Are we 0ver a barrel ready to give two big coughs?


(Agrocr0c) #1

Let’s pretend that Bethesda is Ian Beale’s business.

No matter how passionate and fanatical we all are about wanting to play great games, and no matter how passionate Splash Damage may be about wanting to design and build great games, the bottom line of Beale’s business is to make as much money as quickly as possible.

Importantly, Beale controls Splash Damage’s end product because he pays all their wages and costs. So Beale is the Captain of the Splash Damage ship and its crew. His opinions matter more than all of the rest of his crew put together.

Splash Damage have undoubtedly put a lot of effort into the conception and design of Brink, probably long before Ian Beale saw it. However, the moment the game goes into production, Beale will butt in with his size 7 loafers and give lots of duff orders about where to cut costs, time, and money.

So the result is that Ian Beale wants to squeeze the production of the game until it bleeds, and the gradual erosion of a solid game begins. On one hand there is passion and desire from the developers; whereas on the other much larger and stronger hand is an objective money-orientated corporate slimeball.

It is clear money and time have been saved by insufficient testing of the game and the network code on a scale large enough to simulate Xbox Live. Moreover, it is beyond any doubt that the game has been released early with many features unusable.

Adding insult to injury Ian Beale then underpays spray-tanned Marketing personnel to over-hype the game and tell all manner of tall tales. This must be expected. Every business does it. For example, Listerine. I use it everyday but my breath still reeks of black-bean and burned rubber and my teeth look like small chunks of Caramac. Brink was never going to live up to its hype.

My conclusion is that Splash Damage has been coerced into taking a great initial game design and shaping it into a game that meets Ian Beale’s demands and doesn’t clash with his next power-lunch. We, the customers, listen faithfully to the marketing people and try hard to believe that this time they are telling the truth; using a poker analogy, we go ‘all-in’ and buy or pre-order the game without trying it first. Importantly, we cannot try it first. No demo.

CHA-CHING!! Nothing else matters, Ian’s money is made. He hit his targets. It is Splash Damage that now must fight for their reputation with their tail between their legs, do loads of extra work, and hope that some of their magic shines through Ian Beale’s greasy filter. Meanwhile, Ian goes for a spin in his brand new Carrera GT.

I cannot think of any other market like ours, the gaming market. No other industry has such blind faithful customers that are willing to endure such poor product standards. It really is analogous to drug addiction. We are the crackheads. The developers are the supertalented-innocent-but-wacky-bedroom-scientists trying to design a happy drug that gets us all as high as possible with no ill-side effects. But, most importantly of all, the Ian Beales are the elevated dealers high on their own money and power., who are cutting down the purity of the happy drug until we are left with a $68 dollar bum deal that doesn’t really get us high at all.

Music, games, movies. They are all an escape. We need them, badly. This world is mostly **** except for friends and family and home-life. But even they get boring and its time to escape. Are we trapped?

Who do we blame, ourselves, the developers, or Beale? Shall we revolt?


(kamikazee) #2

While I think this rant is interesting, isn’t every business driven by profit?


(Dr.Ricktofen) #3

They tuuk arr joubz!


(Protector) #4

Isn’t this the second retarded post about Ian Beale? None of us watch crap like Eastbenders, so go watch some more of it and leave us alone.


(Agrocr0c) #5

Yes, profit is the first rule of business. However, in order to maintain and ensure future profits and not just make a fast buck, businesses must produce high quality products, or else risk losing customers to other businesses.

Consider this - the gaming industry is getting far too comfortable when releasing their games riddled with problems because it is becoming ‘the norm’. It is expected, nowadays, that a title will be released with problems, and forthcoming will be a patch and compensation etc.

Imagine buying a car only to be shocked to find it won’t accelerate anywhere near as fast as they told you it would until their mechanic can get it booked in again a month or so after you bought it. It just doesn’t and shouldn’t be allowed to happen.

We are the only ones that can change this - the customers. Publishers only work with compliant developers, others are being pushed out. It’s expensive and you need serious backing from these ‘dealers’ to enter the market.

PS I’m glad you found it interesting. If more people do, perhaps we can do something about it.


(Agrocr0c) #6

Can the idiot in the tracksuit please leave the room, thank you.


(Nullzero) #7

I can’t speak to the conspiracy theories floating around…

But I will say, I am going to second guess any Bethesda game I purchase from now on. Seriously… Where was the quality control? ATI cards broken out of the gate? Where was your balance testing? And what about just the general lag issues and bot bugs everyone has been having?

Wasn’t Fallout a Bethesda game too? Man that game had some bugs in it too.

Splash Damage shoulders some of the blame too, but Bethesda is supposed to be the final check between consumers and the developer… and it doesnt seem like they are doing their job.


(engiebenjy) #8

At the end of the day regardless of the marketing it is YOUR decision to purchase the game. It is easy to wait for a review and then decide whether or not the game is worth your money.

As far as bugs are concerned - I would question how the game gets through QA at both Sony and MS without throughly testing the online portion. On consoles it only requires a small amount of lag to cripple the game and cause rubberbanding all over the place. Black Ops on PS3 was also a mess at launch - but has since been fixed with a number of patches.


(Protector) #9

Haha says the fatty stuck to his couch watching soaps…


(jaggerzz) #10

I too have fallen into the trap of listening to game companies hype, and have bought games based solely on that information. But unfortunately there has been too many times when the game has not lived up to my expectation. And once we open the game, we have just lost at least half the money we paid for it since it is then nonreturnable.
So until they come up with a solution for being able to return a clearly unfinished, broken game, I think we as a community only have one choice to try to send the message to ALL game companies, that we well no longer except your half finished projects. And that is to avoid buying the games on release day, and waiting a week or two for the reviews to come out.
This is really the only way to get our message across to these companies that want to put out an unfinished game.
I have made the mistake of listening to the hype, and rushing out to buy it on release date, only to be very disappointed for the last time. From now on I will wait to read the reviews.


(darthmob) #11

I think it’s just sad. Anybody who has been around for a while or was at the conventions and got a chance to talk to someone knows that SD is a nice team and a good developer. Brink is the chance to get from the hardcore niche into AAA mainstream. But instead there’s a properly bugged release version and lots of hate.

Would love to get an honest opinion on what went wrong here. Problem is you can’t expect that on an official forum. Maybe one day at some convention showing the next title. :slight_smile:


(Agrocr0c) #12

[QUOTE=jaggerzz;316116]I too have fallen into the trap of listening to game companies hype, and have bought games based solely on that information. But unfortunately there has been too many times when the game has not lived up to my expectation. And once we open the game, we have just lost at least half the money we paid for it since it is then nonreturnable.
So until they come up with a solution for being able to return a clearly unfinished, broken game, I think we as a community only have one choice to try to send the message to ALL game companies, that we well no longer except your half finished projects. And that is to avoid buying the games on release day, and waiting a week or two for the reviews to come out.
This is really the only way to get our message across to these companies that want to put out an unfinished game.
I have made the mistake of listening to the hype, and rushing out to buy it on release date, only to be very disappointed for the last time. From now on I will wait to read the reviews.[/QUOTE]

May I say that this is the type of response I was hoping to hear. Maybe renting first if there’s no demo, maybe waiting a few weeks before purchase. But, we all know that te problem is compounding itself - the more disappointing games there are on sale, the more likely we are to buy a game that we see shows promise. We, however, do not control what we see. We see the overly-glossed hype and thus the very deficit of games that disappoints us, pushes us to buy the newest prospect. It will be never ending unless we boycott them in some way.


(dazman76) #13

You’re probably right. Failing that though, I really think some kind of update would be appreciated - if nothing else, it might hold back the current wave of negativity. I know they posted the blog about incoming fixes, but I think even the slightest mention of progress would help right now :slight_smile: In the end though, I’m just hoping Brink comes out of this with a healthy player base - and SD come out of it with some of their sanity left. If they had any to begin with! :slight_smile: lol


(Bakercompany) #14

I think Bethesda tagging their name on it had something to do with a lot of it.

I noticed they picked up what seems to be another completely unrelated title thats not an official Bethesda game Hunted: The Demons Forge.

We received promotional material for both games at the same time (Hunted and Brink). And all the shirts etc have Bethesda on the sleeve, not their corresponding developers.


(riptide) #15

Speaking of player base it has more than halved since release day.

http://store.steampowered.com/stats/

BTW I agree with the OP completely. Unfortunately there isn’t much we can do about it even if we wait for reviews they are done by people who have emotions and as such are incapable of being unbiased unless of course they are jaded. I mean sure we can wait until the technical complaints are addressed but again not everybody will have the same hardware and some consumer is going to end up being the guinea pig.


(Akasen) #16

Bravo good sir, bravo. I have made an account because of your well written rant. I too have bought a game that seems to have suffered a fate akin to Brinks but in some ways was much worse. The game in question was Fallout: New Vegas, a game that I rank as one of my Top 5 favorite RPG’s of all time.

When New Vegas was released it was a terrible mess of bugs. For PC there was an issue where the game lagged because of characters faces and a bug that crashed the game when the ending showed. Bethesda never was blamed for these issues. And why should they? They didn’t develop the game, Obsidian Entertainment did with it’s team of Black Isle Veterans and the man who made Oscuro’s Oblivion Overhaul (no I’m serious).

While New Vegas did meet and exceed all of my expectations that I had for it there were still bugs in it. Many believed this to be the fault of Obsidian. Some pointed at the Gamebryo engine. A small few though have pointed at Bethesda for the problems in the game and their accusations may be right.

Now did I buy this game because Bethesda’s name is slapped on it? No I didn’t. Truthfully I saw the name as a terrible omen. The only game from Bethesda that I have ever enjoyed is Fallout 3.

I was pulled in by the hype of TES:IV and for years I was blinded by an illusion that wanted me to believe that this game was everything I expected and hyped about. As I grew older, my taste in games matured and expanded. I had realized that Oblivion was not everything I wanted. And it didn’t leave me wanting more. It left me disappointed.

Why was I blinded by Developer demo shown at E3 2004? Why did I let myself be lulled by Todd Howard as he explained many aspects of the game? Why did the Alpha of the game look better than the final product? Why does the alpha have more voice actors than the final product?

I can answer these now: I was young and naive, I kept watching the videos over and over with fascination, consolification, and I SERIOUSLY DON’T KNOW. These are the answers to the questions I asked myself after I shattered my illusion and took the name of Bethesda as the name of a company that I must take with caution.

So why then should Brink suffer? While it does have the name of Bethesda on the box and you have to search for the name Splash Damage on the back (I never heard of Splash Damage until that point so I thought it was extra software or something). I had tooken my chances and bought the game BEFORE reading reviews. I read the reviews as I downloaded the game and found reviewers to hate this game but the comments were at war. After booting up the game and playing I found myself loving the title.

So what did I learn after playing Brink? F*** reviewers. The only good reviewer is one who doesn’t speak through a filter made of money. Yahtzee of Zero Punctuation, while paid, isn’t paid to review a game and make sure it sells. He’s paid to review a game and give his thoughts on it and make you the viewer know whether it is worth your money or not.

As a final note, I am sorry for hijacking this thread with a rant of my own. I was just so pleased with your post I had to speak my mind.


(Nullzero) #17

I think Bethesda does shoulder some of the blame though. Usually a small developer will partner up with a big publisher for the express purpose of making the product better. Usually a publisher provides funds, access to QA teams to help test, or consulting for console ports, or PR support for advertising.

If Bethesda didnt help assure the quality of the PRODUCT WITH THEIR NAME ON IT… I have to assume they just dont care. So poop on both companies for failing to properly test their game…


(sirius89) #18

[QUOTE=Nullzero;316917]I think Bethesda does shoulder some of the blame though. Usually a small developer will partner up with a big publisher for the express purpose of making the product better. Usually a publisher provides funds, access to QA teams to help test, or consulting for console ports, or PR support for advertising.

If Bethesda didnt help assure the quality of the PRODUCT WITH THEIR NAME ON IT… I have to assume they just dont care. So poop on both companies for failing to properly test their game…[/QUOTE]

Skyrim pre order is cancelled. :smiley:

No quality product,no money from me Bethesda,simple as that.


(SphereCow) #19

[QUOTE=Nullzero;316917]I think Bethesda does shoulder some of the blame though. Usually a small developer will partner up with a big publisher for the express purpose of making the product better. Usually a publisher provides funds, access to QA teams to help test, or consulting for console ports, or PR support for advertising.

If Bethesda didnt help assure the quality of the PRODUCT WITH THEIR NAME ON IT… I have to assume they just dont care. So poop on both companies for failing to properly test their game…[/QUOTE]

Barring the real absolute truth on who was to provide QA, considering your train of logic, why would it be “poop” on SD also, if you said that Beth was supposed to provide QA? : O


(Orthias) #20

OP: I couldn’t agree more.

The comparison you made between games and drugs on the basis of the need for escapism is one that often crossed my mind, and one that i came to agree with.

Like any drug dealer, publishers are profiting on the misery of their clients:

[ul]
[li]if one is a balanced person that leads a life they are satisfied with (mostly), if one can afford to live comftorably enough to go out, travel, see the world and experience new thing for real, then one will only play games for their entertainment value (same as watching a film - it’s a low risk activity, if the movie is bad, what if, you just lost an hour and a few bucks.)[/li][li]but if one is part of the mass of people that can’t really afford all that, who have to lie to themselves constantly that their life is bearable an theat they feel ok, then one NEEDS to escape, one needs their dose of numbing activities among which playing games and watching TV are chief, so that one doesn’t think too much about their current situation and how bad it really is, because they really don’t feel they have the power to change anything, so then why suffer staring the reality in the face? [/li][/ul]

And therein lies the problem.
People feel threatened by the very idea that a game they are waiting for and that sounds like will cater to their personal preferences in escapism, will be a bug-ridden, half-done piece of over-cut dope.
Because of that, they ignore the unpleasant facts and continue to hope for the sake of hoping that things “really aren’t that bad”, until they come to believe it.

Sometimes the illusion persists even after the game is launched - these are the fan-boys that defend the game no mater what because they lie to themselves to protect themselves.

And sometimes the illusion breaks down, and people are jagged and hurt and angry.

I did the same, I wanted to believe the game was awesome, I saw the passion of the developers, i saw the thought and work that had gone into this and that blinded me to the most important factor in today’s game industry: the publisher.

Bethesda destroyed this game because:

[ul]
[li]they sent out horribly broken X360 copies to reviewers that were worse than even the launched version currently running on the consoles, thus guaranteeing horrible reviews[/li][li]they rushed the release a week to not compete with a couple fo titles that cater to a completely different gaming audince - and so demonstrated lack of faith in their own game and created the false illusion that the game was “ready and done with, no more work needed” - for those that did not realise their true motives[/li][li]they did not support the game as anything more thean a throw-away cash-cow, meaning they did not give enough funds or time for testing[/li][/ul]

But never again will i buy a game before reading competent professional reviews and / or trying the game myself to my satisfaction. (well, except Guild Wars 2 which has a “It’s done when It’s done and not a second before” policy - i’m pre-ordering that the second it’s available, and will perform the lowest deeds to just get into the beta, but I have my reasons to do so, after playing for 5 years what was the best PvP experience in my life: Guild Wars 1 - i would donate the cost of GW2 to the developers, even without reveiving the game)

So if nothing else, i paid 50 Euro to be taught a lesson, one that i needed, and one that i have taken to heart.

(PS, OT: I dided a little inside when i learned bethesda had picked up Hunted, Demon’s Forge)