@SubHumanTorch @Jacen22 Apart from their terrible business practices, I'd say SWTOR and Dragon Age 2 fall into the "crap" category. Particularly DA2, it's just a poor game designed to cash out on the success of it's almost brilliant predecessor. I say almost because they tried to be a modern BG2 but fell short.
No, he's dreadfully wrong. It's not about how good at developing games a dev is, it's about how sellable his product is. Publishers wouldn't fund games like Torment or Project eternity, or even something popular like Path of Exile, because they believe they won't sell enough.
This is not intrinsically a bad thing, of course publishers want to sell, but high selling potential and quality are not directly correlated in most times.
I actually don't mind publishers not wanting to fund X project. What's wrong is publishing X project, and forcing the dev to stray away and modify said project because of what the publisher perceives as potential for sales. If you think a game won't sell, don't fund it, that's logical, but don't go and alienate a project, that's just wrong.
Then again, he's right when he says devs need to be more specific with their conditions then.
The audience is ready as long as always online proves to be a benefit for the gamers and not just for the publishers. It's only viable if it isn't invasive or obstructive for the enjoyment of games, and if it doesn't result in abusive charges and unnecesary fees for games that aren't meant to be played always online.
And no, ridiculous DRM is NOT a benefit for gamers, that doesn't count. Otherwise, he's right, most people have devices that are always online, it shouldn't be so weird, but it must be well done, thinking in the gamers.
In the search for the ever important graphic development, game designers have forgotten how to make a game that is actually fun and engaging. Examples like Starcraft 2, Dark Souls, Path of Exile, Dota 2 and League of Legends show that a large part of the gamer base is looking for something else other than just graphic quality. Kickstarter projects resurrecting game concepts that work on 2D isometric engines being successful is also a good example, while Crysis 3 being a rather poor game overall is an example on how graphics just aren't everything a game needs to succeed.
I think there needs to be a few games that push the bar, but the rest in terms of money and effort should be invested in improving gameplay, storylines and so on, the industry must remember that the gamer segment is growing in age, and more mature gamers are less impressed by even the hottest of graphics, and want either more fulfilling and immersive experiences, or better social features and competitive capabilites.
@experience_fade Bioshock infinite on hard is really easy right now. I mean, not Tomb Raider easy, but still pretty easy. The thing with Dark Souls is that the difficulty is almost completely dependant on the skill and the knowledge of the player. Watch day9's blind playthrough from about a week ago, and see him struggle against the easiest of enemies, but as you learn the game your learning is greatly rewarded, it's a good feeling when after so much struggle you defeat something, and then when you re play the game, you notice just how much better you are now.
@Scorpion1813 Yes I can agree with this. If it's non essential it isn't wrong per se. What I dislike is when day 1 DLCs keep players from the complete game experience and put a money barrier between the gamer and the full game they, theoretically, already paid for.
@IgOr2099 @-MordeN- I don't know why you reference BW here, considering that one is a traditional expac released months after SC (maybe even a full year), in the days of LoD, ToB, etc in which you bought an expansion for $40 and got pretty much a new game in terms of value.
Just cause, alongside Capcom's DLCs, exemplify everything that's wrong about day 1 DLCs, by including elements crucial to gameplay and putting a price barrier between the player who ALREADY bought a supposedly full game, and the actual full game experience, that's just foul play.
I don't disagree with day 1 DLCs per se, but when it has crucial gameplay or story elements, that complete the package the player already bought, it's just wrong.
2.- The most important question, if what you say is true, why is it that usually day 1 DLC content is crucial to the game's storyline and gameplay? Expansions aren't required to make the game complete, they add to what was already complete. Day 1 DLCs are usually a big part of a game's storyline, that players who opt not to buy do not get, hence buying an incomplete game.
Answer these questions, and I will trust your day 1 DLCs.
People know banks don't give a f*** about an internet popularity poll, also, it's an internet popularity poll, of course the company that is more closely related to the internet on a worldwide level is going to beat a bank that actually only people from the US care about and that has a majority of customers over the age segment that commonly cares about internet issues.
That, and EA obviously sucks, serves them right. You say you can do better? Well do it and stop talking, particularly when that very same statement was riddled with poor excuses for bad performance as a company.
-MordeN-'s comments