Even if dev did do some of the work…Its not that hard to implement the DLC like if a modder can add stuff so can Dev. It like adding new entry to a data table. And that it. I have made my own foundation and walls before. It isnt really that difficult.
I’d be peeved the mechanic went on holiday, not that the new guy who isn’t able to or allowed to work on engines decided to work on the cosmetics of my car. But then again, I am a logical, reasonable person that can distinguish the differences between multiple job descriptions.
The point is that the people who make the DLC packs are not the same people who handle bug-fixing. Bug-fixing is, typically, a much higher-level position requiring much more experience. Bug-fixing required you to not only know coding (which DLC packs do not) but also how to code properly, identify conflicting code and rewrite it. Even for non-code issues you still have to be able to identify a problem and fix it. DLC makers can be artists with no more programming skill than I have as a basic modder.
Can we please dispense with the age-old “hurr durr those who complain are idiots who don’t understand cosmetics vs bug fixes”. Some probably don’t, it’s true, but others do.
Of course it doesn’t help when Funcom stokes those fires…
I agree with your statement somehow but I would like to point out some finer details.
As you mention pretty old games I assume you are somewhat of a veteran player like me (not saying you are old )
Back then it was also common to receive patches with games-magazines on a floppy-disk, yes you young ones, there was a time before the internet
I do agree however that the overall quality of the released games was way higher than today simply because the companies could not afford to ship a broken game.
There is a backside to it:
Today’s games are way more demanding, not only for computers but devs, and rich on features with nice graphics and all, I am sure you get what I want to say.
Yes it is annoying having to download a Megapatch on Day-1 but there is a counter to that, do not pre-order or buy it on day one if this is an issue for you.
I like bugfixes when they actually fix bugs and yes I would prefer the product to be finished once they release it.
You do understand the concept of EA right?
It is exactly the point that player beta-test the games and give inputs along the way to improve the game prior release and for that we start with a lower pricetag, at least that is the initial idea.
I do not like the generalisation of dev’s ALWAYS are slow with fixes, take Ark for instance.
The patches and content came regularly, until they started to release the title in console EA as well (not saying they should not have), but it really slowed down the patches for PC.
So EA is a concept I like as long as it is worked as intended, and I had my share of bad examples as well CE not counting as one of them.
HOWEVER once you release 1.0 I expect feature-complete in terms of what was promised in EA, I do expect bug-free to a degree we can expect it with any software.
Recent negative example is Stonehearth, a game I backed long time ago with great community interaction of the dev’s (the team is so small they do not even have dedicated community managers) but suddenly the pumped out features, put the 1.0 on it, scraped features and say they fix it till end of the year then it is up to the modders.
At least this seems not to happen here.
Again pointing to ARK releasing DLC WHILE still in EA, great role-model for other devs.
My personal stance is: DLC after release are fine as long as they work (unfortunately they do not right now so you buy additional bugs )
In case of CE I would still be fine as long as there would be a road-map of how they deal with the complaints we all have.
Sure they made a list of issues but you never get a feel of when there will be something.
Sure @Tascha and the others mention it is fixed internally and comes ASAP, but asap is such a subjective term you never know when approx.
Would they inform better, for me the DLC, eventhough I like them, would be less of a trigger.
No I did not like to read in the first announcement after their long break (they did deserve) that first “patch” will be in order to release another DLC, no matter if put in the cert or whatever prior their break.
You are absolutely correct, when a game is released from Early Access, it should be complete. I also believe that console releases should be complete and not EA, but other people may disagree with that because they want the opportunity to play right away.
Very true and I myself advise against pre-ordering or EA purchases. I also think a day 1 patch shouldn’t exist, it should be applied before release. I do fully understand how EA works and I am not a fan. I have only purchased 4 games in EA because of the price and promise of a great game, and 2x I was burned by it being abandoned.
Ark is the perfect example of how it should work, with the exception you mentioned, slowing down work due to wanting a console release. But, they have continually worked on patches and development for both.
I purchased CE after release and have not encountered many bugs and therefore will not be harsh on Funcom at this time. However, I do realize that my solo play on my own pc may effect if I do encounter more.
For those who are encountering a lot of problems, I believe you are right to criticize Funcom. They should be working hard to fix problems. Despite it is different devs working on cosmetics or DLC from those who are working on patches, it still feels like a cash grab to release the DLC so soon after official release without fixing the bugs or polish on the game.
Thx. I would have no problem with this idea IF Funcom had been honest and transparent with the “special conditions” of CE sales. After all, each player is responsible for their own money and this is none of my business.
Now if a seller sells something incomplete and defective for the full price and still puts misleading information on the label, I am sure many consumers will not be satisfied - fairly and consistently - with their acquisition. I am in this group.
This is a lesson for any game developer who wants to “play fair” with consumers. I do not deny that I had a sincere interest in knowing CE (after all, I bought the game), but I did not volunteer to receive a complete and stable game “one day” in the future even because this “agreement” has no guarantees or deadlines to be fulfilled.
In my position, as much as I want to play a new game, I demand that it meet the requirements of an “acceptable” game on its official release date.
Those that do understand the difference shouldn’t be complaining about the DLC/cosmetic teams. Those that don’t understand should make an attempt to learn.
As an added note to those saying ‘oh, the game is incomplete’: in 19 years of playing MMOs I have never seen a bug-free release. Guild Wars 2 is the closest I have ever seen to a perfect MMO and even they have bugs. While I do not contest that CE has it’s share of issues, it would be wise to lose this expectation of perfection on release or you will be sorely disappointed.
If you are that concerned about games being unfinished when you buy them then simply wait for reviews post-launch and decide. Read the forums for your potential purchase. Talk to friends who bought it. You can’t justifiably complain about a bad game on release if you failed to research your purchase ahead of time. Constructive criticism, on the other hand, is a completely different story.
AMD equivalent cards run terrible. So he might be using a AMD card.
Sure we should. First off, if you believe that launching DLC doesn’t take anything away from the focus on fixing bugs, you’re naive. Sure, artists and coders are different teams, but QA (such as it is) is clearly a limited resource within Funcom. So is management time and focus. Secondly, launching DLC when your game is so essentially broken as it currently is, is just a big “f… you” to your customers. It’s basically saying “well the product you bought isn’t working, but we don’t care - give us more money if you want any hope of them ever being fixed”. And if you want it from the horse’s mouth as it were, go check what Funcom wrote would be the focus of their first weeks after the vacation period. Hint: it rhymes with “Bee Well Sea”.
CE is far, FAR from perfect but no-one is calling for it to be perfect. The issues it has are near game-breaking (the Thrall/Purge issues especially, closely followed by structures and containers randomly disappearing), and your condescending strawman-style post does not stop that being true.
I was there from day one of EA, and I had Funcom’s back all the way through (go check the old reddit boards if you don’t believe me). I had their backs up to the point where they announced half the features would be cut - that’s when I gave up and left in disgust.
Recently I gave the game another try, wanting to see if full-release plus a bit of time had made a difference, but I find that nothing has really changed: bugs are still rife, patches are still launched without any kind of serious testing (I don’t propose to know Funcom’s internal processes but I can see the results), issues pointed out in testlive are ignored and go on to live, and certain people will still jump on you if you dare mention there’s bugs.
To those who say that developing a DLC does not take away resources: Funcom doesn’t even have enough people to add a new loyality reward every 180 in AoC, it’s really just a single item that needs to be added every half year.
So yeah, developing more DLCs actually does take a big chunk of resources which could be used on fixing bugs.
And to those who say they need the money from DLCs to continue the developement: We in AoC pay monthly subscription for years and were promised a crafting revamp but guess what we didn’t get and got scrapped after 3 years of silence…
Seems like Funcom still hasn’t learned from their mistakes in AoC…
Once an MMORPG no longer becomes profitable, and merely financially breaks even, with a skeleton crew, which of the following is worse?:
Shut it down, like Electronic Arts did with Star Wars Galaxies, Earth & Beyond, the Sims Online. Or what NCSoft did with Auto-Assault, and Tabula Rasa, or Sony (now Daybreak) with Matrix Online or EverQuest Next. Reduce those pesky overheads. Maximize profitsss! Screw those toxic hypocritical players!
Keep it running on intensive care, convert it to free to play, with next to no updates, like Funcom does with Anarchy Online, Age of Conan, or what Sony (now daybreak) does with EverQuest 2, or NCsoft with Wildstar and more… keep hope that one can restore these games to glory once more…somehow.
Turn it into a singleplayer game with coop, and cash it out as a complete closed product, apple style: The Secret World Legends.
IMHO? They should turn AoC into a singleplayer coopable. I’d buy it again. Never liked raiding.
Monster Hunter World is making a killing right now, and it’s just that. Single Player Coop. Just like Elite: Dangerous.
They are not going to repair bugs ever, I think they are trying to milk last money from game until it will eventually be a closed project… don’t you see how time flies and there are only 2 - 3 bugs repaired out of a list of 1000? It’s normal to add one dlc after another when people are logging in game just to refresh their timers thinking that maybe one day will be playable?! Even if there would be 2 different teams for the dlc and bug fixing… altho the dlc is added to the game by devs as well (resource which obviously they are missing hard) not some sort of sorcery which makes the changes magically appear in game… even in 2 teams just simply fire another dlc after game is in this state means that they don’t care even 0,000000000001% about playerbase… even less about their product’s future… I was liking the game, I had expectations… I already lost my hope… sad.