Gamespy undecided

Odin

Carbon Dated and Proud
Admin
Gamespy have once again written about Troika's demise and this time they blame the publishers, here's a bit from it:<blockquote>All that said, I've heard from several Troika employees, all of them off the record, about what went down there. Suffice to say that it was a combination of things on both the developer and publisher sides, which doesn't really surprise me. What I'm impressed with is how public the Troika founders have been in taking responsibility for their mistakes. But yes, there was more fault there on Activision's part than I probably indicated in the column.
...
As far as the industry issues go ... you're right, although I question equating Troika's demise with gamers "refusing to buy garbage." Troika's titles had some issues, but they were by and large smarter, more creative, and more unique than 90% of what was on the market. That ain't garbage, by a long shot.
...
There's a reason that publishers go out of business all the time (or come damn near it. The Tony Hawk series basically saved Activision from spiraling down the toilet). It's because the publishing model is COMPLETELY RETARDED. It makes no sense to shovel fifty pounds of crap out the door and hope that one pound of it sells enough to pay for development of the other forty-nine. Publishers employ too many people, there is too much overhead, they're poorly run, 90% of their producers are egomaniacal power-mongers ... it just goes on and on.

The problem is that voting with your dollars more often than not kills the developers and leaves the publishers standing. Because when they luck into a good game (and the years I've spent observing publishers telling me that, yes, it's luck), then that pays for all of the previous crap that they rushed out the door, didn't allow time to finish, bankrolled even though it was clearly a bad/impossible idea, or otherwise screwed up.</blockquote>I ripped the quotes from Vault Dwellers newspost on RPG Codex.
Link: Gamespy talks again..
 
Pretty good article. I still disagree with him about the dev cycle for Vampire being more than enough needed for the game, but all in all he makes some good, reasonable points.
 
More developers need to grow some balls and go with self-publishing (likely using the Internet ala Steam, but without the suck). If customers would like a printed box, manual, pressed CD, and whatever other goodies the developers want to include, they send in $10 or whatever and have it mailed to them. The modern-day publishing model needs to DIE.
 
yea, but indie games are still struggling to make it big. But sooner or later the model will die - jsut like interplay
 
Bloodlines took a long time to develop because they weren't allowed to release it before Half-Life 2 (Source engine). They actually had the game ready for awhile before it was shipped.
 
Xax said:
The modern-day publishing model needs to DIE.

I totally agree, the cost to publish would be virtually 0 if you were able to buy online and download rather than buy a box in the store.
 
I thought it was established before that one main problem of self-publishing would be the lack of funds for development.
 
Ekarderif said:
Bloodlines took a long time to develop because they weren't allowed to release it before Half-Life 2 (Source engine). They actually had the game ready for awhile before it was shipped.

I've heard that before but am at a loss as to how the game would have been released with the large amount of bugs that many have complained about if they had all that time with it completed... or would that be because they didn't have anyone working there since november or whatever?
 
The game wasn't ready, that's just an urban legend. And Boyarsky said he didn't know where that legend started.
 
Quote or death, Monsieur.

Also:
dojoteef said:
I talked to Andrew Meggs, formerly of Troika and now of Mythic, (...) he confirmed the rumor that Activision sat on a 2 month old gold master of Bloodlines.
 
Activision sat on the gold master for 2 months prior to the game's release. They were just waiting for Half Life 2 to be released. One of their employees posted at the RPG Codex that they were working on a patch and were fixing any critical bugs to be patched into the gold master while the gold master sat on the shelf collecting dust. He says they were working up until the day of the game's release, but I don't know how believable that is, though. Most of them were let go in November, and I doubt Activision even bothered to put any of their 'critical patch work' into the retail release, considering how buggy it was. Activision might have screwed up the QA on the patch and taken a month and a few weeks to release the patch after the game was already out in stores.

The game wasn't ready, that's just an urban legend. And Boyarsky said he didn't know where that legend started.
Boyarsky was just saying that to protect the company's image. Either Troika's producers screwed the pooch on the game's final code by giving the 'go' inspite of the fact that it wasn't ready, or Activision pulled the plug on Troika mid-development. Nobody's willing to say which is the case.

As far as I know, the Source build in Vampire was months out of date because they didn't have the time, supposedly, to implement any of the performance improvements Valve had done from March to November. Well, it'd be March to September, considering the game went gold at that time - but the stutter and EAX fixes that Valve amended in November definitely didn't make it in, either. I kind of like how Troika basically lied about how they would implement the (then) newly released stutter fix into the game's first patch. Liars.
 
Hmmm can't find the quote I'm talking about, sorry :roll:
Do you have a link Exitium ?

However, I've found 2 other interesting quotes

10-17-2004 : one month prior to release
http://bloodlines.warcry.com/scripts/news/view_news.phtml?site=69&id=34165
PB.de: Is there a chance of add-ons, sequels or spin-offs for the game, if it's a success? How could they look like? Will we maybe even have playable werewolves or hunters in the game?

LB: Right now we are just concentrating on finishing the game, but I'm sure people on the team have quite a few ideas they'd like to explore if given the chance to do a sequel or add-on, but I guess that's something to discuss at a later date.


http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/vampirebloodlines2-1.php
GB: Personally, I very much enjoyed the different traits available during character creation in Arcanum. Why were character histories like Eerie Presence and Rapacious Bloodlust removed from character creation in Bloodlines, and whose decision was it to have the feature removed?

Leonard: When we created the character histories, Activision didn’t think they could test them adequately in the time remaining and thought it would be safer to remove them
 
Well, maybe Activision only paid for the September version of Bloodlines, took it as a master, stopped all testing and didn't want to pay Troika to develop it any further ?
Then Activision released Bloodlines as soon as HL2 we out.

The line about the traits would be "Activision didn't want to test the traits because it has invested too much money already in that game" :D

It wouldn't be a matter of time, but a matter of money.
But we all know that "Time is money !" so that's not a big lie from Leon :)
 
Back
Top