Rifleman Archive
Thread: 19th May 2005
Page 1 of 1
PTtech
Tue May 03, 2005 1:28 am
#1
Who is the poorer man, the dev who puts out a bugged game or the man who wants so badly to live the Star Wars experience he remembers as a child and saw first run that he is willing to pay for the experience of this devs bugged game?
Stena
Tue May 03, 2005 1:42 am
#2
It's not the dev's choice to put the game out bugged. They have deadlines.
CraftAddict
Tue May 03, 2005 5:54 am
#3
Well, getting the RotW expansion on shelves by the time the new movie hits, and if you think about it, its good for the game. More players is generally a good thing(tm).
So.....working with the timeline they were given, they decided that they wanted to present the best experience as possible to the expansion buyers, many of which are probably not even playing the game now, or have their subcriptions active. Its good business, and good game managment.
Just because you don't like playing his release of the game, doesn't mean others don't. The major complaints I've heard of stem around adjusting to the new system, not the system itself, which is a good design. Just like most things, you perpective about the situation is probably more important that the situation. Games are not what you want them to be, they are what they are designed to be. They are meant to be played.
When you play chess, or poker, you don't complain about the rules of the game, you learn them and use them. MMOs are the same way. The only difference is that MMOs, and MUDs, traditionally have used player input to improve the game, in a sense allowing the community to become associate developers. MMO communities have developed into a breeding house for politics for people that who think they don't participate in politics. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that most developers don't spend most of thier time petitioning the other developers to support their idea.
Take the game for what it is. An online multiplayer persistant video game set in the Star Wars universe, where player fight fantastic battles, epic story arcs, and a focus on community dynamics.
So.....working with the timeline they were given, they decided that they wanted to present the best experience as possible to the expansion buyers, many of which are probably not even playing the game now, or have their subcriptions active. Its good business, and good game managment.
Just because you don't like playing his release of the game, doesn't mean others don't. The major complaints I've heard of stem around adjusting to the new system, not the system itself, which is a good design. Just like most things, you perpective about the situation is probably more important that the situation. Games are not what you want them to be, they are what they are designed to be. They are meant to be played.
When you play chess, or poker, you don't complain about the rules of the game, you learn them and use them. MMOs are the same way. The only difference is that MMOs, and MUDs, traditionally have used player input to improve the game, in a sense allowing the community to become associate developers. MMO communities have developed into a breeding house for politics for people that who think they don't participate in politics. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that most developers don't spend most of thier time petitioning the other developers to support their idea.
Take the game for what it is. An online multiplayer persistant video game set in the Star Wars universe, where player fight fantastic battles, epic story arcs, and a focus on community dynamics.
Page 1 of 1