What Are You Doing Right Now
-
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@nadnerB said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
hour. Last night, for example, we saw 54GB download in a single hour on Steam.
I hear some XBox games can be like that.
Again, caps will kill these types of solutions.
We're back to the semi truck driving data around, as long as we can tolerate the latency, it can be significantly cheaper to do physical media.
Halo Master Chief Collection had a 20GB day one patch. Glad I didn't buy that one
The RetroPie I built my brother for Christmas depressed me. The games they came out with before Highspeed internet was widely adopted were so much more complete. Now, companies will release an unfinished game and then sell the fix for it as DLC and people will buy it. It's sad.
I've never actually seen this, ever. And I have over 2,000 games. What I have found is that they used to sell games that were impossible to finish because they had no way to patch them in the past.
What game have you seen sold where you had to buy DLC to make it work?
BioShock Infinite comes to mind (later fixed by dlc). Street Fighter 5 was a completely unfinished game on release. Off the top of my head
What was wrong with BSI and what DLC fixed it?
-
There are two Burial at Sea Episode DLCs and Clash in the Clouds. Not much DLC for BSI.
-
Street Fighter 5 was broken and you had to pay for it to be fixed by purchasing more? Or you just had to wait for it to be patched? You need to be clear. releasing games early for feedback is not bad, extorting for money is very bad.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
releasing games early for feedback is not bad
Isn't the point of alpha and beta testing so you don't need to do that? Capcom released their game for sale completely unfinished.
SFV was patched months later. You didn't need to purchase DLC for it.
Bioshock Infinite was 15 hours of gameplay for $59.99. -
There was some game back in like 1998 that was released, and it wouldn't even install. You got home and had to download a patch (which was free) before you even install it.
I think it had 2000 in it's name.
-
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
releasing games early for feedback is not bad
Isn't the point of alpha and beta testing so you don't need to do that? Capcom released their game for sale completely unfinished.
- Do we know that they did that?
- Public beta is a major thing.
- Beta testing only gets you so far.
- Public feedback is a standard development practice.
So simple answer is..... no.
-
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
There was some game back in like 1998 that was released, and it wouldn't even install. You got home and had to download a patch (which was free) before you even install it.
I think it had 2000 in it's name.
That's a patch, not a DLC. Annoying, but not what has been accused here.
-
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
There was some game back in like 1998 that was released, and it wouldn't even install. You got home and had to download a patch (which was free) before you even install it.
I think it had 2000 in it's name.
That's a patch, not a DLC. Annoying, but not what has been accused here.
yeah I know.. and there was no requirement for money either.. It was just the first time I ever heard of a game company sending a game out into the wild knowing it wouldn't work (CD/DVD delivery back then).
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
releasing games early for feedback is not bad
Isn't the point of alpha and beta testing so you don't need to do that? Capcom released their game for sale completely unfinished.
- Do we know that they did that?
- Public beta is a major thing.
- Beta testing only gets you so far.
- Public feedback is a standard development practice.
So simple answer is..... no.
I do know. I have friends that work for Capcom and competed at the tournament level for years
-
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
There was some game back in like 1998 that was released, and it wouldn't even install. You got home and had to download a patch (which was free) before you even install it.
I think it had 2000 in it's name.
That's a patch, not a DLC. Annoying, but not what has been accused here.
yeah I know.. and there was no requirement for money either.. It was just the first time I ever heard of a game company sending a game out into the wild knowing it wouldn't work (CD/DVD delivery back then).
Yeah. That's annoying and it should be better than that. But it's totally different than what we are discussing which is illegal. And while annoying it also allows for games to be released months earlier. It's a big deal for cost and for delivery time for customers.
-
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
releasing games early for feedback is not bad
Isn't the point of alpha and beta testing so you don't need to do that? Capcom released their game for sale completely unfinished.
- Do we know that they did that?
- Public beta is a major thing.
- Beta testing only gets you so far.
- Public feedback is a standard development practice.
So simple answer is..... no.
I do know. I have friends that work for Capcom and competed at the tournament level for years
Game players do not "know". Even in house players. This is just pretentious. Windows does public beta testing for a year before release. Did Capcom release a half assed game? Sure. It's SF, it's a half assed game idea. But your friend telling you that he is privy to all Japanese management development testing decisions and information and that he knows that they didn't intend any public testing is absolute BS.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
There was some game back in like 1998 that was released, and it wouldn't even install. You got home and had to download a patch (which was free) before you even install it.
I think it had 2000 in it's name.
That's a patch, not a DLC. Annoying, but not what has been accused here.
yeah I know.. and there was no requirement for money either.. It was just the first time I ever heard of a game company sending a game out into the wild knowing it wouldn't work (CD/DVD delivery back then).
Yeah. That's annoying and it should be better than that. But it's totally different than what we are discussing which is illegal. And while annoying it also allows for games to be released months earlier. It's a big deal for cost and for delivery time for customers.
In the case of that game, I think it was already many months if not nearly a year late in release. lol I didn't play the game, whatever it's name was, I just recall those around me talking about it and we were all amazed that someone would release a game that didn't work on a physical media.
-
So is there actually any example of an broken game where DLC was demanded in order to get it fixed?
And especially a game that wasn't then sued?
-
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
There was some game back in like 1998 that was released, and it wouldn't even install. You got home and had to download a patch (which was free) before you even install it.
I think it had 2000 in it's name.
That's a patch, not a DLC. Annoying, but not what has been accused here.
yeah I know.. and there was no requirement for money either.. It was just the first time I ever heard of a game company sending a game out into the wild knowing it wouldn't work (CD/DVD delivery back then).
Yeah. That's annoying and it should be better than that. But it's totally different than what we are discussing which is illegal. And while annoying it also allows for games to be released months earlier. It's a big deal for cost and for delivery time for customers.
In the case of that game, I think it was already many months if not nearly a year late in release. lol I didn't play the game, whatever it's name was, I just recall those around me talking about it and we were all amazed that someone would release a game that didn't work on a physical media.
Late for other reasons. But earlier than it would have been. Gave them months to fix those problems. DVD pressing is a slow process. Still ridiculous, but likely a sound business move.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
releasing games early for feedback is not bad
Isn't the point of alpha and beta testing so you don't need to do that? Capcom released their game for sale completely unfinished.
- Do we know that they did that?
- Public beta is a major thing.
- Beta testing only gets you so far.
- Public feedback is a standard development practice.
So simple answer is..... no.
I do know. I have friends that work for Capcom and competed at the tournament level for years
Game players do not "know". Even in house players. This is just pretentious. Windows does public beta testing for a year before release. Did Capcom release a half assed game? Sure. It's SF, it's a half assed game idea. But your friend telling you that he is privy to all Japanese management development testing decisions and information and that he knows that they didn't intend any public testing is absolute BS.
He's the community manager for Capcom for the entire United States, directly involved in game balancing. They gave him full control over previous iterations of SFIV. He's not just a player. I'm the player.
I would argue that some of the players know more about balancing specific games than the people creating the games (fighting games especially), but that is another conversation altogether.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
So is there actually any example of an broken game where DLC was demanded in order to get it fixed?
And especially a game that wasn't then sued?
You're assuming my use of 'broken' is a literal meaning. In gaming, broken means unbalanced or sometimes missing components. That's the disconnect here.
-
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
releasing games early for feedback is not bad
Isn't the point of alpha and beta testing so you don't need to do that? Capcom released their game for sale completely unfinished.
- Do we know that they did that?
- Public beta is a major thing.
- Beta testing only gets you so far.
- Public feedback is a standard development practice.
So simple answer is..... no.
I do know. I have friends that work for Capcom and competed at the tournament level for years
Game players do not "know". Even in house players. This is just pretentious. Windows does public beta testing for a year before release. Did Capcom release a half assed game? Sure. It's SF, it's a half assed game idea. But your friend telling you that he is privy to all Japanese management development testing decisions and information and that he knows that they didn't intend any public testing is absolute BS.
He's the community manager for Capcom for the entire United States, directly involved in game balancing. They gave him full control over previous iterations of SFIV. He's not just a player. I'm the player.
I would argue that some of the players know more about balancing specific games than the people creating the games (fighting games especially), but that is another conversation altogether.
We are talking about broken here, not balancing and tweaks and player opinion. Community manager is levels and levels away from these decisions. He is just bragging to you hoping you don't know about how software development works.
-
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
So is there actually any example of an broken game where DLC was demanded in order to get it fixed?
And especially a game that wasn't then sued?
You're assuming my use of 'broken' is a literal meaning. In gaming, broken means unbalanced or sometimes missing components. That's the disconnect here.
Yup. Broken meaning broken. Not broken meaning you didn't like it.
-
The only DLC for SF5, other than goofy outfit packs, is free. Hardly possible for them to be extorting anyone. What DLC are you claiming that they made people buy?
Are you sure you've looked at this game? A casual glance tells us it's not possible to have been charging people for DLC when they don't sell any.
