The War Z dumped onto Steam - Unfinished, Falsely advertised

[Gahars]

Staff Update- Supposedly now withdrawn from sale and refunds offered - GBAtemp thread

Now, this isn't the first time I've posted about The War Z (and if things keep going this way, it won't be the last). But considering the new depths its sunk to... well, it's hard to resist.

Shockingly, “The War Z,” which is shown above, has officially went live on Steam today, but the game hasn't reached a final build yet. While some may think there is nothing wrong with this type of release model, I would agree, as this would provide a basis for implementing features as the build progresses. But, the way Hammerpoint Interactive has decided to do about this release is simply immoral, as they have not stated this information anywhere on the official product listing for this title.

Examiner

The game was advertised as having areas 100-400 km long - it doesn't. The game was advertised as having servers for rent - it doesn't. It's advertised as featuring experience points and acquirable skills - it doesn't. (Note: It appears that some of this may be corrected. In announcing this, the developers claimed that people had just "misread" the original text. Classy.)

You see where this is going?

But wait, there's more! The game charges players real money for in-game items, items that are lost permanently upon death. Speaking of death, there is a 4 hour respawn timer, and the only way around it is to lay down the dough. This is all for a(n unfinished, buggy) game that already costs $15 bucks. If you want a refund, well, too bad; the new Terms of Service players are forced to sign disallows refunds through Steam. Honestly, the title "The Cash-Whore Z" would be far more appropriate at this point.

And despite all of this, it is currently a top seller. Well, you know what they say about fools and their money...

The drama is continuing to unfold, so I recommend you sit back, heat up some popcorn, and enjoy the ride. This looks like it'll be a meltdown for the ages.

 

[raulpica]

I love the idea, too bad I fear it'll get abandoned after 2 months.

 

[Foxi4]

So, it's practically like Minecaft, right?

 

[gifi4]

Still not surpirsed. Like I said in the other thread, I have Day Z but didn't even consider War Z.

 

[Jamstruth]

So, it's practically like Minecaft, right?

Minecraft doesn't charge for in-game items.
Minecraft doesn't have a 4 hour respawn timer unless you pay money.
Minecraft clearly advertised itself as an In-Dev product. This was all over its site.
Don't compare Mojang (which I admit are not the absolute gods of Indie and a paragon of developer morals) to a company entirely in it to wring as much cash as it can out of a product while its having a fad.

 

[Pong20302000]

the sooner this game gets private servers the better

this game will just be constant hassle of people shooting others

 

[Foxi4]

Don't compare Mojang (which I admit are not the absolute gods of Indie and a paragon of developer morals) to a company entirely in it to wring as much cash as it can out of a product while its having a fad.

But... that's exactly what Mojang was... And what Minecraft continues to be - a glorified tech demo.



All of the other factors you mentioned, like long respawn times or the choice for buying weapons with microtransactions are elements of the game proper - It's a simulation, so naturally it takes time for you to respawn.

It's supposed to be hard, thus if you want to get top tier items quick, you better be ready to A) Pay for them and B) Accept the possibility of losing them if you're killed.

DayZ was no game for p*ssies and apparently WarZ tries to follow in its footsteps, for better or worse.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Minecraft doesn't charge for in-game items.
Minecraft doesn't have a 4 hour respawn timer unless you pay money.
Minecraft clearly advertised itself as an In-Dev product. This was all over its site.
Don't compare Mojang (which I admit are not the absolute gods of Indie and a paragon of developer morals) to a company entirely in it to wring as much cash as it can out of a product while its having a fad.

I still paid $24 for an unfinished game.

I know I rail on Minecraft a lot but this did strike me as "Minecraft but with bad press behind it."

 

[nryn99]

steam allows stuff like this?

 

[Jamstruth]

I still paid $24 for an unfinished game.

I know I rail on Minecraft a lot but this did strike me as "Minecraft but with bad press behind it."

You'll notice I said that I admit that Mojang and Minecraft are not the absolute best examples of Indie Games. These guys come off as greedy to me, expecting me to both pay for an in-dev game and pay through the nose just to play it. I can't take games that expect me to pay with in-game transactions after I've already paid for them, especially for things like respawn times.

 

[EyeZ]

I was all for getting this game when I first heard about it, until I read some posts on here (can't remember the thread) that is.

When I saw it on Steam I was gob-smacked, especially after reading about disgruntled purchasers.

I did read the article on eurogamer a few minutes ago and can say I'll be giving this one a wide berth, for now anyway.

 

[Forstride]

I still paid $24 for an unfinished game.

The difference is, you knew Minecraft was unfinished when you bought it, because it was advertised as being in beta stages, and it was your own fault. The War Z isn't advertised as a game in alpha stages, and is listed with features that aren't even in the game. So people going to buy the game after reading the false advertising have wasted their money at the fault of the developers.

 

[Foxi4]

You'll notice I said that I admit that Mojang and Minecraft are not the absolute best examples of Indie Games. These guys come off as greedy to me, expecting me to both pay for an in-dev game and pay through the nose just to play it. I can't take games that expect me to pay with in-game transactions after I've already paid for them, especially for things like respawn times.

You don't seem to get the point of microtransactions. You pay for items and things you normally wouldn't be able to get or it would take immense amount of effort.

WarZ is supposed to be a combat simulator, so the long respawn time is entirely in place - when you die on a battlefield, you just die and your team has to work on its own. Long respawn times are supposed to simulate that by "taking you out of the game" for the duration of an average skirmsh.

As for in-game items, sometimes when you lose your gear you just don't feel like getting it again and you'd rather pay $2 to get it - that's an entirely valid option for start-ups and advanced players alike and it stretches across most MMO's.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

The difference is, you knew Minecraft was unfinished when you bought it, because it was advertised as being in beta stages, and it was your own fault. The War Z isn't advertised as a game in alpha stages, and is listed with features that aren't even in the game. So people going to buy the game after reading the false advertising have wasted their money at the fault of the developers.

I honestly call bullshit on that. If it's in its beta stages, just keep testing it until it comes out. They just slapped a "beta" label on it so if someone complained about something bad in the game, they could just go "Oh it's in its beta stages! It'll get fixed eventually!"

I'm not saying that Minecraft is at the level that the War Z is at, but the difference is that people would gladly take a bullet for Minecraft but shit over War Z. Mainly because of that big lump of bad press it got (which I think was later proven to be false, correct me if I'm wrong).

EDIT: For the record I do think the guys who made War Z are scumbags. They are falsely advertising their game, releasing it unfinished, and blatantly ripping off a popular idea for their own, plus they seem oblivious to their own press. My point is that a lot of people are selective in their criticism of companies who do the same things.

 

[Forstride]

I'm not saying Minecraft doesn't have bugs. You're comparing a game still in development, that was ADVERTISED as in development, to a game that was released as a finished game, ADVERTISED with features that aren't in the game, and might never be.

I don't care how much you hate Minecraft, you just cannot equally compare it to The War Z.

 

[Foxi4]

I don't care how much you hate Minecraft, you just cannot equally compare it to The War Z.

I think his point is that those two games were both in "beta" stages of development the moment they were released to the public, which is true. Advertising doesn't have much to do with the issue at hand, his and my point alike is that the game's a beta, like Minecraft was. That, and it's a joke gone horribly serious all of a sudden.

 

[Forstride]

Are you serious? Advertising DOES have a lot to do with it. People bought this game expecting features that it had advertised on the store page, and were completely ripped off. That's the main reason the game and its developers are getting so much flak.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I think the point is that people shouldn't be releasing their fucking games as betas.

 

[Foxi4]

Are you serious? Advertising DOES have a lot to do with it. People bought this game expecting features that it had advertised on the store page, and were completely ripped off. That's the main reason the game and its developers are getting so much flak.

Question #1: Is WarZ a "beta" at the point of its release?
Question #2: Was Minecraft a "beta" at the point of its release?

If you answered both yes, I'm right and you're taking this way too seriously.

I think the point is that people shouldn't be releasing their fucking games as betas.

That, unless the whole point of the beta release is to test the game that's going to be sold either way, in which case beta testers should receive discounts for the final game as long as they post bug reports.

 

[Forstride]

It's not advertised as a beta or alpha, so for the purpose of this argument, no, it's not.