IGNs First Impressions of NWN2

[jaguars4ever]

For evaluation purposes, I would hold a game to the state it's in out-of-the-box.  Otherwise we're just condoning developers to be lax and release quasi-buggy titles under the future justification that every thing will be patched.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

IThat doesn't make a lot of sense. It's not like developers test their games solely for reviewers. Developers' interests in making non-buggy games extends beyond reviews. A developer that says "let's go half-assed on this and fix it later" is a pretty ****ty developer. Wouldn't we also have to recognize the constraints that a developer is put under that might hinder a game's performance? I don't see any problems with reviewing patched titles, just so long as you indicate that the title's been patched. It's the version most people should be playing, anyway. Reviewing an old version is reviewing a game few people will play.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For better or for worse, games which are reviewed and received well tend to do well, and the converse is also true. Nobody said developers test their games solely for reviewers, but the fact remains that developers do care about their reviews. You need look further than the review accolades Obsidian or Bioware posted in the past on their homepage.

 

Also, unfortunately there are develops for half-ass it and release a seemingly never ending series of patches later. Ironically in fact, one of them continues to consistently develop the fastest selling game within the UK (not mentioning any names). This particular studio knows the public is going to buy their title, so they try to get it out in time for the Christmas rush. Does this make them a bad developer? I'll leave that for you to judge.

[Tigranes]

Better solution;

 

don't review games before they're released. Review it once you get the Gold.

[funcroc]

http://www.worthplaying.com/article.php?si...=thread&order=0

 

Worthplaying review.

[CoM_Solaufein]

Good news since they are comparing in to Baldur's Gate. NWN2 will be a winner.

[metadigital]

For evaluation purposes, I would hold a game to the state it's in out-of-the-box.  Otherwise we're just condoning developers to be lax and release quasi-buggy titles under the future justification that every thing will be patched.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Releasing quasi buggy titles has been the status quo for as long as I can remember. Once in a while you get a polished bug free product, once in a long while.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is true quite often, but whether that's attributed to the devs or the paper pushing publishers varies from case to case.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I mostly agree that it's the content in the box that should be reviewed. However, when a patch is out on release-day I definitely think that should be taken into consideration. ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As above; the problem with a(ny) large software project is that the Gold milestone is a top-down management decision, rather than a botom-up developer one. In other words, the management (Publishers in this case) mandate a temporal finish deadline. The actual messy real-life programming environment may not be able to make that demand. Is that the fault of the developers or the publishers? Depends. Good management should be hooked into the developer feedback loop; good developers should be able to hit a (reasonable) target.

 

I do know that the projects that I have been associated with tend to change in appearance quite dramatically from day to day, including those days either side of the deadline. :D

 

Also, remember the delay from "going gold" to Jo Gamer getting her copy is all about distribution: sending the master ISO image to be cut, cutting a bajillion CD/DVDs, printing the manual and other supporting media (creating figurines and coins) and physically transporting the goods.

 

It is not difficult to have a patch released with the retail debut of the game. Also, instantaneous (electronic) distribution would allow a continuously improving product (like Steam and Half-Life).

[Dark_Raven]

Nice review. It makes me anxious to get my hands on it.

[Plano Skywalker]

P.S. More seriously, the review was alright. Liked most of what I read except the bad stuff I already knew about (like forced companions). The game seems to be completely railroaded as far as linearity goes thus far. That's not cool and even worse than the original OC.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

well, I think it has to do with using the NPCs to tell the story (a la PST and K2). that comes at a price: lack of companion choices, especially early on.

 

on balance, I like the K2 approach to storytelling...but I do wish for a compromise: make some party members releaseable and have their story clues surface elsewhere.

[metadigital]

on balance, I like the K2 approach to storytelling...but I do wish for a compromise:  make some party members releaseable and have their story clues surface elsewhere.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is a great idea.

 

As this is another first impression topic, further observations and comments should go here.