Re: Fact or Fiction: Are Huge Bugs at Launches Hurting Games the Rest of the Year?
Fact. This is a comment from me from another Madden 20 thread
"And it just isn't Triple A sports titles like the increasingly underwhelming EA Tiburon Madden series, it's many many Triple A games across all genres that have become really bad products NOT worth anything near their price points at all due to poor release day quality - Mass Effect Andromeda, Star War Battlefront 1 & 2, Fallout '76, Anthem and many more...
My three main issues of the modern day frustrating Triple A gaming business model:
1 - Microtransactions, loot crate & loot box for all genres: The pay to play (cosmetic or not) gaming "surprise mechanics" features (aka gambling when it comes to the Ultimate modes for sports titles). No need to expound on this issue, if you are a gamer you know what's been going on with this for years now and how sports titles influenced this controversial topic ( I think UEFA Soccer was the first to try this back in 2005 under current EA CEO Andrew Wilson).
2 - Exclusive License: Yeah, the WWNFL and EA have been in bed with their Madden football franchise for years with no end in sight, and the football gaming community has suffered for it. Pretty simple issue here, lack of competition breeds complacency from developers that have a product which is more ingrained pop culture hype and advertising than actual innovation. This has been the norm for EA's Madden series since 2006.
*Basically there has been a whole generation that has only known ONE football videogame, but I loved the halcyon days of reading Electronic Gaming Monthly around August for all the upcoming seasons football gaming offerings, pouring over reviews of Madden, 2K, 989 Sports' Gameday series, NFL Fever and Tecmo, figuring out which ones to rent from Blockbuster to try out before purchasing 1 or 2 for the season to play.
3 - The Internet & "Patch Development": At first being able to play online for any game genre was super fun if only annoying when little brats were screaming in your headset during Halo matches, but then the dreaded "Patch Development" model for games has become en vouge the past several years. It was sold as a positive, "always online to improve the gamers experience", but the reality is the purchasing public are now the game testers. As Triple A titles constantly release half baked, underdeveloped products, with far more gltiches, bugs, and in some cases far less actual good content (with promises to release the good stuff later on but please still drop $60 to $100 now!).
I recall just 10 years ago Triple A games released under big publishers had very few issues, and lots of bang for your buck for the well made titles. Now that is getting increasingly rare (for console games especially), with only Rockstars Red Dead Redemption 2 main single player story being an actual great, day one release product that I can, and have, poured hours and hours into it's original $60.00 price point for the past year."
My utopia scenario if this is now the norm for gaming is they should be free to play "ala carte" style options on release day. Example: the base game should have two (base being $20 and under maybe) options and branch off from there, if I wanna play an Ultimate Team style online 24/7 mode for any sport title I pay "x" amount of dollars and that's that. If I'm a franchise mode single player sports gamer I pay "x" amount for that option. If I wanna play an online/multiplayer mode only for Red Dead 2 I only pay "x" amount and don't get any single player story options at all. Then continue to improve said versions for these genres during the games 1 or 2 year lifecycles with the specific gamer supporting the CHOICE of how he CHOOSES to play and support said game.
But yeah, in short, I hate modern day game "patch development" business model, been way more disappointed than satisfied no matter what genre of game.
Fact. This is a comment from me from another Madden 20 thread
"And it just isn't Triple A sports titles like the increasingly underwhelming EA Tiburon Madden series, it's many many Triple A games across all genres that have become really bad products NOT worth anything near their price points at all due to poor release day quality - Mass Effect Andromeda, Star War Battlefront 1 & 2, Fallout '76, Anthem and many more...
My three main issues of the modern day frustrating Triple A gaming business model:
1 - Microtransactions, loot crate & loot box for all genres: The pay to play (cosmetic or not) gaming "surprise mechanics" features (aka gambling when it comes to the Ultimate modes for sports titles). No need to expound on this issue, if you are a gamer you know what's been going on with this for years now and how sports titles influenced this controversial topic ( I think UEFA Soccer was the first to try this back in 2005 under current EA CEO Andrew Wilson).
2 - Exclusive License: Yeah, the WWNFL and EA have been in bed with their Madden football franchise for years with no end in sight, and the football gaming community has suffered for it. Pretty simple issue here, lack of competition breeds complacency from developers that have a product which is more ingrained pop culture hype and advertising than actual innovation. This has been the norm for EA's Madden series since 2006.
*Basically there has been a whole generation that has only known ONE football videogame, but I loved the halcyon days of reading Electronic Gaming Monthly around August for all the upcoming seasons football gaming offerings, pouring over reviews of Madden, 2K, 989 Sports' Gameday series, NFL Fever and Tecmo, figuring out which ones to rent from Blockbuster to try out before purchasing 1 or 2 for the season to play.
3 - The Internet & "Patch Development": At first being able to play online for any game genre was super fun if only annoying when little brats were screaming in your headset during Halo matches, but then the dreaded "Patch Development" model for games has become en vouge the past several years. It was sold as a positive, "always online to improve the gamers experience", but the reality is the purchasing public are now the game testers. As Triple A titles constantly release half baked, underdeveloped products, with far more gltiches, bugs, and in some cases far less actual good content (with promises to release the good stuff later on but please still drop $60 to $100 now!).
I recall just 10 years ago Triple A games released under big publishers had very few issues, and lots of bang for your buck for the well made titles. Now that is getting increasingly rare (for console games especially), with only Rockstars Red Dead Redemption 2 main single player story being an actual great, day one release product that I can, and have, poured hours and hours into it's original $60.00 price point for the past year."
My utopia scenario if this is now the norm for gaming is they should be free to play "ala carte" style options on release day. Example: the base game should have two (base being $20 and under maybe) options and branch off from there, if I wanna play an Ultimate Team style online 24/7 mode for any sport title I pay "x" amount of dollars and that's that. If I'm a franchise mode single player sports gamer I pay "x" amount for that option. If I wanna play an online/multiplayer mode only for Red Dead 2 I only pay "x" amount and don't get any single player story options at all. Then continue to improve said versions for these genres during the games 1 or 2 year lifecycles with the specific gamer supporting the CHOICE of how he CHOOSES to play and support said game.
But yeah, in short, I hate modern day game "patch development" business model, been way more disappointed than satisfied no matter what genre of game.
Comment