I miss the days when people didn't whine about EVERYTHING! From what i hear most are really enjoying this game! I will buy it in do time as well!:)

I hate the wining too. But then I never go by what the majority say. Ppl hate No Man's Sky yet my 10yr old and I absolutely love it. The majority have very poor taste. Just look at music. Steam reviews are fairly mixed right now and not looking very positive but I won't let that stop me. I'll try it out and if I like it I'll buy it. But first I need to finish DE:HR lol

J I don't buy games for at least a month after release these days. Perfect example is No Man's Sky. I am excited to try it, but I will not touch it with a 10 foot pole until they get it fixed and running properly.

No man's sky runs just fine already. Most of the issues you hear about are from the usual casual gamer with no clue how to get a game running well and have 20 apps running in their taskbar and 100+ processes in the background. Gamers have always had to learn to tweak their OS for games and many just don't know how. Bloated OS, settings beyond their hardware capabilities and no clue how to troubleshoot settings so a game runs smoothly. I get that it shouldn't be that difficult, but that's how PC has always been. I have no issues with it. Runs smooth as butter at 50-60fps on my modest 960 and i5-3570, 8gb RAM(at max settings). 50 hours in, zero crashes and no bugs to speak of so far either. But it's not how it runs most people have issue with. They mostly are complaining because they created their own hype and expectations over the game and were completely wrong about many features, such as Multiplayer (which informed gamers all knew it was never going to be. It's even sold as SinglePlayer on all platforms and always was even during pre-order. That didn't change. People are stupid) Point is don't listen to what people are saying. I have already recorded several videos (my 10yr old playing) and you can even see the game runs smoothly with no issues (even a FPS counter so you can see I'm not lying). https://youtu.be/t0Ts-NCxsUo?list=PL0MrhLanM2wUoZNvq-UhlCITcMLcQvGAk Every time people say this game runs like poo, I generally do a bit of tweaking the settings and get the game running smooth as butter. Sometimes that's difficult but in the case of no man's sky it was as simple as running borderless and turning shader cache off. Simple

That's the example of a bad game.

In your opinion. Bad as in you think it's a bad game or that it's badly optimised? It's really not. Check my specs above, then go look at the Youtube video I shared and tell me it runs badly? In mine it's not a bad game in any shape or form and runs very well as I just said. And example of a bad unoptimised game would be something like DayZ or the last Batman game at release.

^ What I really love about your diatribe is that you wanna lecture me on game development and how much more complex games are, and yet I'm typing this to you right now from a games studio that I work at LOL. Trust me when I say, I know first hand what it takes to develop a game. I have also been a PC gamer for bordering 20 years. Sure, games these days are more complex.. you know what else though? The engines, expertise, and knowledge and overall capabilities to make these games has also increased tenfold. You act as if because the game is more complex, it somehow negates any responsibility on the part of the developer to ensure functionality. Sorry, that's not good enough. Vehicles these days are also more complex. Airlines, also more complex. Do you also give them the same leeway for their products to be delivered to a low level of testing? There is an expectation of functionality upon release.. rushing out games before they are completed only to be patched later is a cancer on this industry. Deus Ex is certainly not alone in this department, but time and time again people are fooled into thinking they will get a working game on release. the only two games that I've played in recent memory that worked largely without issue on their first day were Witcher 3 and Doom. I'm sure there are others, but as I have said repeatedly, most games are now expected to not work on release day. The expectation that you're not buying a fully working game, and the acceptance of such is insane imo. If you wanna make excuses for the game industry that is fine. Lord knows they have a tough job trying to get games working on different types of devices and setups. But that is the job they signed up for. If they didn't want to do that to the level that should be expected, they should just release for console and be done with it. If you wanna develop a game and sell it for the PC platform, make it work. Patching it week after week post release has become so commonplace that people just shrug and say "well that's just how it is I guess" and throw $70 at the game 6 months before its released. Gimme a break. Also, if games were more expensive but came largely trouble free, I would absolutely be willing to pay more $. People are spending thousands of dollars on their rigs, sli setups, and get either sli not working with a game, working poorly, low framerates/terrible scaling, or on the odd chance, it works great.. unless you have gsync, then its again a crapshoot whether it works or not. But its okay I guess.. Its complex, so we should just suck it up. Great position to take. Absolute nonsense. Way to make up your own argument. If you need to come at me with this strawman argument, I can't be bothered to reply further.

http://i.imgur.com/SgJMPa2.gif

Games of yesteryear used to come out buggy, so do modern games. Console games are the least prone to being released broken. PC games though, it's been the same for many years. We hardly ever used to get patches for games 20 years ago. Games would sometimes get a patch and you could find those on game mag discs. Nowadays patches are everywhere because internet is accessible. I don't mind a few bugs in games, I don't like game breaking bugs though. And no game should come out and perform poorly on a high end rig, unless it's the second coming of Jesus, from a graphical standpoint.

I feel like it depends on the bug or issues with the title. Like in the Obduction post on Front Page, I wrote that the game is good but it has some crashing problems. Seritonin then wrote this:

If this wasn't some obscure indie title for pc everyone would be complaining about all the things you're complementing lol.

Ignoring the fact that I didn't complement the issues, his point I guess is that people hold AAA developers to a higher standard than indie ones. I guess my take is, shouldn't we? Like I personally would love for no game to ship with any bugs/control issues/performance problems of any kind -- but I do think that's a unrealistic expectation. That being said, I'm going to be provide more leeway to a small studio of 40 people, than Edios who has 500 + the number of people involved from Nixxes porting the game. That's not to mention that crashing is usually caused by configuration issues, things that are much more difficult to test with a small studio. Where as Deus Ex has problems with core mechanics/control schemes/etc.

its just this cancer of hooking people into "services" look at windows 10, same story, they essentially made procrastination a company policy I certainly appreciate the "add more content later" approach, most software nowadays is expected to get more goodies, but I would like that advantage to come without compromising actual functionality because "we can add that later too"

Games of yesteryear used to come out buggy, so do modern games. Console games are the least prone to being released broken. PC games though, it's been the same for many years. We hardly ever used to get patches for games 20 years ago. Games would sometimes get a patch and you could find those on game mag discs. Nowadays patches are everywhere because internet is accessible. I don't mind a few bugs in games, I don't like game breaking bugs though. And no game should come out and perform poorly on a high end rig, unless it's the second coming of Jesus, from a graphical standpoint.

Exactly a few bugs are expected are far as I'm concerned but bugs that make it unplayable shouldn't happen period.Like that steamer Batman is a prime example.

Games of yesteryear used to come out buggy, so do modern games. Console games are the least prone to being released broken. PC games though, it's been the same for many years. We hardly ever used to get patches for games 20 years ago. Games would sometimes get a patch and you could find those on game mag discs. Nowadays patches are everywhere because internet is accessible. I don't mind a few bugs in games, I don't like game breaking bugs though. And no game should come out and perform poorly on a high end rig, unless it's the second coming of Jesus, from a graphical standpoint.

Games like Half Life and Quake 3 had a lot of patches, as did many others. However, I so looked forward to patches for games like Q3 due to continual performance improvements. Back in those days our systems weren't that powerful so optimisation via patches was key to get every last fps. That extra performance opened the door for using higher-quality rendering features of Quake 3 as well. These days, it's 2-3 patches, then, the studio moves onto the sequel or next game while leaving a whole host of bugs unfixed and minimal optimisation. Just enough to have their games working on the majority of systems and most critical bugs fixed. It's no surprise really, that games seem to get more and more demanding, while only slowly improving in actual fidelity. Also, the pressure to bring products to market really doesn't help. Games that maybe do need 5yrs of development, for example, are being pushed-out in 2-3yrs with an additional year of patching/fixes...justified by DLC released over a year to help hide the work needed to "complete" the game.

I miss the days when people didn't whine about EVERYTHING! From what i hear most are really enjoying this game! I will buy it in do time as well!:)

And I miss the days that people were actually able to discuss, instead of trying to invalidate reason by attaching emotion (like whine) to it. On topic: I didn't buy the game because of Denuvo on top of Steam's DRM. I don't want to jump through hoops like that anymore.

^ What I really love about your diatribe is that you wanna lecture me on game development and how much more complex games are, and yet I'm typing this to you right now from a games studio that I work at LOL. Trust me when I say, I know first hand what it takes to develop a game. I have also been a PC gamer for bordering 20 years. Sure, games these days are more complex.. you know what else though? The engines, expertise, and knowledge and overall capabilities to make these games has also increased tenfold. You act as if because the game is more complex, it somehow negates any responsibility on the part of the developer to ensure functionality. Sorry, that's not good enough. Vehicles these days are also more complex. Airlines, also more complex. Do you also give them the same leeway for their products to be delivered to a low level of testing? There is an expectation of functionality upon release.. rushing out games before they are completed only to be patched later is a cancer on this industry. Deus Ex is certainly not alone in this department, but time and time again people are fooled into thinking they will get a working game on release. the only two games that I've played in recent memory that worked largely without issue on their first day were Witcher 3 and Doom. I'm sure there are others, but as I have said repeatedly, most games are now expected to not work on release day. The expectation that you're not buying a fully working game, and the acceptance of such is insane imo. If you wanna make excuses for the game industry that is fine. Lord knows they have a tough job trying to get games working on different types of devices and setups. But that is the job they signed up for. If they didn't want to do that to the level that should be expected, they should just release for console and be done with it. If you wanna develop a game and sell it for the PC platform, make it work. Patching it week after week post release has become so commonplace that people just shrug and say "well that's just how it is I guess" and throw $70 at the game 6 months before its released. Gimme a break. Also, if games were more expensive but came largely trouble free, I would absolutely be willing to pay more $. People are spending thousands of dollars on their rigs, sli setups, and get either sli not working with a game, working poorly, low framerates/terrible scaling, or on the odd chance, it works great.. unless you have gsync, then its again a crapshoot whether it works or not. But its okay I guess.. Its complex, so we should just suck it up. Great position to take. Absolute nonsense. Way to make up your own argument. If you need to come at me with this strawman argument, I can't be bothered to reply further.

I couldn't agree more. Great post. 🙂

Games like Half Life and Quake 3 had a lot of patches, as did many others. However, I so looked forward to patches for games like Q3 due to continual performance improvements. Back in those days our systems weren't that powerful so optimisation via patches was key to get every last fps. That extra performance opened the door for using higher-quality rendering features of Quake 3 as well. These days, it's 2-3 patches, then, the studio moves onto the sequel or next game while leaving a whole host of bugs unfixed and minimal optimisation. Just enough to have their games working on the majority of systems and most critical bugs fixed. It's no surprise really, that games seem to get more and more demanding, while only slowly improving in actual fidelity. Also, the pressure to bring products to market really doesn't help. Games that maybe do need 5yrs of development, for example, are being pushed-out in 2-3yrs with an additional year of patching/fixes...justified by DLC released over a year to help hide the work needed to "complete" the game.

I was talking about games from well before HL2, you know from the time when "games were awesome". And yeah, some games get a couple of patches, some get years of support, with free content thrown in.

I was talking about games from well before HL2, you know from the time when "games were awesome". And yeah, some games get a couple of patches, some get years of support, with free content thrown in.

I think from HL2 onwards things changed due to steam. Valve have been excellent with their continual support of their games though.