You're confusing "unproven" and "untested". All the games I purchased, I've tested before for free, during open beta tests. And I've purchased because I believed in them.
And we are not talking about people complaining about broken games... but people complaining about games they haven't even played !
This is not about complaining about games that are not out yet, it is working out when is the best time to join a game. The whole idea is that you have already decided you will join, it is just a matter of when.
I had forgot to mention a good reason that swings me to the earlier start side, the fact that games get more P2W with more years after launch going by. That plus the ever more easy mode means you are genuinely losing something by waiting. So this is a tricky decision but as I say one you only have to make if you don't have a guild going in. To be frank looking back I preferred going in as a collective decision, that carries the argument without all the second guessing.
And during the time you guys are wondering if you are going to buy or not, maybe buy later or not, maybe wait for a sale or not, I'm playing games.
The OP is a good example of people who spend more time on forums talking about games they don't play than they spend actually playing games.
Life is too short. Don't be bitter, take some risks, have fun.
“Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in
broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and proclaiming, ‘Wow,
what a ride!!”
I buy what I buy and enjoy what I enjoy. I try and not get so lost in the weeds over overanalyzes.
This.
You purchased New World at launch, in fact you promoted it as I recall.
Do you think the game experience was better back at launch or did it improve significantly so that at some point in the future it was more worthy of being played? (Did you enjoy the experience more)
I personally waited, and from listening to those who were at the beginning I'm pretty glad I missed those bad old days of "more challenging" (more time-consuming?) design/ content.
That's what I try to figure out, when is game at a good point to deliver a positive experience?
I won't lie, I'm not as patient as you and others to overlook a game's faults....well unless it's a Fallout title, I'm all too happy to roll in sh!t for them.
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
And during the time you guys are wondering if you are going to buy or not, maybe buy later or not, maybe wait for a sale or not, I'm playing games.
The OP is a good example of people who spend more time on forums talking about games they don't play than they spend actually playing games.
Life is too short. Don't be bitter, take some risks, have fun.
“Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in
broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and proclaiming, ‘Wow,
what a ride!!”
I buy what I buy and enjoy what I enjoy. I try and not get so lost in the weeds over overanalyzes.
This.
You purchased New World at launch, in fact you promoted it as I recall.
Do you think the game experience was better back at launch or did it improve significantly so that at some point in the future it was more worthy of being played? (Did you enjoy the experience more)
I personally waited, and from listening to those who were at the beginning I'm pretty glad I missed those bad old days of "more challenging" (more time-consuming?) design/ content.
That's what I try to figure out, when is game at a good point to deliver a positive experience?
I won't lie, I'm not as patient as you and others to overlook a game's faults....well unless it's a Fallout title, I'm all too happy to roll in sh!t for them.
And during the time you guys are wondering if you are going to buy or not, maybe buy later or not, maybe wait for a sale or not, I'm playing games.
The OP is a good example of people who spend more time on forums talking about games they don't play than they spend actually playing games.
Life is too short. Don't be bitter, take some risks, have fun.
“Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in
broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and proclaiming, ‘Wow,
what a ride!!”
I buy what I buy and enjoy what I enjoy. I try and not get so lost in the weeds over overanalyzes.
This.
You purchased New World at launch, in fact you promoted it as I recall.
Do you think the game experience was better back at launch or did it improve significantly so that at some point in the future it was more worthy of being played? (Did you enjoy the experience more)
I personally waited, and from listening to those who were at the beginning I'm pretty glad I missed those bad old days of "more challenging" (more time-consuming?) design/ content.
That's what I try to figure out, when is game at a good point to deliver a positive experience?
I won't lie, I'm not as patient as you and others to overlook a game's faults....well unless it's a Fallout title, I'm all too happy to roll in sh!t for them.
If I recall this poster also bailed on NW and jumped to LA as things were so bad .
I personally think its more complicated then that. Games scope is much larger, hardware is more varied compared to 15 years ago. So developers have allot to try and launch a stable game. All the while gamers keep yelling for game prices to stop going up and also requesting more and more features and content.
Other problem is back in the day, we had Play Station and Nintendo for the most part. Now PC gaming, Xbox, Steam, Epic all fighting over exclusives. Gamers because of cost of living normally only pick one or maybe 2 platforms to game on. So people often get sick of waiting for the next game and when one they like is coming to their platform of choice. They buy it, as they are tired of waiting.
Lastly, tech is moving at a much faster pace and in a controlled environment what may seem as stable, may not be so when the product goes live. Im not talking about games like 2077 but just games that seems to get things fixed within a week or two of launch but still for the most part, at launch allot are able to play the game.
And during the time you guys are wondering if you are going to buy or not, maybe buy later or not, maybe wait for a sale or not, I'm playing games.
The OP is a good example of people who spend more time on forums talking about games they don't play than they spend actually playing games.
Life is too short. Don't be bitter, take some risks, have fun.
“Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in
broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and proclaiming, ‘Wow,
what a ride!!”
I buy what I buy and enjoy what I enjoy. I try and not get so lost in the weeds over overanalyzes.
This.
You purchased New World at launch, in fact you promoted it as I recall.
Do you think the game experience was better back at launch or did it improve significantly so that at some point in the future it was more worthy of being played? (Did you enjoy the experience more)
I personally waited, and from listening to those who were at the beginning I'm pretty glad I missed those bad old days of "more challenging" (more time-consuming?) design/ content.
That's what I try to figure out, when is game at a good point to deliver a positive experience?
I won't lie, I'm not as patient as you and others to overlook a game's faults....well unless it's a Fallout title, I'm all too happy to roll in sh!t for them.
That was a tragic launch from all accounts, but who could have foreseen it? That's why I do a two or three months wait after launch as a minimum for anything MO or MMO. You jumped in way before me but some would say will the game be that much different before the end of the year? Possibly not, for me it is more down to having no old guild being interested than my appraisal of the game that I have not already given it a go.
Players like Korrigan did overpromote, quite preposterously, but I have been there for ESO so I am not going to cast too many stones. The problems in ESO were far less but I was not as tolerant of naysayers as I should have been, I pounced on nearly every one.
But as I said earlier if you choose as I have to let a year or two buy by 'welcome to possibly having more easy mode and more P2W'. It is a trade of and I have no certainty that my plan is the best one.
I personally think its more complicated then that. Games scope is much larger, hardware is more varied compared to 15 years ago. So developers have allot to try and launch a stable game. All the while gamers keep yelling for game prices to stop going up and also requesting more and more features and content.
Other problem is back in the day, we had Play Station and Nintendo for the most part. Now PC gaming, Xbox, Steam, Epic all fighting over exclusives. Gamers because of cost of living normally only pick one or maybe 2 platforms to game on. So people often get sick of waiting for the next game and when one they like is coming to their platform of choice. They buy it, as they are tired of waiting.
Lastly, tech is moving at a much faster pace and in a controlled environment what may seem as stable, may not be so when the product goes live. Im not talking about games like 2077 but just games that seems to get things fixed within a week or two of launch but still for the most part, at launch allot are able to play the game.
Im not sure there is an easy answer here....
More competition and an increasing need to get released onto Steam or onto the Pass could certainly be a factor. Without a doubt meeting shareholders expectations is, do you remember when the gaming media found the release date for EA's latest game (I think it was Anthem) from quarterly projections for shareholders? The game would launch (in the forth quarter?) come what may.
But I think we as players and the gaming media have let too much dross of the hook and bought it. That's why I was so happy to see Joseph's review of Redfall, if this is not called out it just will get worse, I presume nobody thinks early access and a lack of polish at launch is going to get better without some pushback?
And during the time you guys are wondering if you are going to buy or not, maybe buy later or not, maybe wait for a sale or not, I'm playing games.
The OP is a good example of people who spend more time on forums talking about games they don't play than they spend actually playing games.
Life is too short. Don't be bitter, take some risks, have fun.
“Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in
broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and proclaiming, ‘Wow,
what a ride!!”
I buy what I buy and enjoy what I enjoy. I try and not get so lost in the weeds over overanalyzes.
This.
You purchased New World at launch, in fact you promoted it as I recall.
Do you think the game experience was better back at launch or did it improve significantly so that at some point in the future it was more worthy of being played? (Did you enjoy the experience more)
I personally waited, and from listening to those who were at the beginning I'm pretty glad I missed those bad old days of "more challenging" (more time-consuming?) design/ content.
That's what I try to figure out, when is game at a good point to deliver a positive experience?
I won't lie, I'm not as patient as you and others to overlook a game's faults....well unless it's a Fallout title, I'm all too happy to roll in sh!t for them.
That was a tragic launch from all accounts, but who could have foreseen it? That's why I do a two or three months wait after launch as a minimum for anything MO or MMO. You jumped in way before me but some would say will the game be that much different before the end of the year? Possibly not, for me it is more down to having no old guild being interested than my appraisal of the game that I have not already given it a go.
Players like Korrigan did overpromote, quite preposterously, but I have been there for ESO so I am not going to cast too many stones. The problems in ESO were far less but I was not as tolerant of naysayers as I should have been, I pounced on nearly every one.
But as I said earlier if you choose as I have to let a year or two buy by 'welcome to possibly having more easy mode and more P2W'. It is a trade of and I have no certainty that my plan is the best one.
One could argue that people who suffered an early launch, help the developers work out the bugs and networking issues, so you 2-3 months later, get to play a stable game. One could also argue, if you dont mind suffering launch problems and know how to have fun despite that. Is an acceptable way to game.
That was a tragic launch from all accounts, but who could have foreseen it? That's why I do a two or three months wait after launch as a minimum for anything MO or MMO. You jumped in way before me but some would say will the game be that much different before the end of the year? Possibly not, for me it is more down to having no old guild being interested than my appraisal of the game that I have not already given it a go.
Players like Korrigan did overpromote, quite preposterously, but I have been there for ESO so I am not going to cast too many stones. The problems in ESO were far less but I was not as tolerant of naysayers as I should have been, I pounced on nearly every one.
But as I said earlier if you choose as I have to let a year or two buy by 'welcome to possibly having more easy mode and more P2W'. It is a trade of and I have no certainty that my plan is the best one.
One could argue that people who suffered an early launch, help the developers work out the bugs and networking issues, so you 2-3 months later, get to play a stable game. One could also argue, if you dont mind suffering launch problems and know how to have fun despite that. Is an acceptable way to game.
I would agree to that both in beta and early access, I only partially agree that's the case after launch. How much are those post launch players really helping the developers? Sure, they are causing problems that the studio sees needs to be fixed but I doubt they are all diligently doing bug reports and I don't expect them to do so. The game should not be launched in such bad a condition that droves leave it so early.
But then I am not questioning people for playing too early unless they pay before launch, that can be detrimental to launch quality in my eyes. I am not saying there are any easy solutions here myself, that why the whole issue is difficult.
I personally think its more complicated then that. Games scope is much larger, hardware is more varied compared to 15 years ago. So developers have allot to try and launch a stable game. All the while gamers keep yelling for game prices to stop going up and also requesting more and more features and content.
Other problem is back in the day, we had Play Station and Nintendo for the most part. Now PC gaming, Xbox, Steam, Epic all fighting over exclusives. Gamers because of cost of living normally only pick one or maybe 2 platforms to game on. So people often get sick of waiting for the next game and when one they like is coming to their platform of choice. They buy it, as they are tired of waiting.
Lastly, tech is moving at a much faster pace and in a controlled environment what may seem as stable, may not be so when the product goes live. Im not talking about games like 2077 but just games that seems to get things fixed within a week or two of launch but still for the most part, at launch allot are able to play the game.
Im not sure there is an easy answer here....
More competition and an increasing need to get released onto Steam or onto the Pass could certainly be a factor. Without a doubt meeting shareholders expectations is, do you remember when the gaming media found the release date for EA's latest game (I think it was Anthem) from quarterly projections for shareholders? The game would launch (in the forth quarter?) come what may.
But I think we as players and the gaming media have let too much dross of the hook and bought it. That's why I was so happy to see Joseph's review of Redfall, if this is not called out it just will get worse, I presume nobody thinks early access and a lack of polish at launch is going to get better without some pushback?
Ya Redfall is not the AAA game it should be in any way but on the other hand, Jedi Survivor has been playable for many since launch, has been updated and fixed very quickly and gamers are still freaking out about that game. I agree with you when you say none of this has easy answers.
And during the time you guys are wondering if you are going to buy or not, maybe buy later or not, maybe wait for a sale or not, I'm playing games.
The OP is a good example of people who spend more time on forums talking about games they don't play than they spend actually playing games.
Life is too short. Don't be bitter, take some risks, have fun.
“Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in
broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and proclaiming, ‘Wow,
what a ride!!”
I buy what I buy and enjoy what I enjoy. I try and not get so lost in the weeds over overanalyzes.
This.
You purchased New World at launch, in fact you promoted it as I recall.
Do you think the game experience was better back at launch or did it improve significantly so that at some point in the future it was more worthy of being played? (Did you enjoy the experience more)
I personally waited, and from listening to those who were at the beginning I'm pretty glad I missed those bad old days of "more challenging" (more time-consuming?) design/ content.
That's what I try to figure out, when is game at a good point to deliver a positive experience?
I won't lie, I'm not as patient as you and others to overlook a game's faults....well unless it's a Fallout title, I'm all too happy to roll in sh!t for them.
Not that poster, but I bought NW on release and I wouldn't say the experience later is significantly better.
I would say it is a marginally better experience now, but in no way does that make me think I should have waited. Why would I? Waiting didn't provide an advantage and playing on release didn't put me at a disadvantage. In fact, if anything, the prior experience made my play smarter and more focused when the fresh start servers released. I enjoyed my experience on the new server much more precisely because of that previous experience.
I've pre-ordered New World after the open beta test in August on year before release. The beta was why I bought, and I wasn't disappointed despite the flaws. I actually never was affected by any of those bugs. I don't exploit. And I'm still playing.
I don't think it was a bad purchase for me. And
EVEN if you've only player a few months... considering the price of the
game, you've still had your money worth, since you don't have to use
the cash shop at all.
Respect, walk, what did you say? Respect, walk Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me? - PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
I started Vanguard after SOE acquired it and spent a year or two bug fixing. I put it on an SSD and it ran fine for me. At launch though, it ran badly. I think it was a definite benefit to wait before playing it. My experience was dramatically better than those who played at launch.
No Man's Sky is another game where the launch was not well received. Now the game has been improved so much it is held up as the model of what to do after a bad launch.
I broke my own rule and bought NW at launch, but didn't play it. I figured Amazon was big enough to survive a possibly bad launch. Just started playing it now.
I still haven't played WoW, wonder if it is too late to start now
I started Vanguard after SOE acquired it and spent a year or two bug fixing. I put it on an SSD and it ran fine for me. At launch though, it ran badly. I think it was a definite benefit to wait before playing it. My experience was dramatically better than those who played at launch.
No Man's Sky is another game where the launch was not well received. Now the game has been improved so much it is held up as the model of what to do after a bad launch.
I broke my own rule and bought NW at launch, but didn't play it. I figured Amazon was big enough to survive a possibly bad launch. Just started playing it now.
I still haven't played WoW, wonder if it is too late to start now
WoW still stands as the worse launch of any game I have played. They were handing out so much free time to people with crashing issues and servers being down. I had almost 2 months free time banked. Also there was no content end game. All we had for a year was raiding faction cities.
Its funny how quickly as gamers, we hold up games as standards to be met by new games, that did not meet the same standards at their launch.
There are several MMOs I've played that I don't feel are better than at some earlier point. I can think of several MMOs where I'm very glad I was there and got to experience the release rather than wait for some future better version that never materialized.
In general, I don't read or watch reviews. I do look at player comments and their recommendations, but don't take those at face value either. I look at the feedback for personal red flags that I think would bother me and take those into consideration.
Overall though, I just play what I want and base my impression on my own experience.
I started Vanguard after SOE acquired it and spent a year or two bug fixing. I put it on an SSD and it ran fine for me. At launch though, it ran badly. I think it was a definite benefit to wait before playing it. My experience was dramatically better than those who played at launch.
No Man's Sky is another game where the launch was not well received. Now the game has been improved so much it is held up as the model of what to do after a bad launch.
I broke my own rule and bought NW at launch, but didn't play it. I figured Amazon was big enough to survive a possibly bad launch. Just started playing it now.
I still haven't played WoW, wonder if it is too late to start now
WoW still stands as the worse launch of any game I have played. They were handing out so much free time to people with crashing issues and servers being down. I had almost 2 months free time banked. Also there was no content end game. All we had for a year was raiding faction cities.
Its funny how quickly as gamers, we hold up games as standards to be met by new games, that did not meet the same standards at their launch.
WoW endgame dungeons Molten Core and Onyxia were in at release. Are you talking PVP arena's? Those were never as popular as raiding. WoW got popular off its PVE content not its PVP. Heck just to keep the arenas busy due to lacking queue's they had to make PVP cross server.
And during the time you guys are wondering if you are going to buy or not, maybe buy later or not, maybe wait for a sale or not, I'm playing games.
The OP is a good example of people who spend more time on forums talking about games they don't play than they spend actually playing games.
Life is too short. Don't be bitter, take some risks, have fun.
“Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in
broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and proclaiming, ‘Wow,
what a ride!!”
I buy what I buy and enjoy what I enjoy. I try and not get so lost in the weeds over overanalyzes.
This.
You purchased New World at launch, in fact you promoted it as I recall.
Do you think the game experience was better back at launch or did it improve significantly so that at some point in the future it was more worthy of being played? (Did you enjoy the experience more)
I personally waited, and from listening to those who were at the beginning I'm pretty glad I missed those bad old days of "more challenging" (more time-consuming?) design/ content.
That's what I try to figure out, when is game at a good point to deliver a positive experience?
I won't lie, I'm not as patient as you and others to overlook a game's faults....well unless it's a Fallout title, I'm all too happy to roll in sh!t for them.
Not that poster, but I bought NW on release and I wouldn't say the experience later is significantly better.
I would say it is a marginally better experience now, but in no way does that make me think I should have waited. Why would I? Waiting didn't provide an advantage and playing on release didn't put me at a disadvantage. In fact, if anything, the prior experience made my play smarter and more focused when the fresh start servers released. I enjoyed my experience on the new server much more precisely because of that previous experience.
There was also the buzz of a fresh game which actually, was sort of duplicated with the Fresh Start servers. Players leveling all together with good player density makes a world feel more alive.
Typically playing an MMO long after release places you in game focused on end-game grind populated mostly by bored know-it-alls with a tiny pool of those who like you are just starting out.
You really do miss out on a great community feeling if you start later.
For single player games though, it makes absolutely no difference and there is very little downside to waiting. Playing those at launch is just a matter of how much you personally want to play that particular game. And just like in MMOs, you have to go into those expecting bugs, glitches and rough balancing if you want to play at release.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I think some actual examples which is the route the thread is now going down is a good idea, it shows to me that no strategy for this will always work, but starting at launch or wafting a year on principle is doomed to fail.
ESO was criticised at launch though in hindsight I don't think it did that relatively badly at all. Would I have had a better player experience had a waited a couple of months, yes. But I would not want to change when I started it was not that bad at all.
CoH had way too much lag, I should have waited until it came to European servers. That to me is how the "pioneering" mentality goes badly wrong, I was too enthusiastic and paid for it.
Crusader Kings is a tale of two stories, I came in two early before most of the dlc's had come out, but luckily because of the structure of the game I was happy to go back to it. That taught me though, if it is not alike to CK hold your horses for those dlc's to come out.
When it comes to solo games, I think joining at launch is a bit pointless, you are not playing with others, what is the rush? Wait at least a couple of months after launch, you may get a good deal by buying early, but still wait for some after launch polish. But even then you have to think about the dlc's which may make you wait far longer.
Like I say I don't think there is any best strategy here, but considering that early access has moved the goal posts and Passes are now being given as a reason to play unfinished games (!) I think we have to seriously consider how we buy and what we boycott. That said when a bad launch like NMS makes good I am there to purchase it once it does, some players seem to hold grudges against studios who have had bad launches, which I have never understood if the game comes good in the end.
I think you are on to something @Scot. For me I pretty much either buy or boycott. Take a game like Diablo Immortal, I just boycotted that. It really doesnt matter what they do, I wont play it on principle.
This is a very complex problem.
So on one hand, if you boycott and dont let them fix it then there is no incentive for them to fix it.
On the other hand, if people just allow them to tweak the game enough to get within a threshold to buy, they will keep releasing trash, with the expectation they can do just enough to get over the finish line.
I dont want just barely passable games either. I want them to release games in a good state and build a reputation for making quality games for their customers. Sort of like the dark souls franchise has done.
No clue why these studio's dont just make great games and build a reputation. Studios that treat their customer right and make great games without the junk monetization scams usually are rewarded and bankroll.
When my friends and family are all picking up a single player game at the same time, I enjoy playing at the same time so we can talk about builds, tactics, and our journey. Xbox has game hubs/clubs where people can share screenshots and videos and discuss. For me, there can be a huge social component to single player games.
That isn't the norm though, but it has been the case more this year than in the last few. If I'm in no hurry I put the title on my wishlist and play the "get it on a good sale" mini-game.
I think some actual examples which is the route the thread is now going down is a good idea, it shows to me that no strategy for this will always work, but starting at launch or wafting a year on principle is doomed to fail.
ESO was criticised at launch though in hindsight I don't think it did that relatively badly at all. Would I have had a better player experience had a waited a couple of months, yes. But I would not want to change when I started it was not that bad at all.
CoH had way too much lag, I should have waited until it came to European servers. That to me is how the "pioneering" mentality goes badly wrong, I was too enthusiastic and paid for it.
Crusader Kings is a tale of two stories, I came in two early before most of the dlc's had come out, but luckily because of the structure of the game I was happy to go back to it. That taught me though, if it is not alike to CK hold your horses for those dlc's to come out.
When it comes to solo games, I think joining at launch is a bit pointless, you are not playing with others, what is the rush? Wait at least a couple of months after launch, you may get a good deal by buying early, but still wait for some after launch polish. But even then you have to think about the dlc's which may make you wait far longer.
Like I say I don't think there is any best strategy here, but considering that early access has moved the goal posts and Passes are now being given as a reason to play unfinished games (!) I think we have to seriously consider how we buy and what we boycott. That said when a bad launch like NMS makes good I am there to purchase it once it does, some players seem to hold grudges against studios who have had bad launches, which I have never understood if the game comes good in the end.
I agree that games like 2077, Redfall are just a mess and are under developed. I just dont think this is wide spread as we make it to be as gamers. I have been gaming since Pong. There has been bad games since the start and buggy games that should have never been released.
Since the internet and PC gaming took us away from Static files on a medium and things can get patched, these buggy games could get fixed. As a kid I cant count how many buggy games I bought, that just were crap and not worth playing and there was no recourse. I think its better now, as there is some accountability.
I agree that games like 2077, Redfall are just a mess and are under developed. I just dont think this is wide spread as we make it to be as gamers. I have been gaming since Pong. There has been bad games since the start and buggy games that should have never been released.
Since the internet and PC gaming took us away from Static files on a medium and things can get patched, these buggy games could get fixed. As a kid I cant count how many buggy games I bought, that just were crap and not worth playing and there was no recourse. I think its better now, as there is some accountability.
Yes, I don't see the likes of Redfall being endemic, I just think the leeway given to Passes may see that problem rise. It is more the acceptance of early access on Steam and later Passes that has me concerned.
Comments
"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
Once upon a time....
Other problem is back in the day, we had Play Station and Nintendo for the most part. Now PC gaming, Xbox, Steam, Epic all fighting over exclusives. Gamers because of cost of living normally only pick one or maybe 2 platforms to game on. So people often get sick of waiting for the next game and when one they like is coming to their platform of choice. They buy it, as they are tired of waiting.
Lastly, tech is moving at a much faster pace and in a controlled environment what may seem as stable, may not be so when the product goes live. Im not talking about games like 2077 but just games that seems to get things fixed within a week or two of launch but still for the most part, at launch allot are able to play the game.
Im not sure there is an easy answer here....
Players like Korrigan did overpromote, quite preposterously, but I have been there for ESO so I am not going to cast too many stones. The problems in ESO were far less but I was not as tolerant of naysayers as I should have been, I pounced on nearly every one.
But as I said earlier if you choose as I have to let a year or two buy by 'welcome to possibly having more easy mode and more P2W'. It is a trade of and I have no certainty that my plan is the best one.
But I think we as players and the gaming media have let too much dross of the hook and bought it. That's why I was so happy to see Joseph's review of Redfall, if this is not called out it just will get worse, I presume nobody thinks early access and a lack of polish at launch is going to get better without some pushback?
But then I am not questioning people for playing too early unless they pay before launch, that can be detrimental to launch quality in my eyes. I am not saying there are any easy solutions here myself, that why the whole issue is difficult.
I've pre-ordered New World after the open beta test in August on year before release. The beta was why I bought, and I wasn't disappointed despite the flaws. I actually never was affected by any of those bugs. I don't exploit.
And I'm still playing.
And EVEN if you've only player a few months... considering the price of the game, you've still had your money worth, since you don't have to use the cash shop at all.
Respect, walk
Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me?
- PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
Its funny how quickly as gamers, we hold up games as standards to be met by new games, that did not meet the same standards at their launch.
Typically playing an MMO long after release places you in game focused on end-game grind populated mostly by bored know-it-alls with a tiny pool of those who like you are just starting out.
You really do miss out on a great community feeling if you start later.
For single player games though, it makes absolutely no difference and there is very little downside to waiting. Playing those at launch is just a matter of how much you personally want to play that particular game. And just like in MMOs, you have to go into those expecting bugs, glitches and rough balancing if you want to play at release.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
ESO was criticised at launch though in hindsight I don't think it did that relatively badly at all. Would I have had a better player experience had a waited a couple of months, yes. But I would not want to change when I started it was not that bad at all.
CoH had way too much lag, I should have waited until it came to European servers. That to me is how the "pioneering" mentality goes badly wrong, I was too enthusiastic and paid for it.
Crusader Kings is a tale of two stories, I came in two early before most of the dlc's had come out, but luckily because of the structure of the game I was happy to go back to it. That taught me though, if it is not alike to CK hold your horses for those dlc's to come out.
When it comes to solo games, I think joining at launch is a bit pointless, you are not playing with others, what is the rush? Wait at least a couple of months after launch, you may get a good deal by buying early, but still wait for some after launch polish. But even then you have to think about the dlc's which may make you wait far longer.
Like I say I don't think there is any best strategy here, but considering that early access has moved the goal posts and Passes are now being given as a reason to play unfinished games (!) I think we have to seriously consider how we buy and what we boycott. That said when a bad launch like NMS makes good I am there to purchase it once it does, some players seem to hold grudges against studios who have had bad launches, which I have never understood if the game comes good in the end.
This is a very complex problem.
So on one hand, if you boycott and dont let them fix it then there is no incentive for them to fix it.
On the other hand, if people just allow them to tweak the game enough to get within a threshold to buy, they will keep releasing trash, with the expectation they can do just enough to get over the finish line.
I dont want just barely passable games either. I want them to release games in a good state and build a reputation for making quality games for their customers. Sort of like the dark souls franchise has done.
No clue why these studio's dont just make great games and build a reputation. Studios that treat their customer right and make great games without the junk monetization scams usually are rewarded and bankroll.
Since the internet and PC gaming took us away from Static files on a medium and things can get patched, these buggy games could get fixed. As a kid I cant count how many buggy games I bought, that just were crap and not worth playing and there was no recourse. I think its better now, as there is some accountability.
https://biturl.top/rU7bY3
Beyond the shadows there's always light