Im hating the way the gaming industry is heading

richymcdermott

im absolutely disgusted what im reading from developers , im so disgusted i might not ever game again , i would like ye to take some time to read the following links i sent you.:mad:


http://www.xugogaming.com/article/493/codemaster_ceo_recommends_selling_unfinished_games


http://www.computerandvideogames.com/303763/sony-very-confident-others-will-follow-call-of-duty-subscription-service/


http://www.qj.net/xbox-360/news/dyack-used-games-force-devs-to-do-multiplayer.html


http://shoryuken.com/2011/05/26/sven-reponds-to-strong-opinions-on-ssfivae-pc-drm-issues/

theres more but im not going to bother wasting anymore time on this subject

so i complained about pre order dlc, lock on disk,online pass now im reading developers like thq are saying they are cutting content from their games and releasing it as dlc , activison with their subscription cod game WHY IS IT SO HARD FOR DEVELOPERS TO GIVE US A FULL GAME . im sick of it at this stage i dont mind dlc if its 4 months onwards after the games release but all this bull**** about lock on disk day 1 dlc pre order ****e so frustrating but feck it i continue buying 2nd hand games and only give my 50 euros worth to the game that deserve it.

Mr Freeze

Codemasters seem quite good at giving us unfinished games.

Graeme The Poet

Most likely this is related to the rampant piracy of games on the PC which in all honesty the developers have used as a propaganda tool to give them carte blanch when dealing with the poor customer.

I live in an area without broadband so have been unable to play any game in the assassins creed serious bar the first one (gotta love the drm). It is an absolute joke and will ultimately kill the industry. Imagine going to the cinema and being told you'll have to pay for another ticket and come back tomorrow to see the second half of inception.

Would NOT be appreciated - so why employ these tactics in a related field of the SAME industry.

With you on this buddy

nyarlothothep

Whenever there is downloadable content I just don't buy it on principle, I think its very cynical and a bit of an insult in the respect that I've already paid for the game. They only do this because people are willing to pay for it.

richymcdermott

we have to take back what we created , we dont owe the developers , the developers owe us , we are the consumer we created those buildings , we make the game great not them .its bull****

sink

Some dlc is very good and well worth the money e.g. GTAIV:TLATD/TBOGT or ME2:LOTSB. Other times it's exploitative and not worth bothering with e.g. ME2 character skins.

So I don't think you can take a carte blanch approach to it. Just be smart about what you buy.

Zombrex

What do we create?

Is this about user created content?

richymcdermott

sink wrote: »

Some dlc is very good and well worth the money e.g. GTAIV:TLATD/TBOGT or ME2:LOTSB. Other times it's exploitative and not worth bothering with e.g. ME2 character skins.

So I don't think you can take a carte blanch approach to it. Just be smart about what you buy.

i dont think you understand , there are clueless people out there that buy anything and everything dlc gun packs skins , it will destroy the games we love do you not see that already. as i said i dont mind dlc if its 4 months after the games released but its becoming a situation on why would you bother paying for a full game with your money and your not getting all the content

Healium

I honestly don't see the problem with Online Pass.

It'd be great if they did it a bit better, though. At the moment, some developers are giving you a trial of multiplayer for 48 hours or so and locking certain game modes.

In an ideal world, you'd get to play all the game modes for that trial, and you'd get free a DLC map pack like Dead Space 2

richymcdermott

Healium wrote: »

I honestly don't see the problem with Online Pass.

It'd be great if they did it a bit better, though. At the moment, some developers are giving you a trial of multiplayer for 48 hours or so and locking certain game modes.

In an ideal world, you'd get to play all the game modes for that trial, and you'd get free a DLC map pack like Dead Space 2

ok lets look at EA For example of online pass, they said they did this cause it hurt the company people buying their games second hand but then they go off and pay 100 million for battlefield 3 advertisement , 2nd hand games do not hurt companies people who want their games will pay for it , its the same way avatar made a billion dollars in the box office and it didnt hurt the movie companies when people download it off the internet online pass is the start of companies thinking we owe them , i dont stand for it

calex71

Sigh, what ever happened to the days when games got a well crafted and developed expansion pack to extend the life of the game. Hells even call of duty got something of worth back in the day and was worth the asking price.

Now people hoot and holler, cash in hand, if all they do is add zombies .

The better the tech gets the better ways they have of fleecing us but thats a wider discussion than just games.

Liber8or

Graeme The Poet wrote: »

Most likely this is related to the rampant piracy of games on the PC which in all honesty the developers have used as a propaganda tool to give them carte blanch when dealing with the poor customer.

I am sorry, but you are wrong. This has nothing to do with piracy on the PC, if anything, it has to do with the 2nd hand games market. People choosing to wait a week or two after a new release comes out and then buying it 2nd hand, is what is causing this need for Online Passes, or Day One DLC. As such, the problem lies with the console market, not the PC one.

Secondly, the problem also lies with how easy it is for "simpletons" to go and buy this DLC, thus perpetuating a cycle of reproducing crap as extra content. Any kid can buy Xbox Live Points, or buy a 20 Euro PSN top up card. Then they can spend it on what they want. Removing the need for a bank account or credit card has done this.

Your concerns lie with who the games are directed at. Take Fallout 3 for example, 5 pieces of DLC, that were relatively substantial and offered new content to move the storyline forward. How many 10 year olds or 13 year olds would play Fallout 3? Very few, because it is a tough game, it is drawn out and a child/teenager (in most cases) does not have the patience. The likes of Call of Duty will be ruined now because of this new Elite service - all the kids will want some extra logo/tag on their gamertag that makes them Elite - leave them to it. Next year, and mark my words, Call of Duty Multiplayer will go subscription based for online gaming - this Elite service is just a stepping stone.

As long as their is a voice against extortionist measures (see EA's/DICE's response to the COD Elite service), there will always be developers willing to offer gamers an alternative. Leave the morons/kids to their 'DLC' and you get on with the game you enjoyed, or alternatively, buy the week old 2nd hand copy to really stick it to the man!

sink

richymcdermott wrote: »

i dont think you understand , there are clueless people out there that buy anything and everything dlc gun packs skins , it will destroy the games we love do you not see that already. as i said i dont mind dlc if its 4 months after the games released but its becoming a situation on why would you bother paying for a full game with your money and your not getting all the content

If it's not worth paying for I won't buy it. Who cares what some numpty is willing to pay for. If developers/publishers want my money they will have to make things I'm willing to buy. Looking at the content coming out of E3 there is still plenty that I'm willing to part with my cash for.

There have always been games that are absolute rubbish and are just cashing in on peoples ignorance, dlc is no different. Just because some people were will to spend money on 'Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing', did not stop other developers producing quality games.

Jet Black

The sub to cod is voluntary. You'll still be able to play everything but there will be extra (useless) things for people who pay, like extra stats. The 'community' will still buy it.
Removing content from a game and releaseing it as dlc is not a new thing, I think its going on a while.
Its all just a money making exercise.

Nody

Liber8or wrote: »

I am sorry, but you are wrong. This has nothing to do with piracy on the PC, if anything, it has to do with the 2nd hand games market. People choosing to wait a week or two after a new release comes out and then buying it 2nd hand, is what is causing this need for Online Passes, or Day One DLC. As such, the problem lies with the console market, not the PC one.

This has actually been confirmed by the developers as the biggest issue beating out piracy by far.

richymcdermott

calex71 wrote: »

Sigh, what ever happened to the days when games got a well crafted and developed expansion pack to extend the life of the game. Hells even call of duty got something of worth back in the day and was worth the asking price.

Now people hoot and holler, cash in hand, if all they do is add zombies .

The better the tech gets the better ways they have of fleecing us but thats a wider discussion than just games.

online was suppose to offer us a new way to play games instead it has become a way to knickle and dime us away from a game we paid full price for

hooradiation

richymcdermott wrote: »

we have to take back what we created , we dont owe the developers , the developers owe us , we are the consumer we created those buildings , we make the game great not them .its bull****

Wow, that's some crazy sense of entitlement ya got going on there. You might want to reign that in.

krudler

richymcdermott wrote: »

we have to take back what we created , we dont owe the developers , the developers owe us , we are the consumer we created those buildings , we make the game great not them .its bull****

how do you figure that?

richymcdermott

krudler wrote: »

how do you figure that?

with our community feedback on forums , just look what happened with Cole on infamous 2 they changed his look the community demanded it to be changed back and it did , we can make the difference but i never see it happen with some people spending ridiculous money on stuff that should be free

richymcdermott

hooradiation wrote: »

Wow, that's some crazy sense of entitlement ya got going on there. You might want to reign that in.

lol

Magill

I don't mind the online pass, the only type of DLC i hate is the stupid **** tahts already on the game !

Anybody that goes into a shop and pays £44 for a £45 game because its second hand deserves to get mugged by the online passes. I've really grown to hate the second hand market (The new games 2nd hand market anyway), bunch of robbing bastards those retailers are !

Except when i bought black ops on the xbox preowned... they deserved it

krudler

richymcdermott wrote: »

with our community feedback on forums , just look what happened with Cole on infamous 2 they changed his look the community demanded it to be changed back and it did , we can make the difference but i never see it happen with some people spending ridiculous money on stuff that should be free

What about games that arent sequels? what involvement had you in those?

that logic carries about as much weight as a facebook status update does for curing cancer

richymcdermott

krudler wrote: »

What about games that arent sequels? what involvement had you in those?

that logic carries about as much weight as a facebook status update does for curing cancer

the consumer still offers feedback , im just saying the games only get critically acclaimed awards and sells well cause of us we control what happens. the only solution developers then makes excuses piracy is why we make online games and 2nd hand games are killing us , all bull****

Magill

richymcdermott wrote: »

the consumer still offers feedback , im just saying the games only get critically acclaimed awards and sells well cause of us we control what happens. the only solution developers then makes excuses piracy is why we make online games and 2nd hand games are killing us , all bull****

Exactly.... so stop buying fooking second hand games and they'll stop with the online passes !

alastair_doom

Magill wrote: »

I don't mind the online pass, the only type of DLC i hate is the stupid **** tahts already on the game !

I really don't get the complaint with stuff being on the disk? You pay for a game, you get what you pay for. Most of the time it is bonus content that they put additional time and money into making, that would probably have been dropped to save money, or just not developed to start with if not for DLC.

Personally I can't see any difference between doing it at the same time as the game or 4 months later, except it would be cheaper to make at the same time as the game.

Magill

alastair_doom wrote: »

I really don't get the complaint with stuff being on the disk? You pay for a game, you get what you pay for. Most of the time it is bonus content that they put additional time and money into making, that would probably have been dropped to save money, or just not developed to start with if not for DLC.

Personally I can't see any difference between doing it at the same time as the game or 4 months later, except it would be cheaper to make at the same time as the game.

And you know this because ???????

hooradiation

Magill wrote: »

And you know this because ???????

Because DLC is usually planned from the very beginning of the project these days. It'd be stupid not to given how lucrative it's proven to be.

So he's correct in his assessment that it is extra content that time and effort is spent on creating, because without the DLC model there is no real reason for it to exist.

richymcdermott

Magill wrote: »

Exactly.... so stop buying fooking second hand games and they'll stop with the online passes !

why should i have to cave to a company demands ?

its either they have to offer a game to me thats worth my 50 euro or they face the music and accept 2nd games. i go in to hmv or gamestop browse through their games and if i see a game that i enjoyed by that developer i buy their next game , why should i have to fork money on a game i might or might not enjoy. also i aint paying full price to a company who offer a cash in game aka dragon age 2 or call of duty. i do pay full price for games like la noire , uncharted 2 littlebigplanet dragon age etc.. its up to the company to bring out a well worthy game if they are expecting us to pay 50 euros , where in a recession after all

alastair_doom

Magill wrote: »

And you know this because ???????

You're assuming that companies would give this content free otherwise? For commercial games companies the first objective is to make a profitable game, the second objective is to make a good game. Stuff that is unnecessary to selling the game would be dropped to save money, or to be invested where it is better spent.

Overheal

richymcdermott wrote: »

with our community feedback on forums , just look what happened with Cole on infamous 2 they changed his look the community demanded it to be changed back and it did , we can make the difference but i never see it happen with some people spending ridiculous money on stuff that should be free

richymcdermott wrote: »

the consumer still offers feedback , im just saying the games only get critically acclaimed awards and sells well cause of us we control what happens. the only solution developers then makes excuses piracy is why we make online games and 2nd hand games are killing us , all bull****

Wow so you think because you changed the way a game character looked, by saying you didn't like it, that decided whether the game was great or not? You didn't exactly write the Portal Engine. Or create the Normandy. Or do the level design on Darksiders.

ghostchant

richymcdermott wrote: »

online pass is the start of companies thinking we owe them , i dont stand for it

But that's the point, you do owe them, in a way. You owe them the money they'd have gotten if you had bought it new instead of 2nd hand.

richymcdermott

Overheal wrote: »

Wow so you think because you changed the way a game character looked, by saying you didn't like it, that decided whether the game was great or not? You didn't exactly write the Portal Engine. Or create the Normandy. Or do the level design on Darksiders.

it was an example , dont take things so literally, we are still giving the companies funds to make the sequels when we buy their products and in return they want even more money and bring out half arsed games.

Gummy Panda

I don't mind subs if the game is free. Paying €50 then a sub is a bit of a joke. Only reason I tolerate it from MMOs is it goes towards content patches and such.

In Korea subscription and free 2 play is the standard. Sure Starcraft 2 at launch was free to play as long as you had an active WoW account

krudler

Magill wrote: »

Exactly.... so stop buying fooking second hand games and they'll stop with the online passes !

I find it laughable that people are complaining about the developers trying to make more money, when they buy second hand games, giving no money to the developers..

VinLieger

TL,DR

Just gonna say have you seen the skyrim demo on gametrailers? http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2011-elder-scrolls/714852

They talk about 300 hours of gamplay, 150 dungeons? you cant complain about that

hooradiation

VinLieger wrote: »

TL,DR

Just gonna say have you seen the skyrim demo on gametrailers? http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2011-elder-scrolls/714852

They talk about 300 hours of gamplay, 150 dungeons? you cant complain about that

Never underestimate the ability of the vocal minority that use message boards to find fault and whine about everything.

Robert ninja

It has gone from a gaming market to a gaming market . Worldwide recession, lads... and it's only gonna get worse.

irishdude11

richymcdermott wrote: »

we have to take back what we created , we dont owe the developers , the developers owe us , we are the consumer we created those buildings , we make the game great not them .its bull****

Do you think these companies are some kind of charities or something? Or that they make games just for the craic?

Its a multi-billion dollar industry, investors have massive sums of money invested in games companies and like any business they are all about maximising their return. You can get emotional about it all you want but every every single business out there has one goal and that is to maximize profit. These companies have decided that this is the best way for them to make more cash. And so what if you think it is unfair. Do you think they should deliberately harm their profits just so lads like you get what you want? They make a product, you can either buy it or not buy it, thats as far as it goes. They 'owe' you jack sh*t.

krudler

I paid 45 quid for Modern Warfare 2, I have almost 30 days playtime on it, 30 days, thats over 700 hours of gaming for less than the cost of a night on the beer. IW owes me nothing. (well maybe my life back :pac: )

hooradiation

Robert ninja wrote: »

It has gone from a gaming market to a gaming market .

It has always been that way.

Orim

richymcdermott wrote: »

it was an example , dont take things so literally, we are still giving the companies funds to make the sequels when we buy their products and in return they want even more money and bring out half arsed games.

But you've already said that you don't give developers funds? You buy second hand and might buy new if a game really impresses. But if everyone took this attitude then we'd never get anywhere and developers would die off. We never would have seen the glory that is Batman:AA becuase of this.

God forbid that people should be grateful to games developers for producing the content which has given countless hours of entertainment.

Fair enough you don't want DLC, don't buy it. The only time I agree with the anger shown by people is when the DLC is advertised in game. That does my nut. But I strike back by not buying future games. I could do more but I'm happy just not having it affect my life.

Also how do you know any game is half-arsed? I'm sure the developers are always working as hard as possible, you can generally hear it in interviews. So it's all down to the bean counters and unless you're involved in the budget for a studio you really have no idea what you're talking about. For you all you know, the projected DLC sales may have encouraged the accountants to realease a little extra funding for the main game. So in reality, this apocalypse of DLC may in fact be encouraging better games.

Rambling point but meh. The self-entitlement of some is absolutely sickening. Try a little gratitude. Personally I'm very grateful to Bullfrog, Blizzard and Capcom among many others for the games that they have produced which I have enjoyed, with or without DLC.

krudler

and can people please stop saying we're in a recession? whats that got to do with gaming prices? if you cant afford something tough sh1t, the people who cant afford things are usually the ones who make the most noise about being entitled to them regardless. If I want to but a new game I just don't go out a weekend or two that month, problem solved.

Big Lar

PC gaming has gone downhill totally, All the consoles are the same so if a game runs on one it will run on them all, PC's on the other hand have so many different configurations that it takes so much more manpower to get the game up and running.

So the morale of the story is buy a console or play the older games on your PC

COD4 for ever............... Wooooooooo.

richymcdermott

irishdude11 wrote: »

Do you think these companies are some kind of charities or something? Or that they make games just for the craic?

Its a multi-billion dollar industry, investors have massive sums of money invested in games companies and like any business they are all about maximising their return. You can get emotional about it all you want but every every single business out there has one goal and that is to maximize profit. These companies have decided that this is the best way for them to make more cash. And so what if you think it is unfair. Do you think they should deliberately harm their profits just so lads like you get what you want? They make a product, you can either buy it or not buy it, thats as far as it goes. They 'owe' you jack sh*t.

if they want to make money fine DUH but they better bring a full game out and not knickle and dime , they are only doing it cause people buy their dlc and pre order exclusives , they actually owe us cause without us their business is as good as dead, dont come out with this spoon fed bull**** its ok they can rip us off all they want cause their a company , its obviously isnt hurting them when they go off and pay 100 million advertisement for battlefield 3 , wouldnt it be better if they devoted all that money and time into a well worthy game than trying to fight their rivals so called call of duty crowd. accept getting ripped off and paying full price for a half game so

krudler

Orim wrote: »

But you've already said that you don't give developers funds? You buy second hand and might buy new if a game really impresses. But if everyone took this attitude then we'd never get anywhere and developers would die off. We never would have seen the glory that is Batman:AA becuase of this.

God forbid that people should be grateful to games developers for producing the content which has given countless hours of entertainment.

Fair enough you don't want DLC, don't buy it. The only time I agree with the anger shown by people is when the DLC is advertised in game. That does my nut. But I strike back by not buying future games. I could do more but I'm happy just not having it affect my life.

Also how do you know any game is half-arsed? I'm sure the developers are always working as hard as possible, you can generally hear it in interviews. So it's all down to the bean counters and unless you're involved in the budget for a studio you really have no idea what you're talking about. For you all you know, the projected DLC sales may have encouraged the accountants to realease a little extra funding for the main game. So in reality, this apocalypse of DLC may in fact be encouraging better games.

Rambling point but meh. The self-entitlement of some is absolutely sickening. Try a little gratitude. Personally I'm very grateful to Bullfrog, Blizzard and Capcom among many others for the games that they have produced which I have enjoyed, with or without DLC.

If I could thank this twice I would, people seem to think games are made by a few people in an office with no costs, the development tools, software, paying the coders, programmers, designers, artists, graphic designers, playtesters, the sound department, the people who do the animation motion capture, the voice talent, the musical people, the merchandising and release of the game? these people all do this for free do they?

when the game is as a good and fun to play as say, Uncharted 2 where you can tell they've put genuine craft and love for the product into it then its all the better. Are there cynical cash ins? of course, but the same can be said for any industry, movie sequels, remastered Beatles albums, etc etc. If you dont agree, dont play the games, simple as. Dont buy it second hand down the road and give no money to the people that put thousands of man hours into making something you think should have to pay half nothing for because you dont agree that an OPTIONAL addon should be paid for. If you wont want DLC, dont fcuking buy it! its not like a game doesnt complete unless you pay more, you're buying optional extras or addons, so stop whinging.

richymcdermott

Orim wrote: »

But you've already said that you don't give developers funds? You buy second hand and might buy new if a game really impresses. But if everyone took this attitude then we'd never get anywhere and developers would die off. We never would have seen the glory that is Batman:AA becuase of this.

God forbid that people should be grateful to games developers for producing the content which has given countless hours of entertainment.

Fair enough you don't want DLC, don't buy it. The only time I agree with the anger shown by people is when the DLC is advertised in game. That does my nut. But I strike back by not buying future games. I could do more but I'm happy just not having it affect my life.

Also how do you know any game is half-arsed? I'm sure the developers are always working as hard as possible, you can generally hear it in interviews. So it's all down to the bean counters and unless you're involved in the budget for a studio you really have no idea what you're talking about. For you all you know, the projected DLC sales may have encouraged the accountants to realease a little extra funding for the main game. So in reality, this apocalypse of DLC may in fact be encouraging better games.

Rambling point but meh. The self-entitlement of some is absolutely sickening. Try a little gratitude. Personally I'm very grateful to Bullfrog, Blizzard and Capcom among many others for the games that they have produced which I have enjoyed, with or without DLC.

Thats why their was huge uproar with marvel vs capcom 3 yeah ? or how about dante new look in devil may cry , im not even going to respond to a person whos grateful for capcom

krudler

richymcdermott wrote: »

if they want to make money fine DUH but they better bring a full game out and not knickle and dime , they are only doing it cause people buy their dlc and pre order exclusives , they actually owe us cause without us their business is as good as dead, dont come out with this spoon fed bull**** its ok they can rip us off all they want cause their a company , its obviously isnt hurting them when they go off and pay 100 million advertisement for battlefield 3 , wouldnt it be better if they devoted all that money and time into a well worthy game than trying to fight their rivals so called call of duty crowd. accept getting ripped off and paying full price for a half game so

Oh ffs, spending money on adverstising generates more revenue, more revenue means more money to spend on future projects and recoup the money spent making the game you're advertising (and the cost of that advertising) to begin with, is the concept of business lost on you or something?

ghostchant

richymcdermott wrote: »

Thats why their was huge uproar with marvel vs capcom 3 yeah ? or how about dante new look in devil may cry , im not even going to respond to a person whos grateful for capcom

Capcom made the Mega Man games, Street Fighter 2 and Duck Tales for the NES. For these and many more I am eternally grateful

krudler

ghostchant wrote: »

Capcom made the Mega Man games, Street Fighter 2 and Duck Tales for the NES. For these and many more I am eternally grateful

but they changed how Dante looks, the damage is irreprable

Robert ninja

hooradiation wrote: »

It has always been that way.

Well it has always been a market but I remember when games where cheaper, better and didn't hold anything back for DLC or whatever... and trading games is what made the gaming industry. Just look at the history of games. So no, the gaming market hasn't always been more of a market than it is about games.... you can tell that just by the quality of games these day.

krudler wrote: »

and can people please stop saying we're in a recession? whats that got to do with gaming prices? if you cant afford something tough sh1t, the people who cant afford things are usually the ones who make the most noise about being entitled to them regardless. If I want to but a new game I just don't go out a weekend or two that month, problem solved.

lol

richymcdermott

krudler wrote: »

Oh ffs, spending money on adverstising generates more revenue, more revenue means more money to spend on future projects and recoup the money spent making the game you're advertising (and the cost of that advertising) to begin with, is the concept of business lost on you or something?

as i said 3 times dont come out with bull**** that a company hurting if they are willing to spend that amount of money on advertisement , yes i know how a business run, read between the lines my friend