Broken Age Episode One - First Impressions here

Put your hand up if you are a backer of Broken Age. Backers will have access to the first part of the game on Tuesday.

Are you excited to try the game out?

I can't wait to hear what people say about it. Some of the early concept stuff looked and sounded great.

There's some experience in that voice cast as well, so I hope the game is funny.

If people want to leave their impressions of the game here that'd be great.

Well Double Fine made Psychonauts which I concider best adventure game on PC and pretty good job done on Brutal Legend.

I hope for good

Let's hope Broken Age is not Broken or it will be an Age until they fix it.

OH A HA HA I made a funny. Do not pray for me, I am too far gone.

I'm sick of this "well, you can play PART of the game next month".

Either release a whole product or nothing at all.

It's like you buy a car and they say "well, in about 6 months bring it back and we'll install the air con"

Won't be buying it, but I'll definitely watch a Lets play of it. Got a nice vibe to it.

Don't forget to leave your impressions here. Its out today for backers.

or you can wait till they release the whole game so you dont have to resort to bitching.

It's not bitching dude, most of the time it's a "cop-out" to release an unfinished product.

Wasteland 2 for example was charging FULL PRICE to play 30% of the game. I just don't agree with the business model, that's all.

I thought it was ok, some decent puzzles and some humour. Vella (girl) side was far superior and longer. Although some of her puzzles were a little out there and tricky. Shay (boy) side was pretty trivial and puzzles fairly easy to work out, kinda disappointing. Vella took me about 3 hours to get through and Shay just over an hour.

It's part 1 of 2 parts, so neither story ends well. It just fades to black and switches to the other character.. Saves were a bit strange, but I didn't lose any progress thankfully. It's well made, great voice work across the board (expensive) and some good looking areas.

I liked it a lot, one of the better point and click adventure games that I've played in the last several years.

I enjoyed it. Shay's story is definitely the weaker of the two, but the game's overall ending made up for any shortcomings. I suspect that the second part will be better, now that they have more ideas to work with.

Notice the ones that are bitching are the ones not paying for it or playing it...yet the ones that are are perfectly happy with it...

I somewhat agree with Felipe. Especially with Wasteland 2. The 30% that I played was disappointing.

Well duhhhh Mr Captian Obvious.

Obviously if people are not paying for it, it is because they don't agree with the scheme.... and people that pay for it obviously agree with the scheme. Doesn't make it right though.

Try to do this to gamers 20 years ago.... the developers would have gotten a bashing. These days gamers (and general younger people) are so desperate and impatient though that they can't wait. They need everything NOW NOW NOW.

Very true. It's all about instant gratification for this new generation of gamers. Sad.

This really is dumb bitching. Do you not realize you sound like a 5 year old kid when you say stuff like that?

Wasteland 2 for example was charging FULL PRICE to play 30% of the game. I just don't agree with the business model, that's all.

There is absolutely no substance in this train of thought. If you don't like it, you can simply wait until its finished. Hence the 5-year old mentality "if it's not released in the manner I prefer, it shouldn't be done at all!". Yikes.

It's not like it's taking an extra-long time because they are releasing the game in parts. I would absolutely adore it if I could monitor every game's progress from the moment I pre-order it. It's the very best way to do things - in plain sight for all to see. Why do you want your game development shielded from your eyes? Are additional options that scary to you? Open your mind dude.

Sounds like you guys are the ones wanting instant gratification...no? "I want it all or not at all". Yet everyone else is perfectly accepting of having the additional option to play the game before its 1.0 release.

You'd have to be pretty fucking stupid to think it's bad business practice to give customers additional options...

Here you go, the 21st century gamer.

"Thank you game companies for letting me pay you full price to play 1/5 of your game now for the promise I can play the rest some other time of your choosing. Thank you oh thank you thank you thank you! Here have some more money! You can come over and do my wife too if you want!"

You people calling instant gratification and entitlement syndrome need a dose of common sense, paying full price for something and expecting a full product at the time of payment is called being a fucking customer. And you KHwhateverthefuckyournameis, more spit less swallow on the game devs please.

So you would be fine if you go pay full price for a car and they say, "hey, come back in about 6 month and we'll install the air con for you" ?

How about you buy a house and they finish construction and say "don't worry, the roof will go on a year from now" ?

No one said it's bad business practice for the devs... it's a great practice for them since they can release unfinished products.

The "bad practice" is the gamers actually accepting this crap, same as they accept $15 for 5 extra maps (COD, BF) which takes the devs probably less than a week to create (since one of them is usually a remake of an older map).

I pay for a product, I want the product, not a part of it. (Episodic content is different since that's the design of the game)

You're funny KH. You complain about BF4 heaps, a finished product with a few bugs... but yet you are willing to pay full price for a PART of a game. ?

The mere fact that you think you only get part of a game for full price demonstrates that you're lacking the brain cells to fully comprehend the situation. It's called pre-ordering. No one is forcing you to preorder a game. Why are your knickers getting in such a bunch over something that doesn't effect you at all? You need that instant gratification so badly that you can't even accept others gladly playing incomplete games? Then fucking wait, you baby - the game isn't necessarily getting done any faster by them releasing it as a whole.

People have preordered games for ages. Now there are simply added benefits to preordering- such as seeing directly where that money is going and being able to give feedback on a game's progress. It's the least shady business practice around. What is shady is people bitching about things for no good reason - the comparisons you're making to buying half a car are literally batshit insane. Did you go to University Felipe? A 13 year old might think buying a car and funding a videogame is the same thing, but any reasonable young adult could easily see such a major distinction.

Double Standards mate, that's all I have to say.

Like @vfibsux said, keep swallowing.

Double standards? You think a car, a house, etc. and a video game is the same thing. They aren't even remotely close to being the same thing. If someone was actually being taken advantage of - there'd be a point behind the bitching. But nobody is being taken advantage of. Tons of people think it's a great thing to have the option to participate in a game's development. And for some reason you think game developer's are taking advantage of people? People aren't being taken advantage of merely because they don't share your opinion on playing earlier videogame builds. You and your buddies live in a world of delusion if you think this is poor business practice.

"You're funny KH. You complain about BF4 heaps, a finished product with a few bugs... but yet you are willing to pay full price for a PART of a game. ?"

And an alpha/beta at that.

Double Standards.

Agreed! :D Loved the example of the house and unfinished construction.

Well said! :) I couldn't agree more.

So you would prefer the game to not be made then? That's the only alternative...

(Indie games like this don't typically get picked up by publishers, that's why they're kickstarted....)

Conservatism doesn't get any scarier than you bozos :\ Why don't you go around bitching about pre-ordering then? You're buying the game and getting NOTHING. Yet every game allows preordering, no? Yet you're whining about this? You people are so dumb it's literally a bit frightening.

You "people" resorting to personal attacks is a bit frightening. Pre-ordering? A moot topic.

If it's different, it must be bad, right? Developers convincing millions of people to buy half-completed game for full price? They must be the ultimate scam artists.

Pre-ordering a moot topic? What do you mean? Backing a kickstarter is preordering the game. How is it moot?

I shouldn't even respond to you since you need to resort to insults to bring your point across.

I don't mind preordering a game that's going to get released COMPLETE, and btw a preorder costs around $10.

But paying FULL PRICE for a game that is not completed, might never be (yes, the devs use this excuse all the time as well as slapping the word BETA on there), and that the devs can give you parts of the game whenever they feel like it is different, and wrong imo.

Difference between a normal $10 preorder for a full game with release date, against a full price BETA "parts" of a game that they can release "when it's finished"

All of these games are released as complete...

The point is the game ISN'T RELEASED yet. Why is so hard to understand? When it's actually released, it will be a complete game and get reviewed as such. And then you can play it too if you don't wish to play it when it's unfinished. When you pre-order a game, it's not finished at that point either is it? The only difference is you don't have the option to check the progress of the game...which is relatively shady. They won't even listen to your feedback on their progress of the game :(

If anything, you guys are supporting archaism and shady business. A game with a disastrous launch like BF4 would never be released as kickstarter project. For weeks people couldn't even play the game on consoles...months later the game is jam-packed with shitty bugs (like Night vision not consistently working on my NV scope...how pathetic).

And no, I preorder games on Steam all the time and it's not just $10...

The 30% of Wasteland 2 is a complete game hey?

How about the other ones that get released and have BETA on the title for the next 5 years?

Which ones are those Felipe? Please, list to us all the games that are planned to be in beta state for the next 5 years...

Something isn't considered to be in a "released" state until it's finished. They are in a testing state. The game will be released, as a complete product, when it's actually finished. And then it will be advertised as so. You act like developers are snake-oil salesmen for letting people who want to test the game do what they want. Just because you don't share their preference doesn't mean it's bad business.

...

I've pretty much made all my points and this is getting into a circular argument. Giving customers options simply is not bad business practice. If you're unsure that the game isn't going to reach completion, you're welcome to wait until it looks like the game will be guaranteed a release. The only people that potentially could take a hit are the enthusiasts backing the project - and the enthusiasts know that they aren't paying to have a guaranteed full game right away. Obviously there's a huge risk supporting a project behind unproven developers - but literally the only games I've seen any of you complain about are games that are being made by proven developers that have tons of experience making games and have delivered in the past. I'm just not sure why you getting your panties in a bunch over enthusiasts wanting to support and fund game projects that couldn't possibly have been made otherwise.

The only game I've ever backed is DayZ, and that game is being made by Bohemian Interactive. I'm saving money on the game and I get to give input on the game's bugs and directions (or just play and have fun). It's actually extremely cool being able to see a game being made before my eyes. It's obvious that this game is going to be finished at some point, and it's also obvious that this game wouldn't work as well if it had to adhere to strict publisher deadline. So to me it just sounds like people are bitching for the sake of bitching. It would be one thing if these projects negatively impact in any way - but they don't. They aren't demanding your money. It seems like you're merely mad at the fact that people now have the option to test the games as they're being made. And it's a pretty silly thing to get mad about. They even give a little warning when you buy DayZ...

WARNING: THIS GAME IS EARLY ACCESS ALPHA. PLEASE DO NOT PURCHASE IT UNLESS YOU WANT TO ACTIVELY SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT OF THE GAME AND ARE PREPARED TO HANDLE WITH SERIOUS ISSUES AND POSSIBLE INTERRUPTIONS OF GAME FUNCTIONING.

Yet you act like they're trying to trick people and run off with their money? When they can see the game being made right before their eyes? Your perspective on the situation makes ZERO sense.

That's fine. Like I said, if you want to keep paying for unfinished products, feel free to do so, just don't expect everyone to follow you.

When I pay for a FULL product, I expect a FULL product. Simple really.

If they want people to participate in the creation of the game etc, then release a Beta and get player's opinions.

Difference is now we are PAYING for Betas.

20 years ago Betas (Demos) and DLCs and Extra Maps etc were all FREE. Now it's paid and even worse, FULL PRICE in some cases.

How did this happen? look in the mirror for the answer.

PS: "Yet you act like they're trying to trick people and run off with their money" *cough WarZ *cough. Also, how many kickstarters have failed to reach potential? Did all that money get refunded to the backers?

Felipe, you do get a full product when the game is finished. Games aren't made instantly. They take time. You can wait until it's finished and buy it then. You sound incredibly self-entitled when you demand free beta participation. Majority of beta testing isn't public, all inclusive, and free...

People are paying for games that publishers wouldn't fund otherwise. Are you really saying all these games simply shouldn't exist then? Just because you'd prefer to NOT have the option to test the game? Sounds kind of silly...especially more so when you relate the subject to DLC.

I don't expect anyone to follow me (in fact, the only vocal ones are the people against it). I'm just pointing blatant fallacies in your arguments. People received refunds for WarZ, and WarZ was a blatant scam trying to cash in on the DayZ fad. They were trying to sell their kickstarter project as a full game. There were no proven developers associated with the project. How do they relate?

I have $1,000 in my wallet that guarantees you this game will eventually see a finished state of release. Want to bet against that?

And what's the point at focusing on the WORST kickstarter projects? How about all the publisher released games that sucked? Did you forget about the millions of those? There are tons more of those than failed kickstarter projects. You should start formulating a list. Considering Sim City 5 earned EA on many "worst business of the year" lists, something tells me they scammed more people than WarZ did.

No, I'm just simply saying release the game when it's finished.

Not in a beta form for years.

Not in parts.

Not a percentage.

Game, finished, simple. It has nothing to do with entitlement which is your favourite word on these forums.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/09/ea-named-worst-company-in-america-again

EA has been named the “Worst Company in America” by Consumerist for the second year in a row. The publisher beat Bank of America with 78% of the vote to claim the title, which Consumerist refers to as the Golden Poo.

“Following last year’s surprise Worst Company In America victory by Electronic Arts, there was hope that the video game giant would get the message,” Consumerist posted. “Stop treating your customers like human piggy banks, and don’t put out so many incomplete and/or broken games with the intent of getting your customers to pay extra for what they should have received in the first place. And yet, here we are again, with EA becoming the first company to ever win a second Golden Poo from Consumerist readers.”

I don't seriously don't recall any kickstarter-based companies earning a place on this list. Obviously they're not doing as much damage as shitty publishers. :| People seem to agree that games put out by publishers are shadier and capable of far more damage to consumers.

Why can't people help test, develop, and fund unfinished games that they want to see made if they so desire? You've failed to established what's actually wrong with giving people that option. You've also failed to established how it negatively impacts you. That's why people around here think it's pointless bitching. To me you sound no different than an uber conserative - against change of tradition, even if the change has absolutely no effect on your life (like gay marriage).

They can help all they want, just release the game when it's finished, simple. They don't need to release parts of a game for gamers to make decisions you know. And are devs that dumb that they need THAT much help from gamers? Heck, have some balls and make a game you design.

And it doesn't impact me in anything, I couldn't care less. What it does do is give developers an easy avenue to fund a product and release it whenever they feel like it, and if never released, just say "oh well, it was just a kickstarter, better luck next time".

Does it? You've made a lot of argument in regards to something that you couldn't care less about. All you're doing is sensationalizing the worst-case scenario. What percentage of kickstarter projects does this happen to? Why haven't any of these failed kickstarter projects received national attention compared to EA's shitty publishing?

You pointed that out yourself. Because EA is a huge company, while kickstarters are normally just a few developers, not even companies in some cases. (hence, they can get away with it without causing too much stir)

So why aren't you complaining about EA then? They're the ones doing the big damage causing the big stir. These very small insignificant projects by unproven developers that failed are very insignificant in comparison to what EA is doing. Yet all you've done in this thread is defend BF4's launch.

Also, clarify...

They can help all they want, just release the game when it's finished, simple.

How can people help all they want if they can't test the game? LOL

You're not making ANY sense.

OMG you can't read. (or choose to make up things, don't know which one)

Where did I EVER defend BF4's launch? I even said the game shouldn't have been released like that, same with Ghosts.

I only said that DICE has now fixed most of the issues (the major ones were fixed within the first 2 weeks).

And I don't complain about EA? lol....another made up thing from KH. I complain plenty when they make mistakes. I spent an hour on live chat with them the other day complaining actually.

Saying BF4 at launch was a "finished product with a few bugs" is defending it. That's not what it was at all, and you know it. Why are you complaining so much about kickstarter projects when their damage towards consumers is very insignificant compared to what publishers are doing right now?

Oh sorry dear KH, maybe my words should of been "finished product with bugs". Are you happy now? Do you need to nip-pick every little word when you run out of arguments?

EVERY game released has bugs, EVERY SINGLE ONE. Some of the major ones BF4 had at launch like server stability, lag, crashes etc should have NOT been there at launch. I've said that multiple times in multiple topics.

Was the game finished? yes it was, 100% with all the maps. They didn't release a 30% of the game.

How it launched with some of the major bugs without DICE knowing I have no idea. Minor bugs are expected, but the major ones not. Luckily, they fixed them quickly.

I paid for a full product, with ALL the features included and all the levels included. Sadly, I had issues playing it the first few days, then they released a patch and it was better. Now I play it no issues at all.

It was in an unplayable state, marketed as being finished. Nobody on consoles could even play it for the first 2 weeks. SP progress constantly reset for players. TDM was the only mode that worked, constant disconnects, insane stuttering and rubber banding, unlock progress reset, game freezing, amongst HUNDREDS of other bugs. Saying these were "minor bugs that were fixed quickly" is bullshit. Most of the bugs on the PS4 still aren't fixed, months later. According to you, these are "minor bugs that were quickly fixed"? How the **** do you figure that? And here you are, bitching about games that are more playable than BF4 was at launch (only missing gameplay features), being marketed as unfinished.

Learn to read posts correctly dude, that's all I'm gonna say.

It's impossible to have a conversation with someone who reads only what they want to see.

I read your whole post. You continue to completely ignore my point, or make any point of your own. Please, actually address my point - What makes kickstarter projects so shady in comparison to this? If you agree that kickstarter publishing isn't as shady, then we're in agreement. If you think what EA does isn't shady, then that's where you're delusional. Once again, you're bitching about games that are more playable than BF4 was at launch (only missing gameplay features), being marketed as unfinished. At the same time, you're giving EA, a company that consistently fails launches, the benefit of the doubt. Who gives a shit about some random failed kickstarter projects that only a few hundred people backed? Hundreds of thousands of people were ripped off with BF4 by being a product that barely worked for a few weeks, and months later only works "okay".

For some, Battlefield 4 was essentially unplayable at launch. The game often crashed, wiping out progress in the single-player campaign, and online multi-player, the main feature of the game, was unstable at best. Patches have been released, fixing some of the problems, but the studio behind the game was forced to suspend all other development, including Battlefield 4 expansion packs and the upcoming Star Wars Battlefront, in order to deal with the game's problems.

This isn't the first time EA has bungled the launch of a game. Electronic Arts released a new version of SimCity back in March, but the game was unplayable for days due to server issues, and it took weeks for the team to iron out the major bugs. The Battlefield situation is even worse, with problems persisting two months after launch.

A class action lawsuit alleges that executives at EA knowingly over-promised on Battlefield 4, and that the vast technical problems were known to the company prior to launch. Optimistic guidance issued before the launch led EA's shares to climb above $28, allowing some executives at the company to sell at inflated prices. The stock has fallen significantly since then.