Forums

Topic: Do you care if [X game in development hell] gets released?

Posts 21 to 29 of 29

themcnoisy

@JohnnyShoulder The difference here is like me your a big gamer. Its more of a priority to you than a general fan of the series 20 years ago. Lets just say ff7 remake releases in 2020. Thats 23 years since the original release and I think will undoubtedly hurt sales towards middle aged fans with more pressing priorities. Most people in their 40s are paying mortgages, have families etc so its harder to get the time to game. Not to mention the nostalgia wears off, I have always called for Streets of Rage 4, over the last few years Im not actually that bothered anymore as its been almost 25 years since the last one.

Im coming at that from a different angle really and I totally agree that less is more when it comes to previews and information. What I am saying is they should have announced this project earlier and had the ff7 remake out now. Imo they have left it a touch too late.

Forum Best Game of All Time Awards

Multiplat 2018: Horizon Zero Dawn
Nintendo 2017: Super Mario Bros 3
Playstation 2016: Uncharted 2
Multiplat 2015: Final Fantasy 7

PSN: mc_noisy

DerMeister

Thanks for the replies, everyone. I guess sometimes I forget that people do care about some of these games. I've seen a lot of negativity around them and it made me wonder. I also forget that it could just be a very vocal minority. Some very good points were raised here too. I never would have thought of games becoming dated in development without this thread.

"We don't get to choose how we start in this life. Real 'greatness' is what you do with the hand you're dealt." -Victor Sullivan
"Building the future and keeping the past alive are one and the same thing." -Solid Snake

PSN: HeartBreakJake95

BAMozzy

DerMeister wrote:

Thanks for the replies, everyone. I guess sometimes I forget that people do care about some of these games. I've seen a lot of negativity around them and it made me wonder. I also forget that it could just be a very vocal minority. Some very good points were raised here too. I never would have thought of games becoming dated in development without this thread.

Its also not about games becoming 'dated' through extended development cycles but also games that may change throughout the development through need because they were 'too ambitious' or through keeping up to the expectation we have of modern games.

A good example of games that 'changed' - albeit slightly - in recent times is the Division. Initially it looked more impressive, the map system in particular and they also had the 'tablet' player - someone that could play on their tablet with you as a 'spotter' drone for example, feeding you information etc. Obviously these things ended up not making it to final release.

When Devs make their 'little' snapshot so early in development, the visuals can look much better because the world isn't so large and developed meaning they can allocate more resources to the visuals. That Division Map for example may be 'too expensive' on resources to work in a lot of areas. Those 'buildings' could just be a facade - a single layer with absolutely nothing behind so when they turn that into an actual building with rooms and objects that you can enter and interact with, that takes up a lot of the resources that the visuals were utilising. Certain things may work in the Studio but then when you try to get them working with full game, and different hardware, things don't go to plan.

Point is that the game you get 'promised' 3 or 4yrs ago ends up being quite different by the time it gets released. We all know how quite a few games were 'criticised' for visual downgrades - even God of War from the initial reveal to the final release. Spider-Man too has changed from some of the earlier footage - even if the costume design itself has remained similar - I refer to the 'texture' and individual little cells in the original reveal to the more 'shiny' version we have seen lately. As an example, there is this video...

I don't think it matters too much but I do prefer the earlier versions as it seems more 'natural/realistic' and more reminiscent of the fabrics we see in 'superhero' movies/TV shows than the slightly more 'cartoony' and shinier version we see now. This is a 'very minor thing in this case and perhaps more 'fitting' with the tone of the game. The older style does seem more realistic and more 'gritty' than the newer style which gives it more of a cartoony and 'fun' vibe so perhaps not a 'downgrade' but more of an aesthetic choice to fit the vibe better. We have seen more obvious 'downgrades' - like Watchdogs for example but maybe they expected more from the hardware specs that we eventually ended up with.

Of course no-one could criticise any 'possible' visual downgrade or style change, can't criticise if devs remove features, change direction etc between reveal and release if you never saw it in the early stages. Every year we get a LOT of new games - too many for me to buy all of them and generally more games I want than I can buy. Often I have to make a decision of which game to buy 'now' and which I may have to leave for those month's when maybe the games released aren't that appealing to me. Point is, there is no reason to reveal games 2 or more years away. There is enough games coming out in the 'year' ahead to deliver a FULL briefing event without needing to show off games that are years away. Kickstarter is obviously different as they need to generate interest to invest in that game from the public but all others needn't be revealed until they are so far along, so close to release that, unless the reveal is a 'major' disaster, that the reveal is the game you will be getting.

If Square Enix cancelled FF7, no one would be upset if you didn't know it was in development. If they do change their mind on something, like the episodic nature, the combat, the visual style etc people wouldn't complain because they wouldn't have known it even existed. Lets be honest, if they just remastered FF7 and released it, people wouldn't be disappointed that they aren't now getting the remake if that remake wasn't revealed. They wouldn't be upset that its now more than 3yrs since reveal and still seemingly years away. It would have far more impact if it was revealed and releasing within 6-12months - that's plenty of time to build hype, reveal little bits without spoiling anything etc and to keep that hype without overkill, without people getting 'bored' or fed-up with waiting, without moving on to something more tangible because that's releasing much sooner etc. Not going to be disappointed because the final release didn't live up to the 'promises' of the reveal and you actually get the game you expected as a result because its so close to release that 90%+ of it is finalised - maybe just the final polishes and ironing out the kinks/bugs.

A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!

Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??

Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...

PSN: TaimeDowne

DerMeister

@BAMozzy Thanks for going into detail about that. Very good point, and another lesson on game development worth knowing.

"We don't get to choose how we start in this life. Real 'greatness' is what you do with the hand you're dealt." -Victor Sullivan
"Building the future and keeping the past alive are one and the same thing." -Solid Snake

PSN: HeartBreakJake95

KALofKRYPTON

@BAMozzy I think the pressure on dev's from publishers is to blame for lot of it.

Soometime's dev's are just overambitious and they'll perhaps make a target render then the next thing they know, Killzone 2 happens! lol

A lot of it, certainly when it comes to big games, studios and publishers is really down to budget and targets; financial budgets, time constraints, and even creative squabbles have scuppered many a release.

The ones that stick with me are things like The Banner Saga for Vita. When a dev tries really hard to make something work, but the power and a useful UI design just isn't available for a good experience.

PSN: KALofKRYPTON (so you can see how often I don't play anything!)

Twitter: @KALofKRYPTON (at your own risk, I don't care if you're offended)

"Fate: Protects fools, little children, and ships named Enterprise." - Cmdr William T. Riker

BAMozzy

@KALofKRYPTON Still NO reason to reveal early and then things like Killzone 2 would happen - although it was helped by coming out on the PS3 instead. If they didn't announce games so early, then delays, cancellations, changes etc would never be an issue because people wouldn't know about these things. If you announce in the year its expected to release, you must be in the final stages, must have most of the game locked in, far enough along that its unlikely to be cancelled (not saying its impossible just unlikely), well aware of the hardware its releasing on and its capability to deliver the visual level/game-play that is being shown etc as you would be in the last stages of the game. Essentially, you would see the game you will be getting and the game as 'described'.

A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!

Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??

Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...

PSN: TaimeDowne

JohnnyShoulder

Soz if this has already been mentioned, but I think one of the reasons games get announced so early is the fear of the game being leaked. At least with it being revealed officially the developer and publisher has control of what is shown. When a game is leaked they have no control. While an explanation is sorted, by the time that happens the 'damage' could have already been donein some peoples eyes and could take a lot of time and effort to get the people back in board.

Edited on by JohnnyShoulder

JohnnyShoulder

Lindamantooth

Yeah.. I think there is need of development in the X games.

Lindamantooth

Top

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic