn't really much gameplay. It's story driven. In other games though, the gameplay goes through adjustments and tweaks throughout the development of the game. So, episode 1 of a game released like this could have pretty shoddy controls, but then they improved them in episode 2, and then perfected them in episode 3. The first episode is going to turn people off of the game. When if they had developed the whole game at once, then the gameplay would be the same throughout the entire game.

 

And lastly, I want to mention that it would be the worst for RPGs. Unless they're painfully linear like FFXIII was. But that doesn't make for a good RPG. Having a lot to do and explore makes for a good RPG, and doing so in an episodic series will just be limiting the amount of content in the game. It could very easily make for a lot of missable stuff. Since once you leave the area for episode 1, you probably won't be able to go back.

[Feral]

I'm not a fan of episodic games at all. If I'm buying a game then I want the full game, not bits n pieces with months in between episodes.

[Wavergray]

It's nice to see many different thought about this topic, even if most of them are negative.

 

To the people who say they would rather the game just be released when it's done and that episodic releases break your immersion and make you forget the story. I hate to say this because it make me seem like a big jerk, but episodic games are a non-problem that doesn't effect you in anyway. I know that sounds like I'm saying your opinion doesn't matter, but the answer to your problems with episodic games is to simply ignore them until all the episode are finished and buy the game like you would any other game whether on disc or a digital complete bundle. Not only would your immersion and story problems never happen, but things like trophy guides will already be available for you to use and you would probably be able to buy the game on sale.

 

To the people who say episodic releases are bad for RPGs. I think that really comes down to how much time a person has to play games. Not everyone who wanted to play DA:I had the time to play it when it was released. DA:I was released on November 18, 2014, now lets say DA:I was always going to be released on that day. How long do you think the first 2/3 of DA:I was done and the only reason the game was released on November 18, 2014 was because they had to finish the last 1/3. Now if EA had come out a said they where going to release the first 1/3 of the game and the multiplayer for $25 in June of 2014, the second 1/3 $20 in September of 2014 and the last 1/3 for $20 and a disc version November 18, 2014 would anything about DA:I changed? Probably not. The only thing that really changes is the people who didn't have time in November to play DA:I instead had a opportunity to play DA:I much earlier in the year when they may have had more time to play games. Do they run the chance of having immersion or story problems, maybe or maybe not that based on the person who playing it. 

 

In other games though, the gameplay goes through adjustments and tweaks throughout the development of the game. So, episode 1 of a game released like this could have pretty shoddy controls, but then they improved them in episode 2, and then perfected them in episode 3. The first episode is going to turn people off of the game. When if they had developed the whole game at once, then the gameplay would be the same throughout the entire game.

 

 

That type of situation a good thing, instead of being stuck with a full game with bad controls, episodic releases would let the developer fix things like that with a quick patch to the older episodes and in the newer episodes it wouldn't be a problem. Something like that happened in the Witcher 3, A lot of people didn't like the controls when the game can out and it took 6-7 patch for the developer fix them to a point where people were happy.

 

Never been into DA, but only played DAO. In DAO you could select some locations from the world map and visit them. A lot of locations got closed off as you progressed. I really didn't like this, neither was I too big fan of the map and the "random encounters". What would have made the experience even worse was if I could only do some few levels, and then had to wait on a new game where in the new game all the old locations were locked again.

 

A big issue with RPGs and episodic is how the stats carry over. What if you haven't played previous episode? This would just annoy me.

 

In any case, this is devs wanting more money... no thanks. Seriously, there's very little positive in it for the player.

In DAO the only time a locations was close off was because of story reasons. Unless you hit the end game flag you could go back to around 75% of games locations whenever you wanted. Why would that change if the game was episodic? As for the stats carry over thing, episodic games are released digitally, the only way you could miss a episode is if you chose not to buy it. 

 

Not game developers, game publishers. 

 

Sorry if I sound harsh, but I absolutely disagree with this.

There is nothing for you to be sorry about, that is you opinion. You can be harsh/passionate about your opinion if you want to.

Edited January 19, 2016 by soultaker655

[ShadowStar83x]

Some games are good episodic, but for most, it's just a stupid money grabbing gimmick.

[Lord_of_Ra]

With all due respect, but I can't believe there are actually people who support this in one way or another. I've seen it on other forums.

 

It's just unbelievable imo.

Edited January 19, 2016 by Lord_of_Ra

[MMDE]

In DAO the only time a locations was close off was because of story reasons.

 

Doesn't mean I liked it. I was just pointing out how I didn't like that part about the game. More of that would just make it worse.

 

As for the stats carry over thing, episodic games are released digitally, the only way you could miss a episode is if you chose not to buy it. 

 

I don't think you understand the issue. It's not that I would miss an episode, and they don't necessarily need to be digital either. It's more issues related to the carry over system. It also very much limits what developers can do in the game. Also, if they want to change something late in the game, they might not be able to due to earlier parts of the game being out and they can't change that. Same goes for making the story make more sense by changing earlier stuff when they want to change later.

 

Not game developers, game publishers.

 

Often, and in this case usually, the same shit really. I've yet to see any good argument for how this benefits the player whatsoever, and I can see plenty of pit falls with it.

 

Nah, no thanks.

[FilmFanatic]

I don't have a problem with episodic games that are 'point and click' and completely story driven however I would never touch an episodic game until it has been fully released as I want to play it all in one go.

[Brawler]

With all due respect, but I can't believe there are actually people who support this in one way or another. I've seen it on other forums.

 

It's just unbelievable imo.

 

Because it works for some games. People didn't mind it when it was the point and click games but now that it's happening with some of the bigger titles, they're starting to worry. While I prefer them giving us the full game upfront, I don't think it's the end of the world that some games choose to do this. I just don't like the idea of it happening with RPGs for the most part, however. Even if you wait for the full game, the fact that it's segmented kinda cuts in to the ability to explore. But like I said before, I won't immediately write off the Final Fantasy VII Remake for it. Just gonna have to wait and see how things turn out.

[Sofa King]

I wouldn't have wanted to play a game like Super Mario Bros. one world at a time, but it feels like this trend of episodic gaming could go in that direction if we as gamers allow it to.

[Satoshi Ookami]

Yea, well... no to RPGs.

Apart from obvious reasoning like the game actually costing 1xx% of what would the actual game costed, I don't want to wait for conclusion to the story crapload of months neither I want to be forcefully cut in the middle of my playthrough.

[GrandPoseidon]

Yes, its a bad thing FULLSTOP

If people buy the season pass, they will pay for something they dont own yet and dont even know what to expect in the future and if people are waiting for episodes to be released, they will probaply pay way too much for the same game. Does this make any sense to you? This is how episodic games work. Simple money grabbing. This is only tolerable by small studios who need the money to work on their projects, but not big studios like Square Enix.

Edited January 19, 2016 by GrandPoseidon

[Zenpai]

- For one, I still buy physical copies. Some publishers have some weird habit of releasing what is essentially part one on disc, everything else as DLC. Really, what's the point in that? May as well download it all.

- I don't want to be told how much of a game I'm allowed to play and when I can get more. If I want to explore every nook and cranny and spend hours in one place, I will. If I want to blast on to the next area and see what happens next, I will. I don't want be told "you're stuck here for a few months until we decide to give you the next part".

- I play one game at a time. Start to finish. I'm not picking up a game multiple times when each 'episode' is released, trying to remind myself what happened previously and trying to 'get back into the swing of things'. If I drop a game part way through, that's probably the furthest I'll get. Episodic games are essentially games I'll probably never finish, because I moved onto other games after episode 1, games that give me a full package I can play till my hearts content, allowing me to maintain my interest for the duration.

- Episodic games usually end up more expensive than if they just put the whole thing in one package. It's essentially on par with cut content DLC and on disk DLC in terms of trying to snatch every penny they can from our wallets.

- They're an excuse to be lazy. Throw down for a season pass and it's even more reason. Why put in too much effort to the rest of the package when a majority of customers have already thrown down all the cash for something that's nowhere near finished.

Back on my first point, they can release the full package when the whole thing is released, but:

1) How long is that going to take? Probably 12 months at least.

2) It's not guaranteed to happen at all.

About OP's "it would be great for RPG's!" claim, as well as an extension of my second point:

I've been playing Fallout 4, so lets imagine that was episodic. You get access to the first two story missions and the first mission for each main faction. You explore every nook of a smaller chunk of the map you have access to, you get bored since you've done the 'main quests' and are sick of doing repetitive misc content. You stop playing for now until the next 'chapter' comes out.

Three or four...or five, maybe six months later, episode 2 comes out. What happened in the story so far again? What did the factions do? Where are the factions headquarters again? Where did I send my companions? Which settlement did I park my power armor at? Have I been here? Where did I store all my armor? Did I set up supply lines? Am I allied or enemy with that faction? Did I go back and get that item? Did this perk work with that item? Why haven't I used these skill points? Damn it, that's why I didn't used those skill points...How long will it take me to get 4 more skill points? Where did I buy this item? Why are the BoS shooting at me? Was I saving these caps for something? You know what, screw this, I'll just play Witcher 3, I remember where I am with that.

 

^ This guy basically voiced every opinion I have on the subject. Not only are episodic games a lot more expensive when added up, they also break the immersion irreversibly. That and despite being "the same game", gameplay is going to be a lot less linear and cohesive. Most of the time, stats, items, etc. are not going to be carried over from episode to episode. Each part would basically be an entirely new game.

 

No thanks. I'd rather have a complete and cohesive experience from the get-go instead. I don't even like to watch TV shows episode by episode, I'd just rather wait for the entire season/arc to be over and then just watch it all in one go.

 

The model we've had up until the 7th generation worked perfectly, and I see no reason to change it. One of my favorite sayings is: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

 

To the people who say they would rather the game just be released when it's done and that episodic releases break your immersion and make you forget the story. I hate to say this because it make me seem like a big jerk, but episodic games are a non-problem that doesn't effect you in anyway. I know that sounds like I'm saying your opinion doesn't matter, but the answer to your problems with episodic games is to simply ignore them until all the episode are finished and buy the game like you would any other game whether on disc or a digital complete bundle. Not only would your immersion and story problems never happen, but things like trophy guides will already be available for you to use and you would probably be able to buy the game on sale.

 

To the people who say episodic releases are bad for RPGs. I think that really comes down to how much time a person has to play games. Not everyone who wanted to play DA:I had the time to play it when it was released. DA:I was released on November 18, 2014, now lets say DA:I was always going to be released on that day. How long do you think the first 2/3 of DA:I was done and the only reason the game was released on November 18, 2014 was because they had to finish the last 1/3. Now if EA had come out a said they where going to release the first 1/3 of the game and the multiplayer for $25 in June of 2014, the second 1/3 $20 in September of 2014 and the last 1/3 for $20 and a disc version November 18, 2014 would anything about DA:I changed? Probably not. The only thing that really changes is the people who didn't have time in November to play DA:I instead had a opportunity to play DA:I much earlier in the year when they may have had more time to play games. Do they run the chance of having immersion or story problems, maybe or maybe not that based on the person who playing it. 

 

 

That type of situation a good thing, instead of being stuck with a full game with bad controls, episodic releases would let the developer fix things like that with a quick patch to the older episodes and in the newer episodes it wouldn't be a problem. Something like that happened in the Witcher 3, A lot of people didn't like the controls when the game can out and it took 6-7 patch for the developer fix them to a point where people were happy.

 

In DAO the only time a locations was close off was because of story reasons. Unless you hit the end game flag you could go back to around 75% of games locations whenever you wanted. Why would that change if the game was episodic? As for the stats carry over thing, episodic games are released digitally, the only way you could miss a episode is if you chose not to buy it. 

 

You have every right to your opinion (of course, these are forums, after all), but honestly, I see a glaring problem with your points: all you've been saying are reasons why you think episodic releases aren't bad, but not a single reason as to why they're good.

Edited January 20, 2016 by jrdemr

[Bullstomp]

The easy answer is stop buying games day one and wait for the game of the year edition/PSN sales/PS Plus giveaways. I mean, in this day and age, I have to believe that unless you are brand new to gaming you have a backlog to keep you busy . . .

[DrBloodmoney]

Nothihng wrong with it at all.

If you don't like it, wait till the whole game is out before buying. If you don't mind waiting, play as the episodes come out.

Complete non-issue.

[Arkthur]

(For those saying it is troubling to wait for the next part, how do you watch episodic movies like Star Wars or LotR)

How do you wait for a book series to finish? Or a TV show?

Movies and games have different paces. You're supposed to be able to play as long as you want without restrictions. Nobody is going to watch a 6 hours film in one sitting.

[StrickenBiged]

Nobody is going to watch a 6 hours film in one sitting.

 

I watched all 3 Lord of the Rings movies in one sitting. The extended editions too. That was something like 12 hours of movie watching in one go... But yeah, that was a one off and I was getting fidgety after about 6 hours.

 

I have, however, very happily played games for 12 hours plus. 

 

On topic: 

 

I think the main problem is that there are no guarantees with episodic content. You could pay for something which, after a promising first installment, turns into a heap of drivel. 

 

I also get the sense that publishers are forcing this delivery model onto the industry when no-one else asked for it. Where were the gamers asking for their favourite franchises to become episodic? Have you heard of a dev that wants to split up their game like this? Have you read a single article from a pundit/reviewer/journalist saying: "Y'know what? I really wish games were split into more bite-size chunks."

 

My natural reaction is therefore to be very skeptical. Who knows what the real motivation behind Squeenix's recent moves towards making "AAA" games episodic but, one thing we can say with confidence, it's unlikely to be in consumers' interests.

[Wavergray]

I don't have the time to write out a lengthy response right now, but I've notice one thing about most of the negative responses in this topic. They don't have any evidence that proves that the situations they are describing could happen.

None of those terrible situations have a precedent that could be use as evidence. However, some but not all of the positive situations do have small precedent in there favor.

 

When I have more time i'll elaborate on what I'm talking about. 

Also even if your opinion don't have any evidence to support it, that doesn't mean you are wrong for having that opinion.

[Ka-Pi96]

Paying full price multiple times for one game? Yeah.... no, that ain't gonna work. Especially since episodic games tend (and by that I mean 100% of those that I've played) to be fairly boring and lacking in gameplay as is. To me episodic games = bargain bin trash.

[Lord_of_Ra]

The other main thing I see when people talk about this topic is the price of each episode. People are always talking about how the game publishers are trying to rip people off by making them pay more for each episode instead of just releasing as a full game. I have always found this line of thinking to strange since there has yet to be a precedent of such a thing happening. Yes as currently stands, it is true that you will end up paying more if you buy each episode separately instead of buying the season pass, but that the price you chose to pay so you could try out the game instead of being stuck paying full price for a game you dislike playing. Plus if you do the math the cost of buying the first episode to see of you like the game than buying season pass off sale and the cost of buying all the episode separately is usually the same. Even the new Hitman game is more or less set up this way, You can pay $15 to try the first few levels and $10 for the next 5 episodes or you can take a risk and pay $60 upfront. If you buy the intro pack and like the game you will have loss $5, but if you dislike the game you have saved $45.

 

Let me break down your paragraph a bit starting with the marked stuff.

 

First you say that there's lack of proof that buying each episode ends up costing more than the full game and yet you immediately correct yourself and say it's true afterwards. In short, it doesn't make any sense at all.

 

Then you start talking about how each episode could become a potential trial for you to see if you like the game or not. Something that doesn't add up since we are talking about the difference in monetary terms regarding buying separate episodes and buying the season pass or the entire game.

 

Keyword: "usually." Bingo, the problem with paying more is still there Otherwise you would have put that is usually the same and the other times is less.

 

And regarding buying a try to see if I like it or not (basically buying a demo or trial because it's the same end) is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of for us the gamers.

 

Even if it's an episodic game I have the right to at least know how it fares before I buy it. Telltale did it right when it comes to this. If you go check the store there's even a free demo of episode 1 of The Walking Dead. It gives me an insight dude.

 

Also, I can always go check gameplays and reviews.

 

From a business perspective, this is awesome. From a gamer's perspective, this is terrible.

 

Take it as constructive criticism mixed with my opinion. I tend to be harsh with positions that are very controversial.

 

Edit: Oh, lost my cool there and unconsciously attacked you personally in a sentence, srry for that. Deleted it.

Edited January 19, 2016 by Lord_of_Ra

[JFKing]

Seems similar to GTA Heists. The community was pissed owed to the time it took to launch. Releasing in episodes could start delaying and make the community upset, especially if I had to wait a year for episode 2. Chances are that if I beat episode 1 the game would long be gone, lended out, or sold by the time episode 2 came out.

[Wavergray]

Let me break down your paragraph a bit starting with the marked stuff.

 

First you say that there's lack of proof that buying each episode ends up costing more than the full game and yet you immediately correct yourself and say it's true afterwards. In short, it doesn't make any sense at all.

 

Then you start talking about how each episode could become a potential trial for you to see if you like the game or not. Something that doesn't add up since we are talking about the difference in monetary terms regarding buying separate episodes and buying the season pass or the entire game.

 

Keyword: "usually." Bingo, the problem with paying more is still there Otherwise you would have put that is usually the same and the other times is less.

 

And regarding buying a try to see if I like it or not (basically buying a demo or trial because it's the same end) is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of for us the gamers. You see implementing costs to something that SHOULD be free is ok with you.

 

Even if it's an episodic game I have the right to at least know how it fares before I buy it. Telltale did it right when it comes to this. If you go check the store there's even a free demo of episode 1 of The Walking Dead. It gives me an insight dude.

 

Also, I can always go check gameplays and reviews.

 

From a business perspective, this is awesome. From a gamer's perspective, this is terrible.

 

Take it as constructive criticism mixed with my opinion. I tend to be harsh with positions that are either very controversial or simple clever trolls (Not saying that this might be a troll but I'm still suspicious of it given some lack of coherence for this last paragraph).

 

Cheers

Don't pick apart paragraphs when discussing things with other people, because most of the time it makes it seem like you don't understand the whole point of the paragraph.

In this case you say, something that doesn't add up about my thoughts on episodic games costing the player more in the long run, but since you only highlighted certain parts of my paragraph I can only assume you didn't even read the example I gave to clarify my point and then you use inconsequential evidence to support your point.

You can not use the free telltale episodes as evidence because they were not always free, during the time of those series episodic release those free episodes cost $5. 

So now we are back at the cost of a episodic game release. You say because I use the word "usually" my point fall apart. Well I'm sorry, that just the way I talk when I'm talking about a hypothetical situation, I should have said "factual" since all current evidence supports the point I was trying to make with my example that I can only assume you skipped over.

 

Everything else you said about demos, gameplay videos, and review don't really help your point at all because those are your choices. Just as you don't like to pay for demos/betas/early access there are plenty of people who would rather do that then wait 1-2 years for a game to be released, even though demos/betas/early access have nothing to do with episodic games. Plus just as you like to use gameplay videos, and review to get insight about a game there are plenty of people who hate the very thought of both of those shaping their thoughts about a game before they can play it.

 

You will always has the right to you own opinion and you can be as passionate as you want about your opinion, but when you allow your passion to overwhelm you, you start to ignore other peoples points, thoughts and opinions. As I said in another post, for people who want the whole game released at once, episodic releases are a non-issue. If a full $60 game was going to come out at the october, but the developer/publisher decide to release the game in as 4 episodes with the first episode costing $20 and the rest costing $15 the only cost different between the person who buys the episodes and the person who buys the full game is $5. That $5 does a lot of things for not only the game it self but the player as well. That $5 insures that the rest of the game will be made because the people who are making the game get payed with that money and the big bad publisher will see that people are interested in the game so that won't cancel the game or shut down the developer while the game is still being made. That $5 could also end up saving the player some money if they don't like the game. If the player buy a new $60 game and hates it based on how fast they are in returning it they may only get $45-$50 back and it may only be in store credit. However, the person who bought the first episode and hated it has saved the same amount of money, but as cash and not store credit.

 

Either way, we have different opinions on this topic and we will never see eye to eye on it which is fine. I didn't make this thread to change other people opinions, I made it to hear other peoples rationale on the topic. You and most of the people who have replied are stuck in a slippery slope argument based on what could happen even though all current evidence points to the contrary, while people like me are optimistic about what episodic releases could do for one of the biggest problems the game industry has, the expectations that are are formed during a long development time become something that the game can never overcome. For examples, see: Final Fantasy 15, Duke Nukem Forever, and others,

Edited January 19, 2016 by soultaker655

[Daniel_Shadow170]

"You and most of the people who have replied are stuck in a slippery slope argument based on what could happen even though all current evidence points to the contrary, while people like me are optimistic about what episodic releases could do for one of the biggest problems the game industry has, the expectations that are are formed during a long development time become something that the game can never overcome. For examples, see: Final Fantasy 15, Duke Nukem Forever, and others"

Nothing points the way you're talking about if you've been in this industry for even a small amount of time you know this WILL be abused. As for that big problem that you say gaming has the examples was duke nukem forever a shit game and FFXV that isn't even out yet for such a BIG problem you posted no evidence.

[FlareXV]

I think people are lying when it comes to immersion, are you really saying that the same immersion is still there even though you took a long break from the game? I think the real problem for people is the cost of these episodic releases. If publishers can give a trade-off like a more cheaper episodic route, I think some would change their minds about it. 

[Wavergray]

Nothing points the way you're talking about if you've been in this industry for even a small amount of time you know this WILL be abused. As for that big problem that you say gaming has the examples was duke nukem forever a shit game and FFXV that isn't even out yet for such a BIG problem you posted no evidence.

Just because it could be abused doesn't mean it will be abused. Where is your evidence that supports this line of thinking.

 

Duke Nukem Forever is called a bad game because it was a game made for the 90s that was released in a time where people had moved on from those types of games. Whether or not an episodic release could have lower those expectations and made people see it in a different light is hard to say, but have you seen what kind of expectations people have for FFXV? That game will never live up to those expectations which will effect whether or not people will see it as a good game or a bad game. This is probably why Square Enix has jumped on episodic release bandwagon after the success of Life is Strange and RE: Revelations 2. Whether or not this will be bad for the gaming industry remains to be seen, but hopping on a slippery slope argument made of bad situations that have yet to happen while completely ignoring any good it could do for an industry that is struggling to change is, I'm sorry to say this, foolish.  

Edited January 19, 2016 by soultaker655

[Daniel_Shadow170]

Just because it could be abused doesn't mean it will be abused. Where is your evidence that supports this line of thinking.

 

Duke Nukem Forever is called a bad game because it was a game made for the 90s that was released in a time where people had moved on from those types of games. Whether or not an episodic release could have lower those expectations and made people see it in a different light is hard to say, but have you seen what kind of expectations people have for FFXV? That game will never live up to those expectations which will effect whether or not people will see it as a good game or a bad game. This is probably why Square Enix has jumped on episodic release bandwagon after the success of Life is Strange and RE: Revelations 2. Whether or not this will be bad for the gaming industry remains to be seen, but hopping on a slippery slope argument made of bad situations that have yet to happen while completely ignoring any good it could do for an industry that is struggling to change is, I'm sorry to say this, foolish.

And where is the evidence that duke nukem failed because of that? You also state FFXV will not live up to the hype you state it like a fact i can play that game as well you are pushing an extremely disliked idea hard i gotta wonder why i can tell there's more then an opinion involved it sounds like you have an agenda. Ether way best of luck if theirs anything i've learned being here is that these people won't change their mind and i respect em for that.