S
Sacred_Path
Guest
With D:OS and WL2, we didn't get the game we were led to expect until the Enhanced Editions. I hope that's not becoming a trend
Wasteland 2 - Director's Cut Trailer - Squad Creation and Tactics
- Thread starter Silver
- Start date
D
DArtagnan
Guest
If by "led to believe" means "imagined based on personal interpretation" - then I'm pretty sure it's a very common trend 
That said, I didn't back WL2 because I didn't have that much faith in the design. Turns out I was right about that. Too much trying to emulate the past and too little understanding the past.
I fear Torment is going that same way.
I didn't back D:OS because I wasn't excited about the humor aspect. Turns out I was wrong about it overall - because the rest of the game was pretty awesome.
That said, I didn't back WL2 because I didn't have that much faith in the design. Turns out I was right about that. Too much trying to emulate the past and too little understanding the past.
I fear Torment is going that same way.
I didn't back D:OS because I wasn't excited about the humor aspect. Turns out I was wrong about it overall - because the rest of the game was pretty awesome.
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
If by "led to believe" means "imagined based on personal interpretation" - then I'm pretty sure it's a very common trend
led to believe if you're buying into the PR hype - which you may choose not to do, of course.
I found WL:2 mechanically unsatisfying with its balance issues and limited character building. D:OS had the same problems and a silly world to boot. Now they've really taken their time to smooth out the rough edges, which is great, it's just that I expected the game to ship like that.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
I think my point is that I don't confuse hype with developers misleading me deliberately.
It's a separate marketing aspect that I've learned to ignore in most cases.
But, if you're really talking about hype, then it's been a trend for a very, very long time when it comes to selling games and products in general
Games are (almost) never as good as they're marketed to be.
I thought D:OS was vastly superior when it comes to mechanics - and I'm long past the point where I expect rich and intricate RPG systems to be balanced.
I do agree with the silly world, but I knew that going in - so I specifically wasn't misled.
As for WL2, I agree it was underwhelming and that they really should have understood the genre better - and I believe we've already talked about the mess of the skill bloat.
But there's a difference between unqualified designers and deliberately misleading the audience.
Well, to me - that is
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
well, I don't remember any lines from the D:OS campaign specifically. But now with D:OS2, Swen is talking about the one RPG to dwarf them all, for instance. Sure, it's not maliciously misleading - but back in the day when I still had great hopes for kickstarter games (before WL2, D:OS and Pillars) I would have expected a game that doesn't take an additional year or so to be really polished.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
To me, that's just an excited developer dreaming big.
I would never, ever, take it seriously and actually expect it to dwarf all other RPGs in existence.
In the past, we wouldn't have received a polished version at all. We'd just have to live with what we got - because a publisher wouldn't want to fund months of additional polish for minimal gain.
Then again, I think it's because I realise just how difficult game development can be - and how there's never going to be a game - ever - that can't be improved significantly with time.
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
True. So I'm kind of torn. Should they just ship an unpolished game and be done with it? Or take an additional year of development time before release? If anything, it makes backing games seem less attractive when they're just going to sit there until they've been patched up. I wouldn't have donated to D:OS2 without the Watch fundraiser, to be sure.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
If they had infinite wealth, they should just finish and polish it until it was good and ready.
But, the thing is - they don't have that
Personally, I'll never stop funding games I believe in.
Why? Because I'd much, much, much, much, much, much, much rather have a great game with bugs and polish issues - that might get polished later - than no game at all.
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
D
DArtagnan
Guest
this is unfortunately true for this genre - beggars can't be choosers.
I still think it's a gigantic step up from the publisher model.
I feel much more like a chooser than I ever did these days
PR or not, there were definitely things that were promised for D:OS that weren't delivered until the game had been already been out for quite a long time. Better late than never I suppose...
Ripper
Зичу Вам успіхів
- Joined
- November 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,085
The way I look at it, the crowdfunding model is delivering some good games we would never otherwise have had, but they do tend to be released in state that might as well be early access. If you get used to putting the new releases in your backlog and letting them brew for a few months, the situation is a win, overall.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,085
D
DArtagnan
Guest
True for nearly all games, including favorites like TW3 - and they've still to deliver what their marketing campaign promised in terms of visuals.
Not sure what the point is supposed to be.
I struggle to recall a single great and ambitious game released without bugs or promised features.
I wasn't aware TW3 was crowdfunded.
I thought it was quite obvious we were talking about kickstarters.
I thought it was quite obvious we were talking about kickstarters.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
I wasn't aware TW3 was crowdfunded.
I thought it was quite obvious we were talking about kickstarters.
The point is, exactly, that crowdfunding titles don't set themselves apart by missing features at release.
I don't think anyone was arguing that point.
D:OS and WL2 were specifically mentioned as not being exactly what was promised, and you seemed to disagree for some reason.
Ripper
Зичу Вам успіхів
- Joined
- November 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,085
They're not unique in that regard, but I think it's fair to say that the crowdfunded games have a trend of evolving very significantly after release.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,085
D
DArtagnan
Guest
No, I'm saying there's no way around it.
I've been arguing this from the beginning.
I'm saying the difference between the crowdfunded titles and the publisher model - is that we're actually seeing these fixes and polished version post-release for free, where that's relatively rare under the publisher model.
Only companies like CDPR release these rather large enhanced editions for free.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
Yes, and I see that as a good thing - not a bad thing
I guess where people disagree with me, is they think it's possible to release the games as "enhanced" upon release - given the budget and time available.
I'm saying I think that's much harder than people think, and that most of these developers (obviously not all) are doing their best to meet the goals and then some.
Why?
Because, in general, I think we're dealing with passionate developers who want to please their audience, rather than cold suits doing only what's necessary to make a return.
If by "led to believe" means "imagined based on personal interpretation" - then I'm pretty sure it's a very common trend
Ok