2016 overall was not that great a year in terms of games, with a slew of failures from Mafia III to No Man’s Sky, and for a PC gamer who is more into the AAA side of the industry, it was even a bigger disappointment with games like Forza Horizon 3 and Deus Ex: Mankind Divided having troubled ports and games like Mafia III and Dishonored 2 broken on launch. While the situation of Dishonored 2 has changed to quite some extent, it seems that Mafia III is still pretty much the same.
Coming to the topic at hand, PC Gamer, one of the most recognized sites in gaming and also regarded as a good media outlet among the PC gaming community (Speaking in general terms here), has gone ahead and given the award to Dishonored 2 and honestly I am surprised. I follow PC Gamer a lot and like the way they talk about things. But this time around I have to disagree with them, because it sends out a very wrong message to developers and publishers. It makes an impression that the developers/publishers can screw with the PC gamers/ hamper their experience on Day 1 and can get away with it.
Don’t get me wrong, Dishonored 2 is by all means a great game, it’s gameplay and story telling is top notch, but for it to be unplayable at launch for many PC gamers should be taken into consideration.Yes the recent reviews from people suggest that the game has been improved a lot with patches and what not, but it’s still not perfect. But to give a game that launched so poorly on a platform that GTX 980 Ti’s were not being able run at 60 fps Ultra settings makes me more uncomfortable.
PC Gamer has a huge following and their opinion matters, more so in the PC community and whatever they say is going to drive sales. Also specifically for Arkane Studios (And for all the developers out there as well), this sends out a message that:
Hey, release Prey in the same state as Dishonored 2, on PC, and even if it’s broken on launch but fixed later with patches, if it is a good game, we will give it a GOTY award.
Sounds very wrong, doesn’t it? And it’s not like the people don’t like the game from a technical standpoint. It is a game with great level design, great art style and aesthetics and if the game had launched in a decent state, I wouldn’t even have raised this question. Heck it was not running at all for many people on Day 1, which adds to the fire. Also have a look at the comments on their own article:
Broken PC ports have become rather common occurrence in recent years- Arkham Knight was 2015’s golden port and developers are not realizing that it is only harmful to the company. Heck look at Watch Dogs 2. After the disaster of Watch Dogs and Assassin’s Creed Syndicate, PC gamers still came back to platy Watch Dogs 2 which is a decent port with moderate hiccups. Yes it did not sell much because it lacks in other departments, but a game like Dishonored 2 would have sold like pancakes, had it been even half as decent a port. Look at GTA V or Witcher 3, both sold more or on equal terms with their current gen console counter parts. What do you PC Gamers out there think about this? Do you think PC Gamer was right in giving Dishonored 2 the GOTY or are of the opposite thought train? Let us know in the comments below.
Have you ever developed a game on your own? Do you know how it’s done? How many people work behind it to ensure that people like you have a game to play? Let me enlighten you.
Development is not a small task especially for a tripleA game. They have tons of things that need to be sorted out. And I’m not only talking about fixing glitches. Localization, sound, research, history, concept art, software design, software framework, level design, making the video clips, and guess what this is just the tip of the iceberg. Not to forget compatibility with the huge range of PC systems we have today. Some are running Nvidia, some are running AMD, some have 4 GB RAM, some of them have 12. With such a vast array of compatible systems, testing takes an awful load of time. It’s only natural to have a few launch time glitches. The developers obviously didn’t dilly dally and implemented the fixes as soon as they could. What more do you want?
Look, all I’m trying to say here is that if they won the GOTY award which is obviously brilliant for them, you don’t get the right to judge them just because of the launch time glitches.
First impression is the last impression doesn’t apply for awards. You have to see how far they’ve come.
Do I as a consumer, need to make a game to justify why I paid 60$ for a broken piece of mess. I didn’t play it for free, I paid for it. That’s like saying to a person who’s car keeps on breaking down and is complaining about the quality of the car on the internet:
“Hey, have you ever made a car? Do you know how it’s done? How many people work behind it? etc etc etc”
That guy paid for the car and expects it to run smoothly till at least 2-3 years. According to you, developers can release a broken mess and sell it and then keep on fixing it, and specifically the PC versions. At least the console versions run at a stable 30 fps. I personally as a consumer who is paying 60$ for a game and am also paying a premium for top quality PC hardware such as a GTX 1070 do not expect developers to give us a shitty port. It looks worse than games like Just Cause 3, GTA V and yet runs worse. Yes it has a good art style, doesn’t mean it is technically demanding. I bet if they optimized the game properly, even a GTX 550 would be able to run it at 1080p.
As far as first impressions go, yes it does affect a game. Look at No Man’s Sky, it was a colossal wreck and now they are fixing it, but has it gained player base? No. I am assuming that slowly it will gain a player base. First impressions may not be the last impressions in games, but they sure do go a long way in judging the overall quality of the game.