• netwren@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Half Life Alyx was sick and demonstrated everything VR could be. I will standby that statement and tolerate the flamers.

      • Zoolander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hard agree. That game is what I hope the future of games is like. Meeting Jeff is one of my favorite moments in gaming.

      • CaptKoala@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I started my second playthrough before even completing my first (due to PC upgrades) and I’m still having a great time.

      • Fisch@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I actually have that in my library because I bought the Index but haven’t played it yet because I wanted to play the first 2 games first. I didn’t play the first game for very long tho because I got stuck at some point early into the game and haven’t felt like continuing yet. You can also really feel the age of that game, controls and that kinda stuff. Not sure if I should just punch through that game or just say fuck it and play Alyx.

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well you’re in luck because there are VR mods available free for the older Half Life games. Just get the Orange Box or something with all the half life backlog and VR mod them for free.

        • Epsilion@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          If by “first game” you mean HL1, you could try playing “Black Mesa” which is a fan remake of the game, in the same engine that powers HL2. It’s not a 1:1 recreation, but it’s close enough (and I feel it improves on some things).

          HL2 is also 3 seperate games (HL2, HL2 Episode 1, HL2 Episode 2), so make sure you have all of those in your library.

          At the very least, I’d suggest playing HL2/EP1/EP2 before Alyx, since those would provide the expected background for Alyx, despite it technically being a prequel-ish thing.

        • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Half life 1 just got a new big update that makes it much better to play this day and age and fixed a bunch of bugs. Either way you could skip 1. As a kid I never played 1 and went straight into 2, then 2 episodes 1 and 2 with the orange box. I still haven’t finished 1 but with this new update I think I’ll go back to it some point soon now.

    • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      At some point the Late vs Suck balance will tip the scales of So Late That the Customers Lost Interest or Died

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Am not sure there’s a way for them to release HL3 and don’t disappoint huge number of people. Not because they suck at making games but because expectations have grown so so so much they are downright unachievable now.

  • Treeniks@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    tbf that’s a lot easier to say when you’re the president of one of the richest companies in the industry. I don’t disagree, but not everybody has the resources to just keep developing forever, and that’s easy to forget too.

    • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      65
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      But he’s also president of one of the richest companies in the industry because he always said this.

      And while your point is valid for smaller studios, it feels like it’s usually used by the big ones that do have the resources, but would rather give more money to investors.

      • Adori@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, no one has a problem with small indie groups doing early access, aka terraria, rimworld, factorio, minecraft. It’s about keeping expectations in check and having a good fun base game.

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Rogue Legacy 2 had a great early access in part because it was regular releases with a lot of communication and they set great expectations for it. I knew what I got myself into and had a blast trying each new area as it came out.

    • fanbois [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s often enough AAA with tons of money that force insane crunch to hit a release date and still have buggy, uncompleted games.

    • Maxe@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      In the documentary this quote is from he said that about thr development of HL1. To be fair the devs themselves said they voluntairily crunched quite a bit and had some time constraints at the end of the game.

    • Seudo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fun Pimps were a smaller company and they have been developing 7 Days since my gramps was in nappies!

  • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    suck is forever

    Why is the consumer just expected to roll over and take it when a game sucks instead of the responsibility being on the publisher to release updates until the game resembles what was originally advertised? Games aren’t on ROM cartridges anymore, you can still improve the game after it’s released.

    Look, No Man’s Sky set the precedent for what you’re supposed to do when your game sucks at launch. And we should expect nothing less from game studios with ten times the person-power and money.

    • Maestro@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      1 year ago

      No Man’s Sky is a great redemption arc, but it would have been better if the game hadn’t sucked at launch

      • Chariotwheel@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, if a product is sold, I expect it to work for the most part. Now, mistakes happen, and not much to do about very obscure things and it’s great if thing can be added afterwards.

        But what I want, and this is apparently wild, is a finished 1.0 product that works as expected.

      • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Obviously sucking at launch is bad. But it’s inevitable that some games will suffer that fate and as No Man’s Sky showed, that’s no excuse for the game continuing to suck after launch.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, if their publisher hadn’t forced them to release in its unfinished state, it would’ve been a lot better.

      • slaacaa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Agree. Also the same with CP77 - I don’t care how much they update and polish that game, I’m not touching it again. It was barely playable on XBOX1X on release. I luckily was able to sell my launch day copy with a small loss, but I’m not trusting them with my money again, after I (and many others) have been misled, and given an unplayable game on consoles.

        I am not an investor to lend money to the company for development, I am a consumer, so I want a working game for my money on Day 1, otherwise I’m shopping elsewhere - as plenty of studios manage to great and polished games (e.g. most PS exclusives).

        • Maestro@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I always wait a few years before buying a game. It prevents situations like this and saves aot of money to boot. Not just the game price but also because I don’t need the highest spec pc

      • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I pre ordered no man’s sky, because the people who made fucking Joe Danger said “I’m going to procedurally generate a universe”

        I played it a bit at launch, but the antihype, especially spoilers about the ending made me stop. It’s a bit dense to try to get back into at the moment, but I regret nothing. I paid a modicum so that the guys that made Joe Danger could make a universe, and because me and people like me didn’t demand a refund, they got to do it.

      • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have no proof but in my eyes it all smells like Sony and other gaming news are to blame. They hyped up the game to unachievable levels and then held Hellogames to the previously set deadline. I am very happy they sat down and finished the game, although there is new content patch ever few months still. Gave them those 60$ happily even though it’s not my kind of game.

      • Zorque@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not a redemption arc, it’s a people forgetting it exists except for those who want mediocre resource accumulation simulators.

      • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly, when you buy a shit product you should learn not to do the same thing. People are still out here buying crap and complaining on the internet where the money having developers couldn’t give less of a fuck.

        • SaakoPaahtaa@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          And the same goes for microtransactions, devs put them in because gamers buy the everliving fuck out of them.

    • fox [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Gabe was talking about the making of Half Life, back when you shipped your disc and that was that. And the game was, apparently, crapola.

      Same kind of deal with the original Deus Ex. It was a spaghetti of poorly interacting systems until the devs were able to make it all click together.

      • Redcuban1959 [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Gabe was talking about the making of Half Life, back when you shipped your disc and that was that. And the game was, apparently, crapola.

        There were patch and updates back in the day. The problem was that not everybody had a good internet connection or a connection at all, during the 90’s.

        Games like Daikatana and SiN were flops due to bugs that required patches to fix.

    • RedWeasel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      CP2077 had a bunch of issues on release as well. Much better now. I feel like they(developers) need to bring in different testers near release. If you have the same testers whom have been testing builds for years it can probably be hard to see the issues with the same clarity.

      Also stop having release dates. Just use vague terms like 2nd half 2024. When you get the release build, anounce a date, like a month later, give your devs a couple weeks off as there will be missed bugs after release. Hard release dates aren’t helping these situations.

      • slaacaa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not about unknown issues on the dev side, it’s about greed. CDPR wanted to release for Xmas when the large playerbase of the prev gen consoles was still relevant, so they happily pushed marketing and lied to take people’s money, hoping they can pay exec bonuses and fund future development from that.

        Sony had to pull the game from the online store, as it was barely playable. One good question of course why Sony would let it even be there without testing, but of course major companies are trusted to QA themselves, and not release a broken game - luckily this seems to work most of the time.

    • SuperDuper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Because people will pre-order games to the point that it’s made a healthy profit even before it’s even released. Consumers vote with their wallet and for some reason gamers just constantly choose to show publishers that shoddy, half-assed products are good enough for them.

    • shiveyarbles@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s because that’s how capitalism works. If you keep buying stuff from the same source without due diligence, you can’t be surprised when you get stuck with another sucky game.

      The only incentive to spend resources on fixing a game is to preserve reputation for future games.

  • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    However, delay also doesn’t mean a better product. It’s possible for a game to be delayed a ton, and then still really suck.

    Delay doesn’t equal good. DN: Forever and Aliens: Colonial Marines made that clear.

  • ManuelC@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    The real question is… Can indie games publishers afford the delay of a game?

    • sudoku@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Valve was a completely new company then. They weren’t going indie, but Sierra didn’t pay them for the remake of Half-Life. In the documentary they talk about financing it by creating Half-Life: Day One.

    • spectre [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Chet Falizek, a dev who led L4D and a couple other games at valve talks about this a lot on TikTok, now that he’s running an indie studio. He’s a cool guy, would fit in on .ml or something for sure.

    • iegod@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Depends on the circumstances. Small self funded team, part time? Can probably delay indefinitely.

    • Redsamuraiman@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes. If I can wait for the Dune movie in February, video game nerds can also wait.

      It’s up to the companies to coast and ration their resources accordingly.

    • dylanTheDeveloper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Usually publishers have multiple products in development simultaneously with varying degrees of investment, the more money invested into a studio to develop a game the more urgent they want it finished.

  • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Counterpoint: Star Citizen.

    I’m not being snarky there. If there are no deadlines and unlimited feature creep, you get Star Citizen. Or rather, you never get Star Citizen except as a janky hyper-monetized pre-alpha.

    • erwan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, landing is difficult.

      There is delaying to release a higher quality product and delaying while having features creep… Not the same thing.

    • D3FNC [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nah star citizen was a scam first, game second. If it ever produces a game it will have been purely incidental to continuing to run the scam and milk those whales

    • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I kind of believe Chris Roberts himself is just an overambitious perfectionist. He pulled the same kind of bullshit with Freelancer, which only released because Microsoft put its foot down.

      I can also believe that a lot of the top people around him are grifters feeding his ambition and perfectionism to keep the gravy train running.

      Either way, they got my Kickstarter money so the only entertainment I’ll ever get from that game is opining about it like I know anything.

  • SignorPao@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, Miyamoto said pretty much the same thing long ago. Glad to see Gaben being on the same wavelength.

  • cmhe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Game developers seem to be very afraid to change core features or the story of the game in a major way (even if the actual work would not be too extensive) after release. But there are enough examples where games improved a lot after release.

    Sure, the initial impression of the game might be ruined, but that is more a consequence for the producers that most often where responsible for the rushed release, than for the gamers or developers, of the game is fixed afterwards.

  • NostraDavid@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    While this was true in a pre-Steam world, it hasn’t been true for a while.

    See Terraria (which didn’t suck, but was lackluster compared to how the game is now), No Man’s Sky, Cyberpunk 2077.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I don’t have a problem when small studios do it for games like Terraria and No Man’s Sky. It keeps them solvent without having to attach themselves to a big publisher.

      I do have a problem when a giant, established company does it, as is the case for Cyberpunk 2077.

    • There’s also a recent trend of “forever games”, where it’s clear that the goal is to keep you playing it perpetually. It has both upsides and downsides. These games tend to change intensely over the years. Minecraft is such an example.

    • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Cyberpunk and NMS did exceptionally decent first day numbers…and then they didn’t do exceptionally decent numbers due to the well-deserved backlash. They would have sold even more copies over the last 5 years if they didn’t scare half of the gaming industry away initially. You have to work really damn hard to save your game from death. Case in point: Bethesda isn’t working to save Redfall and it shows.

    • limeaide@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Whenever I hear this quote I also think of the developers/publishers. They need to have a good reputation so people buy their games.

      I think that’s why EA, Blizzard, Ubisoft, Activision, etc sales have gone down. I will not say that gamers react fairly when it comes to unfinished game releases, but it takes one bad game to ruin a developer. Especially when you consider how small the margins are or if they are publicly traded. Even developers with good games have recently been going out of business because it’s not sustainable.

      I also think of their legacies. Especially in a post-steam world, a game with a good legacy will continue to sell for much longer. I don’t think a game like Watch Dogs ever got rid of the stink surrounding it, even though it isn’t a bad game to go back to nowadays.

    • ReakDuck@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it becomes a mixture of too early and delaying.

      Some games clearly need another year to finish but they delay it for half a year and wont allow more for themselves

    • Thavron@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      And most of the audience is either autistic or neurodivergent with impulsive and/or compulsive disorders, and have unstable hyperfocus and obsession issues.

      Really? Most of the audience?

    • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago
      • The alternative to current model of game launch + DLCs/features added over the year is that the game is not launched at all until ready and full featured.

      I haven’t seen significant numbers of people complaining that their drip feed of content isn’t coming fast enough. I’ve seen people complaining about spending a non-trivial amount of money on a visibly broken game that clearly had plenty of developer resources for microtransactions and loot boxes.

      Gamer audience is privileged, consumerist and impatient. And most of the audience is either autistic or neurodivergent with impulsive and/or compulsive disorders, and have unstable hyperfocus and obsession issues.

      Being a game developer had its moments but was still easily the worst job I’ve ever had, predominantly due to the community.

      That said, I still wouldn’t go diagnosing millions of people with some bullshit I just made up.