Whats happend to the solid games and commonsense?

Well, I feel like getting something of my chest. When the generation shift started, every one was eager to see what they could dish out in graphics. Making things look good was more important then ever. Better graphics equalled better games in everye once minds. Cause we want things to look good... cause if it dossent look totally wicked, people won't buy it. (exampel Dreamfall)

Now what happend was, the studios had to worry more about polygons, textures, normal mapping, bump mapping, parallex mapping and all shorts of shaders than about gameplay, story and polish. Now poorly executed games have been donne before. There is no doubt about that. But rearly do we see games like Splinter Cell Double Agent come out soo unfinished... if you have a 88 GPU you can STILL not play that game. There are homebrewed solutions but they only work in, at best 50% of all cases.

Personaly, I am sick and tierd of paying my hard erned monney for games that don't work! When the hell did it become acceptable for a console game to be patched! PC games I can understand, so mutch diffrent hardware and combinations. It has to be a headace, but consoles! They are compleatly identical. Well, no, they arent. Not any more, thanks to M$. Now don't you go thinking "Yeah, go tell M$ that they suck! Sony/ Nintendo rocks". Because no! $ony wants me to pay $1000 for a freaking console!(Live in Norway) That's just sick. "Ooh, its got a blu-ray, now thats diffrent..." Its still a god damn console! Now Nintendo, yeah I get it. Go a diffrent way. That is smart. Not all can afford to compete in the arms race that is the games industry. So I can understand that, but the console is just to expencive considering what you get! $420 is just wrong! (In Europe again...)

I sure hope that this is just a fad. And that as people get more into the next-gen witch is now current-gen, games will get better and more solid. In fact, the first demo I tried in ages that did not have slowdowns, bugs and/ore artifacts was Overlord. And I can only hope games will continue in that manner. Thanks for reading this, please state you're thoughts aswell.

Its publishers, dude. Evereyone has their price, and you cant blame them for it, but when giving a developer 20 million (which is pennies to EA) to develop a game and release it when its unfinished...thats almost like taking advantage of them.

Its like that Soutpark episode, where everyone pays Kenny to do gross stuff. In one view youre doing him a favor by giving him money, but ultimately you are doing nothing but taking advantage of Kenny. Developers need to either develop Steam-like programs so they can avoid publishers, or sign contracts where they say "its done when its done."

We all like games in a timely manner, but only an idiot would want a bugged game just for the sake of shaving a few months off of development time.

As for the graphics debate, I agree that it is a little sad with this sudden focus on "next gen" tech. But its just the way of the world, man, and we are PC gamers and we just gotta keep adapting like we have for the past decades.

And to be honest, all you people that went out and bought Dx10 cards and Vista on their release date or even now are not helping our cause. Most of us are gonna have to stick with a 7600s and 6600s for another year or so, and even then we will have to buy the mid-range or lower end cards. I know you technophiles only make up about 1.7% of the PC gaming population (stat taken from the Valve hardware survey), but it would just be nice if you had a little restraint and were smarter with your money...imo, Dx10 and Vista are still in their prototype stages. Driver issues, incompatability with games...is there really any excuse for that to occur? Not in my opinion.

I can asure you that I do NOT have Vista... only Crysis and hellhounds can make me install that trainwreck! But the thing is, when my PC can run old games sutch as TES Daggerfall and Blood 2. Why can't the good people at Ubi (witch make SCDA) make this game, this next-gen game, work on the best hardware out there. Its really quite outrageous! Its not nVidia ore driver support that is the issue. Its plain old compatebility. They just didn't implement it. DX9 games sutch as FarCry, Doom3 and Half-Life2 have no problems.

I am not saying next-gen tech is the root of all evil. Just most of it. What I don't get is why they absolutley need to stuff more in there than what they can actually optimize! Like Oblivion, they went and made a fantastic world... but its empty. Only a few people in the streets.

quote "We all like games in a timely manner, but only an idiot would want a bugged game just for the sake of shaving a few months off of development time." Well, of course not! Thats exactly my point. Take youre time ore trye to do less of the magic.

If you build a beautifull house, remember to save some monney so that you can buy the furniture!

Vista and Direct x 10 should have came out til everyone and everything was ready for the leap ahead. Microsoft and hardware makers should have waited til they had their stuff prepared and ready for Vista. Then released the products,but I know its all about money. At least there are companies like Id and Valve that take the effort and release products that people that have old and new hardware. Valve's HL2 Can use Direct x 7,8,9 and maybe in a year or so 10. Because of this they get good reviews, and lots of money targeting almost everyone and not just the top 10% of high ended hardware users. Now all these ports from console to Pc anit helping ethier being not done or buggy. There are groups trying to undermine Microsoft and getting Vista only games working on Xp such as Halo2 and shadhowrun. Microsoft might try to put a end to the project but if they dont sell the coding/program that makes it work Microsoft cant do much. But another good piont is that modders try to fix and add to the games that were not finished or buggy. But still companies should try to create struff that's done to thier best of thier abilites, which some dohave time limits or money limits,but alot dont. So i hope things turn around sometime.

Vista and Direct x 10 should have came out til everyone and everything was ready for the leap ahead. Microsoft and hardware makers should have waited til they had their stuff prepared and ready for Vista. Then released the products,but I know its all about money. At least there are companies like Id and Valve that take the effort and release products that people that have old and new hardware. Valve's HL2 Can use Direct x 7,8,9 and maybe in a year or so 10. Because of this they get good reviews, and lots of money targeting almost everyone and not just the top 10% of high ended hardware users. Now all these ports from console to Pc anit helping ethier being not done or buggy. There are groups trying to undermine Microsoft and getting Vista only games working on Xp such as Halo2 and shadhowrun. Microsoft might try to put a end to the project but if they dont sell the coding/program that makes it work Microsoft cant do much. But another good piont is that modders try to fix and add to the games that were not finished or buggy. But still companies should try to create struff that's done to thier best of thier abilites, which some dohave time limits or money limits,but alot dont. So i hope things turn around sometime.

04dcarraher

What really bugs me is that in any other industry, companies just wouldnt get away with this.

Games with bugs that dont work properly, operating systems that are released before theyre finished, and video cards that dont even have proper drivers. Its just not right.

Its like selling a knife that isnt sharp, or making a car with a broken radio. I think the reason they get away with this stuff is because the majority of PC gamers are young people who dont know how to properly write and make complaints, and also are people who just "go with the flow" and can wait a few months for a patch or driver.

Anyone else have anymore thoughts

I'm going to throw a game in this debate that I think we can all relate to - Star Wars Galaxies.

This is a prime example of how Publihers are gettign away with well.... fraud. From the time that game was released to the current time of day, LucasArts has been taing advantage of the people who play this game. I played it for three years until I got smart and decided I was no longer going to pay someone to do half the job. I don't pay someone to cut half my yard do I? No, I don't - and neither should you.

SOE is usually the people who get the bad rep for SWG, but the truth is, they were merely the developers, and that whole thing has been covered in this debate numerous times. The thing about it is, SOE is not a victim in this scenario. They try to play it off like they have no contol, but deep down, we all sort of know whatthe hell is going on here. SOE is getting paid whether their product is crap or not. If they can do as little amount of work as possible, and still get funding - you're damn right SOE would take advantage of that. So in this sense, they're just as guilty as LA.

The thing is, these things won't change until someone starts suing the hell out of them. What game publishers are doing in the industry is controlling it. In every other market in the world that is "legit", no one has complete control over the stock. It's a gamble. The gaming indutry has absolutely no risk involved, and Publishers know this. The minute they feel like they're about to lose money, they ship the product with no questions asked - period.

Not all Publishers are as bad as some though, so it's not a big deal. Star Wars Galaxies is one that just stands out among all others in this respect. I'm not bent out of shape about it, it's just that what those people went through never should have been aloud on any constitutional level. True, they paid for a service month after month. But how many times did SOE and LA both break promise after promise? This, ladies and gentlemen, is fraud. Had people not already put money on the product, it would be different. True, we can't pove they used that as a bait and switch tactic, but they can't prove they didn't.

I'm going to throw a game in this debate that I think we can all relate to - Star Wars Galaxies.

This is a prime example of how Publihers are gettign away with well.... fraud. From the time that game was released to the current time of day, LucasArts has been taing advantage of the people who play this game. I played it for three years until I got smart and decided I was no longer going to pay someone to do half the job. I don't pay someone to cut half my yard do I? No, I don't - and neither should you.

SOE is usually the people who get the bad rep for SWG, but the truth is, they were merely the developers, and that whole thing has been covered in this debate numerous times. The thing about it is, SOE is not a victim in this scenario. They try to play it off like they have no contol, but deep down, we all sort of know whatthe hell is going on here. SOE is getting paid whether their product is crap or not. If they can do as little amount of work as possible, and still get funding - you're damn right SOE would take advantage of that. So in this sense, they're just as guilty as LA.

The thing is, these things won't change until someone starts suing the hell out of them. What game publishers are doing in the industry is controlling it. In every other market in the world that is "legit", no one has complete control over the stock. It's a gamble. The gaming indutry has absolutely no risk involved, and Publishers know this. The minute they feel like they're about to lose money, they ship the product with no questions asked - period.

Not all Publishers are as bad as some though, so it's not a big deal. Star Wars Galaxies is one that just stands out among all others in this respect. I'm not bent out of shape about it, it's just that what those people went through never should have been aloud on any constitutional level. True, they paid for a service month after month. But how many times did SOE and LA both break promise after promise? This, ladies and gentlemen, is fraud. Had people not already put money on the product, it would be different. True, we can't pove they used that as a bait and switch tactic, but they can't prove they didn't.

crimson_axe

I would love to see a court case of this game. A customer could bring in his computer and step-by-step show every single bug, every single half-finished part of the game, and then have the lawyer argue his case. I honestly dont see how SOE or Lucasarts could defend themselves, and unfortunately they would problably settle out of court, not fixing the problem.

Why upgrade P.C always at high cost ?

Purchase a next - gen console ( Xbox 360 / PS 3), so that u can play and enjoy them too . they've awesome titles to enjoy .

Now , i advised this for good only , not being a console lover . For a gamer enjoyment of games comes first ... IMO :)

I think developers like Id and Epic are starting to realise that gameplay and quality need to come first. For example, Epic concentrated on building good levels with good gameplay first for Unreal Tournament 3, and then they went back to 'make it look good'. Carmack pretty much said the same thing with his new technology - build the levels first, then throw the artists at it. So at least someone seems to be taking on board the fact that great graphics don't make great games, and concentrating on the gameplay first.

That's only a part of the issue, though, because the main problem lies with gamers and hardware manufacturers themselves. Too many gamers want photo-realism in games now, or they aren't satisfied. Everyone seemed to go weak at the knees when they saw the Crysis vs Real life shots, and seemed to lose sight of the gameplay. The graphics card manufacturers are constantly trying to reach that plateau where they can pump out realistic looking gameworlds. The race for better tech in terms of hardware and gaming engines is going too hard and too fast - a game is barely out the door before it's technically out of date compared to what is coming in six months, or three months.

The majority of PC gamers simply can't keep up financially with that rate of change, which means a diminishing market for new titles that can only run on better hardware. Is it any wonder that sales have been declining, when gamers are being priced out of the market? Is it any wonder that mistakes are made by development houses when the hardware and software requirements are exponentially increasing? It's getting to the point where development houses have to try and see into the future to determine what technical marvel is around the corner, or will be available when their game arrives on shelves. They must feel like they're caught up in a race they can never win on PC, so they turn increasingly to consoles, where the hardware is pretty much static and gives them a stable platform on which to develop.

Gamers' cravings for the 'next best thing' are as much to blame for the current situation as anything else. If people didn't keep posting 'this looks like crap' every time a screenshot doesn't have enough shiny bling, then maybe the developers could concentrate more on the gameplay elements, and delivering a solid and polished game, rather than worry about their games looking 'good enough'. The game STALKER is a good example of this - suddenly there was a revamp of the graphics, and other aspects of the gameplay were axed. I think Duke Nukem Forever is caught up in this same rat-race, constantly having to change because the graphics vendors (and gamers) keep moving the goal-posts about what is visually acceptable.

Today's killer 'graphics to die for' are going to be lying in the gutter, downtrodden and rain-soaked in a few short months, because the game failed to live up to expectations, or had bugs, or had problems working on some configurations, or was simply outdone by 'the next best thing'. So is it any wonder that publishers are constantly pushing for games to be released 'now' while they consider them to be 'current' because they know the other games in the pipeline look 10x better, and a game will be simply ignored by graphics whores? So they deliver them buggy, and needing patches, and the whole game development process becomes a choking, stifling chicken-factory production line churning out reruns, rehashes and recycled garbage, which continues to swell the ranks of the disgruntled.

Reap what ye shall sow - well, we keep asking for better-looking games, so they keep trying to make them, and so the cycle goes on until I think the majority of developers will simply throw in the towel and develop solely for consoles because they can't keep up with the rate of technological change any more.

We're on a roller-coaster ride now, but the problem is someone's still building the roller-coaster and we're catching up to them too fast so they'll never be able to finish it before we crash.

As an ex Galaxies player... I can't talk about that game, to manny emotions.

Allot of people say that were waiting for the next big thing. And well, we kinda are. But who said that it needed to look like real life. Look at World of WarCraft. Kinda dated graphics even at launch, but it had gameplay, acceptable ammount of bugs and ofcourse the blizz made it. But still, so manny people i know that never tuched a game loved and still love WoW.

There is soo much proof outh there that insane graphics are not must have to make a great game. So why ceep pushing the limits. Yes ceep on expanding the graphics, but don't bite over more then what you can chew. It feels like publishers and developers never learn.

Please I know that pretty much every thing has been said. But I want to hear you say it. So post youre thoughts and feelings here. No use in bottleling them up.