Aliens : Colonial Marines

Overheal

tuxy wrote: »

It's been fairly successful

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-02-18-uk-charts-aliens-colonial-marines-is-top

Maybe we will get a sequel!

That's the saddest news I've heard out of this whole thing.

It's only going to encourage more studios to overhype game launches with fluff that isn't part of the launching title and then take everyones moneys and run away with it.

These developers need to be thrown out of the industry. Gearbox lost its good name in 2013.

Grumpypants

Alactric wrote: »

You don't like Jim Sterling, fine. How does that invalidate his article? 5 twitter accounts created within a day all licking Pitchford's hole over a game which has been a PR nuke

Well when asked what went wrong by someone acting like an adult Pitchford responded correctly saying the game was below par and they have a lot to learn from it and are looking into what went wrong between showing the demo and why the game didn't end up looking like that.

That is the way professional (or just normal) adults interact.

When Sterling flaps around like a baby calling Pitchford a liar and demanding that he responds to him he just ignores him.

Pitchford responds directly to him : @JimSterling Also - you know how to reach me if you want to ask questions. It appears you would rather show boat publicly for attention.

I won't defend the game but I will defend his right to ignore that moron.

example on how to act like an adult and get a reply.

@DuvalMagic I think while vulgar criticism is unfair to you most people just want an explanation to why the game is so different to the demo

@Trav614 That is understood and fair and we are looking at that. Lots of info to parse, lots of stake holders to respect.

Azza

Overheal wrote:

That's the saddest news I've heard out of this whole thing.

It's only going to encourage more studios to overhype game launches with fluff that isn't part of the launching title and then take everyones moneys and run away with it.

These developers need to be thrown out of the industry. Gearbox lost its good name in 2013.

Bit of an over reaction?

Firstly going to the top of chart means very little. We don't have actual sales numbers, maybe if its stays on top for a few weeks it could be called a success buts its far too early to tell. Bad games often have strong starts then tail off quickly. The Aliens branding along could be enough to ensure it sells well at release. The last Aliens Vs Predator game received poor reviews and it also debuted at no.1 in the charts. It means very little.

Given the absolute roasting Gearbox is getting right now I think studio's will be put off doing the same thing. Note there not the first to do this, back in 2006 Bethesda did the same with Oblivion, they cut dynamic shadows from the game without an announcement despite showing it in trailers. No one cared because the consensus was the game was good. No one would of been too bothered with Gearbox doing the same if the game play of the the finished product been actually good.

Releasing a bad game doesn't ruin the reputation of a company, releasing several bad games does. All will be forgiven if the next game is good.

BlitzKrieg

Also got to remember that Sega paid a lot of money for the rights to this franchise and have more titles on the way, having now 2 of their titles get roasted critically puts their next title (the one that sounds like it could be actually good) at serious risk, more so with this one as the criticism is much more audible in this one over AVP 3.

SeantheMan

On PC at least it's not getting it's due.

According to STEAM statistics

Current Players // Peak // Game
1,395 // 2,334 // The Sims 3
1,388 // 3,320 // Napoleon: Total War
1,373 // 1,659 // The War Z
1,340 // 1,691 // Deus Ex - Human Revolution
1,315 // 2,041 // Borderlands
1,312 // 1,804 // DC Universe Online
1,307 // 3,269 // Aliens: Colonial Marines
1,280 // 2,918 // Ace of Spades
1,207 // 2,887 // Condition Zero

snausages

Grumpypants wrote: »

Well when asked what went wrong by someone acting like an adult Pitchford responded correctly saying the game was below par and they have a lot to learn from it and are looking into what went wrong between showing the demo and why the game didn't end up looking like that.

That is the way professional (or just normal) adults interact.

When Sterling flaps around like a baby calling Pitchford a liar and demanding that he responds to him he just ignores him.

Pitchford responds directly to him : @JimSterling Also - you know how to reach me if you want to ask questions. It appears you would rather show boat publicly for attention.

I won't defend the game but I will defend his right to ignore that moron.

example on how to act like an adult and get a reply.

@DuvalMagic I think while vulgar criticism is unfair to you most people just want an explanation to why the game is so different to the demo

@Trav614 That is understood and fair and we are looking at that. Lots of info to parse, lots of stake holders to respect.

I agree. However salient his argument might be in that article I think he really needs to stow that massive ego of his sometimes.

hooradiation

Overheal wrote: »

That's the saddest news I've heard out of this whole thing.

It's only going to encourage more studios to overhype game launches with fluff that isn't part of the launching title and then take everyones moneys and run away with it.

These developers need to be thrown out of the industry. Gearbox lost its good name in 2013.

Calm down dear, you'll get the vapours.

I'm not sure why you want to put 180 or so people "thrown out of the industry" because a game you don't care for enjoyed some strong sales on it's launch week. I'll put it down to typical gamer entitlement-gone-wild syndrome.


If it makes you feel any better, the traditional sales curve for videogames means the sales are going to drop and the bulk of the sales of any given title will be done by about three weeks after launch.

Given the largely negative response to A:CM that drop is probably going to be more severe than normal. Maybe this will sate your acute feeling of being personally wronged by this.

Not The Real Scarecrow

hooradiation wrote: »

Calm down dear, you'll get the vapours.

I'm not sure why you want to put 180 or so people "thrown out of the industry" because a game you don't care for enjoyed some strong sales on it's launch week. I'll put it down to typical gamer entitlement-gone-wild syndrome.


If it makes you feel any better, the traditional sales curve for videogames means the sales are going to drop and the bulk of the sales of any given title will be done by about three weeks after launch.

Given the largely negative response to A:CM that drop is probably going to be more severe than normal. Maybe this will sate your acute feeling of being personally wronged by this.

My observation is that people, that bought it, are annoyed because they feel like they pre bought a game based on goodwill and a demo that misrepresented the final product. There was an awful lot of hype around the game for months and Sega and Gearbox obviously knew they had a turkey, so they pushed the pre orders a little bit more cause they knew when the game came out it was going to get crushed and sales would drop dramatically.
I can understand why people would be pissed off but at the same time it should act as a good lesson about pre ordering a game on blind faith alone.Its not going to kill anyone to wait a day or two to purchase the thing and check out the reviews. If people showed a bit of self control I'm sure it would have been a massive flop and send a message to the developers that they're not going to make money unless the game is solid enough.Only thing developers have learned from this mess is that they can get away with pushing out a broken piece of **** and that putting money into marketing as opposed to the actual game will turn them a decent profit.

hooradiation

Meatwad wrote: »

Only thing developers have learned from this mess is that they can get away with pushing out a broken piece of **** and that putting money into marketing as opposed to the actual game will turn them a decent profit.

Just how much profit do you imagine the publishers of a game with a six year development cycle have made from it's sales so far?

I'll give you a hint, it's not a lot, you might have to use negative numbers for this one.

Not The Real Scarecrow

hooradiation wrote: »

Just how much profit do you imagine the publishers of a game with a six year development cycle have made from it's sales so far?

I'll give you a hint, it's not a lot, you might have to use negative numbers for this one.

Fair enough point, but either way they made more money than they would have if people waited for the reviews to come out before ordering.

um7y1h83ge06nx

One thing is that saying (you, me, the devs or the publishers) it was in development for six years is a bit vague.

In most software companies that I've worked in there is never usually a static team of people working on a project. The numbers flux depending on the stage the project is at (Only one or two testers needed at the start to design test plans based on the requirements, more needed later when there is something to execute these test plans on), if there are higher priority projects etc. For all we now a skeleton team could have been working on this for a decent chunk of the six years, so a six year development cycle isn't necessarily more expensive than a year or a two year project.

How much it cost is anyone's guess.

tuxy

hooradiation wrote: »

Just how much profit do you imagine the publishers of a game with a six year development cycle have made from it's sales so far?

I'll give you a hint, it's not a lot, you might have to use negative numbers for this one.

No idea, what are the development cost of a game they put no effort into. It was probably on hold for most of the six years.

johnny_ultimate

I'm always baffled at why people pre-order games in the first place, bar maybe ones that run a genuine risk of selling out (GTA mostly) or the occasional risk-free sequel. Especially amazed when it comes to pre-ordering on a digital distributor like Steam where the concept of 'selling out' doesn't exist (again with one in a thousand exceptions like Guild Wars 2). Whatever about pre-loading, surely one would rather wait to hear some general feedback before spending thirty or forty plus euro? It's kind of like giving a waiter a tip before you've even sat down to order.

Previews of games are infamously distorted by marketers and 'bullshots' to the point where we should barely trust them, even misleadingly polished demos. Let this be a cautious lesson to those who wasted their money sight unseen - but TBH it's a lesson that should have been learned long ago.

Magill

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I'm always baffled at why people pre-order games in the first place, bar maybe ones that run a genuine risk of selling out (GTA mostly) or the occasional risk-free sequel. Especially amazed when it comes to pre-ordering on a digital distributor like Steam where the concept of 'selling out' doesn't exist (again with one in a thousand exceptions like Guild Wars 2). Whatever about pre-loading, surely one would rather wait to hear some general feedback before spending thirty or forty plus euro? It's kind of like giving a waiter a tip before you've even sat down to order.

Previews of games are infamously distorted by marketers and 'bullshots' to the point where we should barely trust them, even misleadingly polished demos. Let this be a cautious lesson to those who wasted their money sight unseen - but TBH it's a lesson that should have been learned long ago.

Depends on the game really, i've only really pre-ordered a handful of games. Mostly games that i would have bought regardless of its review scores. You've also got games that offer 5-10% off for pre-ordering on steam, and a lot of games these days have pre-order bonuses.

Saying that, im baffled that people actually pre-ordered this game... its not like its a established IP like Mario or Zelda and i don't think there was any pre-order bonuses ?

Agricola

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I'm always baffled at why people pre-order games in the first place, bar maybe ones that run a genuine risk of selling out (GTA mostly) or the occasional risk-free sequel. Especially amazed when it comes to pre-ordering on a digital distributor like Steam where the concept of 'selling out' doesn't exist (again with one in a thousand exceptions like Guild Wars 2). Whatever about pre-loading, surely one would rather wait to hear some general feedback before spending thirty or forty plus euro? It's kind of like giving a waiter a tip before you've even sat down to order.

Previews of games are infamously distorted by marketers and 'bullshots' to the point where we should barely trust them, even misleadingly polished demos. Let this be a cautious lesson to those who wasted their money sight unseen - but TBH it's a lesson that should have been learned long ago.

Same here. Cannot understand it. You always see it in the comments underneath overhyped preview articles - "Wow, dem graphics - Pre-Ordered" I just put it down to kids who have more money than sense and not enough cynicism. I'm a massive fan of the Aliens movies and have been pining for a game to live up to the first two films, so much so that I debated the idea of pre-ordering this because I had a good feeling that it would be at least an adequate shooter. How glad I am that sense prevailed. In this industry you can't make a buying decision until the reviews are in. Even developer reputation isnt enough.

CastorTroy

Likewise. I mean I can't remember ever seeing a preview that said "Well it looks crap so far so the final product will be just as crap". It always praises a game. Movies are the same.

I especially don't understand people who get excited over a trailer that has no gameplay. Number of comments you see saying "That looks awesome. Day one!" when all we've seen is a 30 second CG trailer(though I do admit the Fall of Cybertron reveal trailer did look awesome. ) Didn't buy it though.

Not The Real Scarecrow

CastorTroy wrote: »

Likewise. I mean I can't remember ever seeing a preview that said "Well it looks crap so far so the final product will be just as crap". It always praises a game. Movies are the same.

I especially don't understand people who get excited over a trailer that has no gameplay. Number of comments you see saying "That looks awesome. Day one!" when all we've seen is a 30 second CG trailer(though I do admit the Fall of Cybertron reveal trailer did look awesome. ) Didn't buy it though.

When I heard A Perfect Circle playing over it, I was sold,lol. The idiot in me decided," It has to be good for APC to allow their song in it". Fortunately I wasn't too wrong.

Sarky

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I'm always baffled at why people pre-order games in the first place, bar maybe ones that run a genuine risk of selling out (GTA mostly) or the occasional risk-free sequel. Especially amazed when it comes to pre-ordering on a digital distributor like Steam where the concept of 'selling out' doesn't exist (again with one in a thousand exceptions like Guild Wars 2). Whatever about pre-loading, surely one would rather wait to hear some general feedback before spending thirty or forty plus euro? It's kind of like giving a waiter a tip before you've even sat down to order.

Previews of games are infamously distorted by marketers and 'bullshots' to the point where we should barely trust them, even misleadingly polished demos. Let this be a cautious lesson to those who wasted their money sight unseen - but TBH it's a lesson that should have been learned long ago.

Sometimes there's so little risk involved that you might as well. I pre-order occasionally. Things like X-COM, New Vegas, Deus Ex 3, The Witcher 2, Space Marine. With most of these I'd seen enough of developer diaries or playable demos close to release that I was confident things would turn out ok. Occasionally I just had no reason to doubt that the developers could make a great game, such as with most of Valve's portfolio (and with The Witcher particularly, every confidence that if there was something bad about the game on release they'd make a massive patch to add new cool stuff or replace poor parts). Also I'm a sucker for a good soundtrack so I'll pre-order the sh*t out of a game if that means I get an album of sumptious music to listen to.

If Colonial Marines looked and played anything like the previews we'd been shown before the, ahem, underwhelming gameplay leaked, I'd have thrown money at a pre-order. As it was, it looked like a mediocre shooter, and I already have plenty of better ones. Many of which I pre-ordered because the demos or the developer diaries were doing things right.

hooradiation

Hadleigh Damaged Stepladder wrote: »

In most software companies that I've worked in there is never usually a static team of people working on a project. The numbers flux depending on the stage the project is at (Only one or two testers needed at the start to design test plans based on the requirements, more needed later when there is something to execute these test plans on), if there are higher priority projects etc. For all we now a skeleton team could have been working on this for a decent chunk of the six years, so a six year development cycle isn't necessarily more expensive than a year or a two year project.
.

Publishers pay for games to be made, the size of the team is an actual irrelevance in how much money gets paid to the developer for this to happen.

Retr0gamer

I think people that pre-ordered should have done their homework. No playable code shown and a review embargo always means a stinker.

Overheal

In recent memory I preordered Skyrim thinking they couldnt do wrong after Oblivion, which was still for its day very good. I did it for a Map :P it keeps falling off my wall. Timing worked out great because winter is the only time I really get to play games, because of classes.

I bought Portal 2 at launch because Portal 2 at launch. In retrospect nobody would have really spoiled that for me but hey, it was still fun as balls, and Valve ran the reality event for it across steam using mother****ing potatoes, so fair play to them.

Space Marine gameplay footage was already starting to look decent when I preordered that, having enjoyed Firewarrior I figured why not. FW already proved they could make an immersive 40k environment, and on a more moderny engine with Titans, bring it. The preorder came with Darksiders for Free, which in the meantime was a great title to get thrown in for the same $50. SM didn't turn out to be hugely disappointing either. Multiplayer got bland rather hastily, but you got some enjoyment from it.

Jamie Starr

Last game I ever pre-ordered was FIFA 04.

Organic player animations my arse.

mewso

I don't normally pre-order and I agree it's often bewildering what people will buy early but I have done it. Half-Life 2 anyone. These days it's the price that will stop me. I would happily pre-order Bioshock Infinite for example but I'll be looking to get it for less than the standard steam 50 quid bollox.

Agricola

The new Tomb Raider (PC) can be had for £20 on Shopto. Its tempting. Then you think, Square Enix. Hitman Absolutions was tempting too with the series history. But it was a forgettable game which I certainly wouldnt have pre-ordered. So I'll be waiting to see how TR pans out.

Nodferatu

i went and bought this other day being a big aliens fan, traded it in with gamestop today at lunchtime. terrible terrible game. completed it in two days on hardened.

Grumpypants

I have never Pre-ordered much bar the PS3 but the best pre order deals are the ones on Steam where you get extra stuff based on how many pre order. Like Bioshock infinite when they hit X amount of pre orders everyone gets Bioshock 1, when they hit Y amount everyone gets Xcom Enemy unknown and a bunch of other stuff between.

Now that I could get behind.

Azza

I'm finding the best place to buy new PC games is Gamestop.ie and G2Play.

I was away from my gaming PC for a little over a week and after playing 10 minutes of this a few days before it was released and finding it repetitive and bland I thought I'd give it a second chance. Really shouldn't have bothered as it really is a cheap and poorly made game with little of interest. Playing it on the hardest setting I find myself breezing through levels, the fact hat you can simply run like hell to the end of each section certainly doesn't help. I found myself alt+tabbing every 10 or so minutes to check facebook which really says all you need to about the same.

Retr0gamer

More info about this trainwreck:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-02-25-several-staffers-on-aliens-colonial-marines-spill-the-beans-on-what-went-wrong-report

Original article from Kotaku.

Sarky

Aliens: Colonial Marines is heavily regarded as one of the biggest train wrecks in gaming history.

How easily Daikatana is forgotten...