lunes, 16 de agosto de 2010

APB sucks... so you know what comes next

I was really hoping for APB to be great, but then I tried the open beta-thing "Keys to the City" event... and what I found was truly horrible. Awful driving, bad shooting, boring missions, long loading times... I didn't want to write specifically about it here because I couldn't even keep playing for long and you know, it was just a beta, though it didn't seem too likely that they could fix all the major problems in time for the real release.

So it's not a surprise that the game tanked, so now the developer is firing everybody. It's sad, but as I usually say, if you make really bad games you'll go under.

After getting this bad news for Real Time Worlds, a former employee has written about it from an insider perspective in the comments section of Rock, Paper, Shotgun. It looks calm and impartial enough, unlike the comment from a former Obsidian employee who crapped on the game as soon as he found the first bad review for it.

Well, I'm not against snitching, but please let a game live or die on its own terms, and then tell us. Don't land the killing blow on it... What if you are wrong? And in the case of that Obsidian guy, he certainly was.

So here's the comment in its entirety. Why not?

What a fucking mess. I’m ex-RTW.

An outcome like this wasn’t desired by anyone at RTW, but game development is a weird business. A game can play poorly right up until only a few months before release, for a variety of reasons – Crackdown was awful right up until a month or two before it came out (some would say awful afterwards, too, but I’m trying to make a point :). Knowing this, it can blind you to a game’s imperfections – or lead you to think it’s going to come right by release. You end up in this situation where you’re heads down working your ass off, not well able to critically assess your own product. APB itself only really came together technically relatively late in its development cycle (and it still obviously has problems), leaving too little time for content production and polish, and lacking any real quality in some of its core mechanics (shooting / driving). It’s not that the team was unaware of these huge issues, but a million little things conspire to prevent you from being able to do anything about them. It can seem difficult to comprehend, it certainly was for me before entering the industry – ‘How did those idiots get X wrong in game Y?’. No team sets out to ship something anything less than perfection, but projects can evolve in ways that no one seems to be in total control of. All that said, it was pretty clear to me that the game was going to get a kicking at review – the gap between expectation and the reality was huge. I wasn’t on the APB team, so I played it infrequently, during internal test days etc. I was genuinely shocked when I played the release candidate – I couldn’t believe Dave J would be willing to release this. All the issues that had driven me nuts about it were still there – the driving was poor (server-authoritative with no apparent client prediction, ergo horrendously lag intolerant), combat impact-less, and I found the performance of the game sub-par on what was a high-spec dev machine.

But the real killer, IMO, is the business model. This was out of the team’s hands. The game has issues, but I think if you separate the business model from the game itself, it holds up at least a little better. A large scale team based shooter, in big urban environments, with unprecedented customisation and some really cool, original features. The problem was that management looked at the revenue they wanted to generate and priced accordingly, failing to realise (or care) that there are literally a dozen top quality, subscription free team based shooters. Many of which, now, have progression and persistence of some sort – for free. The game would have been immeasurably better received it had simply been a boxed product, with paid-for in-game items, IMO. This may not have been possible, given what was spent on the game and the running costs, but the market is tough. You can’t simply charge what you feel like earning and hope the paying public will agree with your judgement of value. Many of us within RTW were extremely nervous at APB’s prospects long before launch, and with good reason, as it turns out.

They also failed spectacularly to manage expectations. When Dave J spoke out saying there would ‘not be a standard subscription model’, he unwittingly set expectations at ‘free to play’. When it’s announced that we’re essentially pay-per-hour, we get absolutely killed in the press, somewhat understandably. The game also announced far too early (though it kept being delayed), and had little to show but customisation for what seemed like years, largely because internally we (correctly) judged it to be the stand out part of the game. But we should have kept our powder dry. Our PR felt tired and dragged on and on, rather than building a short, sharp crescendo of excitement pre-release. We also went to beta far too early, wiser heads were ignored when it was pointed out that any kind of beta, even very early beta, might as well be public as far as generating word of mouth. The real purpose of beta is publicity, not bug fixing. We never took that lesson on board. We also made the error of not releasing fixes externally to many of the issues early beta testers were picking up, keeping the fixes on internal builds, I presume to lessen the load on QA. This simply meant that to early beta testers, it looked as though we were never bothering to fix the issues they found, when in fact, they were being fixed, simply being deployed back into beta very infrequently. This lesson was eventually learnt, but only after we’d pissed off a large number of early-adopters.

The sheer time spent and money it took to make APB is really a product of fairly directionless creative leadership. Certainly Dave J has great, strong, ambitious ideas for his games. But he’s a big believer in letting the details emerge along the way, rather than being planned out beyond even a rudimentary form. For most of the lifetime of APB, he was also CEO of the whole company, as well as Creative Director. His full attention was not there until it late in the day. This has ramifications for how long his projects run – many years, on average – and the associated cost. This, in turn, means that the business model options were constrained, conspiring to place APB in a really difficult position, commercially. Ultimately, it’s this pairing of a subscription model cost with free to play game play that really did for the game. And many of us saw it coming a mile off. I must admit I’m dismayed about the scale of the failure, however. Many of us thought APB might do OK at retail and sell a few hundred thousand, though struggle on ongoing revenue, and gradually carve a niche. But it absolutely tanked at retail I believe (though I’m not privvy to figures) I think due to the critical mauling it received. It never made the top 20 of the all format UK chart. It’s scraping along the bottom of the PC-only chart, a situation I’m assuming is replicated in its major markets. And being at the bottom of the PC-only chart is not where you want to be as a AAA budget game. God knows what the budget was, but when you account for the 150-odd staff and all the launch hardware and support, it was in the tens of millions of dollars.

MyWorld is an innocent bystander caught up in the demise of APB. Which is a real shame, because it is genuinely ground breaking, though not aimed at the traditional gamer audience. It was going great guns over the last year or so, coming on leaps and bounds, impressing everyone who saw it. MyWorld might as well have been a different company – there was very little staff overlap on the two projects, they worked under entirely different production methodologies, and because we were not the next in line for release we received very little attention from the execs (which was a good thing, to be honest). We knew that time was limited, and tried to encourage management to go the ‘google-style beta route – release a limited, but polished core feature set early, and iterate. What happens to it from here on out is not clear, but without the people who wrote it, the code isn’t worth a damn, so I can’t see the project being picked up. Management tried to get a publisher onboard to fund continued development, but the time scales involved meant that was always unlikely, despite some considerable interest from potential partners. God knows what will happen to it now the team are gone. Probably nothing. Years of my life were poured into that project, but it was a blast to make, and at least it was made public so I can point and say, “I helped make that”.

RTW tried something bold, and fucked it up. It tried to make what amounted to two MMOs at once, as well as self-publish. I have to hand it to Dave J. He’s ballsy. But in the end, we couldn’t do it, and I think the whole company will go under sooner rather than later. It’s a shame, too, as Dundee can’t absorb the level of game dev redundancies that are about to hit, which means the Dundee scene gets that little bit smaller. But that’s the price of failure, and we certainly failed. No excuses, really. We were well funded, hired some great engineers, designers and artists, and great QA guys. Ultimately, the senior management team must take responsibility. I think they had far too much focus on the company’s ‘strategic direction’ and not enough on day-to-day execution, which was where it really matters. And I think a huge part of the blame lies with Dave J, though I can’t emphasize enough how nice a man he is personally; ultimately APB has torpedoed the company, and it failed largely under his creative leadership. It has other issues (technical, for instance), but the design and the business plan are largely down to him and the board, and they are what have failed so irrevocably for the rest of us.

ExRTW

miércoles, 11 de agosto de 2010

The new censorship

As you can see in the comments from users here, the Steam software forces you to upgrade your version of Plants vs Zombies to the GOTY release even if you don't want it. Yes, even if you have disabled automatic updates for that game. They have blatantly ignored the choice made by players to keep the old version of the game, following the rules set by Valve to handle Steam.

This kind of disregard for what the player wants, taking advantage of the power they hold when they fully control your access to the games, is what makes me skeptical about digital downloads. They can tamper with your game in any way they think appropriate. Now they are saying, "oh, sorry, some character in the game may get us sued so we are removing it", but at some point you can log in to your game account and be confronted with a disclaimer telling you that "sorry, a big Earthquake killed 100,000 people in California so the Quake games are in bad taste and you can no longer play them". Or maybe one day you try to play "Rock and Roll Part 2" in a Guitar Hero / Rock Band game but then Gary Glitter is arrested for molesting a child, so then the song gets patched out of the game because some parents complained about it... You know what I mean!

And then I, as a player, will yell "stop screwing me! I just want to play my game in peace! Don't take anything away from me!". But now there's nothing I can do, because in the digital era nobody can hear you scream.

sábado, 31 de julio de 2010

Games that stop existing


A few days ago we commented about Plants vs Zombies being updated to modify its content. As an owner of PvZ on Steam, I'll be forced to get the censored version of the game the next time I download it.


That's the worst thing of downloadable games: they can be modified by the provider, and you can't do anything about it. And it even could be worse: the game could just disappear, like Street Racing. This Facebook game was just removed from the internet surprising all its paying customers. This is one of those games in which you buy in-game stuff with real-life money. So may have "invested" a lot of money buying virtual advantages that no longer exist. You are basically screwed.


We all trust that our downloadable games will be there for as long as we want them on Steam, on Xbox Live Arcade, on PSN... but is there a real guarantee? Or can they just say "sorry, you can't play anymore" when they consider that the fan base is not big enough to justify the expense and we have to accept it?


This is what I don't like about downloads... Unless proven otherwise, we are just renting the games. They don't usually disappear, but if they do, can we do anything about it? Or are we just going to be told "sorry, it's over. But you can play our other games!" like with Street Racing?

miércoles, 28 de julio de 2010

Say goodbye to the MJ zombie

Plants vs Zombies was our Game of the Year for 2009. It had laughs, very clever design and a lot of memorable zombie characters. One of the best ones took inspiration from Michael Jackson and his Thriller video, with hilarious results.

Well, if you haven't bought and played this game yet, be quick, because the old version is going to be pulled from game providers (Steam, etc) and replaced by a different build. Seemingly, after his death it's not funny anymore to laugh with Michael Jackson, even after he's been laughed at for several years now. I don't know what PopCap is going to do to replace that memorable enemy, but it won't be easy to match the kind of inspiration and lunacy the original MJ zombie had.

Goodbye, MJ zombie! We'll miss you!


UPDATE: If you have bought the Steam version of the game, then download it right now and select the "Do not automatically update this game" option to keep the old version. The game takes very little space (25 Mb), so you won't regret it!

2nd UPDATE: Here's the new dancing zombie!

3rd UPDATE: JR just sent me this link, and it's perfectly appropriate to illustrate this situation. Trying to "protect the value of a brand" shutting down everything that looks even remotely as a "copyright infringement" only leads to destroy creativity and can even be counterproductive. If Andy Warhol tried to paint those iconic Campbell soup cans nowadays, he would be sued out of existence. Just think about it.

FINAL UPDATE: Forget about disabling automatic updates. Even if you do that, Steam forcefully upgrades your version to the GOTY release. That's not nice, Valve, that's not nice at all...

POST-FINAL UPDATE: Some guys have found a way to keep MJ in the game. It's not perfect, but it seems to work.

miércoles, 14 de julio de 2010

Never say this is the last game

Did you love the Monkey Island games? Well, then you'll love Deathspank. This is the first game from Ron Gilbert in a very long time, and it's good.

It's nice to see Gilbert creating cool games again. The Monkey Island games became crappy and too cartoony after he left! To his credit, he has created something new and exciting. Other designers are happy to make the same game over and over again, with Hideo Kojima being the worst offender, or even Hironobu Sakaguchi, who made his long, prosperous career possible after he went all out to create a "Final Fantasy" which was supposed to be Square's last game. So what's he doing now, after leaving Square-Enix? The Last Story, which will probably be his "last game", again. You have to be kidding me!

Do you know who has been actually frank about creating the same game over and over again until we can't take it anymore? Yes, you guessed it right... Well, the guy responsible for creating Kevin Butler and the ad which kind of proved that Killzone 2 had amazing graphics after all has been hired by Activision. So I guess Activision wants to look less evil now, and this is probably the right person to whitewash Robert Kotick's wrongdoings. I can't imagine what he will do, but I'm sure it will work, because he's clever and we gamers have really short memories.

viernes, 9 de julio de 2010

Jimbecility - A bullet in the head


I shouldn't care about idiots making the world a worse place. After all, I didn't write any blog post about George W. Bush in eight years. But after he single-handedly started a wave of critical hate against a truly great game, and then he kept kicking it at any possible chance until that was it, I've decided that I've had enough with this twat who fancies himself a video games professional writer.


I didn't even want to acknowledge his existence ever again, but his latest act of stupidity is too amazing to let it just slip away. As part of a commentary about the difference between video game violence and real violence, he says: "to illustrate my point, I want to show you a bit of footage that it's a bit disturbing, so I want to warn you now." and then he shows the footage.


This guy is never one to be taken too seriously, because his rants are always so over the top that you don't really know if he is serious or not. So, what is he going to show us, a clip of the death of Bambi's mother?


Well, most of Sterling's followers are teenagers who don't know better, so they don't immediately identify the 23-year-old footage of the Bud Dwyer suicide. So a lot of young readers are expecting some of the patented tongue-in-cheek antics to be expected from him, they keep watching, and they are unexpectedly "rewarded" with a close up of a man shooting a gun into his own face.


Can an immature blogger sink any lower to prove an obvious, sophomoric point? The poor wretch goes on to say something equivalent to "See? Real violence is not disturbing at all. His head didn't blow up or anything like in video games". No, but I got to see a stream of blood gushing down a recently dead dude's face, and now I have to try to sleep after seeing that.


And to cap it all off, this pathetic, unineuronal excuse for a video games journalist thinks it's a good idea to end his simplistic rant taking a plastic gun out of an envelope and placing it in his mouth. Oh, how funny! I'm going to die laughing. And after 150 comments, none of his faithful readers seems offended or anything. Oh, the internets.

martes, 6 de julio de 2010

Killed by bad reviews

Sega has confirmed that there will be no sequel for Alpha Protocol, crushed by slow sales and middling reviews. Because yes, reviews actually have a strong influence on sales.

I didn't want this to happen. The game is very good, but for some reason American reviewers really hated it, specially a short-sighted idiot from Destructoid with a taste for self-promotion (with features like "Jimpressions", "the Jimquisition", and probably something called "Jimbecility" in the near future) who was so off-the-mark as Tom Chick was when he "reviewed" Deus Ex ten years ago in a perfect storm of cluelessness. According to Chick, Deux Ex was a "cliché-riddled game" with "an uninteresting story", "generic soundtrack" (wait, what?!), and "isn't all bad, though; I'd say it's only 90% bad". Amazing words for what is now considered one of the best games in history (or even the best, period).

Now Alpha Protocol is getting the bad rap, even if a lot of people is really enjoying the game. This reminds me of what's been happening to M. Night Shyamalan for the last few years. All of his new movies have been torn to pieces by critics, and the last one is no exception. The Last Airbender has at this point a pitiful 8% at Rotten Tomatoes, which means 92% of the American critics hated it.

But the thing is, a lot of people went to see The Last Airbender. After earning $40 million during its first weekend, it's not a disaster. So Shyamalan's planned trilogy could very well happen, if word of mouth is good and people keep going to watch it.

It didn't go that way for Alpha Protocol. European reviews were usually kinder, and I was even considering to buy the PS3 version (I originally bought it for PC) to support Obsidian's effort. But now it's too late. I guess a future for RPGs with lots of choices is now crushed, as it was for Deus Ex, one of the few games with real significant choices. In the amazing coverage by RPS celebrating Ten Years of Deus Ex, some people express their disappointment because nobody followed the trail opened by it: "I just assumed that games were going to be like that in the future."

Alpha Protocol is truly one of the few games in which the player can actually shape the story in visibly different, complex ways, even changing your allies and foes and getting to fight different people as a consequence. Despite its few weaknesses (the actually decent combat system is hated by many), expect in a few years some articles wondering why this great game failed.