gaming AC: Unity Discussion

[emerpirp an sedi caa 50]

@@Jeric Yes, some games have the SaaS model implemented very nice: Minecraft, DayZ and stuff like that. Then there is also the 500k shitty buggy early acess games that will never be finished ever. But all of those games are indie. I dont recall any major SaaS modeled games. Xept the mmo's, like WoW and such, but thats about it. 

[Megas 28,118]

Some might be interested in this

 

[emerpirp an sedi caa 50]

@@Andaasonsan How could I play games if all the games they gave us were shitty. We need to vote with our walets, so that doesent happen. 

[Ashen Pathfinder 16,164]

@@PathfinderCS So, let me get this straight. You think its ok to spend you hard-earned money on unfinished software(that is marketed as finished)? 

 

That's a personal decision, and it's a subjective choice. For me, it may be unfinished but I can live with patches. If it's marketed as finished, so be it. I've been lied to more than once when it comes to marketing over the years. I've just learned to live with it.

 

But neither are they allowing the full game experience because of those decisions. Why should those missions be upheld from the consumer when they've already made and completed. They're nothing more than to entice players to spend more money on content that was specifically held out for gamers to spend more money on the 60$ deal they had to make to play this game at launch? I mean they have to spend 100$ just to get the full game at launch.

 

Why you think it won't stop anytime soon. Companies follow what makes them the most money and if they find what they're doing is losing them money, they'll change anything to make up for lost profit or be kicked into irrelevance. You should not accept that a patched game will fix all of the problems nor excuse the fact they've willingly released an unfinished game that should've spend another couple of months testing and ironing out those bug problems. Many top developers like Nintendo are farmed for releasing bug free games and are appreciated by the masses for it so why does Ubisoft get a pass for it?

 

Ironically, they've lost 9%on their stock value because of it. I'd rather not accept a company that is willing to release an unfinished game and claim it as a finished product, hates a certain consumer group because they're critical about their actions, and is lying through their teeth about  their practices to cover their laziness and poor choices to maximize profits.

 

Honestly, while it could be seen as a dirty tactic, I also don't see much wrong with it. To me, it's just another revenue stream. If people want to go for it, then they can pay the cost to attempt them. Would they have attempted them if they were free and available from the get-go?

 

In my experience, companies can be unbelievably stubborn while many customers accept what they get. While stock may have already dropped, it remains to be seen if this will affect them in the long run. I won't deny that it is a possibility, though. If Ubisoft learns from this and we get games that don't have to go through patches, then I'll be happy. Again though, I can accept the patches. The game itself looks like it will still be fun regardless.

 

Honestly, I'm not exactly defending Ubisoft here. I can agree that some of their actions are questionable, but I don't want to fight the game itself considering there are many who put in long hours of dedication to make it did get out. There is a game still there to play, and I'd rather enjoy it. I'll see for myself whether it's another "Spyro: Enter the Dragonfly."

[Andaasonsan 3,205]

@@Andaasonsan How could I play games if all the games they gave us were shitty. We need to vote with our walets, so that doesent happen.

Out of all the thousands of games out there you can't find something you enjoy because the brand spanking new hot off the presses games are buggy?

[Nuke87654 1,849]

However, gaming in general will find itself firmly in the SaaS model ... so no game will ever be finished. You should probably start thinking of them like mobile applications, always somewhat buggy and with constant updates with new features and bug fixes. Our children (or rather my grandchildren since my children will be adults in four short years) ... will never likely play a finished game. Unless it is an old one. 

 

But why do they have to be buggy? Gaming before never had an issue with releasing fully finished games and products that work as intended at launch. Whenever they feel the need to add more stuff to it they usually release expansion and sequels for it. Now I understand with the rise of using Online and the use of DLC's and patches to fix whatever issue or balance problem is found is a part of gaming that is forever fixated until something better comes out, but why should they be use for excuses for unfinished games, Day one DLC's, and more Draconian DRM's.

Some might be interested in this

 

 

So it was their stupid Uplay that was causing the whole Frame rate issues!?

[emerpirp an sedi caa 50]

@@Andaasonsan What if we get to a cutoff point where, after that all games will be shitty. Then we'd have to play the same old good games over and over again. And if you think that I should just wait for the patches, I already said that I dont buy any buggy-on-relese-but-fixed- later games ever.

[Nuke87654 1,849]

That's a personal decision, and it's a subjective choice. For me, it may be unfinished but I can live with patches. If it's marketed as finished, so be it. I've been lied to more than once when it comes to marketing over the years. I've just learned to live with it.

 

 

Honestly, while it could be seen as a dirty tactic, I also don't see much wrong with it. To me, it's just another revenue stream. If people want to go for it, then they can pay the cost to attempt them. Would they have attempted them if they were free and available from the get-go?

 

In my experience, companies can be unbelievably stubborn while many customers accept what they get. While stock may have already dropped, it remains to be seen if this will affect them in the long run. I won't deny that it is a possibility, though. If Ubisoft learns from this and we get games that don't have to go through patches, then I'll be happy. Again though, I can accept the patches. The game itself looks like it will still be fun regardless.

 

Honestly, I'm not exactly defending Ubisoft here. I can agree that some of their actions are questionable, but I don't want to fight the game itself considering there are many who put in long hours of dedication to make it did get out. There is a game still there to play, and I'd rather enjoy it. I'll see for myself whether it's another "Spyro: Enter the Dragonfly."

 

That's true with what you said, especially with developers dedicating their time to create the game, but that doesn't excuse them from criticism as these guys have been in the business long enough to know what is good and bad. Willingly allowing the release of video games before they're finished should be criticized so they won't at least start not caring about the product at launch.

[Andaasonsan 3,205]

@@Andaasonsan What if we get to a cutoff point where, after that all games will be shitty. Then we'd have to play the same old good games over and over again. And if you think that I should just wait for the patches, I already said that I dont buy any buggy-on-relese-but-fixed- later games ever.

Then you're going to be missing out on a lot of fun games. Look, if you don't enjoy being a Guinea pig for the first wave of buggy software,then wait like two months. You'll not only have the version with the patch ready to go, but you'll probably get the game for less money . If people just have to have the game right frickin' now, and are willing to put up with bugs, then that's their prerogative.

 

By waiting till the price drops, the reviews come out, and the patches are up, the game company isn't going to be making as much money off of you as they would if you bought it on release. If that loss hurts them enough, then these companies will be forced to do better QA before release. It's like the free market has mechanisms already in place to deal with this.

[emerpirp an sedi caa 50]

Some might be interested in this

 

Yup. That fixes it a bit. That isnt that much better tho. TB's 30fps become 60. BUT HE IS USING DUAL FRICKING 980's. 60fps ON NOT EVEN MAX? With AA off? And that is with a "fix"? Well that just pisses me off. Not even talking about the areas where framerates tank like 90%. That is still awfull optimisation even with double the performance.

@@Andaasonsan  I shouldnt wait 2 months for them to fix the gliches. The game shouldnt be relesed those 2 months to help them iron out the issues. And it hurts the company even more if I dont buy the game, right. Im normally against piracy. But piracy is too, a form of protest.

Edited November 13, 2014 by NightFlash

[Ashen Pathfinder 16,164]

That's true with what you said, especially with developers dedicating their time to create the game, but that doesn't excuse them from criticism as these guys have been in the business long enough to know what is good and bad. Willingly allowing the release of video games before they're finished should be criticized so they won't at least start not caring about the product at launch.

 

Honestly I'm not saying that developers should be free from criticism. My point is that I don't want to ignore the game as I'm sure there's a good game that deserves attention.

 

Again, I have no problem with the gamers who will skip this game. They have a good reason to, but I disagree that the game should be avoided at all costs.

[emerpirp an sedi caa 50]

@@PathfinderCS Well you should check again m8. The game is getting below average user scores on metacritic across all platforms. 

[Andaasonsan 3,205]

@@Andaasonsan  I shouldnt wait 2 months for them to fix the gliches. The game shouldnt be relesed those 2 months to help them iron out the issues. And it hurts the company even more if I dont buy the game, right. Im normally against piracy. But piracy is too, a form of protest.

Look, as I said, it's a risk. Any smart consumer will know they're taking that risk by getting it early and sight unseen. If they want to take that risk, then it is their problem and not yours. If you wait till the game has a patch before buying it, then you'll get to enjoy a game with all the bugs already worked out so you won't have to worry about that stuff.

[Ashen Pathfinder 16,164]

@@PathfinderCS Well you should check again m8. The game is getting below average user scores on metacritic across all platforms. 

 

I know that.

 

However, not all user scores are so harsh. Of course while some of the more positive scores could very well be Unisoft employees, it's just as likely that angry trolls are overestimating the negative scores.

 

Again, I'm not saying problems do not exist, but I have reasons to believe that Unity is still a good or decent game.

[Jeric 46,880]

I think that 'buggy games' are a natural byproduct of technological advancement coupled with corporate dictated releases schedules to be honest with you.

 

That said, pre PS3/XBox One games were still buggy. Don't kid yourself. Gamers just learned to tolerate them. How many LJN games on NES were broken? I remember Fallout having a game breaking bug in it as well. Then with the advent of more internet connected consoles, games could be easily patched. This provided a safety net for the developers which was needed as the complexity of the development has also risen exponentially. This is probably going to accelerate as we move eventually to a digital only space. 

 

I think that market forces will impact publishers when it needs to, and some gamers may have to develop some tolerance. 

[emerpirp an sedi caa 50]

That said, pre PS3/XBox One

 You mean PS4, right?

 

"I think that market forces will impact publishers when it needs to".  Yup. We can make that happen by not buying buggy/badly optimised games. Lets hope Ubisoft re-learns how to optimise.

Edited November 13, 2014 by NightFlash

[Jeric 46,880]

You mean PS4, right?

 

"I think that market forces will impact publishers when it needs to". Yup. We can make that happen by not buying buggy/badly optimised games. Lets hope Ubisoft re-learns how to optimise.

No. I meant the previous gen. The point of my post was to frame the discussion in context, and the prior gen consoles were the first that adopted the idea that mistakes can be fixed later. What I'm saying is that this is not new.

 

Sure, talk with your wallet. Though I've been telling people who dislike Activision and EA that for years ... :|

 

Not working very well.

[long gone 8,929]

Hey guys, just a reminder that this:

 

 

is your voice and voting power against developers and publishers. Use it wisely.

 

 

The fact that the game was allowed to be released in such a sorry state is simply inexcusable. Don't just accept it and say "Oh, they'll just fix it soon." No, that's telling them that it's okay to continue releasing broken games, because oh, they'll just fix it soon. Use your wallet and tell them this isn't okay. Honestly, some of you guys should be expecting better than... this out of your games.

[Light Diamond 950]

I'll be getting my copy of the game tomorrow only renting it but from all what I've seen, it's not looking good. There's too many problems with the game and the reviews aren't that great compared to last years Black Flag.

 

Not everyone has experienced problems, but from what I've seen, there are a lot of complaints about the game and I would agree that Ubisoft shouldn't have allowed this to happen. They knew that the game just wasn't ready to be released in the state that it's in and all they've done now is just angered and upset people. I've also seen that micro transactions can go up to $100 which is a little extreme.

 

I've noticed that more and more developers are releasing incomplete games with a fix it later attitude.

 

Games from Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch, Nintendo or other exclusive studios doesn't seem have these issues.

Edited November 14, 2014 by Light Diamond

[PROJECT: Simon 3,955]

I was very hyped for this game. But 900p and 30fps. At first I didn't care. It looked awesome. But after I saw someone's gameplay, I gave up. I won't buy Assassin's Creed Unity. Very disappointing. 

[Jeric 46,880]

 

 

Games from Naughty Dog

 

Last of Us PS3 had multiple patches, one to fix a bug that refused to let you actually play the game. The PS4 Remastered version was not correctly optimized for the new GPU and has bad fade and pop-in of environments. 

[emerpirp an sedi caa 50]

@ Its not even 30fps. It averages around 20 on PS4 and 24 on XboX One. 

[PROJECT: Simon 3,955]

@ Its not even 30fps. It averages around 20 on PS4 and 24 on XboX One. 

Oh great thanks for telling me. Trailer was epic I give em that but the gameplay.......

 

I might quit being an assassin

[emerpirp an sedi caa 50]

@@Jeric Then you  gotta mean XboX 360, since XboX One is current gen.

[Jeric 46,880]

@@Jeric Then you gotta mean XboX 360, since XboX One is current gen.

 

You know you're right. That was a typo. Was supposed to be the 360.