iPad Why the hell can't devs finish their products BEFORE selling them?

Discussion in 'iPhone and iPad Games' started by arta, Feb 19, 2009.

  1. arta

    arta Well-Known Member

    Feb 14, 2009
    6,900
    0
    0
    #1 arta, Feb 19, 2009
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2009
    This new age of gaming devices being attached to the internet is wonderful. We can get games in the comfort of our homes instead of driving to a brick and mortar store. But the downside is that devs are shortchanging us.

    It's rampant on games made for the Xbox 360, PS3, and now it's happened to the iphone, devs are constantly putting out games for sale when it's clear they haven't finished developing it yet. Back in the day when you had to put the whole game on a disc/ cartridge before shipping it off to the public you had to make sure there was an acceptable standard of feature set/ polish. Now? You can half-ass a game, and put it up for download, and finish it later.

    Look at iDracula and Vector tanks, it's clear that these games were meant to be finished a lot later in 2009, yet they put out these games now to make cash in the meantime. Brightness controls coming in the future? Chillango putting out iDracula now and the "putting out a premium later with levels, options and a storyline? Can't anyone see that this is the game they intended to make, and decided to put up level 1 up for sale to see if they can make money in the meantime.

    This is nothing like Call of Duty 4/ Halo 3 map packs, those are finished games with addons that come later, most of these game coming now are obviously unfinished and broken off to scuttle a buck.

    This new age is ridiculous, imagine if Street Fighter 2 Turbo had shipped to stores with a bunch of bugs and only 3 characters at first with the promise to sell you the full 16 later AGAIN at a premium price? Or Super Mario Land W1-W3?
     
  2. ibelongintheforums

    ibelongintheforums Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2009
    2,717
    4
    0
    yep. i agree

    except u cant generalize and say every dev does that
     
  3. rpb1975

    rpb1975 Well-Known Member

    Feb 5, 2009
    567
    0
    0
    IT Consultant
    Texas
    I buy games that I like. So if a dev releases a product for a price point that I don't like, I don't buy it. Some devs just test the market, and I can't really blame them for that because the app store is a new kind of marketplace. There is no supply limitation and demand shifts every day. I think it will settle eventually.

    After writing this, I am not sure why I even posted ;)
     
  4. emb531

    emb531 Well-Known Member

    Nov 12, 2008
    548
    0
    0
    Dude, for the love of God, learn how to read!! jaguard, the developer, said they were CONSIDERING making a premium version, based on the sales of this one. They put it out with only one level because of the demand, and why not let people play a finished game? (it is a finished game in its current state) And its 99 cents! That is so cheap, I can't even believe someone could complain....jeez :mad:
     
  5. blue ox

    blue ox Well-Known Member

    Sep 18, 2008
    458
    0
    0
    What does one expect for one's 99 cents?

    [​IMG]

    ?
     
  6. Zwilnik

    Zwilnik Well-Known Member

    Streetfighter 2 would definitely have been shorter and more buggy if it had been 99c.
     
  7. BlazingLizard

    BlazingLizard Well-Known Member

    Jan 23, 2009
    141
    0
    0
    Game Development
    Austin, TX
    That's not exactly a great analogy. You only have to purchase an app once. All future updates are usually free.

    iDracula is 0.99 (for now). That's not much to ask for (in fact, I would say that iDracula deserves to be much more). The devs want to spend as little as possible so that if the game's received poorly they're not out a lot of money.

    Keep in mind that (so far) all updates to an app are usually free. So you're getting a cheap app (less than a price of a pack of gum) and it's highly likely that game will be added on and extended in the future. I don't know about you but that sounds like a great deal to me. This is unlike map packs to larger games where you have to spend 5 - 10 bucks to get a new collection of maps.
     
  8. spiffyone

    spiffyone Well-Known Member

    Dec 7, 2008
    2,562
    0
    0
    Clearly the landscape has changed. On the home console and portable side of things the only excuse I can see devs having is that current gen development is much costlier than that of previous gens.

    On the PC and mobile side of things (the latter of which iTouch/Phone is part) the fact is that "updates" are the norm. They're expected. This is both a good and a bad thing. It's good in that there is constant feedback from users that contributes to new additions to the games, thus keeping them alive. However, it's bad in that there are way too many devs in the PC and mobile markets that release unfinished games.

    The home console and portable sides have changed, particularly the home console side of things, due to the increasing acceptance from the user base of downloadable content. Again, mixed blessing and curse.

    It all comes down to increased costs, and the need to make some form of returns in order to develop further. That's one of the things that Nintendo had pointed out, btw, as a reason for them skimping on uber graphics for Wii. They're take is that increased dev costs have hurt the industry, and it just can't keep going on like this. While some may disagree, and Nintendo themselves probably using it to mask the fact that lower tech hardware helps their bottom line as well, the fact is that we've seen dev studios just collapse completely because of not being able to get returns on their development investments due to such high costs. And that fear leads some devs to rush out releases just to make whatever they can and cover themselves.
     
  9. Donburns99

    Donburns99 Well-Known Member

    Dec 29, 2008
    1,866
    0
    0
    ColdFusion Web Developer
    Rhode Island
    #9 Donburns99, Feb 19, 2009
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2009
    We live in an age where getting your idea, even if unfinished, out early is what matters.

    By putting it out early, you get feedback before development is done. You receive ideas to add that you may not have come up with yourself and you get a pre-warning if the application is going to bomb. Most importantly, you will have a bigger following by releasing early, rather than if you release late and someone beats you to the punch.

    The Internet is ever changing, ever evolving.

    It used to be you put something out and that was it. It was nearly impossible to get updates out to people (what, are you going to ship them a new cartridge?!).

    Now people can get the updates seamlessly, so pushing betas and early stages of applications out early is possible.

    I'm not sure about the PS3 or 360, but I assume you mean downloadable content which is the same thing, just data stored in memory. Nothing physical that you can hold or bring back to the store. Nothing that had to be manufactured and shipped out across the world.
     
  10. spiffyone

    spiffyone Well-Known Member

    Dec 7, 2008
    2,562
    0
    0
    ...

    :confused:

    Wasn't SFII only $0.25 in the arcades? I'm just sayin'....

    Eh...regardless, even SFII had bugs. That's part of the reason Capcom kept updating the game.
     
  11. Tennisking1o1

    Tennisking1o1 Well-Known Member

    Nov 15, 2008
    1,393
    0
    0
    Just chill out. Why did you feel the need to have "hell" in the title? A lot of devs finish their products before releasing them and then strive to make the game better and ask their buyers what they can improve on... You can't make such a sweeping generalization. Plus, Super Street Fighter is a much bigger product than anything in the app store. It has had countless hours poured into it and it knows it's basically guaranteed some profit. The same cannot be said for app store games...
     
  12. salsamd

    salsamd Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 1, 2008
    1,841
    0
    0
    San Francisco, CA
    However, one walks a thin line.

    Introducing a polished product at a lower price point rewards early adopters who can add free input for future updates. When updated, the product can then be increased in price, as it has greater value. This affords early access of the product to a competitive market.

    At the same time, many users, particularly those with PSPs, Xbox, etc expect a product to be complete when published the first time and may trash it in the iTunes store b/c of its inadequacies relative to their expectations. This poor rating may then kill the app dead in the water for some time, even when updates are forthcoming.
     
  13. Donburns99

    Donburns99 Well-Known Member

    Dec 29, 2008
    1,866
    0
    0
    ColdFusion Web Developer
    Rhode Island
    I felt that was a horrible analogy myself; comparing older cartridge games that cost money to manufacture physically with downloaded games makes no sense at all.
     
  14. DHrox

    DHrox Well-Known Member

    Jan 21, 2009
    1,513
    0
    0
    College Student
    Baltimore, MD
    Here's my 2 (or .25) cents. A game for .99 is dirt cheap. It still lasts and can be a deal of fun. Besides, updates are generally free. Pocket God is .99 but gets regular updates. I know the point is to address unfinished products, but updates can add features in that gamers want. So it ain't all bad.
     
  15. spiffyone

    spiffyone Well-Known Member

    Dec 7, 2008
    2,562
    0
    0
    @Donburns

    Part of the issue with the home consoles (and the portables) is that traditionally and culturally (if there is such a thing as home console culture) developers never released games "until they were completely done", and gamers expected a plug in and play experience with "completely done" games.

    The PC and mobile markets, in contrast, have a different "culture". Gamers in these markets have come to expect, if not accept, the updating model.

    Personally I don't begrudge Chillingo for the iDracula release. There are different strategy models for iTouch/Phone releases. Could they have released the current version as a free "lite" version that would act as a "preview" of the later "full" release? Sure...but that would've meant passing up returns that could fuel further development. And the game, as it stands, is a complete game. It's much like Smash TV or Robotron in a sense. So why not charge for it?
     
  16. Tennisking1o1

    Tennisking1o1 Well-Known Member

    Nov 15, 2008
    1,393
    0
    0
    Personally, I think this thread should just be closed. We've gotten some good insight now, but it will just turn into a mess by page 3...
     
  17. BadSanta

    BadSanta Well-Known Member

    Dec 13, 2008
    405
    0
    0
    Milan,Italy
    How can you compare 60$ console games with .99/5$ mobile-phone games?
     
  18. Wulfsige

    Wulfsige Well-Known Member

    Dec 18, 2008
    78
    0
    0
    People can have fun NOW at a low price, and then when the game is updated enough people like you can go buy it. Okay?
     
  19. oh, really ?

    you need to watch some of Angry Video Game Nerd's reviews

    http://www.cinemassacre.com/new/?page_id=13

    start with the 2004/2006 section
     
  20. Frand

    Frand Well-Known Member

    I'll just point out again that the market votes with its wallet. If you want quality, buy quality and buy it at the price the developers have set.

    Don't buy anything and everything as long as it's cheap.

    Accept the fact that quality costs and stop buying crap. No smart dev is going to put effort into making quality if crap gives better returns. Complaining about lack of quality while putting high quality apps on AppSniper and buying five $0.99 apps instead of a singe $4.99 app is exactly what drives the market further down into "ring-tone apps".

    Only this will fix the problem and even then it will take time. By buying crap, everyone simply contributes to the status quo.
     

Share This Page