Quote:
Ragnarok-X said:
There are so many examples of this...MoO3, Civ4, HoMM5, Titan Quest etc ++
|
Titan Quest is already in the "Halls of Shame", I see
That's not really fair, though, considering that half of it works half the time, and that 25% is very fun. For some reason, people (probably nVidia users) seem very willing to forgive/defend Civ4... not me, though.
Games get reviewed at release. If a 'C' game at release is patched a month later to be an 'A' game, it will still eternally have 'C' reviews, and have sold like a 'C' game for the first month... and forever after, because in month 2, people will still see 'C' reviews. I understand why people ship an F- piece of trash, and patch it later so it won't delete your registry anymore... since in another 2 months, it would basically be an F- piece of trash with slightly more obsolete graphics. But I don't understand why people spend years developing an 'A' game, and ship it 2 months early as a 'B-' game.
Not to say this is happening here; I have no idea, and I'm not commenting on Space Empires (though I do wonder if GalCiv2 is stable yet). But in general, this whole concept of "faster and brokener" that plagues computer games is utterly baffling to me, since it is so obviously idiotic and self-defeating. Even the excuse 'I thought it was done' is obsolete in elementary school, when you find out that turning in a test as soon as you have scrawled something by every question does not magically grant you a better score than people who take time to make sure the answers are right.