*This blog will be re-released undergoing some changes. We will have the blog featured on different sites with different bonuses on each site. Gamawarenesstwit will feature daily twitter feed with the blog while gamawarenessface will grant you exclusive access to our Facebook fan page! If you pre-order by sending me your hard earned money before this post is published, you can get everything! Oh oh and skins too. I can change the blog to any color you want with the pre-order package! (Do note that I will no longer conclude my posts. Please purchase the season pass for proper conclusions.)*
So Evolve, is trying to evolve the way we pay for games. Sorry though, a few other games have been doing what you did. (how did you decide on which version of Watchdogs to buy anyway?) If you were thinking of buying Evolve, you would have feasted your eyes upon the number of options/add ons that the game can come in. Options are good right? Sure! Unless you are chopping up your game into individual little pieces and selling them off one bit at a time.
All these are available for pre-purchase and will be available on day one, meaning they are already spending time developing it before the game is out. To most of us, this means it should belong in the game. When we think about it, it's true that the developers should have the option authority to decide what to include in the package. But games these days are getting lighter and lighter on content, and truth be told, if we give developers and publishers free reign on this, we'll soon be paying for each individual level and character or even weapon and map. There is no historical proof that they will put their customers first and every evidence that they will screw gamers over and exploit them at every opportunity, down to the very last cent.
This Is how the market works I guess. Sellers will make their products as least value as possible while consumers will pay until it becomes too ridiculous. Gamers however, are willing to pay for the most ridiculous things and will even defend their purchase. I would like to see if there are enough idiots falling for their marketing for more companies to follow suit in this format. As for me, even though I was looking forward to Evolve, I will have to give it a pass. I guess I am not ready yet for this evolution.
Showing posts with label consumers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label consumers. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Kicking Pains
Kickstarter, how mistaken I was to not have seen the negatives of this particular form of supporting game creation. Or rather, I had missed out some crucial elements when I last posted about this, elements which have now become much more visible as more projects move on to their final phase of completion.
Kickstarter is still A powerful way for people to vote for the games they want created with their wallets, and indeed we have seen how big some of these wallets are, but we are now seeing how some small and new developers (and even some established ones) are unable to properly handle and manage the funds offered to them. There are games that fail to live up to their expectations and promises, and worse, some that are not even completed due to the studio running out of funds.
Understandably, some of these developers lack the experience to plan how much they need, and so set unrealistic goals at the start or as their stretch goals. But even experienced ones like Double Fine have fallen into the trap. Some have resorted to early access or even second a second kicking of Kickstarter campaigns (though most supporters wouldn't be too happy and would really love to give them a kicking). Let's hope they don't promise too much for the second campaign!
This is a risk that people have to take when kick starting games. Some studios are reputable, but as we've seen, that doesn't guarantee anything, though it helps. And what happens when the game is out and it sucks? While some might argue against this point of view, to the consumer, it is much like a pre-purchase, with a risk of not getting anything back. And if we really think this is worth it, it's a risk we should be willing to take before dropping money in. It's helpful to the developer who can see how much people want this, and also for us to get a game which we might otherwise not even get to see.
Hopefully, people can learn to consider such risks, and also do a bit more research before dropping their money in. Also, developers need to be more responsible and hopefully learn from these failed projects. It'll be a shame to see good quality projects failing the funding because people are too weary, and yet, they do need to be aware of where their money is going and who they are supporting.
I'm still looking forward to a completed Planetary Annihilation, War for the Overworld, Worlds of Magic, Godus, Asylum, Star Citizen and other games that I may or may not have supported. Mighty No. 9, I'm waiting!
Kickstarter is still A powerful way for people to vote for the games they want created with their wallets, and indeed we have seen how big some of these wallets are, but we are now seeing how some small and new developers (and even some established ones) are unable to properly handle and manage the funds offered to them. There are games that fail to live up to their expectations and promises, and worse, some that are not even completed due to the studio running out of funds.
Understandably, some of these developers lack the experience to plan how much they need, and so set unrealistic goals at the start or as their stretch goals. But even experienced ones like Double Fine have fallen into the trap. Some have resorted to early access or even second a second kicking of Kickstarter campaigns (though most supporters wouldn't be too happy and would really love to give them a kicking). Let's hope they don't promise too much for the second campaign!
This is a risk that people have to take when kick starting games. Some studios are reputable, but as we've seen, that doesn't guarantee anything, though it helps. And what happens when the game is out and it sucks? While some might argue against this point of view, to the consumer, it is much like a pre-purchase, with a risk of not getting anything back. And if we really think this is worth it, it's a risk we should be willing to take before dropping money in. It's helpful to the developer who can see how much people want this, and also for us to get a game which we might otherwise not even get to see.
Hopefully, people can learn to consider such risks, and also do a bit more research before dropping their money in. Also, developers need to be more responsible and hopefully learn from these failed projects. It'll be a shame to see good quality projects failing the funding because people are too weary, and yet, they do need to be aware of where their money is going and who they are supporting.
I'm still looking forward to a completed Planetary Annihilation, War for the Overworld, Worlds of Magic, Godus, Asylum, Star Citizen and other games that I may or may not have supported. Mighty No. 9, I'm waiting!
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
New Consoles
The PS4 has been announced, and we're awaiting Microsoft to give more details. Having already gotten our hands on the Wii U and also hearing about the Steam box and PS4, the new age of consoles is upon us.
However, will the consoles be able to rid through the tough initial period where the lack of games will hinder the adoption rate of consumers? That and the lack of backwards compatibility of the PS4 (streaming PS3 games is not ideal) and most likely the next Xbox will definitely be a factor as well. The wise console maker will actually embrace this if they want to draw gamers from the other camp into their family because gamers who do not own a PS3 and missed out on the PS3 exclusives will be glad too pick up a PS4 early to play those games if there was backwards compatibility. As it stands, there's little to no reason to pick up a PS3 now and if the next Xbox were released at approximately the same time as the PS4, they might still stick to Microsoft.
There is no news as of yet if Sony will charge a mandatory subscription fee for online access, but if they do, it will not sit well with the gamers. Seeing how gaming companies like money (who doesn't?) over consumer goodwill, it is not impossible that they will go this route. I don't know if brains are needed to run a company, but I guess not since companies tend to cancel out all the good that they do pretty quickly, apologize, try to fix it, and then going back to screwing themselves and their consumers over.
We're moving into the next generation and actually do have more of a choice in our consoles this time (including a PC console-wannabe) so we probably should see what the console makers are up to before settling for one. Take into consideration the online sub and also whether they are punishing you, their consumers by banning used games and such. Vote with your wallet and perhaps, they will take notice.
On a side note, here's an abridged version of the PS4 conference that everyone should watch.
Sunday, September 9, 2012
Free to Play, or Just a Demo?
I wonder how many people have actually heard of Age of Empires Online before they started out on Steam. The latest addition to the Age of Empires series takes a turn towards the MMO genre, adding quests, crafting, experience points and levels to the mix, and it is "free to play".
I tried the game initially when it just came out. But the lack of units at the start, plus the fact that you could never have access to major content until you paid for it turned me off. It didn't help that these content were expensive.
Recently however, The devs have started to listen to their players and have made major changes to the game. (Report from PC Gamer and official site; and a summary and review of the changes) Empire points can be earned and used to unlock content previously only accessible by paying. The leveling curve has also been adjusted, plus a few other changes. I have started trying it out again because of these and the game's actually pretty enjoyable.
Is it actually ok when free to play is just a demo? Personally, I feel it is alright, as long as it is stated upfront that there are content that you will never get for free. Of course, the devs might change their mind later like for AOE Online. But if you make your game an MMO, meaning you want many players involved in the game, making it a demo might turn some people off. Plus in a game like AOE Oline, a proper pvp ladder would require a substantial number of people. In the case of AOE Online, in order not to let paying players have an advantage, ranked ladder is only for paying players, so this further shrinks the player base.
The issue here is the price. Each faction here was $20 if I don't remember wrongly. Granted, the devs need to make money, but lower costs for important parts of the game should be a given. Paid content should be non-essentials, so people can skip those and people who want to support the company can pay for them. The most common thing would be vanity items to show off, or experience boosts.
That said, the case of Gas Powered Games showed how the free to play model could close the gap between consumer and push game development in the right direction. Gamers are hoping for great support for the games they play, and they actually care enough to give feedback instead of leaving to play another game. If devs can sieve out the real issues from the loads of complains, they can truly create a masterpiece even if the game didn't kick off well. But then again, if you've been to any forums for games, especially Blizzard's, you would know there is really a lot of crap to sieve through...
I tried the game initially when it just came out. But the lack of units at the start, plus the fact that you could never have access to major content until you paid for it turned me off. It didn't help that these content were expensive.
Recently however, The devs have started to listen to their players and have made major changes to the game. (Report from PC Gamer and official site; and a summary and review of the changes) Empire points can be earned and used to unlock content previously only accessible by paying. The leveling curve has also been adjusted, plus a few other changes. I have started trying it out again because of these and the game's actually pretty enjoyable.
Is it actually ok when free to play is just a demo? Personally, I feel it is alright, as long as it is stated upfront that there are content that you will never get for free. Of course, the devs might change their mind later like for AOE Online. But if you make your game an MMO, meaning you want many players involved in the game, making it a demo might turn some people off. Plus in a game like AOE Oline, a proper pvp ladder would require a substantial number of people. In the case of AOE Online, in order not to let paying players have an advantage, ranked ladder is only for paying players, so this further shrinks the player base.
The issue here is the price. Each faction here was $20 if I don't remember wrongly. Granted, the devs need to make money, but lower costs for important parts of the game should be a given. Paid content should be non-essentials, so people can skip those and people who want to support the company can pay for them. The most common thing would be vanity items to show off, or experience boosts.
That said, the case of Gas Powered Games showed how the free to play model could close the gap between consumer and push game development in the right direction. Gamers are hoping for great support for the games they play, and they actually care enough to give feedback instead of leaving to play another game. If devs can sieve out the real issues from the loads of complains, they can truly create a masterpiece even if the game didn't kick off well. But then again, if you've been to any forums for games, especially Blizzard's, you would know there is really a lot of crap to sieve through...
Friday, August 3, 2012
Why I'm going to actively boycott publishers/developers
This more of a personal rant than anything objective.
I've been careful to not buy games that have always-on DRM as a form of protest against this particular form of 'punishment to legitimate gamers'. Ever since I learnt of the DRM for Assasin's Creed 2 (I think), I've stopped buying Ubisoft games at full price for PC, but probably only got 1 for the Wii. I bought Command and Conquer 4 from EA, not realizing that it had the same DRM and have since been weary of buying their games. I gave Blizzard a chance because I have always liked their games even though I was upset with Diablo 3's required online access and also the Real Money Auction House. I bought Capcom's fighting games for the PS3 even though I know they had a habit of making new versions and selling them as a new game instead of providing it as DLC for the older version. Even for some of the games I boycotted, I still ended up buying it at a Steam sale or when they finally removed the offending portions of the game.
What I'm starting to realize is that you can't have your cake and eat it (duh). Partial boycott doesn't help matters. Publishers will keep putting out such crap until gamers put their foot down and hit them in their wallets. I understand that what one person does is not going to do much, but I believe more and more gamers and fighting back against publishers. Bioware changing their ending and Capcom saying they'll change their stand on on-disk-dlc shows that gamers do have the power if they stand together (though I think Capcom will still make content and then not put it on the disk, but rather make people pay for it later so I don't believe them at all).
So I'm going to totally boycott games made by EA, Ubisoft, Blizzard and Capcom, and mind you, I have games from EA, Activision, Blizzard and Capcom that I really love. I would really love to continue following the story and playing the games (Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo series) made by Blizzard, the various great games published by EA like Dead Space, and Capcom's fighting games and Resident Evil series (I love my survival horror if you haven't noticed, but those games are dying, being replaced by 'action-horror'), so this is really a painful choice for me. But it has to be done, and anyway, there will be people streaming if I'm really interested in the story. I am still interested in gaming though, and will look towards independent developers and other publishers like Paradox, THQ, CD Projekt and the like.
I've been careful to not buy games that have always-on DRM as a form of protest against this particular form of 'punishment to legitimate gamers'. Ever since I learnt of the DRM for Assasin's Creed 2 (I think), I've stopped buying Ubisoft games at full price for PC, but probably only got 1 for the Wii. I bought Command and Conquer 4 from EA, not realizing that it had the same DRM and have since been weary of buying their games. I gave Blizzard a chance because I have always liked their games even though I was upset with Diablo 3's required online access and also the Real Money Auction House. I bought Capcom's fighting games for the PS3 even though I know they had a habit of making new versions and selling them as a new game instead of providing it as DLC for the older version. Even for some of the games I boycotted, I still ended up buying it at a Steam sale or when they finally removed the offending portions of the game.
What I'm starting to realize is that you can't have your cake and eat it (duh). Partial boycott doesn't help matters. Publishers will keep putting out such crap until gamers put their foot down and hit them in their wallets. I understand that what one person does is not going to do much, but I believe more and more gamers and fighting back against publishers. Bioware changing their ending and Capcom saying they'll change their stand on on-disk-dlc shows that gamers do have the power if they stand together (though I think Capcom will still make content and then not put it on the disk, but rather make people pay for it later so I don't believe them at all).
So I'm going to totally boycott games made by EA, Ubisoft, Blizzard and Capcom, and mind you, I have games from EA, Activision, Blizzard and Capcom that I really love. I would really love to continue following the story and playing the games (Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo series) made by Blizzard, the various great games published by EA like Dead Space, and Capcom's fighting games and Resident Evil series (I love my survival horror if you haven't noticed, but those games are dying, being replaced by 'action-horror'), so this is really a painful choice for me. But it has to be done, and anyway, there will be people streaming if I'm really interested in the story. I am still interested in gaming though, and will look towards independent developers and other publishers like Paradox, THQ, CD Projekt and the like.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)