Why do we have to suffer to poor devs?

[abdul94]

Im guessing it takes time to optimise a game (speaking with no experience here...) and the gaming industry is a business. The guys who put money down for the devs to create these games want a return, so devs have deadlines... so dont always shit on the devs...

[abdul94]

6 hours ago, Praesi said:

Yes, not every Problem can be adressed. Im ok with that. But lying in our Faces can be adressed. And CDRed lied big time. No matter how good Witcher 3 is or is not.They talked alot BS about the PC Version. And i dont believe them blind in the Fuiture. We can not trust any Dev. No matter which one.

You say it like the devs are the "bad" guys here... They work their assess off, but they have deadlines since its a business and the investors want the product out there so they can make money. 

[Praesi]

53 minutes ago, abdul94 said:

You say it like the devs are the "bad" guys here... They work their assess off, but they have deadlines since its a business and the investors want the product out there so they can make money. 

Of course they are. They lied to us about the Graphics. I dont care about Deadlines or shit like that. There is no Reason to show a Version of the Game that would never see the light of Day. They knew it, but they did it to generate a huge Hype. Ridiculous to protect that.

[Monarch]

39 minutes ago, Praesi said:

Of course they are. They lied to us about the Graphics. I dont care about Deadlines or shit like that. There is no Reason to show a Version of the Game that would never see the light of Day. They knew it, but they did it to generate a huge Hype. Ridiculous to protect that.

Game development is a complex process. Things change during the development, and yet devs are required to show how the game looks way too early in development. Some things turn out not to work good in the end, when they look at the big picture.

Another issue are consoles. They do limit PC games in term of graphics, but CDPR clearly stated they couldn't afford to make TW3 without them. 

The game is demanding on hardware as is, I can imagine what would happen if the graphics were better. People would complain the game's unoptimized. Development takes years, and it's not easy to predict how powerful the hardware will be when the game comes out, so that probably had something to do with the downgrade as well.

Take a look at this article: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-05-19-cd-projekt-red-tackles-the-witcher-3-graphics-downgrade-issue-head-on

 

TW3 is a masterpiece. It's well optimized, has tons of graphics options, has great graphics despite the downgrade, very good gameplay, great story, superb soundtrack. Definitely one of the best games I've played. CDPR and DICE are probably the developers that care about PC gaming the most. There's absolutely no reason to dislike and blame CDPR for the graphics downgrade.

[Praesi]

42 minutes ago, Monarch said:

Game development is a complex process. Things change during the development, and yet devs are required to show how the game looks way too early in development. Some things turn out not to work good in the end, when they look at the big picture.

Another issue are consoles. They do limit PC games in term of graphics, but CDPR clearly stated they couldn't afford to make TW3 without them. 

The game is demanding on hardware as is, I can imagine what would happen if the graphics were better. People would complain the game's unoptimized. Development takes years, and it's not easy to predict how powerful the hardware will be when the game comes out, so that probably had something to do with the downgrade as well.

Take a look at this article: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-05-19-cd-projekt-red-tackles-the-witcher-3-graphics-downgrade-issue-head-on

 

TW3 is a masterpiece. It's well optimized, has tons of graphics options, has great graphics despite the downgrade, very good gameplay, great story, superb soundtrack. Definitely one of the best games I've played. CDPR and DICE are probably the developers that care about PC gaming the most. There's absolutely no reason to dislike and blame CDPR for the graphics downgrade.

You didnt get the Point. It is not about how good the Game is. Its about the Fact that CDRed were lying in our Faces. They knew the PC Version would never look like the "PC Gameplay" they showed us.

It doesnt matter how the Game look now, or why its downgraded to Oblivion. Nothing of that is a Reason to lie.

All this "things change during development ect" is just Bullshit in my Eyes. Consoles are the Reason? Fine, dont show a Fake PC Version than. If they would have been honest, nobody would complain about the finished Product.

 

1. What was promised

2. What we got.

 

I will never understand how People can defent this.

 

 

[Monarch]

3 minutes ago, Praesi said:

You didnt get the Point. It is not about how good the Game is. Its about the Fact that CDRed were lying in our Faces. They knew the PC Version would never look like the "PC Gameplay" they showed us.

It doesnt matter how the Game look now, or why its downgraded to Oblivion. Nothing of that is a Reason to lie.

All this "things change during development ect" is just Bullshit in my Eyes. Consoles are the Reason? Fine, dont show a Fake PC Version than. If they would have been honest, nobody would complain about the finished Product.

 

1. What was promised

2. What we got.

 

Cant take People serious who defent this.

They all make trailers. That's a common practice. Some are made early in development and are not exactly representative of what the final product will look like. The trailer and gameplay footage we got near or at release were real and people knew what the game looked like before buying it. Sure, we would all love to have the graphics shown in the first demo, but there are good reasons why we can't have them. 

[WynLore]

10 hours ago, ivhyn said:

Video games are a big business and deadlines have to be met, with games that are as big as The Witcher 3 that hundreds of people worked on for three to four years not every problem can be adressed immediately. I'm not sure if games nowadays have more problems than they did years ago (some do), but patching is so easy and common nowadays that it makes sense to correct errors that could not be fixed before or close after release.

You'd think that after releasing TW2, they'd have ample time to actually make sure that they would release the game with little to no bugs, regardless if they're gamebreaking or not. Its not a question if they have a deadline to catch up or not, its more of if CDPR allocated their time properly... and it shows. And regarding patching, THATS THE PROBLEM. Its so easy and common to patch games that its also common to have triple A games released with poor optimization, bugs, glitches, so on and so forth. 

 

10 hours ago, Praesi said:

Yes, not every Problem can be adressed. Im ok with that. But lying in our Faces can be adressed. And CDRed lied big time. No matter how good Witcher 3 is or is not.They talked alot BS about the PC Version. And i dont believe them blind in the Fuiture. We can not trust any Dev. No matter which one.

Exactly. Its more of trying to find the lesser poison nowadays.

[Kiyuubi]

Because casuals and children eat that shit up.

[WynLore]

9 hours ago, abdul94 said:

You say it like the devs are the "bad" guys here... They work their assess off, but they have deadlines since its a business and the investors want the product out there so they can make money. 

If it was around 10-15 years ago, I would've agreed with you. Nowadays, ever since consoles can receive patches (the original XBox got a patch in 2003 for a game, which I forgot the game's name. The 360, PS3, and the Wii made it normal... followed by their succesors), developers and/or publishers take game development for granted, patching games after release to fix issues instead of actually allocating time to test the games themselves. If there was a developer I can and could trust in terms of sheer optimization, it'd be Nintendo... and thats actually a disturbing sight because EVEN SONY AND MICROSOFT have fucked up optimization. Don't even get me started on games that have shit gameplay anyways, regardless if its bug/glitch free or even if its optimized to the nth degree.

[cluelessgenius]

19 hours ago, LokiFire said:

Poor being context, these cunts have money to create amazing pieces of work.

Instead we get a game like COD GHOSTS, you need like 3x the hardware for what is no difference visually from it's last iteration.

This is what the game looks like on a GTX 580 at playable frames (no stutter)

 

 

 

 

Now the exact same system can run games like this...

 

 

 

 

 

Battlefield 4 is dodgy but it never stutters.. and visually looks good, my CPU holds me back recording BF4 sadly so FPS i slower than usual, i lose like half my frames purely from recording LOL.

 

 

But it's a good point no? far larger scale games.. superior graphics, better performance, numbers are not everything, COD GHOSTS is a stutter monster for no reason.

 

ok im gonna say something incredible pissy here but:

 

as a software developer im offended every time somebody says something like "why cant this run like this ord dothis ora that, that other software does it perfectly." 

 

im not trying to attack your point im just reporting about my experience with clients.

people dont realize how much work litlle things can be and how much performance decrease it all adds up to. Every time a client tries to tell me how long something has to take or how simple something is i immediately stop them with an attitude of "fun is over".

 

some programmers are just better than other. some had more time to perfect their product. some are just more familiar with the subject. 

 

the company just wants to make money obviously and thats its job and fine but whenever you look at the software itself you can bet your ass the developer did all he could within his abilities, the timeframe he had and the technologies available to make the product as perfect as possible.

 

and then of course on release date people shit all over every little detail thats not working.

[LokiFire]

Just now, cluelessgenius said:

 

ok im gonna say something incredible pissy here but:

 

as a software developer im offended every time somebody says something like "why cant this run like this ord dothis ora that, that other software does it perfectly." 

 

im not trying to attack your point im just reporting about my experience with clients.

people dont realize how much work litlle things can be and how much performance decrease it all adds up to. Every time a client tries to tell me how long something has to take or how simple something is i immediately stop them with an attitude of "fun is over".

 

some programmers are just better than other. some had more time to perfect their product. some are just more familiar with the subject. 

 

the company just wants to make money obviously and thats its job and fine but whenever you look at the software itself you can bet your ass the developer did all he could within his abilities, the timeframe he had and the technologies available to make the product as perfect as possible.

 

and then of course on release date people shit all over every little detail thats not working.

 

 

Yeah like the game just being a broken pile of smeared shit.

[cluelessgenius]

3 minutes ago, LokiFire said:

 

 

Yeah like the game just being a broken pile of smeared shit.

you think the devs are not devestated enough about how their work turned out? imagine you do your job whatever that is and everytime you finish your process and deliver, half the planet calls it shit and complains. honestly im supprised the suicide rate among game devs isnt higher.

[LokiFire]

1 minute ago, cluelessgenius said:

you think the devs are not devestated enough about how their work turned out? imagine you do your job whatever that is and everytime you finish your process and deliver, half the planet calls it shit and complains. honestly im supprised the suicide rate among game devs isnt higher.

I just don't do the job in the first place, i do something i am good at savvy?

[cluelessgenius]

3 minutes ago, LokiFire said:

I just don't do the job in the first place, i do something i am good at savvy?

ok now youre just fucking with me . whatever you do i bet i could make you feel like crap about your effort in under 3 minutes. if you have a carrier in something you dont jump boats because people dont like your stuff. you try to become better. even if ALL my clients would suddenly complain about their product i wont say "fuck it ill become porn star" ( see what i did there? )  i try harder to become a better programmer ive invested years of my live to get to this point you cant expect people to just start over because they "suck at it".

[LokiFire]

Just now, cluelessgenius said:

ok now youre just fucking with me . whatever you do i bet i could make you feel like crap about your effort in under 3 minutes. if you have a carrier in something you dont jump boats because people dont like your stuff. you try to become better. even if ALL my clients would suddenly complain about their product i wont say "fuck it ill become porn star" ( see what i did there? )  i try harder to become a better programmer ive invested years of my live to get to this point you cant expect people to just start over because they "suck at it".

 

 

 

Explain please, this game looks better than COD GHOSTS on my PC... no issues, DEV not the problem? i would dare say you would stand up for a criminal.

[cluelessgenius]

6 minutes ago, LokiFire said:

 

 

 

Explain please, this game looks better than COD GHOSTS on my PC... no issues, DEV not the problem? i would dare say you would stand up for a criminal.

 

i am not a game developer so i cant go into detail technically why the newer one is harder to run.

but your attitude towards other peoples hard work i can explain:

 

ignorance

[LokiFire]

Just now, cluelessgenius said:

 

i am not a game developer so i cant do into detail technically why the newer one is harder to run.

but your attitude towards other peoples hard work i can explain:

 

ignorance

Hahahaha

 

Next you will be telling me GTA IV is ignorance.

[cluelessgenius]

2 minutes ago, LokiFire said:

Hahahaha

 

Next you will be telling me GTA IV is ignorance.

i give up since i clearly can not get my point across. youre obviously right and know just how the world works. everybody should listen to what you have to say and agree. i am sorry if i have irritated your fragile mind and wish you all the best in your life.

[LokiFire]

Just now, cluelessgenius said:

i give up since i clearly can not get my point across. youre obviously right and know just how the world works. everybody should listen to what you have to say and agree. i am sorry if i have irritated your fragile mind and wish you all the best in your life.

Woah, as i may recall you tried to be the white knight here sailor, but you failed and well the tide hit you but merely glanced off of me, you went full swing overboard

[cluelessgenius]

1 hour ago, LokiFire said:

Woah, as i may recall you tried to be the white knight here sailor, but you failed and well the tide hit you but merely glanced off of me, you went full swing overboard

ok ill try to keep it simple: you. are. attacking. the wrong people. (imagine me wildly gesticulating to put emphasis on each word)

the devs arent the ones making the decisions that fuck up the game. my problem is not with you calling whateveer game shit. my problem is with you blaming the devs for something they have no power over. if a game is written badly then its because somebody poked his nose into the developer shit to often. manager says "bla bla bla bullshit" devs go "but.. and you know that would..." manager goes "i dont care we need this this and that. thats whatll sell" 

e.g. "fuck ubisoft" not "fuck the devs working at ubisoft"

 

i hope i could make myself clear this time. also you need to level with me here and stop acting like youre above me or some shit because you were the one starting this bitching about how your game doesnt run fast enough. i try to deliver some insight and now you are making jokes. seriously.

[LokiFire]

53 minutes ago, cluelessgenius said:

ok ill try to keep it simple: you. are. attacking. the wrong people. (imagine me wildly gesticulating to put emphasis on each word)

the devs arent the ones making the decisions that fuck up the game. my problem is not with you calling whateveer game shit. my problem is with you blaming the devs for something they have no power over. if a game is written badly then its because somebody poked his nose into the developer shit to often. manager says "bla bla bla bullshit" devs go "but.. and you know that would..." manager goes "i dont care we need this this and that. thats whatll sell" 

e.g. "fuck ubisoft" not "fuck the devs working at ubisoft"

 

i hope i could make myself clear this time. also you need to level with me here and stop acting like youre above me or some shit because you were the one starting this bitching about how your game doesnt run fast enough. i try to deliver some insight and now you are making jokes. seriously.

Cluelessgenius

[cluelessgenius]

4 minutes ago, LokiFire said:

Cluelessgenius

 

ok ill give you that one. my nickname is not helping in this argument :D. but at least my words are valid. 

 

 

[typographie]

11 hours ago, Monarch said:

They all make trailers. That's a common practice. Some are made early in development and are not exactly representative of what the final product will look like.

 

That doesn't make it okay to market a game based on features it won't have at launch. I can understand being forced by industry realities into a difficult position, and I can understand [to a degree] needing to meet the requirements of multiple platforms, but they had every opportunity to be upfront about it and it was only after release—and, more importantly, after many months of happily accepting pre-order money—that they were.

 

The Witcher 3 was still my favorite game of last year, and probably over many years. I've put over 150 hours into it, I think it's a masterpiece. That doesn't mean I can't still be critical of CDProjektRED when they do something like this. The point isn't that they're awful, cynical people, it's that you shouldn't buy a product based solely on the company's marketing materials, not even when it's CDPR.

[GeekJump]

THIS POST IS TAKING SO TURNS THAT MY BODY WAS NOT PREPARED FOR!

 

First, I'm glad to finally see someone take off the rose-colored glasses and make negative comments about CPR and the witcher. 

 

but back on topic...second, like I and others have said, devs aren't the sole person to blame. I would hope the developers and creators of a game would put their heart and soul in their creation and try to make the best thing possible; especially if they are investing years to do it. But when you have the general public demanding updates and early releases on one side and the money-men demanding a return on investment ASAP, you have to sacrifice some things in exchange for others. 

 

If consumers weren't little brats and had some real patience and devs had the money to take their time, games would come out better than expected.

 

I have spoke to some developers before and almost every time -no matter how popular or crap the game - they mention the fact that they wish they could do more and fine tune it but weren't given the option. They also have mentioned how they read all the reviews, comments, videos, etc. and they take all those shit comments to heart and try to improve on the next one. But some limitations are impossible to break.

 

There's also the fact that updates and patches are a thing now. There are only so many testers devs can hire to find bugs to fix. Patches allow a huge ass testing pool to work out the kinks. 

[Monarch]

2 hours ago, typographie said:

 

That doesn't make it okay to market a game based on features it won't have at launch. I can understand being forced by industry realities into a difficult position, and I can understand [to a degree] needing to meet the requirements of multiple platforms, but they had every opportunity to be upfront about it and it was only after release—and, more importantly, after many months of happily accepting pre-order money—that they were.

 

The Witcher 3 was still my favorite game of last year, and probably over many years. I've put over 150 hours into it, I think it's a masterpiece. That doesn't mean I can't still be critical of CDProjektRED when they do something like this. The point isn't that they're awful, cynical people, it's that you shouldn't buy a product based solely on the company's marketing materials, not even when it's CDPR.

 

What's wrong with sharing a video showing off how a game looks like at a certain stage in development? Everybody knew what they were getting before the launch. People knew about the downgrade prior to launch, they knew how the final product was going to look like, so it's not really like they marketed it falsely.

 

I think the issue is that people don't understand how to treat gameplay or trailers taken during the early development. They are not supposed to show you exactly how the final product will look like, but rather give you an idea as to how it may look like.