How the Internet is ruining gaming
So this going to be my first "rant"/not top 10 style post for this blog....because I think it finally needs to be said. The internet is fucking ruining gaming.
Now I know that sounds weird, we do a lot of our gaming on the internet....and thanks to the internet we get cool shit like DLC and patches for bugs and the what not. And I admit, it all sounds great in practice......but the problem is the system is being abused and as a result gaming is paying for it.
The most noticeable effect of this abuse of the internet is the number of, quite frankly unfinished games being released. Now look I realize game designing is very hard, and the designers are human and mistakes will be made. But they should be kept to a minimum.......however since the internet that seems to no longer be the case. You name a major series, I can name a game that was so badly bugged and flawed it was seen as possibly "destroying" the series reputation
For example, You say: Halo. I say Halo Master Chief Collection, whos online features were basically non functional at launch...and Im pretty sure is still kinda buggy.
You say Battlefield, I say Battlefield 4...so buggy the developer announced they had to put everything project on hold to try to fix that game.....which still took over a year
Or Batman Arkham series. Arkham Knight. Which happened to be pulled from the PC and all money refunded. Incidentally Arkham Origins also could work here as they had problems across all systems.....and basically announced they were giving up try to fix any that were left after 5 months.
Or Assassins Creed: Unity, which was basically the same problem as Arkham Knight.....but across all systems. (and also led to refunds)
Final Fantasy 14...the first time around. Basically they pulled the game, and eventually released a working version....3 years later.
And I could keep going, just as a short list of the some of the remaining titles famous for how broken they are (or were): Dead Island, Total War Rome 2, GTA online, Test Drive Unlimited 2, The War Z, Fallout: New Vegas, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, Drive Club, Destiny, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes and Sim City
Now if we add in games with day very large day one patches (so games that got through production before someone realized they were massively broken....but managed to fix some of it before consumers got to play them, we can add:
Halo 5, Assassins Creed Syndicate (which actually had 2 patches on day one)Fallout 4, Call of Duty Black Ops III, Medal Of honor: Warfighter, Skyrim, Just Cause 3, Evolve, Star Wars Battlefront, GTA V and Battlefield 3
Now I'm not counting minor stuff here like a patch to fix a small single issue (IE cant save in a given location so a patch fixed just that issue). Im only dealing with games that had so many bugs they were basically unplayable out of the box. (or at least certain modes were unplayable)
Now look I'm sure I can find some examples of this in the pre-internet era of games that were unplayable on launch day......but those were few and far between.....and usually bankrupted the company that made them. Also who can name the last game they bought that didnt have a patch? (not counting Nintendo titles, cause basically until current gen they couldnt patch shit....and actually to be fair to them, they still usually dont need to, cause they make quality games, no matter what you think of their consoles)
Thats no longer the case, as you may have noticed. Almost all the games I mentioned have sequels...and several of them were made by the same company (mostly looking at you EA and Bethesda).
Which brings us back to the problem....these games are clearly being released prior to anyone actually play testing them.........because who gives a shit if the game is slightly to mostly broken.....odds are pretty good the game can be patched up later online.....so lets get it out the door as is, so we can move on to the next money making project.
Basically, because everything is connected to the internet...and therefore can be fixed later, why bother testing quality? When instead the publishers can try to make the game work AFTER getting peoples money?
Which actually brings us to our next problem....DLC.....or more specifically Season Passes.
So again, in theory, DLC is AWESOME....and when used correctly can massively enhance and extend the life of a game...for example, Mass Effect 3's Citadel DLC.....which fans of the series consider one of the best DLC's ever, was released a year after the game came out. Meaning fans had to play the game again....but with new cool stuff in it. This is an incentive to the fans to keep playing the games they like/a reward for buying the game and sticking with it.
Problem is, a lot of DLC is no longer like that. A couple years ago, people got really upset over the idea of "Day 1 DLC'.....this is downloadable content that is made available (for extra cost) on the day the game is launched.
Now again to be fair, this is somewhat understandable if the DLC is basically reskins and a few visual tweaks.....that stuff likely can be churned out quickly and isnt really going to change the game. But again, lots of day one DLC is stuff like Mass Effect 3's "From the Ashes".....which adds extra characters, missions or fleshes out plot's/add's subplots to the game.
Which of course led to questions of why werent the very large DLC's just put on the game.....you know by having the release date pushed back the extra month of two it made to make the DLC? (and we wont even get into the launch day DLC that winds up being coded on the disk.....)
Now that question was never really answered.....people just started to accept it as a way of life.
Which eventually led to the concept of the "Season Pass"
For those unfamiliar with the idea(by which I mean Nintendo fans :P ), a Season Pass is basically a voucher that can be bought before the game launches (or later) entitling you to all the upcoming DLC that gets released over a set period (usually games launch date +3 to 6 months)...and they may or may not tell you what that DLC is ahead of time, but the first one is almost always available in week or so from launch
In otherwords you are now not only buying day one DLC.....they are telling you before BEFORE hand they are doing it......which implies they arnt working on fixing the game anymore (And see problem 1 for the number of games that make it through to the consumer and are fucking broken)
And the problem is becoming that more and more of the season pass content appears to be content that was intentionally held back from the original game....so that it could be sold separately.
Take the new Starwars Battlefront. if you buy the basic game you get to play a number of multiplayer modes with 1 of 2 factions on 1 of 4 planets and limited only to infantry fights
Compare that to its predecessor Star War's Battlefront 2 (dont ask about the numbering). It let you play a number of single OR multiplayer modes as 1 of 4 factions on over a dozen planets with a dozen more maps for space combat.
So why is it that the predecessor from a decade ago kicks the shit out of the features of this current gen game? The Season Pass thats why.
See the Battlefront Season Pass costs as much as the base game (actually probably more than the base game given that the base game is already on sale for as much as 30% off in a lot of places). And what does it include? Well EA finally released some of the details this morning (December 15th) and well the DLC for the season pass is going to included 2 additional play modes (not specified if one of those will be single player) and 16 additional maps (so 4 times what the game actually launched with.).....much of which it is implied will focus on new locations from the new movie.
Now of course it makes sense the new game would tie in with the new movie.....Battlefront II was sold with the same idea...it of course tying into the prequels (unlike its predecessor the original battlefront which only focused on the original trilogy). And it makes sense that no one wants to spoil the movie by having all the new stuff be released in a game ahead of time.
Which is why in the pre/early internet gaming era, Battlefront II was released 6 months AFTER episode 3. But now that everyone uses the internet to game and we can send much more information over it at reasonable speeds then we could 10 years ago...well fuck it, why not release the game before the movie.........and then charge people AGAIN for the movie content, which appears to make up most of the games content? (for a total of $110 (game+DLC) btw). And note again I said all the news about the contents of the Season Pass came out today......which is likely several months to late for the people who pre-ordered the game.....and likely reasonably expected more than 20% of the maps to be included, and who now basically have to pay for the game again (via cost of season pass) to get the product they thought they bought the first time.
Because hey.....thanks to the internet, just because the games released doesnt mean we actually finished making it (even if it works perfectly)....or that we should sell it all to you at the same time.
And Battlefront is not the only one whose doing this (evolve, Destiny ect)
By the way, all 3 of those games are basically pure multiplayer, which brings us to our 3rd and final way (for now) that the internet is destroying gaming
EVERYTHING is multiplayer. Now again, like the other 2, I have no issue with Multiplayer games or having an multiplayer mode.....if its done right.
The problem comes from the assumption/expectation that everyone is going to play multiplayer because the internet allows them too....and as a result Multiplayer is bleeding over to single player.
For example, going back to Mass Effect 3, until a patch (the extended cut) fixed the problem, it was impossible to get the best ending without boosting your galactic readiness (read Score) in multiplayer.....even if you had absolutely no interest or intention of ever playing multiplayer.
As a more recent example WWE 2k16 has several of the championship belts for single player mode locked until you reach a specific rank,,,,,,in the online multiplayer. Which means if you dont play multiplayer you cant fully enjoy the single player....because hey, why not penalize people for not playing the game the way the developers want it to be played?
Actually thats a little unfair, cause they is another way to unlock those championships.....via paid DLC......because hey why just settle for punishing you when theirs a profit to be made.
And again neither of those two games are isolated examples....theres probably at least 100 other major games from the last few years I could have cited
And none of this even touches on the fact that online multiplayer gaming is still fairly unstable. Several of the games I mentioned in the first part actually functioned fine....until you tired to go online with them and which point Online Multiplayer mode was buggy as fuck......assuming the servers didnt just crash on day one (Diablo 3, World of Warcraft ect).
Now again, I'm not against online only/focused games. MMORPG's and Online shooters have their place and if thats your thing, awesome go for it. The part I'm complaining about other games doing that for no reason. For example if I want to run around a map and shoot my friends....I'm going to go play Call of Duty for that.....I'm not going play Uncharted 4 to do that (I might play uncharted 4 for other reasons, but not for its scaled down attempt to be call of duty in multiplayer)....and I am especially complaining when I get forced to play Uncharted 4 as a Call of Duty want-to-be so I can fully enjoy the features I actually BOUGHT the game for (IE single player) *disclaimer in fairness to Uncharted 4 I have no idea if the multiplayer is going to overlap with the single player, its just an example).
So yea there you have it....all the reasons modern gaming actually kind of sucks/is a massive pain in the ass.....even if the games look great.
Now I know that sounds weird, we do a lot of our gaming on the internet....and thanks to the internet we get cool shit like DLC and patches for bugs and the what not. And I admit, it all sounds great in practice......but the problem is the system is being abused and as a result gaming is paying for it.
The most noticeable effect of this abuse of the internet is the number of, quite frankly unfinished games being released. Now look I realize game designing is very hard, and the designers are human and mistakes will be made. But they should be kept to a minimum.......however since the internet that seems to no longer be the case. You name a major series, I can name a game that was so badly bugged and flawed it was seen as possibly "destroying" the series reputation
For example, You say: Halo. I say Halo Master Chief Collection, whos online features were basically non functional at launch...and Im pretty sure is still kinda buggy.
You say Battlefield, I say Battlefield 4...so buggy the developer announced they had to put everything project on hold to try to fix that game.....which still took over a year
Or Batman Arkham series. Arkham Knight. Which happened to be pulled from the PC and all money refunded. Incidentally Arkham Origins also could work here as they had problems across all systems.....and basically announced they were giving up try to fix any that were left after 5 months.
Or Assassins Creed: Unity, which was basically the same problem as Arkham Knight.....but across all systems. (and also led to refunds)
Final Fantasy 14...the first time around. Basically they pulled the game, and eventually released a working version....3 years later.
And I could keep going, just as a short list of the some of the remaining titles famous for how broken they are (or were): Dead Island, Total War Rome 2, GTA online, Test Drive Unlimited 2, The War Z, Fallout: New Vegas, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, Drive Club, Destiny, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes and Sim City
Now if we add in games with day very large day one patches (so games that got through production before someone realized they were massively broken....but managed to fix some of it before consumers got to play them, we can add:
Halo 5, Assassins Creed Syndicate (which actually had 2 patches on day one)Fallout 4, Call of Duty Black Ops III, Medal Of honor: Warfighter, Skyrim, Just Cause 3, Evolve, Star Wars Battlefront, GTA V and Battlefield 3
Now I'm not counting minor stuff here like a patch to fix a small single issue (IE cant save in a given location so a patch fixed just that issue). Im only dealing with games that had so many bugs they were basically unplayable out of the box. (or at least certain modes were unplayable)
Now look I'm sure I can find some examples of this in the pre-internet era of games that were unplayable on launch day......but those were few and far between.....and usually bankrupted the company that made them. Also who can name the last game they bought that didnt have a patch? (not counting Nintendo titles, cause basically until current gen they couldnt patch shit....and actually to be fair to them, they still usually dont need to, cause they make quality games, no matter what you think of their consoles)
Thats no longer the case, as you may have noticed. Almost all the games I mentioned have sequels...and several of them were made by the same company (mostly looking at you EA and Bethesda).
Which brings us back to the problem....these games are clearly being released prior to anyone actually play testing them.........because who gives a shit if the game is slightly to mostly broken.....odds are pretty good the game can be patched up later online.....so lets get it out the door as is, so we can move on to the next money making project.
Basically, because everything is connected to the internet...and therefore can be fixed later, why bother testing quality? When instead the publishers can try to make the game work AFTER getting peoples money?
Which actually brings us to our next problem....DLC.....or more specifically Season Passes.
So again, in theory, DLC is AWESOME....and when used correctly can massively enhance and extend the life of a game...for example, Mass Effect 3's Citadel DLC.....which fans of the series consider one of the best DLC's ever, was released a year after the game came out. Meaning fans had to play the game again....but with new cool stuff in it. This is an incentive to the fans to keep playing the games they like/a reward for buying the game and sticking with it.
Problem is, a lot of DLC is no longer like that. A couple years ago, people got really upset over the idea of "Day 1 DLC'.....this is downloadable content that is made available (for extra cost) on the day the game is launched.
Now again to be fair, this is somewhat understandable if the DLC is basically reskins and a few visual tweaks.....that stuff likely can be churned out quickly and isnt really going to change the game. But again, lots of day one DLC is stuff like Mass Effect 3's "From the Ashes".....which adds extra characters, missions or fleshes out plot's/add's subplots to the game.
Which of course led to questions of why werent the very large DLC's just put on the game.....you know by having the release date pushed back the extra month of two it made to make the DLC? (and we wont even get into the launch day DLC that winds up being coded on the disk.....)
Now that question was never really answered.....people just started to accept it as a way of life.
Which eventually led to the concept of the "Season Pass"
For those unfamiliar with the idea(by which I mean Nintendo fans :P ), a Season Pass is basically a voucher that can be bought before the game launches (or later) entitling you to all the upcoming DLC that gets released over a set period (usually games launch date +3 to 6 months)...and they may or may not tell you what that DLC is ahead of time, but the first one is almost always available in week or so from launch
In otherwords you are now not only buying day one DLC.....they are telling you before BEFORE hand they are doing it......which implies they arnt working on fixing the game anymore (And see problem 1 for the number of games that make it through to the consumer and are fucking broken)
And the problem is becoming that more and more of the season pass content appears to be content that was intentionally held back from the original game....so that it could be sold separately.
Take the new Starwars Battlefront. if you buy the basic game you get to play a number of multiplayer modes with 1 of 2 factions on 1 of 4 planets and limited only to infantry fights
Compare that to its predecessor Star War's Battlefront 2 (dont ask about the numbering). It let you play a number of single OR multiplayer modes as 1 of 4 factions on over a dozen planets with a dozen more maps for space combat.
So why is it that the predecessor from a decade ago kicks the shit out of the features of this current gen game? The Season Pass thats why.
See the Battlefront Season Pass costs as much as the base game (actually probably more than the base game given that the base game is already on sale for as much as 30% off in a lot of places). And what does it include? Well EA finally released some of the details this morning (December 15th) and well the DLC for the season pass is going to included 2 additional play modes (not specified if one of those will be single player) and 16 additional maps (so 4 times what the game actually launched with.).....much of which it is implied will focus on new locations from the new movie.
Now of course it makes sense the new game would tie in with the new movie.....Battlefront II was sold with the same idea...it of course tying into the prequels (unlike its predecessor the original battlefront which only focused on the original trilogy). And it makes sense that no one wants to spoil the movie by having all the new stuff be released in a game ahead of time.
Which is why in the pre/early internet gaming era, Battlefront II was released 6 months AFTER episode 3. But now that everyone uses the internet to game and we can send much more information over it at reasonable speeds then we could 10 years ago...well fuck it, why not release the game before the movie.........and then charge people AGAIN for the movie content, which appears to make up most of the games content? (for a total of $110 (game+DLC) btw). And note again I said all the news about the contents of the Season Pass came out today......which is likely several months to late for the people who pre-ordered the game.....and likely reasonably expected more than 20% of the maps to be included, and who now basically have to pay for the game again (via cost of season pass) to get the product they thought they bought the first time.
Because hey.....thanks to the internet, just because the games released doesnt mean we actually finished making it (even if it works perfectly)....or that we should sell it all to you at the same time.
And Battlefront is not the only one whose doing this (evolve, Destiny ect)
By the way, all 3 of those games are basically pure multiplayer, which brings us to our 3rd and final way (for now) that the internet is destroying gaming
EVERYTHING is multiplayer. Now again, like the other 2, I have no issue with Multiplayer games or having an multiplayer mode.....if its done right.
The problem comes from the assumption/expectation that everyone is going to play multiplayer because the internet allows them too....and as a result Multiplayer is bleeding over to single player.
For example, going back to Mass Effect 3, until a patch (the extended cut) fixed the problem, it was impossible to get the best ending without boosting your galactic readiness (read Score) in multiplayer.....even if you had absolutely no interest or intention of ever playing multiplayer.
As a more recent example WWE 2k16 has several of the championship belts for single player mode locked until you reach a specific rank,,,,,,in the online multiplayer. Which means if you dont play multiplayer you cant fully enjoy the single player....because hey, why not penalize people for not playing the game the way the developers want it to be played?
Actually thats a little unfair, cause they is another way to unlock those championships.....via paid DLC......because hey why just settle for punishing you when theirs a profit to be made.
And again neither of those two games are isolated examples....theres probably at least 100 other major games from the last few years I could have cited
And none of this even touches on the fact that online multiplayer gaming is still fairly unstable. Several of the games I mentioned in the first part actually functioned fine....until you tired to go online with them and which point Online Multiplayer mode was buggy as fuck......assuming the servers didnt just crash on day one (Diablo 3, World of Warcraft ect).
Now again, I'm not against online only/focused games. MMORPG's and Online shooters have their place and if thats your thing, awesome go for it. The part I'm complaining about other games doing that for no reason. For example if I want to run around a map and shoot my friends....I'm going to go play Call of Duty for that.....I'm not going play Uncharted 4 to do that (I might play uncharted 4 for other reasons, but not for its scaled down attempt to be call of duty in multiplayer)....and I am especially complaining when I get forced to play Uncharted 4 as a Call of Duty want-to-be so I can fully enjoy the features I actually BOUGHT the game for (IE single player) *disclaimer in fairness to Uncharted 4 I have no idea if the multiplayer is going to overlap with the single player, its just an example).
So yea there you have it....all the reasons modern gaming actually kind of sucks/is a massive pain in the ass.....even if the games look great.
Comments
Post a Comment