You can't compare games that are out with games in development, come on guys, that's a gaming golden rule.
A game can be out and in development. Just like they can be released and unfinished. Whether one can apply the arbitrary “finished” designation to a game at the time of evaluation is effectively irrelevant now. Perhaps it wasn’t the case back in the day, but times have changed and so have games.
You can't compare games that are out with games in development, come on guys, that's a gaming golden rule.
A game can be out and in development. Just like they can be released and unfinished. Whether one can apply the arbitrary “finished” designation to a game at the time of evaluation is effectively irrelevant now. Perhaps it wasn’t the case back in the day, but times have changed and so have games.
In reality this translates to: “You can praise our game for all the good things it has and all the awesome things we still have planned. You can however not point at bugs, poor performance, lacking features etc. because our game is still in development.”
Sounds like the best position to be in, as a developer. As for gamers, well, not so much. Or can we review current SC through the same lens as all finished games that have been brought up? Because that would be fun.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
You can't compare games that are out with games in development, come on guys, that's a gaming golden rule.
A game can be out and in development. Just like they can be released and unfinished. Whether one can apply the arbitrary “finished” designation to a game at the time of evaluation is effectively irrelevant now. Perhaps it wasn’t the case back in the day, but times have changed and so have games.
In reality this translates to: “You can praise our game for all the good things it has and all the awesome things we still have planned. You can however not point at bugs, poor performance, lacking features etc. because our game is still in development.”
Sounds like the best position to be in, as a developer. As for gamers, well, not so much. Or can we review current SC through the same lens as all finished games that have been brought up? Because that would be fun.
It translates in simple undertanding of the basics of the game development cycle. One can perfectly be able to praise games in development while understanding that they will have bugs, poor performance and lack features since that's part of the process of developing them.
anyone else also though when read the title what is the scam this week?
Only haters do so
Best scam ever produced by +500 devs and played by +1.4 million individual backers.
Meanwhile Publishers are making Fallout76, anthem or... remaster of their old game. Just LoL
$310 million, 500+ devs, about 9 years of development and all there is is some tech demo modules released and no way its all released in the next 5 years... yea id call that a scam. Sure they are making something, but the product "released" after 9 years does not pass the $310 million smell test
Yea we know... "collapse 90 days top for sure!"... back in 2015.
Prophecies of naysayer/haters are always wrong, that the most refreshing part. SQ42 entering Beta in few quarters (half of the project), SC receiving quarterly patch and ll SQ42 assets at release. All for less than a souless triple-A made by Publishers who don't care about gamer at large.
Your prophecies haven’t been any better so far Joe, unless SQ42 Beta releases next month of course...
And all for less then what? These are some of the most expensive projects every and not close to release. I won’t even get into Roberts “doing it for the gamers.”
As for 1.4 million “backers” over 6+ years, whoopdido, the new Animal Crossing sold 22.4 million units in 4 months. You need to get a bit of perspective, you are so one sided you could fall over any second.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
My words are not prophecies just fact: released when ready... and comparing sales of a game with 1/1000 scope/ graphic of SQ42+SC on portable console... you are desperate lol
anyone else also though when read the title what is the scam this week?
Only haters do so
Best scam ever produced by +500 devs and played by +1.4 million individual backers.
Meanwhile Publishers are making Fallout76, anthem or... remaster of their old game. Just LoL
$310 million, 500+ devs, about 9 years of development and all there is is some tech demo modules released and no way its all released in the next 5 years... yea id call that a scam. Sure they are making something, but the product "released" after 9 years does not pass the $310 million smell test
Yea we know... "collapse 90 days top for sure!"... back in 2015.
Prophecies of naysayer/haters are always wrong, that the most refreshing part. SQ42 entering Beta in few quarters (half of the project), SC receiving quarterly patch and ll SQ42 assets at release. All for less than a souless triple-A made by Publishers who don't care about gamer at large.
Your prophecies haven’t been any better so far Joe, unless SQ42 Beta releases next month of course...
And all for less then what? These are some of the most expensive projects every and not close to release. I won’t even get into Roberts “doing it for the gamers.”
As for 1.4 million “backers” over 6+ years, whoopdido, the new Animal Crossing sold 22.4 million units in 4 months. You need to get a bit of perspective, you are so one sided you could fall over any second.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
My words are not prophecies just fact: released when ready... and comparing sales of a game with 1/1000 scope/ graphic of SQ42+SC on portable console... you are desperate lol
Hmm, so a game with 1/ 1000 of the scope / graphics which certainly took far less time to make and very likely didn't cost anywhere near $350M plus to build has 22 times the paying customers.
Which company made the the better use of their development money?
Chris should probably get busy on a mobile version, eh?
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
My words are not prophecies just fact: released when ready... and comparing sales of a game with 1/1000 scope/ graphic of SQ42+SC on portable console... you are desperate lol
Some JoeBlober facts:
JoeBlober, May 2017
"it is coming in matter of quarters not years for SQ42 Chapter 1"
JoeBlober, May 2018:
"At this rate Beta will be mid-2019 without problem"
JoeBlober, May 2019 "Beta in 4 quarters"
JoeBlober, now "SQ42 entering Beta in few quarters"
anyone else also though when read the title what is the scam this week?
Only haters do so
Best scam ever produced by +500 devs and played by +1.4 million individual backers.
Meanwhile Publishers are making Fallout76, anthem or... remaster of their old game. Just LoL
$310 million, 500+ devs, about 9 years of development and all there is is some tech demo modules released and no way its all released in the next 5 years... yea id call that a scam. Sure they are making something, but the product "released" after 9 years does not pass the $310 million smell test
Yea we know... "collapse 90 days top for sure!"... back in 2015.
Prophecies of naysayer/haters are always wrong, that the most refreshing part. SQ42 entering Beta in few quarters (half of the project), SC receiving quarterly patch and ll SQ42 assets at release. All for less than a souless triple-A made by Publishers who don't care about gamer at large.
Your prophecies haven’t been any better so far Joe, unless SQ42 Beta releases next month of course...
And all for less then what? These are some of the most expensive projects every and not close to release. I won’t even get into Roberts “doing it for the gamers.”
As for 1.4 million “backers” over 6+ years, whoopdido, the new Animal Crossing sold 22.4 million units in 4 months. You need to get a bit of perspective, you are so one sided you could fall over any second.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
My words are not prophecies just fact: released when ready... and comparing sales of a game with 1/1000 scope/ graphic of SQ42+SC on portable console... you are desperate lol
Joe, Joe, Joe, everybody can look at your post history to see you repeating SQ42 Beta Q3 2020 over and over, to mock people, to shut them up. Now you have changed your tune because your “facts” turned out to be complete and utter nonsense. I even told you back then, I guess you are the only one who has forgotten. Talk about desperate...
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
You can't compare games that are out with games in development, come on guys, that's a gaming golden rule.
A game can be out and in development. Just like they can be released and unfinished. Whether one can apply the arbitrary “finished” designation to a game at the time of evaluation is effectively irrelevant now. Perhaps it wasn’t the case back in the day, but times have changed and so have games.
In reality this translates to: “You can praise our game for all the good things it has and all the awesome things we still have planned. You can however not point at bugs, poor performance, lacking features etc. because our game is still in development.”
Sounds like the best position to be in, as a developer. As for gamers, well, not so much. Or can we review current SC through the same lens as all finished games that have been brought up? Because that would be fun.
It translates in simple undertanding of the basics of the game development cycle. One can perfectly be able to praise games in development while understanding that they will have bugs, poor performance and lack features since that's part of the process of developing them.
Hey, I am not the one mistaking the thin black line between Yellow and Green with the Pink phase. Seems moot and misguided to compare two projects on such a different point in time, wouldn’t it?
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
My words are not prophecies just fact: released when ready... and comparing sales of a game with 1/1000 scope/ graphic of SQ42+SC on portable console... you are desperate lol
Some JoeBlober facts:
JoeBlober, May 2017
"it is coming in matter of quarters not years for SQ42 Chapter 1"
JoeBlober, May 2018:
"At this rate Beta will be mid-2019 without problem"
JoeBlober, May 2019 "Beta in 4 quarters"
JoeBlober, now "SQ42 entering Beta in few quarters"
Honestly, you could probably write a pretty concise synopsis of how little is actually added and finished in the game in the last 12 months. Just do this once a year.
My words are not prophecies just fact: released when ready... and comparing sales of a game with 1/1000 scope/ graphic of SQ42+SC on portable console... you are desperate lol
Some JoeBlober facts:
JoeBlober, May 2017
"it is coming in matter of quarters not years for SQ42 Chapter 1"
JoeBlober, May 2018:
"At this rate Beta will be mid-2019 without problem"
JoeBlober, May 2019 "Beta in 4 quarters"
JoeBlober, now "SQ42 entering Beta in few quarters"
They work in shifts. His backup will be here soon to post some charts that explain why everything is alright.
Oh yes, the good ol' charts with raised money and people who bought into this thing.
Who needs games when you have charts and videos, right? Babuinix? JoeBlober?
Hmm, i can't remember the other one... MaxBacon maybe?
I can't remember, i was observing this circus for 3-4 years, always same people posting this chart bs. Somehow, i don't see them getting involved anywhere else besides Star Citizen, weirdly.
You can't compare games that are out with games in development, come on guys, that's a gaming golden rule.
A game can be out and in development. Just like they can be released and unfinished. Whether one can apply the arbitrary “finished” designation to a game at the time of evaluation is effectively irrelevant now. Perhaps it wasn’t the case back in the day, but times have changed and so have games.
It is quite fair to compare FO 76 with NMS and Anthem, as they where all widely seen to not have enough content at launch. Even though Anthem is not a MMO, you can look at how far they have come since launch, baring in mind some have had a lot longer to add content after launch than others.
Likewise you can compare SC to any other game not out yet, a rather pointless comparison as until they launch you don't know what you will get. You can go so far, how often they update, do videos and so on, but I think the significance of such factors can be overestimated. SC does a lot of videos because it has the money to do so, personally I think they should make fewer to slowdown "development fatigue".
You are right the distinctions are getting blurred, but as yet they are still distinct, comparing a game in development with one that has launched is going out on a limb.
Who needs games when you have charts and videos, right? Babuinix? JoeBlober?
Hmm, i can't remember the other one... MaxBacon maybe?
I can't remember, i was observing this circus for 3-4 years, always same people posting this chart bs. Somehow, i don't see them getting involved anywhere else besides Star Citizen, weirdly.
Welcome to the forums!
Being here and not posting does not count, you only get a welcome if you post.
You can't compare games that are out with games in development, come on guys, that's a gaming golden rule.
A game can be out and in development. Just like they can be released and unfinished. Whether one can apply the arbitrary “finished” designation to a game at the time of evaluation is effectively irrelevant now. Perhaps it wasn’t the case back in the day, but times have changed and so have games.
You are right the distinctions are getting blurred, but as yet they are still distinct, comparing a game in development with one that has launched is going out on a limb.
But I have to ask, in this day and age, what does it mean for a game to be "launched", or what is really the difference? Let's compare.
About two years ago FO 76 "released", meaning players could access a 24 x 7 persistent environment if they were willing to pay a fee ranging from $59.99 to $150 or so.
Most everyone would agree it was unfinished, very buggy, and certainly not ready despite what Bethesda chose to call it.
One can easily argue it wasn't until Wastelanders released this year the game was anything close to what it really should have been to be properly called launched.
Since then additional content additions including seasonal content, the upcoming One Fallout level removal, perk card revamp are all fine tuning changes which might have been during a proper beta cycle back in the day before releasing.
So why not compare it to SC, CF or DU who also have had a persistent universe available for players willing to spend anywhere from $49.99 to many thousand of dollars and even offer a monthly sub option....just like FO 76 added.
I'm not including games like Pantheon, CU, or SoL as they only meet one criteria, charging for access, no persistent world yet.
But Kyle, what about the no more wipes part? While a qualifier many of us have held in the past, it's not in any way a hard and fast rule, especially as everyone keeps pointing out, these times are a changing.
I guess you could argue FO76 was different in they sold it in retail stores, but that distribution channel has become increasingly irrelevant in this day and age, especially for the PC.
So in my view it is completely fair to compare FO76 today with those other titles such as SC, CF, and DU, the differences between them are a matter of players preference, not the result of any hard and fast rule.
Besides, as any SC defender will tell you, hundreds of thousands of people are "having fun" playing and watching their early access game, to me, no different than my experience in Fallout 76, which is still way ahead of any other of them, at least as I see it.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
You can't compare games that are out with games in development, come on guys, that's a gaming golden rule.
A game can be out and in development. Just like they can be released and unfinished. Whether one can apply the arbitrary “finished” designation to a game at the time of evaluation is effectively irrelevant now. Perhaps it wasn’t the case back in the day, but times have changed and so have games.
You are right the distinctions are getting blurred, but as yet they are still distinct, comparing a game in development with one that has launched is going out on a limb.
But I have to ask, in this day and age, what does it mean for a game to be "launched", or what is really the difference? Let's compare.
About two years ago FO 76 "released", meaning players could access a 24 x 7 persistent environment if they were willing to pay a fee ranging from $59.99 to $150 or so.
Most everyone would agree it was unfinished, very buggy, and certainly not ready despite what Bethesda chose to call it.
One can easily argue it wasn't until Wastelanders released this year the game was anything close to what it really should have been to be properly called launched.
Since then additional content additions including seasonal content, the upcoming One Fallout level removal, perk card revamp are all fine tuning changes which might have been during a proper beta cycle back in the day before releasing.
So why not compare it to SC, CF or DU who also have had a persistent universe available for players willing to spend anywhere from $49.99 to many thousand of dollars and even offer a monthly sub option....just like FO 76 added.
I'm not including games like Pantheon, CU, or SoL as they only meet one criteria, charging for access, no persistent world yet.
But Kyle, what about the no more wipes part? While a qualifier many of us have held in the past, it's not in any way a hard and fast rule, especially as everyone keeps pointing out, these times are a changing.
I guess you could argue FO76 was different in they sold it in retail stores, but that distribution channel has become increasingly irrelevant in this day and age, especially for the PC.
So in my view it is completely fair to compare FO76 today with those other titles such as SC, CF, and DU, the differences between them are a matter of players preference, not the result of any hard and fast rule.
Besides, as any SC defender will tell you, hundreds of thousands of people are "having fun" playing and watching their early access game, to me, no different than my experience in Fallout 76, which is still way ahead of any other of them, at least as I see it.
Here for me is the are two big differences, the launched games put themselves up for review and the inevitable score that follows. And that score can burn, it can put an albatross around a games neck unless it is careful. The second is that developing a game while it is up and running has issues that pre-launch does not have.
The blurring is caused by the way all games but especially MMOs have moved the goalposts when it comes to wipes, what a beta means and the likes of early access. But once you have that launch you are saying "we are a real game now, ready to play, ready to be scored with all the others." So yes the games are still developing, but they have put their game up for real scrutiny on the level playing field that is "launched"!
Actual persistance is where I draw the line for the EA/Alpha/Beta murk. At that point it's 'real'. Prior to that, it's all guestimation and palaver. And sometimes overstatement. Stellar overstatement in various instances.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
You can't compare games that are out with games in development, come on guys, that's a gaming golden rule.
A game can be out and in development. Just like they can be released and unfinished. Whether one can apply the arbitrary “finished” designation to a game at the time of evaluation is effectively irrelevant now. Perhaps it wasn’t the case back in the day, but times have changed and so have games.
You are right the distinctions are getting blurred, but as yet they are still distinct, comparing a game in development with one that has launched is going out on a limb.
But I have to ask, in this day and age, what does it mean for a game to be "launched", or what is really the difference? Let's compare.
About two years ago FO 76 "released", meaning players could access a 24 x 7 persistent environment if they were willing to pay a fee ranging from $59.99 to $150 or so.
Most everyone would agree it was unfinished, very buggy, and certainly not ready despite what Bethesda chose to call it.
One can easily argue it wasn't until Wastelanders released this year the game was anything close to what it really should have been to be properly called launched.
Since then additional content additions including seasonal content, the upcoming One Fallout level removal, perk card revamp are all fine tuning changes which might have been during a proper beta cycle back in the day before releasing.
So why not compare it to SC, CF or DU who also have had a persistent universe available for players willing to spend anywhere from $49.99 to many thousand of dollars and even offer a monthly sub option....just like FO 76 added.
I'm not including games like Pantheon, CU, or SoL as they only meet one criteria, charging for access, no persistent world yet.
But Kyle, what about the no more wipes part? While a qualifier many of us have held in the past, it's not in any way a hard and fast rule, especially as everyone keeps pointing out, these times are a changing.
I guess you could argue FO76 was different in they sold it in retail stores, but that distribution channel has become increasingly irrelevant in this day and age, especially for the PC.
So in my view it is completely fair to compare FO76 today with those other titles such as SC, CF, and DU, the differences between them are a matter of players preference, not the result of any hard and fast rule.
Besides, as any SC defender will tell you, hundreds of thousands of people are "having fun" playing and watching their early access game, to me, no different than my experience in Fallout 76, which is still way ahead of any other of them, at least as I see it.
Here for me is the are two big differences, the launched games put themselves up for review and the inevitable score that follows. And that score can burn, it can put an albatross around a games neck unless it is careful. The second is that developing a game while it is up and running has issues that pre-launch does not have.
The blurring is caused by the way all games but especially MMOs have moved the goalposts when it comes to wipes, what a beta means and the likes of early access. But once you have that launch you are saying "we are a real game now, ready to play, ready to be scored with all the others." So yes the games are still developing, but they have put their game up for real scrutiny on the level playing field that is "launched"!
Meh, since devs have corrupted the other terms, no reason to cling to old school definitions of launched, might as well "progress" with the times.
These days it's just another marketing term used to entice a different tier of customers to start paying for what everyone seems to agree will always be an "unfinished"game, at least when talking about online GaaS.
Devs want to hide behind the "it's not ready to be judged" wall, fine don't charge players for access to their persistent environments, otherwise they should be evaluated like any other title, how much content, what level of quality, value for the money spent etc.
We shouldn't let devs have their cake and get to eat it too.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
You can't compare games that are out with games in development, come on guys, that's a gaming golden rule.
A game can be out and in development. Just like they can be released and unfinished. Whether one can apply the arbitrary “finished” designation to a game at the time of evaluation is effectively irrelevant now. Perhaps it wasn’t the case back in the day, but times have changed and so have games.
You are right the distinctions are getting blurred, but as yet they are still distinct, comparing a game in development with one that has launched is going out on a limb.
But I have to ask, in this day and age, what does it mean for a game to be "launched", or what is really the difference? Let's compare.
About two years ago FO 76 "released", meaning players could access a 24 x 7 persistent environment if they were willing to pay a fee ranging from $59.99 to $150 or so.
Most everyone would agree it was unfinished, very buggy, and certainly not ready despite what Bethesda chose to call it.
One can easily argue it wasn't until Wastelanders released this year the game was anything close to what it really should have been to be properly called launched.
Since then additional content additions including seasonal content, the upcoming One Fallout level removal, perk card revamp are all fine tuning changes which might have been during a proper beta cycle back in the day before releasing.
So why not compare it to SC, CF or DU who also have had a persistent universe available for players willing to spend anywhere from $49.99 to many thousand of dollars and even offer a monthly sub option....just like FO 76 added.
I'm not including games like Pantheon, CU, or SoL as they only meet one criteria, charging for access, no persistent world yet.
But Kyle, what about the no more wipes part? While a qualifier many of us have held in the past, it's not in any way a hard and fast rule, especially as everyone keeps pointing out, these times are a changing.
I guess you could argue FO76 was different in they sold it in retail stores, but that distribution channel has become increasingly irrelevant in this day and age, especially for the PC.
So in my view it is completely fair to compare FO76 today with those other titles such as SC, CF, and DU, the differences between them are a matter of players preference, not the result of any hard and fast rule.
Besides, as any SC defender will tell you, hundreds of thousands of people are "having fun" playing and watching their early access game, to me, no different than my experience in Fallout 76, which is still way ahead of any other of them, at least as I see it.
Here for me is the are two big differences, the launched games put themselves up for review and the inevitable score that follows. And that score can burn, it can put an albatross around a games neck unless it is careful. The second is that developing a game while it is up and running has issues that pre-launch does not have.
The blurring is caused by the way all games but especially MMOs have moved the goalposts when it comes to wipes, what a beta means and the likes of early access. But once you have that launch you are saying "we are a real game now, ready to play, ready to be scored with all the others." So yes the games are still developing, but they have put their game up for real scrutiny on the level playing field that is "launched"!
Meh, since devs have corrupted the other terms, no reason to cling to old school definitions of launched, might as well "progress" with the times.
These days it's just another marketing term used to entice a different tier of customers to start paying for what everyone seems to agree will always be an "unfinished"game, at least when talking about online GaaS.
Devs want to hide behind the "it's not ready to be judged" wall, fine don't charge players for access to their persistent environments, otherwise they should be evaluated like any other title, how much content, what level of quality, value for the money spent etc.
We shouldn't let devs have their cake and get to eat it too.
Well that's why I say, don't pay until you see the reviews, if the score is not decent don't buy. If you think it is that much of a continual process, do what I do and never play a game until at least a couple of months after launch. That's tricky with co-op and exceptions are made (which is why gaming companies love co-op) but works fine with solo player and MMOs.
Sure "launch" is now a marketing term, but they still get a score and knowing that does make a difference to how "play ready" the game is. They have moved the goal posts, but only because we have let them, no money up front, no more of this shenanigans.
But there I am agreeing with you, charging for persistent environments is bad. I notice that you are not as happy with 'no more wipes' as you were what a month ago? That's how fast this is moving, the new development payment model becomes the norm before we have pressed the post key.
JoeBlober!!! Hey you white knight you. They must pay you well, they hire you beginning of 2017?
Reality check.
When Star Citizen first appeared and the game was only going to take a COUPLE of YEARS, my son who was in grade school at the time got all bent out of shape when we would not give this has-been 25 f'ing grand or what the f ever absurd f'ing package cost. My son said there was no point in playing the game then, what game? A new shiny launched and he forgot all about it.
He was a child and didn't know about snake oil salesmen, he was a kid didn't know any better.
Fast forward to today, he graduated GRADE SCHOOL, graduated HIGH SCHOOL, and about to graduate COLLEGE, has a job, own money, and guess what never gave them a cent either. So Proud.
I mean if that doesn't scream huge PROBLEM, or something seriously AIN'T RIGHT here to anyone then i dunno what would get through?
At what point, i mean when will everyone realize they have been taken? We know they will never come out and say my bad couldn't do it, thanks for the 300 million peace out, even when the money stops flowing in, after the Chronicles Of Elyria - Scam all these scammers have learned is always "pretend" to be working on it, then there is never an end, no action can ever take place, just forever "working on it" making new "road maps" ffs anyone would love to make millions making fake timelines "road maps".
It's a valid point but it is mostly countered by A/ the Scale at launch changed and B/ Game development doesn't work like that.
A/ is both sides of the coin at the same time, it's annoying that it happened because it pushed the launch out considerably BUT it's good because it is expanded the boundaries of what the game would be.
B/ If you actually thought a game would be done inside an estimated timeline, quite frankly you're naive; If you're bitter about it as well then, well bad luck. No games in the last 15+ years has hit their initial launch window, bar a few cookie cutter annual releases and even then you had developers bringing in additional studios to stagger the cycle and give the teams additional year(s) of dev time. And the BUT THEY PROMISED IT WOULD LAUNCH ON DAY X, yeah so what. that's what developers do, Blizzard, Activision, T2, CD-Projekt RED, EA as the more recognizable names. BUT THEY TOOK MY MONEY, yeah, so do Blizzard, Activision, T2, CD-Projekt RED, EA with their preorders having had in it development for however many years and then still wait, till sometimes within a month of the launch, day to announce a delay.
I don't really care what you call them, I'll probably even agree with some of the names you use. But don't try and piss on JoeBlobbers for still being enthusiastic and calling BS when people say it's a scam. I don't actually care if you call it a scam, but if you do, you have to acknowledge that every, single, other game is also a scam. Lets follow the bouncing ball, CIG isn't doing anything new or out of the ordinary, if it's not out of the ordinary, than it is ordinary practices for the industry. I expect there to be exceptions, but I have yet to find any.
Why developers need to polish games if there are people who are ready spend their money on unfinished projects? I understand some projects wouldn't survive because of this but please stop feeding giants like EAs/Bethesdas/Activisions and etc.
Pre-order from companies with solid products like CD Project Red.
That's why gaming industry is out of control, people are willing spend their money on utter shit, just because they are searching for something to fill that void in their hearts. Don't go there.
If we keep spending money this way, we will keep receiving shit.
Comments
Whether one can apply the arbitrary “finished” designation to a game at the time of evaluation is effectively irrelevant now. Perhaps it wasn’t the case back in the day, but times have changed and so have games.
Sounds like the best position to be in, as a developer. As for gamers, well, not so much. Or can we review current SC through the same lens as all finished games that have been brought up? Because that would be fun.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
One can perfectly be able to praise games in development while understanding that they will have bugs, poor performance and lack features since that's part of the process of developing them.
My words are not prophecies just fact: released when ready... and comparing sales of a game with 1/1000 scope/ graphic of SQ42+SC on portable console... you are desperate lol
Which company made the the better use of their development money?
Chris should probably get busy on a mobile version, eh?
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
JoeBlober, May 2017
JoeBlober, May 2019
"Beta in 4 quarters"
JoeBlober, now
"SQ42 entering Beta in few quarters"
Sources:
https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/comment/7169344/#Comment_7169344
https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/comment/7327306/#Comment_7327306
https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/comment/7475740/#Comment_7475740
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
I'm sure it's their job to post on forums like this, just to keep the hype going.
Who needs games when you have charts and videos, right? Babuinix? JoeBlober?
Hmm, i can't remember the other one... MaxBacon maybe?
I can't remember, i was observing this circus for 3-4 years, always same people posting this chart bs. Somehow, i don't see them getting involved anywhere else besides Star Citizen, weirdly.
Likewise you can compare SC to any other game not out yet, a rather pointless comparison as until they launch you don't know what you will get. You can go so far, how often they update, do videos and so on, but I think the significance of such factors can be overestimated. SC does a lot of videos because it has the money to do so, personally I think they should make fewer to slowdown "development fatigue".
You are right the distinctions are getting blurred, but as yet they are still distinct, comparing a game in development with one that has launched is going out on a limb.
Being here and not posting does not count, you only get a welcome if you post.
About two years ago FO 76 "released", meaning players could access a 24 x 7
persistent environment if they were willing to pay a fee ranging from $59.99 to $150 or so.
Most everyone would agree it was unfinished, very buggy, and certainly not ready despite what Bethesda chose to call it.
One can easily argue it wasn't until Wastelanders released this year the game was anything close to what it really should have been to be properly called launched.
Since then additional content additions including seasonal content, the upcoming One Fallout level removal, perk card revamp are all fine tuning changes which might have been during a proper beta cycle back in the day before releasing.
So why not compare it to SC, CF or DU who also have had a persistent universe available for players willing to spend anywhere from $49.99 to many thousand of dollars and even offer a monthly sub option....just like FO 76 added.
I'm not including games like Pantheon, CU, or SoL as they only meet one criteria, charging for access, no persistent world yet.
But Kyle, what about the no more wipes part? While a qualifier many of us have held in the past, it's not in any way a hard and fast rule, especially as everyone keeps pointing out, these times are a changing.
I guess you could argue FO76 was different in they sold it in retail stores, but that distribution channel has become increasingly irrelevant in this day and age, especially for the PC.
So in my view it is completely fair to compare FO76 today with those other titles such as SC, CF, and DU, the differences between them are a matter of players preference, not the result of any hard and fast rule.
Besides, as any SC defender will tell you, hundreds of thousands of people are "having fun" playing and watching their early access game, to me, no different than my experience in Fallout 76, which is still way ahead of any other of them, at least as I see it.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The blurring is caused by the way all games but especially MMOs have moved the goalposts when it comes to wipes, what a beta means and the likes of early access. But once you have that launch you are saying "we are a real game now, ready to play, ready to be scored with all the others." So yes the games are still developing, but they have put their game up for real scrutiny on the level playing field that is "launched"!
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
These days it's just another marketing term used to entice a different tier of customers to start paying for what everyone seems to agree will always be an "unfinished"game, at least when talking about online GaaS.
Devs want to hide behind the "it's not ready to be judged" wall, fine don't charge players for access to their persistent environments, otherwise they should be evaluated like any other title, how much content, what level of quality, value for the money spent etc.
We shouldn't let devs have their cake and get to eat it too.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Sure "launch" is now a marketing term, but they still get a score and knowing that does make a difference to how "play ready" the game is. They have moved the goal posts, but only because we have let them, no money up front, no more of this shenanigans.
But there I am agreeing with you, charging for persistent environments is bad. I notice that you are not as happy with 'no more wipes' as you were what a month ago? That's how fast this is moving, the new development payment model becomes the norm before we have pressed the post key.
It's a valid point but it is mostly countered by A/ the Scale at launch changed and B/ Game development doesn't work like that.
A/ is both sides of the coin at the same time, it's annoying that it happened because it pushed the launch out considerably BUT it's good because it is expanded the boundaries of what the game would be.
B/ If you actually thought a game would be done inside an estimated timeline, quite frankly you're naive; If you're bitter about it as well then, well bad luck. No games in the last 15+ years has hit their initial launch window, bar a few cookie cutter annual releases and even then you had developers bringing in additional studios to stagger the cycle and give the teams additional year(s) of dev time. And the BUT THEY PROMISED IT WOULD LAUNCH ON DAY X, yeah so what. that's what developers do, Blizzard, Activision, T2, CD-Projekt RED, EA as the more recognizable names. BUT THEY TOOK MY MONEY, yeah, so do Blizzard, Activision, T2, CD-Projekt RED, EA with their preorders having had in it development for however many years and then still wait, till sometimes within a month of the launch, day to announce a delay.
I don't really care what you call them, I'll probably even agree with some of the names you use. But don't try and piss on JoeBlobbers for still being enthusiastic and calling BS when people say it's a scam. I don't actually care if you call it a scam, but if you do, you have to acknowledge that every, single, other game is also a scam. Lets follow the bouncing ball, CIG isn't doing anything new or out of the ordinary, if it's not out of the ordinary, than it is ordinary practices for the industry. I expect there to be exceptions, but I have yet to find any.
Pre-order from companies with solid products like CD Project Red.
That's why gaming industry is out of control, people are willing spend their money on utter shit, just because they are searching for something to fill that void in their hearts. Don't go there.
If we keep spending money this way, we will keep receiving shit.