Explore our other sites
  • kotaku
  • theroot
    cxm
    cxm
    cxm

    This is what I’ve been saying for a while. People keep giving Bethesda a free pass for releasing buggy games under the excuse that “it’s a huge game”, but all that means is that Bethesda is godawful at planning their games before release. They over scope the game, creating a game so big and complex that it’d take a

    In the console space, it’s not so cut and dry. There’s usually a one to two month gap between when a game is “done” and when the game passes certification where some teams roll people off to work on additional content under a separate budget. Even before certification, people have been rolling off as fewer and fewer

    Too bad Saudi Arabia didn’t think its treatment of religion was a positive thing since they’ve apparently outright banned the game for religious reasons...

    All this stick talk. Who needs sticks? if you take the camera by the lens, what direction do you move the lens to look up? you push it up. What direction do you move the lens to look down? you push it down. All Y-inverters keep wanting to control the camera from behind the fulcrum with these imaginary sticks when it’s

    The issue isn’t the game having bugs so much as the knee-jerk acceptance of said bugs when it comes to Bethesda games. If other games released with the same number and types of bugs you find in many Bethesda releases, you’d, at the very least, see scores take a hit when the bugs are called out in the review. However,

    Arguably, it doesn’t excuse them at all. Part of properly planning a game is designing a game that you can reasonably finish at an appropriate level of quality in the time you have allotted. The fact that Bethesda repeatedly bites off more than they can chew isn’t a reason for people to let their quality/performance

    Totally agree. Why would they even bother TRYING to fix these bugs if the press and the public will simply throw 9’s at them on the promise that the good game underneath will eventually show up after a few patches. I love Bethesda games as much as the next guy, but a game at release as buggy as theirs does not deserve

    Always gets me how much of a pass Bethesda gets releasing such buggy games, simply because they release good, but buggy games, all the time. Any other studio that releases a well designed game that was this buggy would have been dinged for it fairly harshly. Bethesda just gets a shrug and a 9.5, and everyone’s

    Here’s the thing. People keep talking as if how DLC works for one company is how it works for ALL companies which is bullshit. CD Project Red isn’t beholden to a large publisher and they have a MASSIVELY successful IP and relatively low development costs. That gives them the clout and the finances to be able to give a

    Eh, it depends. I’ve only really seen the ‘sloppy’ inference when it comes to games. Most of the time when I hear the “lazy” call out, it’s usually attached to “why didn’t the devs do (this feature/system)“ or “why didn’t the devs redo all the animations”. It’s people moaning about not getting a feature they wanted or

    Publishers probably don’t but you know that the development house execs probably do. Hiring and training people isn’t cheap or quick, so better to hold onto the people you have who know how to do the job.

    If you peruse any gaming forum long enough, you’ll find that people spouting these things aren’t all that rare, particularly on the fansite forums where the posters are emotionally invested in a title that might not have come out the way they want it. Disappointed super-fans tend to leave their brains at the door when

    This largely confuses me. How many days after a game is released is it acceptable to charge for additional content? If a developer was working on content while the game was in certification/manufacturing/shipping and they’re able to deliver the content on the release day via a patch, why not release it that day? And

    You do realize that they still need to pay for the developers’ time to develop the DLC, right? DLC is usually handled as a separate line item in the budget since you aren’t ‘technically’ working on the core game any more. If there’s no chance of getting a return on investment, few publishers would be willing to

    That depends largely on how they did it. A lot of DLC will be able to make it on disc in a partial, incomplete form, so that consumers will have less content to have to download, and while the game is in certification/manufacturing/distribution, the developers are working on finishing off the DLC content so that it’ll

    There’s plenty to be anger to go around...no need to give the jackass a pass just because the industry treats its employees like shit.

    Man, you really just walked right into being one of those guys they’re talking about. Do you have any idea how much time, effort and risk is involved with overhauling a game engine between games? Nevermind the cost of potentially having to rebuild assets if the new engine workflow isn’t cleanly compatible with the

    No need to be a bitch about it:

    This is one of the weirdest complaint articles i’ve seen, yet. You’re basically relying on developers to develop a game with a flat difficulty ramp so that players jumping in at a later point in the game wouldn’t run into a brick wall, because if they did, it’d pretty much be the same thing as locking the player out

    I see what happened. We’re talking about two different things. LIVE streams can’t likely be enforced, but archived streams absolutely can. However, if a streamer habitually streams content that ends up being DMCAed, i wouldn’t be surprised if Twitch sanctions them to cover their own asses.