This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

FRUSTRATED WITH THE STATE OF GAME DEVELOPMENT

 Balders Gate 3 just opened up a massive can of worms for greedy devs.

A game that has a massive amount of content, a huge replay ability factor, NO MICROTRANS or store purchases. Oh and it is actually polished and playable at launch.

Compare that to games like Diablo 4 and Destiny 2. Lame weak content, little to actually do post game but grind, anything that might be worth having is behind a paywall. Elden Ring and BG3 came under fire from devs for "over delivering". Excuse me, so a game dev that actually values making an enjoyable game, that is consumer focused rather than a bare minimum release where you get to pay a premium for the right to be beta tester yet anything worth having in game is classed as an add on that cost you more... is "over delivering"? No, thats called being a decent Dev studio that delivers on their promise and is why they get positive as hell reviews.

FromSoftware and Lorian have proven that you can make an amazing game, for a reasonable price and it be focussed on the game and enjoyment rather than treating gamers like money making udders just to be squeezed. Yet AAA studios care more about the money than the product that they're selling. Blizz/activison are going to destroy Diablo because they're using the same crappy business model Destiny 2 is known for. It's a rancid behaviour. CDPR have polished Witcher 3 for ages and it's still a well loved game, it released great and only got better. So massive multi billion pound studios CANNOT just sit and say oh no... don't expect us to do better for the 60-100 pound asking price for our beta game, spend more money in the store over the next year and we may actually patch the issues.

A lot of readers will like just say "don't buy it day one blah blah...". Normally I wait for games to come down in price and recently wait to see how well they perform on release because of terrible dev behaviours. I shouldn't have to. If a dev makes a promise on the calibre of its game, they should be held to it. I have bought the Resident evil games day one and they are amazing. Dark Souls games, Nioh + 2 and a few others that all delivered on that promise of an amazing experience from day one. It should not be a lottery of when a game releases if it will actually be playable or not. It is another reason I respect Nintendo more that the others. They only release things that work and they're not riddled with micro transactions. A lot of studios will never see my money again while this practise is the norm.

EDIT: For clarity, I believe ALL devs guilty of chasing the bag rather than giving quality products need to do better and if they can't then they should look to make internal changes so they can. I will not alter my original post as I still stand by it.
When buying games at a premium on day one is pretty much being a BETA tester so it gets cleaned up 12months later, yet feels hollow until you buy every add on going or cosmetic pack so there's actually some content... That is not how gaming should be.
The product should be high quality with actual content for the money you pay and anything else should feel like a bonus. My examples may not fit for everyone looking but those are the immediate ones that are easy to find. Still, Buying a broken game on release should not be allowed to happen. Especially when there is no transparency in the way it is executed. 

If they are millions into profit making games, they do not need to be so greedy and then call "overheads", it's more like shareholders if they're being honest.

  •   

    I have decided to remove the comment thread that occurred since the start of this post. I welcome the renewal of the discussion so long as it does not continue down the path it already has. I am also stating this publicly so that others are aware to be thoughtful with their responses.

    Please be mindful when engaging in discussions that, even if one person may be wrong, it's still important to be civil. Please do not resort to personal attacks and please remember to abide by the Community Terms of Service. Thank you.

  •    Frankly I find it weird that you think the title of this "thread" is acceptable and isn't offensive, derogatory or encouraging toxicity against the parts of your community who work within the gaming industry. You must be aware people who work in the gaming industry will be members of your community. This entire post is oddly ranting, full of childish language and encouraging toxicity that I frankly am surprised you allow and want to encourage in the community.

    There is a huge difference between have an opinion that you share in an adult, calm and polite way for discussion - and importantly, being open to that discussion - and starting a thread to just rant whilst throwing offensive language and inciting toxicity in the community in the hope of polarising more people's opinions towards toxicity and only actually having the intention or hope to create an echo chamber.

    I also shouldn't have to point out that stereotyping all "Western devs" for derogatory comments in the original post and posts you deleted without any factual basis, evidence or any reasoning whatsoever, is borderline discriminatory by targeting people's livelihoods for no other reason than where they are based. People can read into this that Lenovo are happy to sit by and watch toxicity and borderline discrimination happen in their community.

  • That's quite alright.

    Although I dont remember making it personal, I apologise if it came off that way.

    I do find Keiadow's current pleading a childish attack on what a hell of a lot of people feel about the state of gaming right now. Yes, I was venting slightly, but I have also come a cropper to devs tactics of chasing the bag rather than making quality games and I am not buying any excuses. I also broadened the spectrum which they appear to have missed entirely.

    I do not believe it is toxic or childish to expect better of companies and I am not the only one to think that. So I would appreciate the thread to stay as it is, I see no harm in showing distaste to devs of any kind exploiting gamers.

  • Please take a look at your own behaviour because quite frankly the pot is calling the kettle black here. It's not just a rant either, the feeling is mutual among gamers that we are paying over the odds for unfinished games with micro-transactions that sometimes are necessary to complete a game on top of the initial purchase price. And before you put another comment down as baseless, here's corroboration from an industry insider, the industry is on very thin ice.

    www.thegamer.com/.../

  • Games are released early even if in a broken state because devs want money back from the investment asap, they don't want to keep pay dozens/hundreds of people working on a game without any money coming in so they release before its ready and fix whatever issues exist after its out, new game releases are basically almost all betas at this point, with the players being not only unpaid beta testers but they actually pay to have this privilege. I haven't bought a day 1 game since like 2016 because it's disgusting.

  • The thing you're still missing the point on is that I have agreed with you. At no point have I denied that there are issues. All I did was offer some reasons you clearly weren't aware of and weren't considering previously as to why things are happening generally for some devs and asked you not to take it to a polarising toxic extreme, which your original post was and posts since have been. You're still acting like I'm denying it's even an issue or that I'm trying to defend all devs which I never have been.

    The fact other people have agreed there are issues in the industry doesn't validate the way you went about voicing this and the tone of your post(s), everyone knows there are issues in the industry with this stuff. That validates there are problems in the industry, it does not validate your language or tone about it.

    As I clearly said there is no problem with anyone having and sharing an opinion, or wanting an adult discussion. It's the way you went around and continue to go around it (evidenced from the above point that you're still continuing down) that is the problem.

    If you can't see that the way you've gone about this and some of the language you've chosen to use is offensive to and polarising against people in the industry who don't even have anything to do with the problem you're talking about, or are even fighting against what you're talking about yet still come under the broad insult umbrella you've put out, then I don't know what to tell you anymore.

    "So I would appreciate the thread to stay as it is, I see no harm in showing distaste to devs of any kind exploiting gamers." - is a complete contradiction in itself. You aren't showing "distaste" to devs who exploit gamers. That was what I was asking you to acknowledge and you refused to - only having a go at the devs who actually deserve it. You're just being downright rude and childish to ALL devs. That's how your post and deleted posts were originally written and caused this whole issue.

    And if you don't care about the effect that what you say and how you go about saying it can have on people, then what are you even pretending to apologise for? You're apologising to Kelie S because they caught you out and told us both off, not because you actually care about any impact you've had on other people. Which is frankly a fake apology to try and save face.

  • The fact other people agree with it - and I shouldn't need to point out if you've actually been following this that I did agree with it too - does not validate how the post is written, the language that's used and the tone it is written in. It validates that people are annoyed about overpriced games and pricing tactics, which is fine. It does NOT validate whether the original post was written in a toxic way, encouraging polarising opinion in an echo chamber instead of objective, open discussion. Needless to say the deleted posts and original posts before editing were worse.

    You're now arguing with me on an issue which is about HOW the post and discussion has happened yet you're continuing to argue the merits of the original post itself about game dev practices, which has nothing to do with the issue of HOW the post and discussion happened.

    This is exactly what happens when people make polarising posts that spark extreme emotions instead of civilised behaviour. All rationality goes out the window because you're so annoyed at what that person has stirred up and you think anyone who remotely says anything otherwise must be the enemy, that you're not even focusing on the actual point being discussed anymore. It's the same tactics that have been used in commercial marketing and politics for decades, but have been more in the limelight in recent years with things like Trump, Brexit and Boris Johnson's elections. It has been proven to work so effectively on people who don't stop and think about it to be aware of it, that it's widely known YT content makers, sole trader/individual Game Reviewers and even Twitch Streamers have started using these same tactics to push emotional reactions to an extreme and polarise opinion to grab their audiences tighter and improve retention amongst those people. Which I suspect is the same thing the guy in the YT video that was posted does for his audience, as it's clear from his lack of balanced objectivity, tone and language. These are reasons why I call for open discussion, reflection and empathy instead of ranting, bias, rudeness, rumour-spreading and echo chambers.

    FYI, Stacey Henley is a journalist. NOT an industry insider. Her LinkedIn is even public and she's only ever had a journalistic career. Even her degree was in journalism. I completely agree with the point she's making about games being overpriced - I think they are when you take into account all the "extras" and subscriptions/"seasons" thrown in and the fact the industry has standardised a $70 price point world-wide when only a tiny fraction of games warrant that price point. But her opinion is not from within the professional industry itself and that article is off a sharp tangent from the specific points Ragnaraz has been making. That article does not validate the specific pointst Ragnaraz has been claiming. I find myself agreeing far more with that article than anything Ragnaraz has said or his "evidence" in that one YT video and she goes about making her argument better, but then I still agreed with his base point regardless didn't I.

  • Dude, we are simply not going to agree here, you have your view and I have mine.

    I am not bothered in the slightest if you have taken offence to my wording. I haven't been insulting, I called out behaviours of devs and expressed my opinion on it. 

    Ironically, this statement mainly goes towards devs and studios with those behaviours, I have also mentioned what I deem as solutions which you have yourself completely ignored. So pot calling the kettle black here much. I am not trying to save face as my edit states quite clearly, I stand by my words. You just do not like it and are thus complaining stating its going to somehow set people off with pitchforks after all dev studios. We both know that is not the case, plenty of media has covered this topic recently and their dissatisfaction in the state of AAA gaming. My post here does far less than the other outlets stating the same. My apology was simply for if it seemed personal, not for what was said.

    Again, my statement and sentiments will not effect others views, as anyone with common sense would have their own opinion or if what I have said has made them curious previously mentioned sources are out there and people will go and look for themselves and draw their own conclusion. The fact several threads on here have alluded to the fact they refuse to buy games until years later because of lack of quality and content, meaning they wait for a complete edition at £25 in a sale compared to a £60 beta, says a lot about peoples feelings towards the industry lately.

    For sake of not going in circles or causing mods anymore drama I will ignore subsequent replies from you here and at least on my end, agree to disagree.

      I do hope this does not cause anymore issues for you.

  • "I am not bothered in the slightest if you have taken offence to my wording."

    Yeah I'm just going to leave that there before you edit yourself out of that one too. Says it all.

    "My apology was simply for if it seemed personal, not for what was said."

    You do realise the complete contradiction in that, right? But again, it just shows you are not actually sorry for anything.

    I'm not going to bother replying to most of what you've said because I've already addressed those points about the fact I'm not even disagreeing about games being overpriced etc so no idea why you're still making out otherwise. And what you say about not affecting other people completely contradicts the entire point, intention and psychology of making a forum post about it in the first place and having forums - which once again is something you know to be outright not true but you're just trying to worm your way out of this now.

  • I am not going to edit anything out. I haven't edited anything out of the original post.

    Your offence is not my problem, it was not a personal attack on you and I am entitled to comment as I like, you are offended by it though.

    It also is not contradictory. It was not intended to come across as a "personal attack", if it did for that I am sorry. Otherwise I still stand by my points. I am not worming out of anything. I am literally in broad daylight owning what I said and doubling down on it. I have contradicted myself in actually replying to this lame bait though.

    People's opinions are a lot like humour, you may not agree with it, but your offence to someone's comment that doesn't actually change anything in the grand scheme of things or is not directed personally at you... it is on you. Not everyone else to take the edge off, cancel or remove it because you do not agree or find it offensive. I refuse to apologize because you see it as offensive or polarizing because I have a strong view on the state of the gaming world. I get we agree on things need to be better, you're just moaning how it's "toxic and childish" in the wording.  Like I said, you're implying like my wording is going to set of a chain reaction and there will be "witch burning" and lynch mobs purely on the way I worded it. Get over it already.