- 9,232
- Solid Gone
- MeanElf
Well, hopefully Sony will not be doing that with DC - it is Sony's call after all. I think I'll tweet them and XDevs to see if I can get some confirmation (assuming that they are the ones caretaking now.)Knowing history, Evolution Studios shut down MotorStorm: Pacific Rift's servers leaving all the online exclusive cars locked unless you've ticked all the requirements. Absolutely no patches were made to 'unlock' the online cars.
The case is more severe in MotorStorm: Apocalypse. If you have no internet connection, you're left with one vehicle per class since all the other vehicles are only unlockable via online multiplayer. Couldn't recall if the servers were still up by now.
Thanks for the info by the way.
Agreed, the tools for use with coding are far better, also the coding skills of those developers working with the game engine they create/use/adapt for the game too. I still feel that game design and aims have grown more complex though. Take DC as an example. There is the base game and the career races. Add then the fully dynamic weather and time change to this for the arcade and online options. Interwoven throughout all that is the live-updating that the game does, matching your scores with the thousands of other players live, all so you can get a challenge whilst running arcade laps or races. Then there is the online itself, the challenges too and of course a truly stupendous and comprehensive photo mode that remembers where and when all non-dynamic aspects of the background game have occurred; then there are the complex, dynamic aspects running alongside it all which ensure that any one arcade event will not be the same as the last, even with the same settings. True, not all games run to that level - however, a lot of them do.I don't think game design has really become harder, at least not relatively. The tools are no doubt a lot better than what they had to work with in the 80's and 90's, the industry collectively has a lot more experience, and they are no longer as limited by the hardware as they used to be. The expected quantity of content, and the quality of said content, has certainly gone up, which in turn requires more time. But the actual process of making this content isn't harder due to better tools and industry experience.
True, I've butted up against things like that. I don't let it get to me though. If I like the game and it doesn't break it so that I cannot progress, then I'll see what thet developer brings out next. If they continue to do that, then I'll likely not bother getting future games....but you can't tell me that you've never played something where you've encountered a bug that is so obvious that it makes you think how it is possible that no one noticed it during playtesting?
I think though that you answered this yourself.
...Some bugs are only produced under very specific circumstances, making it entirely possible that they elude the play testers. I'm more talking about obvious ones, or releasing a game before all the content is ready.
Problem now though is that a game (like a film) has to succeed within the first week or the 'reviews' by gamers will cast doubts on the game's worth in the minds of those who haven't bought yet and pay attention to those kind of reviews....The consumer base has grown too, which should mean that the added time and cost required in producing a game should be offset.
As with DC again we unfortunately know that's not how it works. Beta testing was done on DC (though not public) and apparently it is difficult to simulate for the kind of numbers that a game at launch can attract. Sony or Evolution made a mistake in that respect and paid the price. I'm sure that DC's example has led many developers to try for actual, closed and open beta phases. I see what you mean, but I still don't think it is that simple overall....If you're making a game that is centered around its online component, then you have one or more betas to test the net code before release. That is common sense.