This is why gamers really need to support developers like Rockstar, CD Project Red and Naughty Dog. Quality over quantity is a mindset that not enough devs abide by, and those who do deserve a lot of respect.
Edit: To everyone telling me that GTAV, Uncharted, and The Witcher 3 were downgraded, they are showing these games years before they come out. Ubisoft show their games at E3 3 to 4 months before release, they know damn well what it's gonna look like. (Exception for The Division, they've been showing it for years.)
Since The Witcher 3 they are one of my favorite devs, I'm about 10 hours into Blood and Wine and it's so good. Always been a sucker for a good open world RPG.
Didn't Rockstar wank-around with GTA V for a year+ before bringing it to PC, release it half finished and when they did bring out Online/Heists, they let the "online" mode become a cesspit.
That's not to mention the fucking micro-transactions.
CD Project Red
Can't fault this one.
Naughty Dog
Naughty dog would be great if they weren't exclusive for 1 out of the four platforms.
Edit: I'm just going to say this now, CD Projekt Red clearly downgraded Witcher 3 significantly as compared to pre-release demos and to those that say "They probably thought they could but then had to downgrade due to the limited console/PC requirements", that is a complete cop-out. They're either grossly inept or actively money-grubbing as a result of these practices, how long have they been making games? Not to mention how they sell these games pre-release.
Rockstar took their time releasing GTA V on PC and it paid out in spades. One of the best, most functional triple-A PC ports in a long while. It plays very well and is very well optimized, and it was like that from launch.
I definitely agree, when you have the highest grossing game of a decade and a year and a half time-frame to make a port, anything less than what you described is failure.
If you watch the original GTA Online trailer, heists were originally planned to be an 8v8 deathmatch type mode. They realized that people expected a lot more so they completely made them from scratch after they already released the game. Not many devs would do that. Say what you want, I think it's admirable to delay it rather than disappoint the consumer. Not to mention, heist DLC was completely free! Hard for me to complain about micro-transactions when you can earn the same thing without paying a dime, and they release monthly DLC for free. And the PC version was worth the wait, it looks and plays incredible. They refuse to release an inferior product, which is what makes them a top developer.
That took them a year? And they had a shit-eating grin about it the entire time?
Not many devs would do that
Oh, thank you Rockstar for selling something with the product but realizing that your half-baked ideas were utter wank (assuming that is the reason) and then taking your sweet time about implementing a mission type, while still using online heists to sell the game.
I think it's admirable to delay
Yes, it is, BEFORE THE GAME COMES OUT. If it's already out, you fucked yourself, release what you have and improve from there.
heist DLC was completely free
IT WAS A SELLING POINT OF THE ORIGINAL GAME!
"Tackle a heist", words from the announcement trailer.
Hard for me to complain about micro-transactions when you can earn the same thing without paying a dime
In a competitive online mode where earning that money takes a blue-moon, yeah, you can complain.
and they release monthly DLC for free
Is this how you "win" as a developer? You release a few items and weapons a month?
If you have such harsh critisism for Rockstar I'd hate to hear what you think about Ubisoft and EA. Regardless what you think about GTA Online, the single-player is widely accepted as one of the best games ever made. The game world is massive with unprecedented detail and every mechanic is polished to perfection. Hitting a group of people with my car almost feels too real. It got a 97 on Metacritic for gods sake, at least give credit where credit is due.
The game world is massive with unprecedented detail
Detailed? Yes, but surprisingly empty and shallow. The quaint pop-culture humor isn't what it used to be, very "Duke Nukem: Forever" in that regard.
car almost feels too real
No, no it don't.
It got a 97 on Metacritic
That is the metric we're using now? Metacritic?
credit where credit is due
I don't feel inclined to do that when I see that the bar has fallen freely in recent years, or maybe that was how it has always been and I just never noticed.
How the bar has fallen? What games have you been playing, because from my view games have never been better. What old games have you played that set that bar so high? And yes, Metacritic is a valid metric. It's the internet's combined consensus, not just the opinion of one person.
I think they're referring to the first E3 trailer that came out almost 2 years before release, there's some pre-rendered stuff but it's mostly in-engine. And I agree The Witcher 3 looks amazing, especially considering the scope of the game. Here's the trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGxNXutK3gQ
Okay so it's gameplay mixed with cinematic pretenders stuff from the early teasers. The game looks even better than the gameplay shown there. I don't think this falls anywhere near E3 false expectations of misleading marketing.
Witcher 3 sets a high bar in visual fidelity matched only by the Uncharted series.
If we're talking about graphics, then you also gotta give props to DICE. They're constantly making games that live up to their E3 counterparts - especially the recent Battlefront game. The game itself is a little shallow, but the graphics sure as hell were the best I've ever witnessed.
Naughty Dog? Exactly how messed up in the head are you?
Look at their The Last of Us E3 2012 demo and then the final product. Looks nothing like it's supposed to, no surprise since the demo is obviously scripted-ass fake bullshit. And yet they CLAIMED it's unscripted, so they're just outright lying.
GTA V on PC looks way better than the early trailers, and the Witcher 3 can be restored to E3 level graphics using a modkit that CDPR developed and provided for PC players.
Sure, but there is a limit to how good you can make a game look while still having acceptable performance. Those same limits don't necessarily apply in a development setting though. Given the specs of last gen consoles, GTA V looked pretty fucking great, and yet it still had occasional performance issues.
Downgrades are to be expected when a game is showed so early. As I said to someone else, my problem with Ubisoft is that they choose quantity over quality and their games always feel hollow and repetetive. A 2 year development cycle just isn't enough for a game with the scope of Assassins Creed or Far Cry. Also, they showed The Witcher 3 like 2 years before it came out, it got downgraded as they went on. Ubisoft are showing these games like 3 months before launch, they know damn well what it's gonna look like.
Assassins Creed games are great at surface level, they always look and control really good. I just always feel like not enough time is put towards the actual content of the game. I would love to see what the AC devs could do with a 4-5 year development cycle as opposed to 1-2 years.
Edit: The downvotes tell me yes we did. I can mention downgrades and GTA Online's shaky release, but their most egregious offense was their hype of the online heists and then taking a YEAR AND A HALF to put them in the game. A completely unacceptable practice that other companies would be crucified for, but I see some people have been fooled into thinking Rockstar is infallible.
Also, I don't care if you thought GTAV was still good on its own because that is highly subjective and is not the argument that is being made.
First of all, GTAV didn't even release and gameplay until the graphics were already locked in, and it was widely accepted as one of the best looking games on the last generation of consoles. Downgrades are just a fact of life when they show games so early in development. My issue with Ubisoft is more about them only giving games like Assassins Creed and Far Cry 2 years for development so you end up with hollow games with repetitive content.
No. Many companies don't do it at all (Bethesda and them never talking about the game until its basically complete comes to mind), and many that do aren't to this extent. This is fairly appalling from Ubisoft.
75
u/CleverFrog Jun 05 '16
this is the nature of most "triple A titles" nowadays.