Do you think VC even cares??

[SoxFan01605]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

Sox. I didn't shift anything. My subject is "Do you think VC cares?" And I say NO becuase if they really cared about there product it wouldn't go through testers with so many bugs in it and push the product out. I know they have a deadline but if anything they should have not done the REAL-TIME atmosphere (gimmick) and focus on the core gameplay and test for bugs. 2k isn't the developers but since its 2k's product I would be pissed as well.

Well first, it's not a gimmick. It's a design choice so they don't need to use cutscenes. It may or may not have to do with space, I don't know.

It will be an excellent feature id they iron it out though (really, the animations-which simballer admitted they didn't get into as deep as they plan to for the future-are the only thing holding it back).

Also, you can't equate a poor product solely to laziness. Is it a factor in some cases, sure. They have serious QA issues, on that we agree. QA is not a function of the developers "caring" though as they aren't necessarily the ones testing the porduct in that regard.

I'll steal from the SCEA devs for this, but I remember one of them describing the reason they need precise details to replicate a bug. They are not viewing the "end item" when building/tweaking the game. They are looking at the code, primarily.

This means that what might seem fine to them won't translate as well initially. That's not to say they don't fire it up and can't catch it. It just means there is a lot to the process and it's easy to be deep enough into what you're building to miss it's outer flaws.

That's the whole function of a QA department. They are supposed to be there with the sole purpose to be a second set of eyes to produce a better end item. So when the developer misses it because he's so deep into things, QA can catch what he misses.

I agree that their QA is abysmal. I also agree (with whomever said it) that their marketing is a joke as well. That's what I mean about the separate argument though. Effort or "caring" by the developers and poor QA processes are not the same issue.

[JayBruce32]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

Don't bother writing 2ksports customer service, it's fielded by "Ronny" who I assume is the same "2kRonny" who Czars their joke boards on the 2k site.

The complaints clearly all fall on deaf ears, the same dead end path which is Ronny.

Like I told him and like I will say here. In any company if you turn in work this poor you will be terminated, fired. It is unacceptable and there is no denying it.

What I love is they are allowed to produce a completely crappy game and take our money with no repercussions and we aren't even allowed to say anything about it.

[SoxFan01605]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

VC's support has always been kind of lacking. IMO they cut corners as far as quality control and support, to save money

VC's support hasn't been that bad, 2K sports on the other hand...lol. I agree with the overall premise though.

The do the same with advertising in their games.

Also agreed. They're advertising, like their QA is a joke IMO.

2k is just a sports game company. They aren't EA or Sony where they have loads and loads of cash.

I won't argue their bottom line in relation to EA (I honestly don't know, but I would agree that they are likely not in the same league...lol)), but they aren't limited to sports and certainly aren't some fledgling little company. A quick list of relatively recent 2K games:

<TABLE class=wikitable><TBODY><TR><TH>Game</TH><TH>Release</TH><TH>Format</TH></TR><TR><TD>Sid Meier's Pirates!</TD><TD>2005</TD><TD>Xbox</TD></TR><TR><TD>Amped 3</TD><TD>2005</TD><TD>Xbox 360</TD></TR><TR><TD>Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth</TD><TD>2005</TD><TD>Xbox, Microsoft Windows</TD></TR><TR><TD>Civilization IV</TD><TD>2005</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X</TD></TR><TR><TD>Close Combat: First to Fight</TD><TD>2005</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows, Xbox, Mac OS X</TD></TR><TR><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD>Dungeon Siege II</TD><TD>2005</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows</TD></TR><TR><TD>Dungeon Siege II</TD><TD>2005</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows</TD></TR><TR><TD>Jade Empire</TD><TD>2005</TD><TD>PC</TD></TR><TR><TD>Motocross Mania 3</TD><TD>2005</TD><TD>PlayStation 2, Xbox</TD></TR><TR><TD>Serious Sam II</TD><TD>2005</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows, Linux, Xbox</TD></TR><TR><TD>Vietcong 2</TD><TD>2005</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows</TD></TR><TR><TD>24: The Game</TD><TD>2006</TD><TD>PlayStation 2</TD></TR><TR><TD>CivCity: Rome</TD><TD>2006</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows</TD></TR><TR><TD>Civilization IV: Warlords</TD><TD>2006</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X</TD></TR><TR><TD>Dungeon Siege II: Broken World</TD><TD>2006</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows</TD></TR><TR><TD>Dungeon Siege: Throne of Agony</TD><TD>2006</TD><TD>PlayStation Portable</TD></TR><TR><TD>Family Guy Video Game!</TD><TD>2006</TD><TD>Xbox, PlayStation 2, PlayStation Portable</TD></TR><TR><TD>Prey</TD><TD>2006</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows, Xbox 360, Mobile, Mac OS X</TD></TR><TR><TD>Sid Meier's Railroads!</TD><TD>2006</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows</TD></TR><TR><TD>Stronghold Legends</TD><TD>2006</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows</TD></TR><TR><TD>The Da Vinci Code</TD><TD>2006</TD><TD>PlayStation 2, Xbox, Microsoft Windows</TD></TR><TR><TD>The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion</TD><TD>2006</TD><TD>Xbox 360, PlayStation 3</TD></TR><TR><TD>Sid Meier's Pirates!</TD><TD>2007</TD><TD>PlayStation Portable</TD></TR><TR><TD>BioShock</TD><TD>2007</TD><TD>Xbox 360, Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 3</TD></TR><TR><TD>Carnival Games</TD><TD>2007</TD><TD>Nintendo DS, Wii</TD></TR><TR><TD>Civilization IV: Beyond the Sword</TD><TD>2007</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows</TD></TR><TR><TD>Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer</TD><TD>2007</TD><TD>Nintendo DS, Wii, Xbox 360, PlayStation 2, PlayStation 3</TD></TR><TR><TD>Ghost Rider</TD><TD>2007</TD><TD>PlayStation 2, Xbox, PlayStation Portable, Game Boy Advance</TD></TR><TR><TD>The Darkness</TD><TD>2007</TD><TD>PlayStation 3, Xbox 360</TD></TR><TR><TD>The Elder Scrolls IV: Shivering Isles</TD><TD>2007</TD><TD>Xbox 360</TD></TR><TR><TD>Civilization IV: Colonization</TD><TD>2008</TD><TD>Microsoft Windows</TD></TR><TR><TD>Civilization Revolution</TD><TD>2008</TD><TD>Nintendo DS, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360</TD></TR><TR><TD>Borderlands</TD><TD>2009</TD><TD>PlayStation 3, Microsoft Windows, Xbox 360</TD></TR><TR><TD>BioShock 2</TD><TD>2009</TD><TD>Xbox 360, Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 3</TD></TR><TR><TD>Mafia II</TD><TD>2009</TD><TD>Xbox 360, Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 3</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

That doesn't even include Take Two's (2K's parent company) other projects, most notably GTA IV.

Basically, they do have the backing...they've just made some questionable decisions on a lot of their recent sports titles.

Caring=$$$$$$$ for any of these companies. I'm sorry to tell you Scott but 2k doesn't care about you. They just want you for your wallet.

This is the bottom line. Of course they don't personally care about each customer individually, but I doubt they would have even attempted the overhaul if they didn't care about the product and getting their customers back on board.

[kGinGreen]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

yeah i guess 2k is pretty big as well. But I'm assuming EA and Sony still are quite a bit larger. That's not really an excuse but when you are going up against giants you ahve to find other ways of getting money. I wonder how much 2k paid for the mlb license and i'm sure they were outbidding the likes of EA obviously. The reason we are seeing all these advertisements in their games and seeing them cut corners is to make up for that most likely. Or am I wrong? How did they get the license? Was it a bidding thing or were they given first dibs for a certain dollar amount because EA had the NFL? There must have been some deal there.

[kGinGreen]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

But the point is the same. Another reason why licenses are bad.

[Bruin26]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

I know they read the boards, because I started a thread just within the first few days after the game released about having an issue with the game locking up after loading a new roster, 2kshare or otherwise and then others said they had the same issues, it wasn't long before someone from 2k said they had been looking into it all that day, then came back and said they had a fix that came with the most recent living roster. Sure enough it was fixed.

Will they be able to fix all the issues you may want. That may not even be possible with a patch, but to answer your question of if they care? Then yes to me they have proved that, much more than the previous developer of this game.

[bigfnjoe96]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

I know they read the boards, because I started a thread just within the first few days after the game released about having an issue with the game locking up after loading a new roster, 2kshare or otherwise and then others said they had the same issues, it wasn't long before someone from 2k said they had been looking into it all that day, then came back and said they had a fix that came with the most recent living roster. Sure enough it was fixed.

Will they be able to fix all the issues you may want. That may not even be possible with a patch, but to answer your question of if they care? Then yes to me they have proved that, much more than the previous developer of this game.

Totally agree, not to mention the Franchise Bug, which was patched on day-1. Living Rosters have been on-going since release fixing & adding players..

[RedSoxFox7]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

Take 2 absolutely does not give a damn. 90% of the posters in this forum that have been critical of 2K9 (and rightly so) would have already been banned at 2K's forums (if they haven't already been).

If T2I had even the slightest bit of care, they wouldn't have let Brinkman walk in the third year of his planned three year dev cycle. If T2I/VC had even the slightest bit of care, they might have produced an MLB title worth buying, at any point in the past 8 years.

[RedSoxFox7]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

Well first, it's not a gimmick. It's a design choice so they don't need to use cutscenes. It may or may not have to do with space, I don't know.

It will be an excellent feature id they iron it out though (really, the animations-which simballer admitted they didn't get into as deep as they plan to for the future-are the only thing holding it back).

Also, you can't equate a poor product solely to laziness. Is it a factor in some cases, sure. They have serious QA issues, on that we agree. QA is not a function of the developers "caring" though as they aren't necessarily the ones testing the porduct in that regard.

I'll steal from the SCEA devs for this, but I remember one of them describing the reason they need precise details to replicate a bug. They are not viewing the "end item" when building/tweaking the game. They are looking at the code, primarily.

This means that what might seem fine to them won't translate as well initially. That's not to say they don't fire it up and can't catch it. It just means there is a lot to the process and it's easy to be deep enough into what you're building to miss it's outer flaws.

That's the whole function of a QA department. They are supposed to be there with the sole purpose to be a second set of eyes to produce a better end item. So when the developer misses it because he's so deep into things, QA can catch what he misses.

I agree that their QA is abysmal. I also agree (with whomever said it) that their marketing is a joke as well. That's what I mean about the separate argument though. Effort or "caring" by the developers and poor QA processes are not the same issue.

As someone who has worked in engineering and QA, they ARE the same issue. When engineers or developers know they have a weak QA department (or none at all, which I suspect is the case here), they need to take that into account and actually care about the end product. They need to pick up the slack and do more to ensure they're releasing a quality product. The numerous bugs and poor AI is the result of lazy developers at best, and sheer incompetence at worst.

QA and developers are supposed to work with one another, in the same department. QA may not have the technical knowledge to fix issues, but they damn well better have an exchange with the developers. If QA isn't doing this, the job falls on the developers to make sure they're getting good feedback. You're treating them as if they're wholly separate parts of the process, when they're not, nor should they be.

And yeah, as it stands now, the real time atmosphere is pure gimmick, and poorly implemented at that.

[tj1182]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

Is it possible to redo the entire game engine this development cycle? I mean this game would benefit more with everything re-done. The player models and animations are horrible, and they been that way for years. I think VC would make this a lot better with their own work then using Kush or whoevers previous work.(which is a mess)

[Perfect Zero]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

I know that this game isn't perfect, but my goodness people this isn't a game that is unplayable. There are some glitches, and there are a few minor problems, but getting down to getting rid of cutscenes as being just gimmick is nonsense. I'm sure if they would have left them in, the framerate would have suffered, and it would be blown up into three different eight page topics. It's coming down to splitting hairs and complaining just to complain.

Personally, I think they do care, and I think that 2k10 will be a better product than 2k9, which is better than 2k8. Will it be the best game ever played? No, and I expect people on here to cry about something that 90 per cent of gamers hardly recognize, but it will be a better game.

[jeffy777]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

I know that this game isn't perfect, but my goodness people this isn't a game that is unplayable. There are some glitches, and there are a few minor problems.....................

Personally, I think they do care, and I think that 2k10 will be a better product than 2k9, which is better than 2k8. Will it be the best game ever played? No, and I expect people on here to cry about something that 90 per cent of gamers hardly recognize, but it will be a better game.

Yes, and this is why it's true that as long as your expectations aren't very high, then you will be happy with an MLB 2K game. Don't expect greatness and you won't be disappointed. Too me, that's sad though. 2K9 could be so much better. 2K7 had amazing potential, and logically the newer games in the same series should be better in every way. Unfortunately, that's not true. The 2K games since then have improved in some ways, but are not as good overall as 2K7 was (even the reviews show that to be true). That's pretty sad if you think about it, but that's 2K for you. Two steps forward, three steps (or more) back.

But maybe next year will be different.........although we've been saying that for years now.

[kcxiv]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

Honestly, I do. And the "first year" thing is especially valid in this case.

They do care, they know whats going on with the game and they are reading it. Its obvious that the game was released when it wasnt supposed to be. I dont think anyone will deny that except for them, but i know why they cant take a claim to that.

If next years game is this unpolished, then i would have to start questioning things. We all know sports games are going to require a patch or 2 now days when they come out, 95 percent of them do. It really sucks that they cant get a full 2 years or so to develop games. This not only goes for 2K games, but for EA as well.

[kcxiv]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

Don't bother writing 2ksports customer service, it's fielded by "Ronny" who I assume is the same "2kRonny" who Czars their joke boards on the 2k site.

The complaints clearly all fall on deaf ears, the same dead end path which is Ronny.

Like I told him and like I will say here. In any company if you turn in work this poor you will be terminated, fired. It is unacceptable and there is no denying it.

What I love is they are allowed to produce a completely crappy game and take our money with no repercussions and we aren't even allowed to say anything about it.

actually, they are totally redoing their customer service. I have inside knowledge on a few things.

Ronnie is also a very very good guy. He does as much as he can, before him, we got absolutely NOTHING from 2K and their sports division. He has done alot. He's brought out NBA dev's to talk on their forums and take questions and he got the MLB team to do the same. I am not saying its perfect and its not going to change overnight, but he's done a hell of alot and he's only been there about a year. Dude seriously cares about what he does. I talk to him almost on a daily basis and we both run idea's around about certain things that have to do with 2K. It just sucks that i cant say alot of things about what he's trying to do for obvious reasons.

I think people on her eknow i am a pretty fair dude. I dont talk crap to one another, i try to be as helpful as i can. I am just calling it like i see it. He's one of the best hires 2K has done in a while.

[SoxFan01605]

Re: Do you think VC even cares??

As someone who has worked in engineering and QA, they ARE the same issue. When engineers or developers know they have a weak QA department (or none at all, which I suspect is the case here), they need to take that into account and actually care about the end product. They need to pick up the slack and do more to ensure they're releasing a quality product. The numerous bugs and poor AI is the result of lazy developers at best, and sheer incompetence at worst.

QA and developers are supposed to work with one another, in the same department. QA may not have the technical knowledge to fix issues, but they damn well better have an exchange with the developers. If QA isn't doing this, the job falls on the developers to make sure they're getting good feedback. You're treating them as if they're wholly separate parts of the process, when they're not, nor should they be.

And yeah, as it stands now, the real time atmosphere is pure gimmick, and poorly implemented at that.

I absolutely am not treating them as they are completely separate. I'm simply stating that bug catching isn't directly related to developer's caring or not. It can be a factor, but isn't necessarily the root cause.

I've worked on both sides of QA during the last ten years and I can tell you that no matter what you do on the development side of things, there are going to be issues you just miss. It's the human element.

The more variables you throw at it (deadlines, rushed production schedules, necessary rework-due to the previous teams failures, implementation of new and overhauled features, etc) the more likely the person in the deepest will miss things. It's not about caring, it's about prioritizing and scope of responsibilty. The broader the scope, the more open to error.

QA's primary function should be to be putting these items/features through their paces and trying to "break" them. This is the converse of what the developer should be doing, which is why disparity between the two teams occur. One is testing for success, the other should be testing for failure.

I do agree about the give and take, but I wouldn't presume to know the dynamics of their process (nor should you) as all QA departments are not created equal. To say they are part of the same department is not necessarily true.

Plenty of bigger operations have an entire QA department responsible for all QA. They then farm out reps or team members to various divisions/projects and assign areas of responsibility (usually, but not always, based on expertise) My point was that their is a QA problem with 2K sports. Period. To state it's due to caring is merely conjecture.

That's all irrelevant though, as you are missing the point entirely. Reading back, that's probably my fault for tossing the "QA" term around loosely. I wasn't absolving the developers from the QA process. In fact, when I stated that their QA is flawed, I include the developers in that. They are a part of that process. That's what I meant by their QA is abysmal. They aren't catching things at EITHER END.

The point remains (the one that was strayed from to get back to the "but the game sucks" argument) that a faulty end item isn't directly related to a lack of care for the product in many cases. It's usually more related to budgeting, resources, and the development processes overall.

There is a serious flaw in how 2K tests it's games, no question. To put it all on the developers pride in their product is presumptuous and not supported at this time (in the case of VC's 2K9 dev team). Not saying impossible, mind you, just not supported at this time.

Also, for the last comment, this is a subjective statement at best. Poorly implemented, yes (again, it's more an issue of animations that are long overdue for rework than anything).

I think the term gimmick gets tossed around lightly by people who either don't understand the function, or don't like the results of the function. That's fine...but it's opinion