Stupid executive decisions concerning games...

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2006-09-12 12:15am

Klingon Academy got pooched pretty badly when Brian Fargo stepped down from high on and decreed that thou shalt re-use the Starfleet Academy engine! For awhile it looked like Klingon Academy was going to be stuck in 640x480 because SFA's engine didn't originally support higher resolutions, and they had lost the source code for the engine some time prior to KA's development. I wouldn't be surprised if that decision alone was responsible for a lot of the bugs that plagued Klingon Academy.

Interplay then went on to immediately fire nearly the entire development team shortly after a rushed release, which effectively ended any hopes for the promised mission builder program, as well as for any additional downloadable content.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-09-12 01:11am

Noble Ire wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:I have to say it's pretty stupid of Microsoft/Bungie to treat the Halo franchise as if it's the Holy Grail of gaming, by assuming that gamers will put up with just about any cost and inconvenience to get the next iteration of the franchise. However, they seem to be getting away with it, so far.
What are you talking about, exactly? I've never really found that the Halo games are any more expensive or generally inconvenient than most any other big-name console products (unless, of course, you're referring to the PC version, which I know little about).

I guess I'm talking primarily about the way they use it as a "killer app" to make people upgrade to new hardware/software platforms, as if it's really worth it.

Instant Sunrise · Post by **Instant Sunrise** » 2006-09-12 03:23am

I would say that for Halo: PC the blame should lie with Gearbox for making an utterly shitty PC port of Halo. I can't think of a single reason why Halo: PC should have been the flagship title for DX9, when Doom 3, or HL2 (at the time) would have been a much better choice. Or how a game ran on a 733MHz Celeron and an overclocked GeForce 3 needed such a powerful system to run at the time.

The only real redeeming feature of Halo: PC was that the multiplayer was absolutely fucking awesome for LAN play, and in many respects was what Halo 2 should have been. (ex. a Banshee that doesn't suck ass.)

And then Microsoft doing the exact same goddamn thing for Halo 2: Vista and the new 'Games for Windows' API. I don't get how a game that ran just fine (albeit at 720x480) needs Windows Vista and the hardware requirements that it brings to run on the PC.

Nephtys · Post by **Nephtys** » 2006-09-12 03:27am

skyman8081 wrote:I would say that for Halo: PC the blame should lie with Gearbox for making an utterly shitty PC port of Halo. I can't think of a single reason why Halo: PC should have been the flagship title for DX9, when Doom 3, or HL2 (at the time) would have been a much better choice. Or how a game ran on a 733MHz Celeron and an overclocked GeForce 3 needed such a powerful system to run at the time.

The only real redeeming feature of Halo: PC was that the multiplayer was absolutely fucking awesome for LAN play, and in many respects was what Halo 2 should have been. (ex. a Banshee that doesn't suck ass.)

And then Microsoft doing the exact same goddamn thing for Halo 2: Vista and the new 'Games for Windows' API. I don't get how a game that ran just fine (albeit at 720x480) needs Windows Vista and the hardware requirements that it brings to run on the PC.

That's because consoles get away with crappy specs, because everyone has an identical machine so you can optimize a lot better. That's pretty obvious.

If they're insisting on new standards, hopefully the Vista version of 2 will be actually decent, instead of the usually shoddy as hell port.

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2006-09-12 10:52am

Graeme Dice wrote: It likely would have sold had the game been any good. BG:Dark Alliance sold plenty of copies after all. Unfortunately the developers didn't understand the charm of the Fallout universe.

That's not all they didn't understand. They didn't understand how to make a good, or even competent action RPG, leaving a game where 90% of the skill tree is utterly useless, and the weapons are all dull and samey, they didn't understand the capabilities of the engine or platform they were programming for, making it by far the worst looking of the Snowblind engined games (and I've been replaying BGDAII, same version of the engine but in house at BIS, not outsourced to monkeys, upscaled on the Xbox 360, and I'm still seeing new things that are only apparent at the new resolution), and they didn't understand just how attached Fallout's fanbase was to the universe. When Interplay opened a BOS board on their forum they had to take it down again because of the hideous screeching.

Ghost Rider wrote:No, but they are making you buy a $400+ system to play the next one, and their PC translation for the first made Starcraft for the SNES look like gold.

Sure, because programming Halo 3 for the original Xbox two years into the 360's shelflife would make tons of sense! They have a new platform, they are going to put the new game on it. Just like new iterations of every other franchise under the sun are going to, with only the real megacrossplatform games like EA Sports releasing for everything. New console platforms take over the new releases very quickly.

Anyway, I still say that the most fuckbrained corporate decision about a videogame was releasing Knights of the Old Republic II before it was finished, in the misguided effort to grab the christmas sales. Lucasarts pissed away the last of the goodwill they'd had from gamers, and have made KOTOR3 a very shaky prospect, because people will remember what they got last time. I know I would think very long and hard before buying another LA game, star wars or not. (In fact, I don't think I have bought another one since KOTOR2).

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-09-12 11:56am

Vendetta wrote:
Ghost Rider wrote:No, but they are making you buy a $400+ system to play the next one, and their PC translation for the first made Starcraft for the SNES look like gold.
Sure, because programming Halo 3 for the original Xbox two years into the 360's shelflife would make tons of sense! They have a new platform, they are going to put the new game on it. Just like new iterations of every other franchise under the sun are going to, with only the real megacrossplatform games like EA Sports releasing for everything. New console platforms take over the new releases very quickly.

Gee, context helps given that this started with Mike statement of:

I have to say it's pretty stupid of Microsoft/Bungie to treat the Halo franchise as if it's the Holy Grail of gaming, by assuming that gamers will put up with just about any cost and inconvenience to get the next iteration of the franchise. However, they seem to be getting away with it, so far.

With Nephtys retorting:

There's what... two Halo games? Both for the same console? That's not really that bad. It sounds pretty much like generalized flagship product support by Microsoft. More or less the same way Sony waves around their favorite Square-Enix or Konami products.

It's not like say, requiring you to get a 600 dollar PS3 just to play 60 dollar Metal Gear Solid 4. Or the Ubisoft team making Crysis, which is going to require a graphics card able to divinely render.

Which I responded to the last part, because that is exactly what they are making you to do. Nothing more, except my last bit which was a disgust over the translation of Halo 1 on the PC.

Manus Celer Dei · Post by **Manus Celer Dei** » 2006-09-12 12:41pm

Wasn't there some nonsense about the port of Halo 2 being Vista-only?

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2006-09-12 12:47pm

Manus Celer Dei wrote:Wasn't there some nonsense about the port of Halo 2 being Vista-only?

It's currently not nonsense untill it comes out and we find out whether anyone can hack it to work on XP.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-09-12 01:31pm

The thing is that the decisions are being made for the sake of the platform, not the games. There's no good reason to make Vista-only games in the near future; XP-only games only just started coming out this year, and XP has been out since 2002. And their attitude toward the PC ports is incomprehensible.

On a slightly related note, I'll bet that a Halo RTS game would have been successful, if it was done reasonably well.

Netko · Post by **Netko** » 2006-09-12 02:28pm

XP only games are XP only mostly to save on testing and QA expenses (and, yes, a few of them artificialy limit installing on 2000 for that reason). There are none or almost none technical reasons to have XP only over XP/2000.

With Vista it might/will be diffrent, however you are correct that for the next couple of years any game publisher that is looking at the sucsess of his title alone will have XP support.

Faqa · Post by **Faqa** » 2006-09-12 04:22pm

KOTOR 2. Just.... KOTOR 2.

Who the FUCK decided shitting on an awesome game, then shoving the result out for Christmas was a good idea?

Execs - it would have sold well ANY TIME. You did not need to do this, you probably LOST money by doing this, since you churned out a fucking INFERIOR PRODUCT. And even only three-quarters finished, it's a terrific RPG.

A few more months. That's it. Fucktards. If KOTOR 3 does come out, I expect it to come with a finished KOTOR 2 and a written apology from the dumbfucks at Lucasarts.

Also, who authorized firing Jane Jensen from Sierra? They took my Gabriel Knight! Bastards!

White Haven · Post by **White Haven** » 2006-09-12 05:06pm

The hell of it is? The PC release WAS delayed by three months. In other words, the PC version was released unfinished for the express purpose of missing the 'Christmas rush' by two and a half months.

Jade Falcon · Post by **Jade Falcon** » 2006-09-12 05:18pm

Faqa wrote:Also, who authorized firing Jane Jensen from Sierra? They took my Gabriel Knight! Bastards!

At LAST!

Another Gabriel Knight fan.

Faqa · Post by **Faqa** » 2006-09-12 05:28pm

Another Gabriel Knight fan

*frowns*

There's people who DON'T like it?

Infidels.

Jade Falcon · Post by **Jade Falcon** » 2006-09-12 05:33pm

Well it rarely seems to be mentioned, and I must admit that I wasn't overly struck by the game engine in GK3.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2006-09-12 05:54pm

Faqa wrote:
Another Gabriel Knight fan
*frowns*

There's people who DON'T like it?

Infidels.

yes, quite puzzeling, even the people that go ZOMG FMV suxxors, refrain from complaining about GK 2, or Puzzle in Flesh I (PiF II sucked though), it along with the C&C cut scenes were some of the best video ever done for a computer game.

Faqa · Post by **Faqa** » 2006-09-13 02:54pm

Puzzle in Flesh I

*frowns*

Wasn't that just plain Phantasmagoria? It was only the second that sub-titled itself as A Puzzle In Flesh.

And yes, the first Phant was awesome. Gave me nightmares in sixth grade, but you can't have it all.

Cao Cao · Post by **Cao Cao** » 2006-09-13 03:26pm

Graeme Dice wrote:
Jade Falcon wrote:There's also a Sierra game called Outpost that came out years ago. There was to be a case where you founded a colony and there were to be all sorts of features that were chopped out the end product.
I don't think that Outpost ever had much of a chance to succeed, even if it had been finished. It was only overtaken in the "Worst Game Ever" category by Battlecruiser 3000 AD.

Outpost wasn't that bad for it's time. I think it would've done well enough if they had shipped a complete game instead of the stillborn carcass they threw at us.
The game even came with a note apologising for the lack of half the features advertised on the back of the box! And half the manual was filled with promises about future content. Which never appeared.

As for my own nomination.. Star Control 3 goes down as another "what the hell were they thinking??!?" game.
Sure, Star Control 2 was sublime and a hard act to live up to but SC3 pissed away everything that was fun and tacked on a half-assed colonization type game (which didn't work because it was woefully limited) and it had this computer advisor that would force the solution to whatever quest you were on down your throat.

The stupidity didn't end there, I remember a Star Control 4 in production some years back for the PS1. And it was a generic space-shooter.

To this day I don't know if it was released, even if it was it made zero impact and it really sucks that Star Control 2 will never recieve a worthy followup.

Alan Bolte · Post by **Alan Bolte** » 2006-09-13 06:32pm

For X-Wing Alliance, you forgot missing textures, ship models that in some cases hadn't changed since TIE Fighter, numerous bugs that made starship combat in custom missions pointless, a variety of ship models with no canon or EU basis that weren't even used in the campaign, a missile boat lacking its signiture SLAM, and really horrible network coding. All of that just because Episode I was coming out and they didn't want to put any more time or money into OT stuff for a while.

Let's not forget the horrible lack of marketing for Freespace 2 around the same time, as well as the decision not to print any more copies when the first run sold out. Between XWA, FS2, and Wing Commander Prophecy, the genre has been dead outside of eastern Europe since, and it's gonna stay that way because it's been dead so long there's countless freeware products around or in production now. No one's willing to compete with free in a niche market. Even if half of it does turn out to be vaporware.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2006-09-13 07:45pm

Faqa wrote:
Puzzle in Flesh I
*frowns*

Wasn't that just plain Phantasmagoria? It was only the second that sub-titled itself as A Puzzle In Flesh.

And yes, the first Phant was awesome. Gave me nightmares in sixth grade, but you can't have it all.

yes I admitted to that, I got confused, it was the first Phantasmagoria that I was thinking aboutt.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2006-09-13 07:48pm

of course for that matter the entire hostile take-over of sierra and firing of Roberta Williams was a fuck up of unearthly proportions.