Are there any respectable, dependable devs/pubs?

[dobwal]

Personally I have no problems with the current realities. Outside of the uninformed gamers and multiplayer centric titles, we all have the option to simply wait a few months before purchase where you get titles that are way more vetted than whats reasonably possible with internal QC and, especially for disc, at prices that well off your typical launch price.

I have been following the Destiny thread since the beginning even though I waited just till last month to purchase it and I am way behind most other players in terms of skills and experience, I still have a blast playing the game. Plus I got to avoid a lot of issues people initially had with the title and my $60 seems to have bought a lot more content.

For single player games the only real difference between a pub delaying 4 months or you waiting four months after launch is will power. Well, that and you can't participate in the griping here at B3D if the game turns into a cluster@#$# of bugs. LOL.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The problem with the wait-and-see approach and buying cheaper is that the pubs need that higher prices of launch. If everyone waited until the game was fixed and cheaper, games literally couldn't be made as they are. Hence we ought to be looking at software being launched in excellent condition to justify investing early at full price.

 

[Persistantthug]

Launch day broken games has become more rampant than ever.

I think lemon laws should apply to games,
then maybe developer/publishers would stop releasing broken games at launch.

Them having to refund would make them think twice before launching games broken.

 

[BRiT]

I think in the EU one can return the game for any reason what-so-ever should it fail to live up to their standards. I might have this slightly wrong, but I'm sure others like @Davros or @London-boy would be able to correct me.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Blizzard.

Yup. And the newest release SC2: Legacy of the Void, is another...thus far...flawless release.

Than again Blizzard are big enough to self publish (hell they are part of the Activision-Blizzard publishing pair) and can release their games whenever they want as they never tie themselves to a any sort of release schedule until a release candidate is close. They also start to BETA test aspects of the game sometimes well over a year in advance.

There was no Day One patch. There are no major bugs to fix. The only patch released thus far is

Fixed an issue where players of the Brazilian Portuguese version of Legacy of the Void could not have access to the localized content of the expansion.

Regards,
SB

 

[iroboto]

Loving the sc2 right now. Campaign and multiplayer!

But oddly killing my PC lol.
They phenom IIx4 with 4GB DDR2 with GeForce 660 GTX is not enough. Lol. I do regret a bit over spending on my MacBook Pro and not cutting back 500 to overhaul this PC. I mean, who would know OverWatch would look so damn good !!

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Blizzard's releases may be very solid, but I have issue with their business model. Specifically, they sold millions of console owners Diablo 3, and then released an update that required buying the whole game again at full price. That game has since had lots of updates, and ongoing support has been excellent there's no denying, but can you really trust buying a game on release that you won't have to buy it again when they release the new, improved version?

 

[iroboto]

Blizzard's releases may be very solid, but I have issue with their business model. Specifically, they sold millions of console owners Diablo 3, and then released an update that required buying the whole game again at full price. That game has since had lots of updates, and ongoing support has been excellent there's no denying, but can you really trust buying a game on release that you won't have to buy it again when they release the new, improved version?

Weird I thought reaper of souls was the only Diablo 3 to make it to console ?

I feel like I am missing something.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

There was initial D3 release, and then Ultimate Evil edition with no upgrade option. Also they tweak the play with updates but don't inform you. I had a Witch Doctor that made good use of Vampire Bats. Then one update she kept dying. Blizzard decided to change the life drain skill to make it not work at higher levels without really informing you - only if you read the description of "Life Drain" are you told it becomes less effective at high levels, and they still don't inform you it has 0 effectiveness at level 70.

That's an ongoing problem with modern games. Updates can change them and you never know when something you like is going to disappear in a puff of upgrade. But they could at least inform you of the changes, certainly where they are significant to disabling a core mechanic of the game like D3's life drain.

 

[BRiT]

Yes, Diablo 3 was released on X360 / PS3 consoles before Reaper of Souls ever existed. Then about a year to year and half later D3:Reaper of Souls was released for nearly the entire full price of the Diablo 3 game.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

And no trade in/upgrade option. Why not sell it as a paid DLC?

 

[iroboto]

Right. The destiny payment system.
Interesting so basically D3 was released for last gen. Ultimate Evil was released for both generations. And there was no upgrade path for d3->d3 ROS for last gen.

Yea that's pretty shitty. Interesting thing with OverWatch is that something similar is happening, you must pay for the more expensive version of the game to get it on console. The cheaper PC variant that is base game only is locked to PC.

Edit: as long as you didn't pay $40 or more for the ultimate Evil on last gen, then I don't think it's too bad. ROS cost $40 for PC users to upgrade. So base + ROS was gunning at $60+$40.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

There was initial D3 release, and then Ultimate Evil edition with no upgrade option. Also they tweak the play with updates but don't inform you. I had a Witch Doctor that made good use of Vampire Bats. Then one update she kept dying. Blizzard decided to change the life drain skill to make it not work at higher levels without really informing you - only if you read the description of "Life Drain" are you told it becomes less effective at high levels, and they still don't inform you it has 0 effectiveness at level 70.

That's an ongoing problem with modern games. Updates can change them and you never know when something you like is going to disappear in a puff of upgrade. But they could at least inform you of the changes, certainly where they are significant to disabling a core mechanic of the game like D3's life drain.

I suppose that's one situation where it sucks to be on console. As expansions in general have to be released as standalone thus need to include the base game. If all games were sold with a digital model (disks as just physical distribution) with online ownership verification they could likely go with a PC model where you just buy the expansion.

In fact, that's what you see with episodic games. Digital version can buy each episode one by one. Physical has to buy the whole thing or nothing. It would have been interesting to see Blizzard offer Reaper of Souls to D3 digital owners on consoles at the 40 USD expansion price versus the 60 USD stand alone price (how it was handled on PC).

As to why not DLC? How many DLC are released that are almost the same size as the base version of the game in terms of HDD space? Or even half the size? Heck, how many DLC are offered at 40 USD? I don't think either of the platform holders would have allowed Blizzard to offer something that large and that expensive as just DLC.

Also how many games actually had a free upgrade to a new console? A few, but not many. Another "benefit" of console gaming. You can't really blame that on Blizzard as that's just business as normal on consoles.

After all, is anyone getting the PS4 versions of Uncharted for free? How about The Last of Us? Tomb Raider? Grand Theft Auto V? Hell at least Diablo 3 Ultimate Edition on consoles not only came with a visually upgraded version of the game (similar to Uncharted, Tomb Raider, and GTAV) but ALSO came with a significant amount of additional content. Sure with Uncharted you're getting all 3 older games, but nothing is new other than the graphics. No additional content. No new mechanics. No new game modes. I guess the MP beta for UC4 is something at least.

Regards,
SB

 

[Grall]

Updates can change them and you never know when something you like is going to disappear in a puff of upgrade. But they could at least inform you of the changes, certainly where they are significant to disabling a core mechanic of the game like D3's life drain.

On PC, there's always patch notes released alongside Blizzard game updates. On consoles there might not be a convenient place to display these, so maybe they aren't available. If one follows the fansites or Blizzard's own game pages, these changes should be discussed though...

While we're complaining about Blizzard tactics, one might mention their pricing strategy regarding downloadable content. Mounts and pets in WoW usually cost in the 10+ €/$ range. This is pretty substantial for just a mount (or a tiny critter that does nothing except follow you around), you can buy entire games on Steam for that sum - or less even.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

On PC, there's always patch notes released alongside Blizzard game updates. On consoles there might not be a convenient place to display these, so maybe they aren't available. If one follows the fansites or Blizzard's own game pages, these changes should be discussed though...

While we're complaining about Blizzard tactics, one might mention their pricing strategy regarding downloadable content. Mounts and pets in WoW usually cost in the 10+ €/$ range. This is pretty substantial for just a mount (or a tiny critter that does nothing except follow you around), you can buy entire games on Steam for that sum - or less even.

You think that's bad? Square Enix charges 24 USD for a mount in FFXIV. Outfits for glamour cost up to 15 USD. Pets that you can't get in game cost only 5 USD at least. Getting married can cost you up to 20 USD per person. Extra retainers (basically more storage space and more things you can sell on the market) cost 2 USD per month for each extra retainer on top of your monthly fee.

And I know people that have bought outfits, the mount, the most expensive marriage (so they can dye their marriage outfit a different color), and multiple extra retainers (storage space is ridiculously limited in FFXIV and there is no separate glamour storage).

They also have a "recruit a friend" program with items and mounts you can only get doing that. I know people that have opened a second account and paid a 9 months worth of subscription just to get the Twintania mount (~ 120-130 USD + the cost of the game ~20 USD) as that is the only way to get it. That second account sometimes just sits there and rots. So almost 150 USD to get the Twintania mount. That's if they want to wait a minimum of 3-4 months before they can get it as the longest subscription plan is only 6 months. If they want it immediately, they'll buy 2 accounts. Sub one for 3 months and sub the other one for 6 months. So almost 170 USD in that case.

I also know some girls in game that have gotten one or more RL guy friends that like them to sub for up to 9 months so they could get it. More often than not those guys end up only playing for a month or two.

It's no wonder that Square Enix is managing to stay in business mostly because of FFXIV.

Regards,
SB

 

[Grall]

You think that's bad?

Ugh, lol. Reading your post creeped me out enough to make my teeth wiggle.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I suppose that's one situation where it sucks to be on console. As expansions in general have to be released as standalone..

There's no real requirement there. Borderlands for example released expansions as downloads that required the existing (disc or downloaded) game. There are lots of examples.

After all, is anyone getting the PS4 versions of Uncharted for free? How about The Last of Us? Tomb Raider? Grand Theft Auto V? Hell at least Diablo 3 Ultimate Edition on consoles not only came with a visually upgraded version of the game...

I think you're confusing RoS with the PS4 version. I'm talking about the PS3. I bought D3 for PS3 at full price. I was then asked to pay full price for RoS on PS3 that uses all the same assets as the first game. It's just another chapter, 20% more stuff, but you had to buy it to get ongoing support as Blizzard dropped the original version of the game.

In summary - buy a game at full price; have support for it dropped; have to to buy the same game again at full price to get the version that'll gain ongoing support. That's akin to buying Uncharted, then having to buy it again to get the version that has online patched so you can play other people. Or buying GTA IV, then having to buy the whole thing again at full price to get access to the DLC. Or buying Star Wars Battlefronts, and then having to buy the whole game again at full price to gain access to a new single player campaign and not be locked out of future online play.

 

[jlippo]

Housemarque have had quite nice and bug free games.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm thinking more AAA (disc) games. There are lots of small indies and download games that are dependable and high quality. HouseMarque is definitely a name you can trust to provide a polished, working game when you buy it. Same with Q Games and their Pixel Junk series, or RedLynx and the Trials games. Ubisoft's smaller titles tend to be quality fair, like Rayman or Child of Light, but their AAA titles can be pretty horrific like all the major publishers. I don't think there's any publisher I'd trust to put down £50+ at launch for a game and know I'd have a solid game with no killer issues save Nintendo. There's always that possibility that you'd play some hours of game and then *BAM*, some killer bug stops you in your tracks.

 

[Prophecy2k]

There was initial D3 release, and then Ultimate Evil edition with no upgrade option. Also they tweak the play with updates but don't inform you. I had a Witch Doctor that made good use of Vampire Bats. Then one update she kept dying. Blizzard decided to change the life drain skill to make it not work at higher levels without really informing you - only if you read the description of "Life Drain" are you told it becomes less effective at high levels, and they still don't inform you it has 0 effectiveness at level 70.

That's an ongoing problem with modern games. Updates can change them and you never know when something you like is going to disappear in a puff of upgrade. But they could at least inform you of the changes, certainly where they are significant to disabling a core mechanic of the game like D3's life drain.

THIS SO HARD!!!!

I play alot of Elite: Dangerous on PC (though it's now on XB1, so probably still relevant in this thread), and the frustration I get with the Devs keep releashing "updates" that significantly nerf certain important aspects of the game is just plain infuriating at times.

One minute my >Cr200m, fully upgraded Python (that I grinded out 1000+ hours to afford) is kicking ass and taking names in Hazardous RES sites. And then suddenly after a patch, I'm getting savaged by 3-ship wings of NPC <Cr30k Eagles, just because some newb players on the Fronteir forums were complaining that they couldn't have fun not being able to beat rediculously more expensive ships in the Open PvP mode.

Even last gen there's been lots of instances of devs ruining their games with updates that change the base mechanics in a very significant way. It's like you buy and enjoy a game at launch, and then a month down the line it's a different game entirely because the devs were too afraid to stick to their original vision and decided to give in to the vocal minority of whiners on their website.

It's why I generally prefer to stay with offline single player games more often these days, as at least you'll be more likely to have a consistent experience now as you did a year ago when the game first released.