Bethesda priortizes MTX over bug-fixing in Wolfenstein Youngblood

[Cacodemon345]

I hope this doesn't affect future Bethesda-published games...

[MFG38]

21 minutes ago, Cacodemon345 said:

I hope this doesn't affect future Bethesda-published games...

 

Hate to break it to you, but it most likely will. After all, Bethesda is Bethesda.

[Avoozl]

Ehh, I gave up on Bethesda long ago.

Edited August 1, 2019 by Avoozl

[Cruduxy Pegg]

Bug fixing takes longer than fixing this.. And this is Bethesda so expecting bug fixes should involve a lot of praying.

[FractalBeast]

I hate YongYea. Goddamn fucking retarded clickbait channel. Not watching that.

[geo]

Step 1: Microtransactions

Step 2: Pay employees

Step 3: Fix and add stuff.

 

Stupid programmers not wanting to work for free! Call me crazy, but these "cheap cash in spinoffs" are probably still super expensive to produce. Wolfenstien New Blood 2 wasn't a big hit? Need something to keep making Wolfenstien New Blood 3? Spin off cash grab! Perfect. Take the base from the previous game and use this to keep making the next while making money along the way. Youngblood is the Mario Bros between Donkey Kong and Super Mario Bros.

Edited August 1, 2019 by geo

[[McD] James]

How could anybody possibly hate Yong Yea? He's never had any clickbait videos before. Clickbait is when you use false advertising to get people to click on something. That isn't his style. I greatly respect him. 

[geo]

59 minutes ago, Ajora said:

How could anybody possibly hate Yong Yea? He's never had any clickbait videos before. Clickbait is when you use false advertising to get people to click on something. That isn't his style. I greatly respect him. 

I always felt clickbait is a sensationalist headline followed by something innocuous... "Slipknot member gets choked out on stage!" Turns out it was one band mate play choking the other. It's not false advertising, he was choked, but it's never as serious as you'd expect from the headline.

 

I've also seen headlines like "Man says: I'd rather burn my car than get back in with that snake." The story was about a dude that had a snake pop out of his vent when he turned on the heat. What kind of snake? Tiny, harmless snake, so tiny it could slither out of a heating vent. Where the quote came from was someone on Twitter saying "I'd rather burn my car than get back in with that snake." That was the headline... a Twitter comment. Sensationalism makes for clickbait.

 

"Doom Eternal forces players to kill innocent civilians" yeah... after they had turned into possessed zombies trying to kill him.

[D4NUK1]

3 hours ago, geo said:

I always felt clickbait is a sensationalist headline followed by something innocuous... "Slipknot member gets choked out on stage!" Turns out it was one band mate play choking the other. It's not false advertising, he was choked, but it's never as serious as you'd expect from the headline.

 

I've also seen headlines like "Man says: I'd rather burn my car than get back in with that snake." The story was about a dude that had a snake pop out of his vent when he turned on the heat. What kind of snake? Tiny, harmless snake, so tiny it could slither out of a heating vent. Where the quote came from was someone on Twitter saying "I'd rather burn my car than get back in with that snake." That was the headline... a Twitter comment. Sensationalism makes for clickbait.

 

"Doom Eternal forces players to kill innocent civilians" yeah... after they had turned into possessed zombies trying to kill him.

That's why i unsuscribed him time ago. They need to talk more logical that sensationalism.

[Cacodemon345]

Clickbait means it would be implying something else IMO (example: "Someone got choked to death on a place!" which is the headline, but after you watch it, turns out that the guy wasn't actually choked to death, making it both sensationalized (making it look like the guy died) and false-advertising, which is a way in how I view clickbaits).

 

Back into topic, with how Bethesda has victimized Wolfenstein Youngblood with MTXs using the bugs as an way, I hope they don't even try to find a bug and use it as a way to victimize anything with MTXs in future games published by them (which includes Doom Eternal in my list unfortunately, just because id is the developer and Bethesda is just the publisher, doss not mean that the publisher can't decide how stuff rolls out, as we seen in the recent Doom re-releases. That "publisher and developer are different" phrase isn't a good way to say that the game will be unaffected IMO.).

[scalliano]

Customer service is king. If you screw up your service to your customers, your priority should always be to put it right. No exceptions. Shipping a broken game and deferring fixes in order to attempt to extract more money from the people who have already paid you is a customer service faux-pas of truly WB Games proportions.

 

Also, I've seen the skins in Youngblood. They're fugly as all hell. Anyone who drops real money on them deserves what they get IMO. Bear in mind, though, like FO76, the late-addition pay-to-win cancer will spread, both to this game and future titles. I've said it before, but I'll say it here again - Doom Eternal WILL have this cancer. They're already pushing demon skins as preorder bonuses. It might not have it at launch - AAA pubs have already found a loophole in that if they wait for a month, they can bypass both the media backlash and the "in-Game Purchases" label on boxed copies. We've already seen this with Activision's recent shenanigans.

 

I'm picking up Eternal for the campaign alone. Bethesda gets ONE shot at this. I still trust id as a dev, but If my favourite frachise ends up going down in flames with this bullshit, I'm done. And you can screencap this post and show it to me in future if I ever go back on it.

[Quasar]

Microtransactions do not pay a game's programmers, and are not necessary to do so. AAA publishers that plead poverty are one of the most oxymoronic things in the world, as they rake in literally billions of dollars in profit, and then lay off employees immediately after posting record income. Some of them have CEOs who could personally afford to pay every other employee's salary out of their own, for life, and not feel a pinch. Microtransactions are a predatory way to extract money from people with addiction issues, first and foremost. This is proven; companies have admitted as much on video at their conferences.

 

So, please don't mindlessly help spread propaganda like "games cost too much to make." It is bullshit now and always has been bullshit.

[seed]

2 hours ago, Quasar said:

So, please don't mindlessly help spread propaganda like "games cost too much to make." It is bullshit now and always has been bullshit.

 

Good to know it was always fiction.

[geo]

17 hours ago, Quasar said:

 

 

So, please don't mindlessly help spread propaganda like "games cost too much to make." It is bullshit now and always has been bullshit.

I guess I'll listen to your propaganda then.

 

Do you know how much it costs to manufacture physical copies and ship them out? To negotiate with distributors up front and manufacturers want their money too. Most big stores won't take an unknown single game project. They don't have a track record of sales like a publisher would. It's that name recognition that publishers have. Game developers want to get paid and want advances on royalties and depending on the contract, the publisher can fund a good percentage. Depending on the contract, the publisher takes the financial risk, therefore it should be worth their while to make the lion's share. People like to think these things just magically happen, but in the world of physical copies there are costs of gas, plastic, employees that do not want royalties like developers. Some consoles did or still do require fees to even publish on their systems. Nintendo requires a developer to have a publisher before they're allowed to publish on the system. Otherwise it could fill up with too much indie garbage.

 

TV ads don't come cheap either. Depending on the publishing deal, the publisher might cover or split those costs. It's all just a money sink.

 

Publishers exist because they have the balls to take that risk and because otherwise developers would have to take on extra employees to deal with these getting from we have a product to the store. Digital distribution made it a lot easier and costs have come down, making some lesser publishers obsolete.

 

It is indeed shitty that publishers have to force microtransactions, but if a studio doesn't like it... time to do it themselves? Be at the top of the food chain. Businesses have to make money. Just be happy they're not soiling true Wolfenstien with their microtransaction taint. They made a whole new spin off for it!

Edited August 7, 2019 by geo

[ketmar]

15 minutes ago, geo said:

in the world of physical copies

can you land me your time machine, if you please? i have some things to fix in my past.

[Graf Zahl]

On 8/6/2019 at 2:51 PM, Quasar said:

So, please don't mindlessly help spread propaganda like "games cost too much to make." It is bullshit now and always has been bullshit.

 

O, really?

Having seen the runaway costs that can happen even with a low profile game production first hand, I simply cannot concur. If it was "bullshit" the current market situation where a few abusive big players control the entire market would never have developed.

 

If this was "bullshit" there'd also be more content that'd take more risks. But as we can see we get sequel after sequel after reboot after reimagining, which is also a clear sign that the budgets of games are high enough that they need some franchise association to sell.

 

If this was "bullshit" some of the smaller game studios would grow and slowly but certainly outclass the current leaders in the market. But none of this happens, in fact the big ones manage to purchase the smaller studios and transform them into part of the problem.

 

We actually have the exact same problem in Hollywood - for decades now there hasn't been any new studio being able to produce AAA titles - all the smaller upstarts either went bankrupt or got bought out - we are now at the point where even a big one got bought out. The reason, like with games, is that the production budgets - and even more the advertising costs - have risen to amounts too high to handle for an upstart.

 

The important thing to remember is that a big studio or publisher can cover a flop's cost with the profit of the rest of their portfolio. A small studio will often have problems covering these costs, endiing their existence as an independent entity - either by getting shut down or being sold. And rest assured - that flop WILL happen - for everyone working in that business!

 

 

 

 

[seed]

12 minutes ago, Graf Zahl said:

If this was "bullshit" there'd also be more content that'd take more risks. But as we can see we get sequel after sequel after reboot after reimagining, which is also a clear sign that the budgets of games are high enough that they need some franchise association to sell.

 

I dunno what to say about this particular point though.

 

I think there's more reasons to this other than just requiring some brand association. When something is good, it is natural for people to want more, but it can also lead to laziness because you already found the formula so you don't have to experiment or try new things because the end result is probably still going to be good anyway. You know what works, you know what people want more of, you know what makes profit, you have no reason to take unnecessary risks.

 

And it's also far too easy to milk a franchise after you put out a good game once, chances are, as long as the quality doesn't sink below the sea between installments, people will buy it anyway, enough to make decent/good profit off of it.

[Graf Zahl]

The operative term that applies here is "risk management". as a business you do not want to produce a costly flop. The easiest way to avoid this is building on a well known brand. Taking risks with high budgets is frowned upon by the men in suits.

 

Just have a look at the movies again: Disney has become the undisputed king of the hill in moviemaking and if you take a closer look at how they got there it is very obvious that everything they do is either franchise fare or some remake of one of their successful older titles. Not one single title they released this year was a standalone story!

 

In addition, only one title in this year's top-10 was a standalone production.

 

And anything you get from this bit of trivia also applies to the games industry. This very obvious lack of risk-taking is a clear indicator of costs that have risen through the roof.

[ketmar]

3 hours ago, Graf Zahl said:

a clear indicator of costs that have risen through the roof

because AAA studios are trying to produce very bad b-movies instead of games. and movies are expensive.

[Quasar]

On 8/7/2019 at 12:53 AM, geo said:

Do you know how much it costs to manufacture physical copies and ship them out? To negotiate with distributors up front and manufacturers want their money too.

 

Physical distribution is a very small part of the market now and is not nearly the major cost sink you're making it out to be. The most physical sales now are for special and collectors' editions, and the huge markup on the plastic junk stuffed into them well more than already pays for it.

 

On 8/7/2019 at 12:53 AM, geo said:

Most big stores won't take an unknown single game project.

Good thing I am not talking about small indies here, huh? It's AAA publishers that plead poverty while putting exploitative microtransactions into their games. That say games are "too expensive" while making billions of dollars off of them.

 

On 8/7/2019 at 12:53 AM, geo said:

Game developers want to get paid and want advances on royalties and depending on the contract, the publisher can fund a good percentage.

I don't know any individual developers that get paid royalties. Are you talking about the studio's split of sales?

 

On 8/7/2019 at 12:53 AM, geo said:

Nintendo requires a developer to have a publisher before they're allowed to publish on the system. Otherwise it could fill up with too much indie garbage.

This is not true. All of Nightdive's titles on Switch are self-published. I think you forgot to whom you speak here.

 

On 8/7/2019 at 12:53 AM, geo said:

TV ads don't come cheap either. Depending on the publishing deal, the publisher might cover or split those costs. It's all just a money sink.

Nobody needs multi-million dollar marketing campaigns to sell the next CoD. This is an elective cost source, one that could easily be scaled back at this point.

 

On 8/7/2019 at 12:53 AM, geo said:

Publishers exist because they have the balls to take that risk and because otherwise developers would have to take on extra employees to deal with these getting from we have a product to the store.

Publishers exist to monopolize the market to the greatest extent they can. They buy up studios for the IPs and then shut them down, reducing competition for their own in-house grindfest drivel market-tested to appeal to the lowest common denominator with which they flood the market.

 

On 8/7/2019 at 12:53 AM, geo said:

It is indeed shitty that publishers have to force microtransactions, but if a studio doesn't like it... time to do it themselves? Be at the top of the food chain. Businesses have to make money.

Plenty of other smaller studios make money without exploiting people like this. I belong to one of them. How's that?

 

On 8/7/2019 at 12:53 AM, geo said:

Just be happy they're not soiling true Wolfenstien with their microtransaction taint. They made a whole new spin off for it!

You're going to be singing a different tune in November.

[wheresthebeef]

Watched about 30 seconds of the video, way too many "apparently"s were said for me to take it serious.

Is there a TLDW of what he's claiming?

[Quasar]

On 8/9/2019 at 9:56 PM, wheresthebeef said:

Watched about 30 seconds of the video, way too many "apparently"s were said for me to take it serious.

Is there a TLDW of what he's claiming?

The TLDR is: Wolfenstein Youngblood, like pretty much any game, has a lion's share of issues that need addressing in a patch. But out of all such issues, the only one they rushed a patch out for ASAP is a "fix" to the game that disables a method of unlocking microtransaction items without paying for them.

[Graf Zahl]

On 8/10/2019 at 3:32 AM, Quasar said:

Publishers exist to monopolize the market to the greatest extent they can. They buy up studios for the IPs and then shut them down, reducing competition for their own in-house grindfest drivel market-tested to appeal to the lowest common denominator with which they flood the market.

  

 

Actually, publishers exist to handle the parts of the business the developers do not want to do themselves, like running marketing campaigns etc. and getting the product into the stores (as long as physical distribution was still a thing.)

 

Not every publisher is evil by default, but the current crop of bigshits simply gobbled up too much influence in the times when a publisher was still needed to get the product sold, and now do anything possible to keep the competition small - the biggest weapon is large marketing budgets that ensure that the potential buyers only notice their shit and not the output from smaller developers which do not have the budget to compete.

 

I've seen how it worked and how their money destroyed the smaller shops.

 

[rampancy]

bring back shareware

[Woolie Wool]

On 8/5/2019 at 5:43 PM, scalliano said:

Customer service is king. If you screw up your service to your customers, your priority should always be to put it right. No exceptions. Shipping a broken game and deferring fixes in order to attempt to extract more money from the people who have already paid you is a customer service faux-pas of truly WB Games proportions.

Customer service is "king" in a young, competitive market. When markets mature into oligopolies, nobody has to give a fuck anymore and they can and will fuck over the customer over and over and over because they can get away with it. And you can't even "vote with your dollars" because Bethesda's advertising reach is inescapable and their will to keep fucking you over will win over your will to completely give up on all the IP they have ever acquired or will acquire forever. And they can just keep buying studios and properties until they have the one you just can't resist.

 

They don't have to care. They don't care. They will never care, and will continue to get away with not caring until the economy collapses and nobody can afford to buy or make video games at all.

 

On 8/7/2019 at 5:34 PM, ketmar said:

because AAA studios are trying to produce very bad b-movies instead of games. and movies are expensive.

AAA games are on a cost par with tentpole movies with all-star casts, not "B-movies", whose primary distinguishing factor is low budgets, about one-tenth that of an AAA video game.

Edited August 21, 2019 by Woolie Wool

[ketmar]

19 minutes ago, Woolie Wool said:

AAA games are on a cost par with tentpole movies with all-star casts

yet their quality is rarely even on par with an average b-movie.

[zen4040]

On 8/1/2019 at 12:29 PM, Cacodemon345 said:

I hope this doesn't affect future Bethesda-published games...

I didn't notice any bugs in the game so far so I don't see why people would be wanting bug fixes right now so much, and they just released a patch to remove some of the hitboxes. There's not even as many microtransactions as some other bethesda games, it's comestic only and you even start off with a bunch of gold coin to buy some skins, that with the fact that most of these cosmetics are just reskins anyways, I'm pretty happy with what I managed to buy with the gold coins.

"there isn't a feature to pause the game, like every single player game has"

It's like talking to my parents back when they didn't know anything about games at all. it's not single player, it's a fucking online coop game. The game still has it's problems for being a coop game no one seems to mention any of those, I swear people hate this game just for the sake of hating it. they can't even come up with points like the lack of a chat system.