I’m not going to presume to know what you do for a living, skeebertus. However, given the nature of this forum, if you are a creative type then it’s more than a little hypocritical to trash the very system that’s designed to protect you too.
You’re more or less saying, “F*** them. They deserve what they get.” If you were on the other side of the equation then you’d be pissed off that some gamers with a feeling of entitlement and an over inflated sense of self-importance are unjustly enriching themselves by freely taking what you spent months or years working so hard to eventually charge for. Imagine spending ages making cookies for a bake sale only to have some jackwad with the munchies steal your platter just because you charged $2 instead of $1.50, the price they thought it should be. If you can’t empathize with that poor baker then you’re in the wrong field.
Honestly, it’s that bullsh** sort of argument that has led to a whole host of problems in the industry. An emphasis on DLC and micro-transactions. Crippling DRM. Episodic gaming. ETC and so on. Thieving gamers have ironically become the cause for the very problems they’re complaining about.
Just to address your issues…
I buy a boxed copy of a game in a store for 60 to 80 Dollars but get only 1 install DVD where there should be 4 or 5
Understand the logic behind that.
- Physical copies, like brick and mortar stores, are becoming an endangered species. Downloads are becoming more of the norm than the exception. Personally, I’ve bought an ungodly number of game over the past 4 or 5 years. Of those games, I think that only (maybe) 5 of them were bought at retail. The rest were digital.
If certain companies were to have their way, that would only be the beginning. We’d all eventually stream instead. I don’t that it’d get to that point any time soon, but I do think that physical copies are on their way out. We’ve already seen it happen with content creation software.
Ten years ago, all of my key apps at the time came on CD or DVD in these big boxes with equally large printed manuals. Today, every content creation app I use has been delivered to me in the form of a download. Just an e-mail with a link to an installer, some support content, and maybe a few PDFs. It’s been that way for a bunch of years now. How could I be shocked that it’d filter down to the consumed content. level?
Retailers used to respect release dates and copyrights. Now they’re the ones leaking games early and making the bootlegs. Selling only the installation DVD puts a necessary kink in the system and gives pirates one more thing to have to work around.
It’s a cost saving measure. Physical copies cost money. Depending on how they’re packaged and what’s inside, they can cost a LOT of money. Mandating downloads shifts a portion of that cost to consumers and their ISPs. That’s especially important to mention now that we live in a world of HD and 4K.
In many cases, they let companies like Steam worry about distribution instead of maintaining countless download servers themselves. Keeping costs down on their end Lets them put out games at more affordable price points. Sucks as a gamer, but it’s smart business if you’re a developer.
FTR, you’re complaining about $60-$80 price points, but you’re not being entirely reasonable. Games haven’t actually kept up with inflation. I’ll give you a good example. Take Golden Axe II from 1993. That Genesis game sold for $52. On the surface, that sounds cheaper. Tack on inflation and that game would sell for $90 today. That’s still well below the $60-$70 that most games retail for these days.
Golden Axe II wasn’t even the most expensive game of that era either. Back in 1993, Phantasy Star III retailed for $62. That’s just under $110 in 2018 money. Complain all you want about $60-$80. However, as a general case, games are actually LESS expensive these days. The only thing that a season pass tends to do is bring the cost up to what it would be if game prices had kept up with inflation.
I pay 60 Dollars for a PC game and get a piss-poor port from console with dumbed down gameplay and simplified controls aimed at consoles. Not acceptable.
I don’t know what to tell you. If you want more complex games then you either have to vote with your wallet, opting not to buy console influenced games, or just go out and make the game you want to play.
Don’t buy games like that if you object to them. You, and others like you, only have yourselves to blame when developers churn more of them out. They’ll only make it if you keep on buying it. You just about forfeit your right to complain when you do. At the very least, you undermine you argument when you still insist on buying into the very system you hate.
The 80s and 90s saw a ton of SF2 and Mario clones. Gamers ate them up at first. Developers made more and more of them. Gamers grew tired and stopped buying them. Developers moved on to greener pastures. The bubble burst because gamers popped it. The same thing will soon happen with pixel games, metroidvania games, and Minecraft clones.
Your money matters. That’s the bottom line. That’s what developers care about most. Deprive them of that cash if you’re so pissed off.
I buy a game the day it is released, and it hasn’t been playtested and is buggy as hell. Not acceptable.
First off, that’s nothing new. Even games back in the NES and SNES days got released in various states of (in)stability. Open up any number of copies of the same cart-based game and you might see a different rev number on the board or chips. Old school games got patched all of the time. It was less of a complaint back then because there was no internet.
The number of bugs was often fewer because consoles are closed systems. PCs, on the other hand, come in an endless variety of hardware and software configurations. That only compounds the problem. Developers cannot possibly test for every combination of hardware and software. It just isn’t possible. Even the most thoroughly tested game will ship with issues.
Second, if games seem to be released in an unfinished state then we kind of have ourselves as gamers to blame. I’m not letting the devs off of the hook. Don’t get me wrong. However, as gamers, we force these developers to adhere to arbitrary release dates or sale windows.
We want games that are super deep and complex, but insist that the developers make them in the same 18-24 month time frame. It’s super unreasonable. Sadly, too many developers choose not to release a game “when it’s ready,” instead opting to release within that limited window. Throwing more programmers and artists at the problem doesn’t always fix things either.
Our “now now now” hive mentality has created a situation where publishers feel pressured to release now with the full knowledge that they’ll patch later. Shame on them for doing that, but also shame on us for not being more patient.
Game content that should be in the main game is sold to me for extra money as DLC content. Not acceptable.
Again, I refer you to my point on inflation. Phantasy Star 3 retailed for $62 back in 1993, That game would sell for almost $110 today.
Now let’s look at a game like Far Cry 5. That standard edition of the game only retails for $60, which is cheaper than what Phantasy Star 3 would have cost both then - in 1993 - and now in 2018. Let’s assume that you feel compelled to have the most complete Far Cry 5 experience. You skip over the Deluxe Edition and go GOLD. OOOOOH!!! You’re now paying $90. That’s still nearly $20 cheaper than the inflation adjusted cost of a pricey 1993 game.
Unless we’re heading into Capcom or Namco levels of suckery, most games are still cheaper today than yesterday… even with DLC or season passes in the mix. Always take inflation into consideration.
Every game I buy is either tied to Steam, UPlay or Origin. I cannot untether my games from these services ever, nor move games from one service to another. Not acceptable.
Not every game’s like that though. Some games sell through services like GOG, which don’t screw you in the same way as UPlay or Origin. Of course, that’s not the norm. DRM is par for the course because piracy has become so easy.
Even so, back in the day, publishers would screw over gamers and protect games via code wheels, entry of keywords from the manuals, or mandating that the disc be in the system to play - even when fully installed. DRM stinks, but it’s just the latest form of anti-piracy measures.
Having said that, not all publishers or developers are keen on DRM either. The team behind the upcoming Cyberpunk 2077 are as anti-DRM as gamers. They seem to have indicated as much in this most recent E3 event. Whether or not they keep to their word upon release is another issue. However, have faith that not every developer assumes that the gamer is an aspiring pirate.
Even if DRM measures like UPlay were to disappear, anti-piracy measures in general won’t. Developers will just get more creative. Remember the gun that fired only chickens for gamers who ran bootleg copies?
Almost all of the companies making games lie horribly about the size of the production budget. “X game cost 65 Million Dollars to make bla bla bla”. Except that when you buy the game, you see about 15 to 25 Million Dollars worth of content max.
I agree. Game budgets are WAY out of control, a trend that started with Wing Commander 4 way back when. Again, understand what’s going on here though. You’re getting $20mil of content, but the developers are working from a $60mil budget. Why?
Look at some of those bts documentaries. A lot of developers are squandering their budgets on “research” - which usually involves trips, oddball purchases, and so on. Stuff that ultimately doesn’t create more content. PLUS,. just because you see only $20mil of content doesn’t necessarily mean that the $60mil budget is getting wasted. As with movies, a good portion of budget goes toward marketing. Getting that hype machine going isn’t free. On top of that, how many modern games use celebrity talent for voice overs or likenesses? That doesn’t come cheap either, even when the celebs opt to work for peanuts.
That budget money IS going somewhere. It just isn’t always in the exact somewhere you want it to go.
IMO, developers should work with more restrictions. Smaller budgets might make productions less grand, but it would also force more devs to be more creative and cost conscious. Limitations sometimes force devs to do more with less. Unlimited resources can often be a very bad thing. You’re 100% right.
Almost all major games use the exact same game mechanics in 2018. Zero creativity, risk taking or innovation. Not acceptable.
REALLY!?!? That’s your complaint. How about the fact that most games are still using the same mechanics as games made in 1998? Hell, depending on the genre and franchise, some games are using the same mechanics today in 2018 that games were using back in 1985.
All of that aside, gameplay has gotten stale because safe sells. Innovation is risky. Why dump $60mil into a maybe when you can just dump that same cash into a whored up clone of yesterday’s big hit? Get what I’m saying? If that $60mil innovative and groundbreaking risk doesn’t sell well then lots of people are out of a job. Churn yet another roster swapped NBA or PGA game instead and everybody keeps working for another day. Is it fair to gamers? HELL NO! Can you see why they do it? Sure.
Again, it’s easy to complain about this stuff. Voting with your wallet is where you get the chance to be heard. More people need to do that. Be the change or stop complaining. (Not saying that you can’t or shouldn’t complain either way. You just lose a leg to stand on in your argument if you don’t speak with your wallet first.)
Many game reviews rate games much higher than they should be rated.
I’m kinda torn on this one.
I’ve written product reviews before. I understand that these things have to be written a certain way. You can’t always write from the perspective of a hardcore fan or longtime user. Speaking to the wider audience sometimes leads to more forgiving reviews. On the flip side, I abhor reviews that gush. I hate it when reviewers look like they’re sucking up to the developers. It makes you wonder if these reviewers have been bought off, which happens sometimes.
Again, you’re right. It doesn’t always happen. It usually doesn’t. Sometimes it does. Movie have the same problem, which is why Rotten Tomatoes has become such a thorn in the side of movie makers. Too many bought and paid for reviews. Hell. Even with safeguards, Amazon has that problem too.
Ideally a good reviewer is one who tries to be objective and examine the product from multiple angles.
As far as your view of Far Cry 5 goes, it’s all subjective.
Lots of people loved the Telltale Batman game. I thought that it was total crap. Too buggy. Too linear. Choices, including button presses, usually didn’t matter. Puzzles designed for 5 year olds. It was basically an overpriced “Choose Your Own Adventure” book. It was a long way off from traditional clicky adventure games like Sam & Max and massive departure from Telltale’s own Back to the Future. Again, lots of reviewers (and gamers) loved that Batman game. I hated it. To each his own, I say. Similarly people hated Deus Ex Invisible War, but loved Mankind Divided. The opposite was true for me. Hated MD. Loved IW.
What you love or hate is a personal thing. As a gamer/consumer, take reviews with a grain of salt. They are what they are. A review is only one person’s opinion. It is by no means the final word. Only you can say for sure what you like.