Congrats to Rare on collectively disapppintig the largest group of fans at launch that they've ever managed!
What?
Congrats to Rare on collectively disapppintig the largest group of fans at launch that they've ever managed!
Congrats to Rare on collectively disapppintig the largest group of fans at launch that they've ever managed!
You did it again. If you look at facts... The industry is telling you this isn't true. Simple as that. The majority of successful games released are not half baked.
As you can read in this thread, my issues aren't related to error messages at all. And yes, I've reached out to Microsoft several times already.
But Bluehole and Hello Games keep supporting their games. They didn't stoped because success, they kept adding and fixing their games because success. You can think that "incomplete" games can be succesful is bad or undeserved, and that's fine, but the true is that being succesful and also facing criticism tends to make developers do the effort to try to get better.Well done to you - but given that enough people bought the retail version for it to be at number 2, you're not representative of a significant number of people, unless there are a huge amount of those that did trial it first. No Man's sky was a runaway success and so was PUBG. It would be somewhat odd if publishers didn't look at those successes and pause for thought - why spend many millions polishing a game when you can send it out to market half baked, see who bites and then commit the remaining dev cash only if it's a success. It massively de-risks the rising costs of AAA development.
Well, if a service game is sold for full price and sells very well, but has a horrible player retention quickly, it shouldn't be a problem, as long as the studio gives it up quickly enough. Because then it is not much more costly to make than a standard game and if it sold more or the same as a standard game would have, financially, everything is fine. To me, personally, the ideal situation would be good to very good initial sales, completely cratering right after and super-low player retention immediately (ensuring Rare's future, but Sea of Thieves' lack thereof). However, user numbers doubled from a million to two millions quickly and it is still played a lot, right? So I guess this is just both, a great sales success and a great success as a service.I mean don't get me wrong, congrats to them (finally out of kinect hell) but isn't for a service based game more important how it does down the line? I know 6 people who all got it on launch, already planning to stream it and who's going to play with whom in a crew the next few weeks, all stopped playing 2 days after launch (They didn't go with gamepass, afaik). On Twitch right now it has roughly 1.500 viewers. I really hope they can bring some significant content fast enough.
I wish as well, but hope is lost.
I'm not surprised at all...having a captive audience with nothing else to look forward to will drive sales.
If you look at the selected facts you choose to pick, sure, although: a) that doesn't negate my point in any way at all since I never said half-baked launches were the norm and b) it's not as simple as just stating that, as I explained:
I'm not disputing that the majority of games are complete. However in less than 2 years (NMS was August 2016) there's been 3 high-profile half-baked games going to market and being very successful. Prior to that, none that I can think of to that level of success. The industry is going through great change: rising dev costs, publishers having to find more income streams through DLC and experimenting with various income models and this is yet another new way of addressing those cost issues.
As I said - why wouldn't publishers look at that and think there's something in that to de-risk the massive (and increasing) costs of development? I believe that's a dangerous precedent for us gamers, although I'm heartened to hear that people are enjoying SoT.
damn some people are so bitter on hereI'm not surprised at all...having a captive audience with nothing else to look forward to will drive sales.
Not like the audience is unable to enjoy games like Farcry huh?I'm not surprised at all...having a captive audience with nothing else to look forward to will drive sales.
We don't need them for that, anyways. The new Killer Instinct, as well as Retro's two Donkey Kong Country games, show that all we need for these old franchises is talented new blood that understand and respect the source material.
I'm not surprised at all...having a captive audience with nothing else to look forward to will drive sales.
Are we not counting Kinect Sports games as "full titles" because of reasons? They were also the most successful games for Rare in a long time, especially the first one.
So because it didn't fit your category as a title by Rare...so basically nothing. Ok.I think I don't have to explain why I'm not counting that.
It was release software for a peripheral that failed miserably. It wasn't marketed as a game by rare but by Microsoft Studios. Besides that it doesn't come anywhere near the usual stylistic charm or subject matter that Rare is known for.
I think I don't have to explain why I'm not counting that.
It was release software for a peripheral that failed miserably. It wasn't marketed as a game by rare but by Microsoft Studios. Besides that it doesn't come anywhere near the usual stylistic charm or subject matter that Rare is known for.
Do we have any solid numbers?
I don't know if Rare's best selling game was under 100K or 100 million. Don't we need numbers for context and congratulations?
I think I don't have to explain why I'm not counting that.
It was release software for a peripheral that failed miserably. It wasn't marketed as a game by rare but by Microsoft Studios. Besides that it doesn't come anywhere near the usual stylistic charm or subject matter that Rare is known for.
That's actually really surprising, didn't Kinect Sports do really well?
I think I don't have to explain why I'm not counting that.
It was release software for a peripheral that failed miserably. It wasn't marketed as a game by rare but by Microsoft Studios. Besides that it doesn't come anywhere near the usual stylistic charm or subject matter that Rare is known for.
I think I don't have to explain why I'm not counting that.
It was release software for a peripheral that failed miserably. It wasn't marketed as a game by rare but by Microsoft Studios. Besides that it doesn't come anywhere near the usual stylistic charm or subject matter that Rare is known for.
I think I don't have to explain why I'm not counting that.
It was release software for a peripheral that failed miserably. It wasn't marketed as a game by rare but by Microsoft Studios. Besides that it doesn't come anywhere near the usual stylistic charm or subject matter that Rare is known for.
People needed something besides Adventures with the Kinect launch. The Wii sports "killer".
Dance Central did even better than Kinect Sports, and both Xbox 360 Kinect Sports games did really well, selling 8 million copies.
That's right. I even had that game lol
DC actually was good for the Kinect. It actually worked decently.
You mean good word of mouth I think?
Kinect Sports Rivals and Sea Of Thieves are an old IP and a new IP.
But they did. It's common knowledge that they're not interested in going back to their old IPs if they can't do something new with them, and that's completely in line with their legacy of constant innovation and reinvention. Besides, the series that their old fans want them to return to - without making any significant changes to them, of course - are now 15-20 years old.
Yes they did, you just didn't like it as it wasn't "Banjo Tooie but different yet fully the same". Or "Conker's exactly the same, yet also different.".
Rare never really got a fair chance, for goodness sake just after they were bought the rumours were already :"Nobody of old Rare still works there, most sticked with Nintendo! HAH, MS bought a shitty shell!". Even though back then that was far from the truth.
A remake of Conker, a mediocre PD game, and a Banjo game that barely even resembles the gameplay of the old games doesn't exactly scream "trying" to me. I don't think that anybody can deny that they should've done a whole lot more with their IPs these last 15 years.
A remake of Conker, a mediocre PD game, and a Banjo game that barely even resembles the gameplay of the old games doesn't exactly scream "trying" to me. I don't think that anybody can deny that they should've done a whole lot more with their IPs these last 15 years.
Where's a proper Banjo platformer? Where's an actual Conker sequel? Where's Perfect Dark? Not every sequel or franchise revival has to be radically different from the originals.
If Kinect for a 360 was a failure then feck knows what to make of VR sales.
But 15-20 years is an awful long time in this industry. I'm sure you'll have excuses, but Yooka-Laylee was basically Banjo, and it didn't set the world on fire. In fact, many peope complained about it feeling archaic.
I mean, I really feel for fans of old games, I would also love to get faithful sequels to MDK or Little Big Adventure or Gabriel Knight, but in today's market they just wouldn't fly as high profile releases, not without some significant changes.