I've got to admit something: I never preordered games. Never. I've bought some games on launch day, but not that often. And I haven't felt the rush to "go home and instantly play this game" in...erm...ever? At least 10-15 years. Even now: I've bought Donkey Kong Country tropical Freeze and Bayonetta, and put them in my "to play" list. This may sound stupid - I could easily saved 10 bucks - but it's my motivation to get a job. I tend to reward myself with things after something (say..."I can play this game after jogging 10 km") rather than just fucking that selfdiscipline thing. Also: having a game on the side also prevents me from overly buying games (why would I want to buy this? I still have that to play).
And I'm sure today's games are more about the release dates than anything else. It used to be that you barely knew of a game until you found it in the stores. Now, you've got teasers, spoilers, interviews, conventions...the list goes on. It's so much that it pushed actual magazines into bankruptcy, but that's something for another topic. In any case, it's no longer an exception to have limited editions, exclusive-to-day1-purchase goodies, day1 DLC (which I don't mind, but that's something for another topic) and even discounts if you preorder. It's barely common use to be able to download the actual game before launch day and "play BEFORE launch day" becomes an attempted trend. Companies try to sell you the exclusivity to play the game before anyone else.
Perhaps it's my age speaking, but...what's the point in that? I guess some gamers owe it to their identity to do this ("a REAL gamer doesn't buy games after release day!!!"...that sort of reasoning). But the industry sure isn't making it easy on them.
For one: how do you know a game is good before it's released? You know in advance that all the info on the internet is skewed. They show the best footage of the best levels. If it's a franchise (which it usually is), it rarely steps away from the comfort zone of what made the game good, so you're pretty much replaying the previous game.
...and that is assuming it works fine. As of late, many AAA-titles just deliver buggy or broken games. Sure, this tends to get patched sooner or later, but still...it's quite a counterweight to the advantage of being the first.
Now...let's step away from that first day release and revisit that very same game in two or three years. I know this means ignoring the hype, but look at the advantages:
* price dropped dramatically. During steam sales, prices 5 to 10 times cheaper than the original launch price are no exception. Prices in bargain bins usually aren't that remarkable, but still...up to 4 times cheaper isn't hard to find.
* things have been patched quite well since that time.
* On a growing amount of AAA-titles, you'll have later editions (usually called GOTY-edition, but 'definitive edition' is also common) that include all the DLC and/or expansions
* (for PC games) thanks to Moore's law, that "incredibly demanding" game from some years ago now runs on (for today's standards) an average PC.
Case in point: rollercoaster tycoon 3. I never got into it because I heard bad things about it (what? no underground building? DAMNIT!
). It was buggy, ran slow, and more of that stuff. So I continued playing RCT2 and forgot about it. Until only about a week or so ago. I decided to try it out, since it was 70% off on steam sale (meaning: 5 bucks for the game and the two expansions). After playing for some hours, I went out and read some user reviews about it. I couldn't agree with one of them. Not that they were wrong, but those bugs were fixed, underground rides were added (in the 2nd expansion pack, IIRC) and by standards of 10 years ago (RCT3 debuted in 2004) I have a BEAST of a computer. As you can imagine, my experience was much better than any of those guys. While I agreed on some things (there ARE some counterintuitive design choices in this game) the overall balance was positive.
Because I "waited" ten years for it.
UT3 is another one I know quite well. The interface that had you made far more choices than needed to be dragged the entire experience down. But by the time the Black edition rolled out, it was too late. Opinions were already formed, and they don't easily change after that.
I'm sure I'm not the only one. In fact, I bet most longtime fans of a serie will admit that their latest entries look at their worst on launch day (diablo 3, anyone?). And sure: older games often miss things we've come to take for granted since then (gamepad support, to name one). But it's not as bad as it once was. Ten year old games don't require exotic hardware or advanced emulation to run, and it was well after the time of (indie-reclaimed) 16-bit. Take a game like Rise of Nations: it's one of the best RTS'es ever made, and can still easily stand next to any games released today. And that, my friends, is a good thing. A very, very good thing.
And I'm sure today's games are more about the release dates than anything else. It used to be that you barely knew of a game until you found it in the stores. Now, you've got teasers, spoilers, interviews, conventions...the list goes on. It's so much that it pushed actual magazines into bankruptcy, but that's something for another topic. In any case, it's no longer an exception to have limited editions, exclusive-to-day1-purchase goodies, day1 DLC (which I don't mind, but that's something for another topic) and even discounts if you preorder. It's barely common use to be able to download the actual game before launch day and "play BEFORE launch day" becomes an attempted trend. Companies try to sell you the exclusivity to play the game before anyone else.
Perhaps it's my age speaking, but...what's the point in that? I guess some gamers owe it to their identity to do this ("a REAL gamer doesn't buy games after release day!!!"...that sort of reasoning). But the industry sure isn't making it easy on them.
For one: how do you know a game is good before it's released? You know in advance that all the info on the internet is skewed. They show the best footage of the best levels. If it's a franchise (which it usually is), it rarely steps away from the comfort zone of what made the game good, so you're pretty much replaying the previous game.
...and that is assuming it works fine. As of late, many AAA-titles just deliver buggy or broken games. Sure, this tends to get patched sooner or later, but still...it's quite a counterweight to the advantage of being the first.
Now...let's step away from that first day release and revisit that very same game in two or three years. I know this means ignoring the hype, but look at the advantages:
* price dropped dramatically. During steam sales, prices 5 to 10 times cheaper than the original launch price are no exception. Prices in bargain bins usually aren't that remarkable, but still...up to 4 times cheaper isn't hard to find.
* things have been patched quite well since that time.
* On a growing amount of AAA-titles, you'll have later editions (usually called GOTY-edition, but 'definitive edition' is also common) that include all the DLC and/or expansions
* (for PC games) thanks to Moore's law, that "incredibly demanding" game from some years ago now runs on (for today's standards) an average PC.
Case in point: rollercoaster tycoon 3. I never got into it because I heard bad things about it (what? no underground building? DAMNIT!
). It was buggy, ran slow, and more of that stuff. So I continued playing RCT2 and forgot about it. Until only about a week or so ago. I decided to try it out, since it was 70% off on steam sale (meaning: 5 bucks for the game and the two expansions). After playing for some hours, I went out and read some user reviews about it. I couldn't agree with one of them. Not that they were wrong, but those bugs were fixed, underground rides were added (in the 2nd expansion pack, IIRC) and by standards of 10 years ago (RCT3 debuted in 2004) I have a BEAST of a computer. As you can imagine, my experience was much better than any of those guys. While I agreed on some things (there ARE some counterintuitive design choices in this game) the overall balance was positive.Because I "waited" ten years for it.
UT3 is another one I know quite well. The interface that had you made far more choices than needed to be dragged the entire experience down. But by the time the Black edition rolled out, it was too late. Opinions were already formed, and they don't easily change after that.
I'm sure I'm not the only one. In fact, I bet most longtime fans of a serie will admit that their latest entries look at their worst on launch day (diablo 3, anyone?). And sure: older games often miss things we've come to take for granted since then (gamepad support, to name one). But it's not as bad as it once was. Ten year old games don't require exotic hardware or advanced emulation to run, and it was well after the time of (indie-reclaimed) 16-bit. Take a game like Rise of Nations: it's one of the best RTS'es ever made, and can still easily stand next to any games released today. And that, my friends, is a good thing. A very, very good thing.
