[QUOTE=ArchdemonXIII;385101]I’m willing to concede that the bugs played a large part in killing Brink. The unfortunate reality these days is that when a game gets released in that state, it’s the usually publisher demanding the game be out now as opposed to when it’s ready. When you look at Dev teams that release “when it’s ready” (Valve, Blizzard, regardless of whether you actually like their products) it’s because they self-publish.
Unless you can point me to specific link that says that they tried to make it more accessible because “the game is too involved for the average joe who just wants to shoot his mates’ face in”, I’m going to go with the more likely possibility that they made it more accessible either because without an established brand, you need to appeal to the average player, or even more likely, that an “accessible, team-based shooter” is what Bethesda paid SD to make. W:ET and ETQW were MP games based on existing IPs with a hardcore fanbase built in. It made sense to target them. Bethesda’s recent track record on the other hand, is anything but hardcore-focused.
… snip…[/QUOTE]
I’ve noticed that Bethesda games all seem to “come out rough” and then get patches to bring them in line. Brink, Rage and Skyrim have all been released in a state that require very quick patching.
Brink had a whole host of bugs and lag issues, Rage had all sorts of texture issues (and something else on console that I wasn’t paying attention to) and now I read there are issues with Skyrim’s textures if you install the game on Xbox (low tex not loading their high tex versions? and some crashes during load) and Skyrim on PC has generated a bunch of complaints and patch requests.
I stopped buying Bethesda games after Brink. I felt a bit used by their marketing, releasing, packaging of preorder dlcs and generally bad customer connection. (What? I pay for 4 costumes and get 3 extra because I got one in a pre-order and Joe Blogs who didn’t preorder pays the same but gets 4 extra? Yeah, that’ll keep faithful customers happy and convince them that you’re not trying to have unconsensual relations with their wallet.)
I also agree with you on Bethesda probably pushing to make the game more accessible, but (at least on PC) they could have addressed the issue with customizable options. The big complaint about the interface is the “one button does everything” issue. They could easily (if coded with this in mind) have a checkbox for “one button action interface” and “individual buttons” which could be configured so that buffing actions no longer open the CP because you happened to accidentally be aiming the wrong way as someone ran past (as an example).
Console development will not go away and it shouldn’t go away. They are a good market to tap into with a massive audience and a massive profit base. That doesn’t excuse a company from neglecting one of the platforms however. The argument would still be the same if the game didn’t work as expected on a PS3 but worked fine on everything else.
I still say that it should have been tailored to the individual platforms better, but then this point probably boils down to Bethesda again since it takes time and money and by the look of things Beth is trying to get into our wallets as quickly as possible.
Sorry SD but if you’re sticking to Bethesda then you’re saying goodbye to me as a customer (just like id, and I used to be a diehard id fan). It may seem stupid but until I think Bethesda’s business practices are more customer friendly I’m not supporting them. I have plenty of other things to play and plenty of other publishers who are willing to be more careful about their releases and how they treat their customers.
EDIT coughhorse armourcough
(I couldn’t resist adding that)
