Incomplete Games and a Loss of Faith and Trust

Okay, so in another thread (Titanfall 6 Update), some forum-goers expressed their disinterest in Titanfall despite all of the updates that have come and are coming, which include bug fixes, new game modes, mechanics, etc. simply because they were upset about
how little they received when the game first came out.

This premise made me realize that there's a sort of theme with this notion or line of thinking. It also kind of mirrors how some people feel that they've been burned by the Xbox One console itself - with how much wasn't available at the start, despite how
many improvements we've had since, numerous people have turned away from the Xbox One. Other examples also include the poor reception Battlefield 4 received from consumers because of how it was obviously released incomplete and despite numerous updates, people
still refuse to play it. Yet another example is Killer Instinct - despite being a free release and getting a few updates since its own launch, many people don't feel as if it's a full game unless you buy all of its "parts" or throw a chunk of money at it to
get the full thing and so avoid purchasing it.

With these games and the Xbox One console in mind, how do you feel about this? Do you think many of these games were released incomplete or should have had much of its updates or DLC available at launch (which could, of course, potentially hold the release
of the game back)? Do you think waiting to improve these games for the better could have hurt or improved sales? Do you feel burned by this or do you enjoy the fact that despite the games' rough start that they are indeed improving for the better? With the
release of other consoles and the Xbox One and the timeframe available to the developers, do you think that holding back a game's release to add such improvements would have even been feasible?

IMO, although I think it's not necessarily a good thing to release a bare-bones type of game, I tend to judge it on a case-by-case basis (e.g. Titanfall was fine, but Battlefield 4 was not - the former was playable and the latter was a completely broken
mess). In almost all of the examples, I have given above, I've weathered the storm and have been enjoying the games despite their numerous issues or lack of "game" because they've been improving regularly and have become even more fun as a result.

Personally, although I understand being upset about what many feel to be an incomplete game or console, I don't see any reason to remain upset about it after numerous updates and fixes are applied (no offense to those who may feel that way). Many people
have even gone as far as declaring that they won't get a certain game because of how poorly they think it was handled to begin with, despite the many improvements since. IMO, those people are truly missing out.

In any case, that's my take. Now I'd like to know your responses to my opinion, this discussion, and more.

*As always with my discussions, please keep it respectful of others and their opinions, as well as on topic.

:)

 

Is Magic The Gathering 2015 Out Today? And How Do I Check?

I have no faith. Trust no one but yourself, and even be weary of that ;-p

 

Why I am losing faith in MS and have none for the Xbox One

I have no faith or trust for either of them

 

Another example I just thought of that kind of goes in the opposite direction, is Minecraft. It's a game that's being held back on next-gen consoles because the developers want to ensure that all of the features are there to make their consumers happy. Meanwhile,
many of those consumers are clamoring for them to go ahead and release the game anyways (after all, Minecraft on the Xbox 360 released with nowhere near the amount of features the PC version had and people still ate it up). I just wanted to add this into the
discussion to show how there might even be some hypocrisy going around. Just some food for thought...

 

I absolutely think is is ridiculous that games are released unfinished, released with the thought "Release it Playable" and "We will fix it in the go".

Battlefield 4 was absolutely unacceptable (as a fan of the series), I will now not give their next game my sale. We as consumers need to realize that some of these Publishers push some games to make unreasonable deadlines.

I use the analogy "You would never let a uncleared plane take off, and say fix it mid-flight". To extreme? Fine... "You would never serve meat under prepared".

Titanfall's evolution is not in the same boat in my opinion. The game has evolved, not been "fixed". Like Battlefield 4

 

Also, another thought. Despite how "good" Battlefield 4 is (I enjoyed it despite it being nearly unplayable and then traded it in) and it being playable now. People are still playing it lets EA know that they can continue to do this.

 

The one that annoyed me most was watchdogs it looked nothing like it said would and as for the dlc you buy season pass to ge a outfit and a mini game to wait 3 months for more outfits and another find things misson

 

^^To be fair to WD's the original E3 trailer back in 2012 was running on a high end PC. Next gen wasnt even announced yet. And then even at Sony's reveal I highly doubt Ubisoft had a dev kit. The doqngrade was definitely noticeable but if you thought the
game would look like it originally did you are naive.

 

I had only heard of watchdogs when i preordered my x1 (which i cancelled when it was delayed wish i hadnt like if had known how good forza was) the game looked better before they delayed it and as for the dlc we are still waitng for something they advertised
before it released

 

I agree NxtDoc there is a huge difference between "fix as we go" and just mixing it up and adding new stuff. BF4 is an excellent example of a game that shipped clearly unfinished but they kicked it out the door anyways. Any game might need patches here and
there but BF4 needed an overhaul.

In the case of Titanfall I found it to be a pretty polished and fun game on release. The Devs are keeping up and tweaking issues but they are also trying to keep the game fun by adding new gamemodes. I like this mentality. I think TF was great on release
and continues to be great even this far after launch.

 

Thank you Bowski and I agree as well regarding Titanfall being polished and fun at release. Titanfall is evolving and continuing to innovate

 

It's a first impressions thing. First impressions are VERY hard to change. If a game releases and is buggy or otherwise frowned upon by the masses, then 2 months later when that game is fixed and is now a shining star, it is still going to have a bad reputation
and lots of people will avoid it.

Think about the top game franchises today that can't seem to lose. GTA, Halo, Call of Duty, Mario, Final Fantasy, Assassins Creed, Gran Turismo, Zelda, Metal Gear, and many more. They all have one thing in common, which is a relatively flawless release/experience.

EA seems to be an exception to the rule. I don't know if they're trying to do too much and simply not able to keep up, or what, but it they're building a bad reputation for themselves as a whole. However, they continue to thrive because they have an abundance
of big game names under their umbrella. (The sims, pretty much anything sports related, Battlefield, etc.) One shining example of where they're failing is Fight Night Champion. There is a bug crippling pretty much a whole game mode and making 2 achievements
unobtainable. That game has been out well long enough now for any major bugs like this to be resolved, and I have a feeling this one may never get fixed. If only they would see that if they spend the time/money to keep their reputation in check, they would
make a boatload more than they do today.

 

I think Skrid makes an excellent point regarding the importance of 1st impressions. In particular, I'm also glad he brought up EA. I wonder if, as a publisher, EA is simply more slack on game release requirements when compared to other publishers.

 

Yeah, first impressions is a huge factor. Then why in the world did anyone keep Battlefield 4? Because "potential" is seen in EA's products. Which they ultimately under achieve.

 

Yeah, first impressions is a huge factor. Then why in the world did anyone keep Battlefield 4? Because "potential" is seen in EA's products. Which they ultimately under achieve.

Depends on what you consider the first impression... Battlefield "4" is not the first game, technically and therefore would have people who liked previous versions confidence as
a swaying factor.

Don't mistake that statement as a defense of EA in any form... they haven't had my support in a very long time for reasons beyond the scope of this discussion. I've even put Mass
Effect 4, a series I absolutely loved, on the back burner until I see how it's received... and for no other reason than it belongs to EA.