Oprindeligt skrevet af kp_roberts:

why is this happening.

Because 'we' as customers, allowed this to happen.

If people refused to purchase 'unfinished games', there would be no market for them.

Since enough people agree to part with their money, though, it shows that there is evidently a viable business model and as such, will continue and be reproduced / adopted by others.

Oprindeligt skrevet af Commander Makara:

Oprindeligt skrevet af kp_roberts:

why is this happening.

Because 'we' as customers, allowed this to happen.

If people refused to purchase 'unfinished games', there would be no market for them.

Since enough people agree to part with their money, though, it shows that there is evidently a viable business model and as such, will continue and be reproduced / adopted by others.

deep, but true

Oprindeligt skrevet af kp_roberts:

Why is this a thing? do these companies not care that they are releasing a bad product because gaming is so massive now if you have a bad release you can still make a ton of money? I dont understand why alot of these companies would develop games and spend years of work on a product that is sometimes completely broken/unplayable or needs a patch but takes weeks if not months to patch. Seems to be more and more common and acceptable to release a 80% complete game as the finished product.

I wont buy a product unless ive heard its well polished and got a good reputation, well balanced and doesnt require a massive download to fix the game day one of release. Alot of disappointment in many games ive been interested in the last year or so and looks like more to come but they still manage to make huge amounts of money and not giving a crap they havent finished their products before its on the shelves or available to download.

Some games come to mind but i didnt want to name them and keep it more in general why is this happening.

unless you name some examples its safe to say its not happening and you are just assuming

Some fully 'finished' games are buggy as hell and aren't worth playing either. Developers releasing bad buggy games is nothing new people. That has always happened. It didn't just start.

Sometimes it's because they want to capitalize on certain sales event periods, such as Thanksgiving or Christmas.

Also, creative projects are very, very difficult to manage.

Oprindeligt skrevet af Tux:

Oprindeligt skrevet af kp_roberts:

Why is this a thing? do these companies not care that they are releasing a bad product because gaming is so massive now if you have a bad release you can still make a ton of money? I dont understand why alot of these companies would develop games and spend years of work on a product that is sometimes completely broken/unplayable or needs a patch but takes weeks if not months to patch. Seems to be more and more common and acceptable to release a 80% complete game as the finished product.

I wont buy a product unless ive heard its well polished and got a good reputation, well balanced and doesnt require a massive download to fix the game day one of release. Alot of disappointment in many games ive been interested in the last year or so and looks like more to come but they still manage to make huge amounts of money and not giving a crap they havent finished their products before its on the shelves or available to download.

Some games come to mind but i didnt want to name them and keep it more in general why is this happening.

unless you name some examples its safe to say its not happening and you are just assuming

Mortal Kombat X, Arkham Knight, AC: Unity, Watch_Dogs...

Oprindeligt skrevet af Big Metal:

Could you imagine if the aircraft industry followed the software industry's development model?

I'm gonna use this somewhere

Oprindeligt skrevet af THE GREAT PAPYRUS:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Big Metal:

Could you imagine if the aircraft industry followed the software industry's development model?

I'm gonna use this somewhere

See, all I am picturing now is Kerbal Space Program, and the "Rockets" people tend to build.

Oprindeligt skrevet af supertrooper225:

Some fully 'finished' games are buggy as hell and aren't worth playing either. Developers releasing bad buggy games is nothing new people. That has always happened. It didn't just start.

Oprindeligt skrevet af Quint the Robot Girl:

Sometimes it's because they want to capitalize on certain sales event periods, such as Thanksgiving or Christmas.

Also, creative projects are very, very difficult to manage.

I think these cases are largely more due to publishers placing extremely restrictive timescales, deadlines and launch schedules on their client developers.
When the devs are working 18 hour days for weeks in crunch, and the QA typically deem anything that doesn't competely prevent the game from starting as 'DO NOT FIX' because the late nights and increased pressure lead to more bugs than those being fixed.

I've said this a lot of times previously, but no harm in re-iterating it, I'm sure.

Game devs, whether programmers, artists, voice-actors, composers etc. you name it, are all in a creative industry. Whilst there's possibly a tiny handful of exceptions no doubt, as with any creative work, those who actually realise it do so with a passion for their talent. Just as Michaelangelo didn't want to do a ♥♥♥♥ job of the sistine chapel, creative people want their products to be a finished product they can be proud of.

Unfortunately, all too often, restrictions on resources which include time are controlled by the publishers who typically do not well appreciate the lead on videogames. (Or, perhaps more fairly and accurately, as videogames have grown in depth and complexity, and the amount of refinement increased exponentially between feature complete and polished (or even finished) the publishers have been lax to catch up or readily acknowledge a reasonable increment.

Whilst the vast number of developers I am sure would love to address certain issues with titles after release, but unless the publisher agrees to fund such work, allowing for a time todo so (remember, the devs will have other projects requiring their attention too) and the salary for their efforts (not a matter of greed, this is the vocation and the devs need to put food on their tables at home) but possibly most importantly, and an aspect so many people seem to disregard, is that devs simply ARE NOT ALLOWED by law to affect the product without the publishers' express permission.
Well, one might 'steal some source code and tap away at home and release a fixed version unofficially to the world, but then they'll get their arse sued and may never be hired again since security of IP is very, very serious in any field.

Instead, depending on the title and its lifetime expectancy, whether there are alternate strategies other than basic unit sale, for example: future 'pakage editions', plans for expansion package/DLC, monthly fees or more esoteric merchandising and spin-off sales. etc. then there is little motivation or support for any further interest in the product. At the very least, there is often an agreement for a limited period of requisite patches (helpful, but largely just a cop-out scheme for the pubs to sidestep criticism of their deadline and crunch antics) - where support may exist for some months post launch, especially where more major known issues identified by QA are acceptably not addressed by launch.
This processes, in my opinion, is largely insufficient, it does not convert wellfrom the corporate IT format that it has been adopted from whereby companies could request specific changes or requirements for their bespoke software from the developer representation that would then be produced and delivered accordingly, whereby bugs were mostly due to miscommunicaiton between the company misunderstanding implication of one request, or failing to communicate their request effectively. However, patches for those bugs could be made to order with the same stringent quality as any other software process by that vendor.
However, this is awkward and undersupported in many cases with the videogame industry, and is an other aspect which is exascerbated by the public/consumer acceptance and agreement to allow it to continue - the notion of 'ZeroDay' or Day One patching for example, has become almost a standard policy or expected for many.

In short, be wary of blanket blaming developers for the faults that they may not be responsible for.

I am not sure who made this quote but it every word of it is true for those of you who don't participate in the creation of art:

"Art is never finished, it is abandoned."

Basically, an artist is never truly satisfied with their work. They always see things they want to fix or reiterate..but sooner or later the thing has to go out of the door.

Just like most media, it is on us the consumer to make good decisions. You have an incredible amount of tools at your disposal like professional reviews, user reviews, game forums, game blogs, youtube/twitch let's plays, Steam Broadcasting, Steam Family sharing, and so on and so on. Couple that with the new refund policy and it is much easier to make the right gaming choice than in the 90's or 2000's.

thank you for the input everyone, sadly i expect to see this continue and maybe get worse

This thread was quite old before the recent post, so it has been locked.