Re: Ryzom released too early IMO
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 4:20 pm
You know, this question always comes up on forums. No matter what the game, some people will say it was not ready for release, and do you know what? In nearly every case they're right.
No MMOG I've ever seen was ever really complete when it was released. Now some might say that this type of game evolves and so you can't expect all the content to be there, and from a storyline perspective that's true. However, Dam does raise issues that are very real and affect (as far as I'm aware) every single MMOG that has ever been released.
The blame for this problem does not rest with the developers/publishers alone. We as players must also take a good portion of the blame as we continue to accept releases that are not ready. Think of it this way - if you bought a single player game with the amount of bugs in it that the average MMOG has at release, you'd probably return it and demand your money back. When it comes to MMOGs though, for the most part we accept there will be bugs and hope they'll be fixed in upcoming patches, and this is where the problem lies.
In an ideal world, the only thing a patch in a MMOG should be for is to introduce new content, not fix bugs. Bugs should be fixed before the game is released, especially silly ones like placeholders instead of names etc. To me, that's just laziness and bad project management. No doubt some will counter this by saying that in code as complex as a MMOG you should expect bugs, but this is nonsense. During my career as an IT security consultant, I worked with some of the most complex code in existence, and quite frankly bugs were simply not accepted. I see no reason why we should take the release of buggy code as the 'norm' when there should be no need. I have seen highly complex systems be developed from scratch within 5 years that have absolutely no bugs in them, none whatsoever.
To be fair however, one must also consider that gamers have a tendency to do things with games that the makers never dreamed of, which is why I said 'in an ideal world' in the previous paragraph. I accept that as code develops (that being storyline code) there is a strong possibility that an unforeseen circumstance will require fixing. I wouldn't expect the kind of diligence to be paid to game code as I would to security products, but at the same time I would expect nothing more than professional pride to push companies to produce the best and most bug free product they can.
Having said that, the kind of bugs we see commonly in Ryzom (placeholders again a good example) are in my view the kind of things that horrify me as a gamer and as someone who works in the video game industry. The other thing that is frequently mishandled is perception. Dam mentions things that were to be included at release, and some have countered that these things were actually planned 'shortly after'. I thought things like mounts were planned at release, as apparently did a lot of others. Now it may well be that we were wrong, but if so many people have a misconception about something like this, it asks questions about the way perceptions were handled in the first place. If (for example) 90% of the playerbase believe something is going to happen a certain way and then it is done completely differently, then the resulting whinging is as much the fault of the company as the fault of the players, as things were obviously not made clear enough to begin with.
After saying all that, I do have to be fair to Nevrax. For the most part, they have sone very well, far better than many bigger names I could mention, and Ryzom is a game I enjoy playing and expect to continue to enjoy for a long time. Do I think the game was ready for release? From an ideal standpoint, I'd have to say no it wasn't. Far too many bugs still remain that should have been fixed long ago. From the current MMOG 'standard' however, I'd say Nevrax have done better than most, but the lack of storyline from day one is the thing that really lets me down. I understand why they did it, but I personally believe they should have carried out a concurrent closed beta under a non disclosure agreement during the last open beta to test content for release from the start.
No MMOG I've ever seen was ever really complete when it was released. Now some might say that this type of game evolves and so you can't expect all the content to be there, and from a storyline perspective that's true. However, Dam does raise issues that are very real and affect (as far as I'm aware) every single MMOG that has ever been released.
The blame for this problem does not rest with the developers/publishers alone. We as players must also take a good portion of the blame as we continue to accept releases that are not ready. Think of it this way - if you bought a single player game with the amount of bugs in it that the average MMOG has at release, you'd probably return it and demand your money back. When it comes to MMOGs though, for the most part we accept there will be bugs and hope they'll be fixed in upcoming patches, and this is where the problem lies.
In an ideal world, the only thing a patch in a MMOG should be for is to introduce new content, not fix bugs. Bugs should be fixed before the game is released, especially silly ones like placeholders instead of names etc. To me, that's just laziness and bad project management. No doubt some will counter this by saying that in code as complex as a MMOG you should expect bugs, but this is nonsense. During my career as an IT security consultant, I worked with some of the most complex code in existence, and quite frankly bugs were simply not accepted. I see no reason why we should take the release of buggy code as the 'norm' when there should be no need. I have seen highly complex systems be developed from scratch within 5 years that have absolutely no bugs in them, none whatsoever.
To be fair however, one must also consider that gamers have a tendency to do things with games that the makers never dreamed of, which is why I said 'in an ideal world' in the previous paragraph. I accept that as code develops (that being storyline code) there is a strong possibility that an unforeseen circumstance will require fixing. I wouldn't expect the kind of diligence to be paid to game code as I would to security products, but at the same time I would expect nothing more than professional pride to push companies to produce the best and most bug free product they can.
Having said that, the kind of bugs we see commonly in Ryzom (placeholders again a good example) are in my view the kind of things that horrify me as a gamer and as someone who works in the video game industry. The other thing that is frequently mishandled is perception. Dam mentions things that were to be included at release, and some have countered that these things were actually planned 'shortly after'. I thought things like mounts were planned at release, as apparently did a lot of others. Now it may well be that we were wrong, but if so many people have a misconception about something like this, it asks questions about the way perceptions were handled in the first place. If (for example) 90% of the playerbase believe something is going to happen a certain way and then it is done completely differently, then the resulting whinging is as much the fault of the company as the fault of the players, as things were obviously not made clear enough to begin with.
After saying all that, I do have to be fair to Nevrax. For the most part, they have sone very well, far better than many bigger names I could mention, and Ryzom is a game I enjoy playing and expect to continue to enjoy for a long time. Do I think the game was ready for release? From an ideal standpoint, I'd have to say no it wasn't. Far too many bugs still remain that should have been fixed long ago. From the current MMOG 'standard' however, I'd say Nevrax have done better than most, but the lack of storyline from day one is the thing that really lets me down. I understand why they did it, but I personally believe they should have carried out a concurrent closed beta under a non disclosure agreement during the last open beta to test content for release from the start.
]
)