[squarejawhero]

I've been visiting the boiling-point.net forums with interest about this game. It's like Vampire The Masquerade meets Far Cry via GTA, and although it's evidently bugged to crap (see Kieron Gillen of PC Gamer's review here at Eurogamer ) it sounds deep and entertaining. Some of the stories posted there about playing the game makes it sound really fun, but Atari released it waaaay to early. Man, I'm really pissed off that this kind of thing happens - it's not good for consumers and its horrid for developers!

I'm thinking of getting it as it sounds like a great laugh, bugs or no bugs. Will do me until GTA:SA is released on PC. Apparently the developers have a big patch in the works, but WHY does this always happen to the MOST promising games, the most interesting. I mean, this game obviously takes a bigger step in terms of ideas than pretty much every shooter out there right now, and it's forced out the door early?

The enthusiasm on those forums, and the early reviews, points to a game which is worth putting time into, much like the last Vampire game. I can take basic graphics is the gameplay is experience sounds as rich as this, but god knows why they weren't given a few more months on it. Presumably Atari were scared that Stalker would be pulled forward and didn't want a similar game out there at the same time.

I don't know. It beggars belief.

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by squarejawhero

I've been visiting the boiling-point.net forums with interest about this game. It's like Vampire The Masquerade meets Far Cry via GTA, and although it's evidently bugged to crap (see Kieron Gillen of PC Gamer's review here at Eurogamer ) it sounds deep and entertaining. Some of the stories posted there about playing the game makes it sound really fun, but Atari released it waaaay to early. Man, I'm really pissed off that this kind of thing happens - it's not good for consumers and its horrid for developers!

I'm thinking of getting it as it sounds like a great laugh, bugs or no bugs. Will do me until GTA:SA is released on PC. Apparently the developers have a big patch in the works, but WHY does this always happen to the MOST promising games, the most interesting. I mean, this game obviously takes a bigger step in terms of ideas than pretty much every shooter out there right now, and it's forced out the door early?

The enthusiasm on those forums, and the early reviews, points to a game which is worth putting time into, much like the last Vampire game. I can take basic graphics is the gameplay is experience sounds as rich as this, but god knows why they weren't given a few more months on it. Presumably Atari were scared that Stalker would be pulled forward and didn't want a similar game out there at the same time.

I don't know. It beggars belief.

It's one big evil word my friend: "Publishers".

[squarejawhero]

Why do they bother funding games and not finishing them?

If any other item was put for sale in such an unfinished condition there'd be uproar, but with games, it seem par for the course - at least on PC. Now even on Xbox they've got patch delivery systems too.

Would you spend $60 on a DVD on an unfinished movie?

[SoccerDude28]

Originally Posted by squarejawhero

Why do they bother funding games and not finishing them?

If any other item was put for sale in such an unfinished condition there'd be uproar, but with games, it seem par for the course - at least on PC. Now even on Xbox they've got patch delivery systems too.

Would you spend $60 on a DVD on an unfinished movie?

See with PC games, publishers and developers tend to be lazy. I'm guessing this is what went to the publisher's mind: "Why wait a few months, when you will have to compete with next-gen XBOX games and big hit PC games, possibly losing a gajillion dollars and euros. Instead, we will just release it like it is, people will buy it, and we will provide patches later on." PC's have the advantage/disadvantage over the consoles, in that you can keep providing patches. With consoles, you have one time to deliver the game, if there is a game stopper bug, you are screwed, and you need a total recall (like in the case of the WWE game). With PC's you can just provide a patch and people will download it. It's really sad that it is actually expected that a game will have a patch to fix bugs these days.

Also I think that PC's not being owned by any one company do not have the scrutiny that XBOX and PS2 games have. Every console game needs to be approved by Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo to be shipped. With PC's, no one is there to prevent you from shipping an unfinished piece of crap.

[squarejawhero]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

See with PC games, publishers and developers tend to be lazy. I'm guessing this is what went to the publisher's mind: "Why wait a few months, when you will have to compete with next-gen XBOX games and big hit PC games, possibly losing a gajillion dollars and euros. Instead, we will just release it like it is, people will buy it, and we will provide patches later on." PC's have the advantage/disadvantage over the consoles, in that you can keep providing patches. With consoles, you have one time to deliver the game, if there is a game stopper bug, you are screwed, and you need a total recall (like in the case of the WWE game). With PC's you can just provide a patch and people will download it. It's really sad that it is actually expected that a game will have a patch to fix bugs these days.

Also I think that PC's not being owned by any one company do not have the scrutiny that XBOX and PS2 games have. Every console game needs to be approved by Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo to be shipped. With PC's, no one is there to prevent you from shipping an unfinished piece of crap.

For some reason, the Office of Fair Trading rules don't seem to apply to publishers. I don't mind bugs that're hardware configuration or driver based problems - to an extent, but that's PC gaming for you. But bugs due to the developer not having time to finish the title is unforgiveable.

Problem is, as in the case of Tribes: Vengeance or Vampire: Redemption, games publishers don't always patch them up to completion and don't feel the need to if the game doesn't perform as expected. Well, seriously - I say tough shit on them. People are still being asked to pay full price for games like these on some sites, and the money's still going back to the publisher.

Eh, perfect world and all...

[Funktion]

I have the game, I've been playing it for almost a week (it's been out here in Europe since last week), and it's a blast!
There's a lot of talk about bugs, but I really didn't experience anything major (besides small problems with textures, like clipping, ...). I haven't crashed once, so why this game gets a review mentioning the bugs, while Knights of the Old Republic 2 gets louded as a great game (I couldn't even play it until the first patch; all my saves would become corrupt, and the game crashed like hell) it's beyond me.
This game is very similar to Deus Ex, but on a different setting and on a much bigger scale. It's a really fun game.
The only thing I have to mention is that the game is a resource "hog", be prepared to spend some time "tunning" the options until you get a good performance. I can run HL2 (1280x960) and Vampire:TM - Bloodlines (1280x1024) without any problems, but in this game I had some trouble until I could find a setting that would suit me (it's 1280x960, but with several options scalled down; the game still looks good).

Regarding the "early" release, I've been following the game since the very beginning (it was previously called "Xenus"), and I have to say this game was self-funded by the team at Deep Shadows (in the beginning there were only 4 guys working in the game!). Atari only made a publishing deal with them last year (already in the 2nd half of the year, if I'm not mistaken), and they released the game with known bugs (the readme mentions they're aware of certain bugs, and that a patch will be released soon; aparently according to Atari France it's out this week).

If you can give this game a try.

The next game Deep Shadows is making is a very similar game, but on a space/sci-fi setting (visiting lots of planets, doing quests for lots of races, ...). It's called Precursors, check http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/615/615973p1.html for some screenshots.

[squarejawhero]

Good to hear it - might pick it up today! Precursors looks incredibly ambitious again. I just really hope they find another publisher other than Atari as evidently they're incredibly talented and need more time to give things the spit and polish they deserve. As Kieron Gillen says in the Eurogamer review though, they'll probably just add more content instead though!

Just hope they don't go the way of Detalion, another developer underappreciated by their publisher.

[SamandMax]

If EA had made the game, they would've forced their workers to put in 28 hours a day into it, making sure there was absolutely no bugs or problems in it. Because for every bug they find, they whip the person who made the mistake.

[sideburnmania]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

Also I think that PC's not being owned by any one company do not have the scrutiny that XBOX and PS2 games have. Every console game needs to be approved by Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo to be shipped. With PC's, no one is there to prevent you from shipping an unfinished piece of crap.

Look at Driv3r though. That was a buggy, rushed out version and it was released on console..