deadline developing / cutting corners / shortcuts

scruffycavetroll

This isn't an indictment of ESO, but an observation of the industry in general....edited thread title

They're lazy / don't pay attention to the little details anymore. They're all trying to put a game out by a deadline to avoid having to pump more money into it by pushing a title back. Never mind bugs, I'm talking about the nuances here. Remember the days when if a title wasn't up to snuff, it would be pushed back a month or two? I miss those days. Makes me wish time was cyclical, instead of linear so we could get back to that point.

In Battlefield they're re-using buildings from BF3, and even some from the Bad Company series. In their new Carrier Assault mode, rather than have people place charges on several spots throughout the carrier, like the engines, fuel tanks, munitions storage, they use those generic Mcom kiosks from the Rush game mode, and only 2 of them....lame.

Last night I was playing the guild quests on an alt. The laziness here I found is that they couldn't even change the names / randomly generate a new toon as the quest giver. They're using the same people. I understand guilds being in cities, i can even understand the quest lines being the same...as the guild should have the same ideals / motives...BUT to have the same characters? CLONES!!! A simple name change and new toon randomly generated using the character creation tool, would've went a long way here.

I totally understand the why they do this, and that every house does it. Time savers, money savers, and to meet deadlines. I get that, but people here like to throw the word immersion around when it comes to this game (and others). They like to get into it...all well and good, enjoy it, that's why we play it. Things like this completely and totally break that (i'm not one to really get that into the 'immersion' factor), but really detract from the story.

As far as ESO is concerned, I hope they consider retooling some of those finer details at some point. I know there are bigger issues that need attention, but in the future i hope they consider modifying some of the names, sprites, and voice-over placements for some of the characters in the game as many are out of place and could be redone to be a more accurate representation of what they really are supposed to be.

Shimond

I saw this as a conscious design decision because you can only do those quests one time on a character (you do not repeat them in VR zones). They clearly have no problem with using different characters/voices for the same thing - look at the guys you talk to in order to join the guilds.

yenkin2001b14_ESO

I thought it rather lazy that he fighter and mage guild quests were the same for all factions as well as the main line quest.

scruffycavetroll

yenkin2001b14_ESO wrote: »

I thought it rather lazy that he fighter and mage guild quests were the same for all factions as well as the main line quest.

exactly...i can understand some similarities / crossovers, but to be exactly the same without even a slight variation, dull.

I know it's early in the game's life so there is only so much they can do, but it really does pull away from some of the replay-ability.

Ciinen1988

Let me get this straight. OP thinks its lazy for the developers to use the same NPC as the the quest giver for all of the quests in the NPC guild quest lines? So for the mage's guild for example. You don't want to talk to the same person that you have been working with on the same problem but with a new development? You want to talk to some random new person who is to magically know WTH you are talking about when it comes to deciphering these books and not to mention have to alter the ending quest on the line because there is now more than one person who has been driven mad by deciphering these books. Am I understanding all this correctly? And with the Fighter's Guild you want to talk to some random person in the fighter's guild about how you suspect treachery at the upper ranks? Personally I agree with the way the story line is written. Do I think they could have varied it a little bit when it came to different alliances? Yes. But I don't think that the developers were lazy for the NPC guilds being set up the way they are. Now I haven't gone back to the earlier zones to double check but are we sure that they are "clones" and the NPC hasn't actually moved to the new location and aren't in all locations at once? Cause if it is phased then your comment about being "clones" is invalid.

Shimond

He's just talking about the faction differences. Nevermind that it's the same setup as the main quest (which also you can only do one time per character, regardless of VR zones).

scruffycavetroll

Ciinen1988 wrote: »

Let me get this straight. OP thinks its lazy for the developers to use the same NPC as the the quest giver for all of the quests in the NPC guild quest lines? So for the mage's guild for example. You don't want to talk to the same person that you have been working with on the same problem but with a new development? You want to talk to some random new person who is to magically know WTH you are talking about when it comes to deciphering these books and not to mention have to alter the ending quest on the line because there is now more than one person who has been driven mad by deciphering these books. Am I understanding all this correctly? And with the Fighter's Guild you want to talk to some random person in the fighter's guild about how you suspect treachery at the upper ranks? Personally I agree with the way the story line is written. Do I think they could have varied it a little bit when it came to different alliances? Yes. But I don't think that the developers were lazy for the NPC guilds being set up the way they are. Now I haven't gone back to the earlier zones to double check but are we sure that they are "clones" and the NPC hasn't actually moved to the new location and aren't in all locations at once? Cause if it is phased then your comment about being "clones" is invalid.

I don't think you are understanding correctly. I'm saying that the same line is alright, but that they should've changed a name and a sprite for the different 'offices' / factions your getting the quest from.

I'm in a different part of the world, a different faction, and a different building yet, if I play the fighers guild quest for the dominion, then switch to the pact, i'm still talking to sees-all-colors. That is the lazy part / cloning part. This same quest-giver is simultaneously giving me the quest in one part of the region, while giving it to someone else in another.

All they needed to do was change see's-all-colors to Farts-into-the-wind for example and generate a new sprite (they could've used the same v.o. for all i care). I'm OK with the questline being the same....and possibly the names of the others in the line also to reflect different people of different factions...like merrick & aeliff becomes ohh, herp and derp.

Robocles

Ciinen1988 wrote: »

Let me get this straight ... invalid.

He means that the quests, down to the actual quest givers, are the same across all factions (and he stated it very clearly in his post).

I would agree that is lazy.

Ravinsild

NO! EVERYONE needs to meet Merric at-Aswala. That man is the BEST EVER.

I feel like he's a friend, he's so jolly and he always calls me Comrade. Like, we're battle buddies in the fight against Daedra. I started making Redguard weapons and armour because of Merric.

I'm glad every faction gets to meet Merric and that he is always the same.

MrSnoopy

First, a really good read! Seriously, I enjoyed that.

So just looking at this from my point of view with a background in marketing, once a title is announced and a date set, many games (with the exception of indie games and some AAA titles) must be finished by that date. Not because they want to save money (although it does factor into it), but because the image that it sets for the company, in the case of ESO, Bethesda and Zenimax.

Think of it this way, if you hire someone to make you a website for your company and they set a definate date of 15th July for it to be finished. At the last moment they let you know that it wont be ready on the 15th of July, but the 15th of August instead. What impression would that give you of the company you hired to make the website? Now that's only your opinion in that case, with things like AAA title games, they dont have to please one person at launch, but hundreds of thousands. That's why they launch a game when they say they will, to avaoid the negative light that delaying the game would portray on the developers.

Its a lose-lose situation to some extent. By getting the title out on time, they appear to be rather professional, but if the game isnt complete or the finer details are not quite up to scratch, then they are seen as rushing the title. They would be able to reassure the community that they are still fixing issues and by involving the wider community (through a bug reporter like the one ESO is using), they will be able to resolve a lot of issues over time.

If they get the finer details finished, while delaying the release, they are seen as unconfident in their game and less professional. Sales will be slow to start with (most people are not patient and would likely cancel their orders and pick it up at a later date), but would gradually pick up as the content of the game was seen as superior to others.

But as far as the money part goes, it costs the developers money when they have to perform maintenance on their servers to fix these issues. I think they would rather have everything finished to a high standard and release ontime, but its not a perfect world.

Like you said, it's the industry in general, not just one or two developers.

Zorak

I know what you are talking about.

There is a NPC model on Ebonheart Pact that is so ridiculous...

It's literaly the same guy on many quests over and over.

For any Ebonheart players, I'm talking about that nord from "The Frozen Man"quest on Bleakrock Isle.

They use this same model on many EB quests. And I'm not talking about a few...it's MANY quests that you see this same nord guy with a beard, a hat, different hair or whatever. It's absurdly lazy.

If you think I'm overreacting, go make an EB character and pay attention to it.

No excuses, pure laziness !

jircris11

scruffycavetroll wrote: »

This isn't an indictment of ESO, but an observation of the industry in general.

They're lazy / don't pay attention to the little details anymore. They're all trying to put a game out by a deadline to avoid having to pump more money into it by pushing a title back. Never mind bugs, I'm talking about the nuances here. Remember the days when if a title wasn't up to snuff, it would be pushed back a month or two? I miss those days. Makes me wish time was cyclical, instead of linear so we could get back to that point.

In Battlefield they're re-using buildings from BF3, and even some from the Bad Company series. In their new Carrier Assault mode, rather than have people place charges on several spots throughout the carrier, like the engines, fuel tanks, munitions storage, they use those generic Mcom kiosks from the Rush game mode, and only 2 of them....lame.

Last night I was playing the guild quests on an alt. The laziness here I found is that they couldn't even change the names / randomly generate a new toon as the quest giver. They're using the same people. I understand guilds being in cities, i can even understand the quest lines being the same...as the guild should have the same ideals / motives...BUT to have the same characters? CLONES!!! A simple name change and new toon randomly generated using the character creation tool, would've went a long way here.

I totally understand the why they do this, and that every house does it. Time savers, money savers, and to meet deadlines. I get that, but people here like to throw the word immersion around when it comes to this game (and others). They like to get into it...all well and good, enjoy it, that's why we play it. Things like this completely and totally break that (i'm not one to really get that into the 'immersion' factor), but really detract from the story.

As far as ESO is concerned, I hope they consider retooling some of those finer details at some point. I know there are bigger issues that need attention, but in the future i hope they consider modifying some of the names, sprites, and voice-over placements for some of the characters in the game as many are out of place and could be redone to be a more accurate representation of what they really are supposed to be.

Actually as a Dev my self i will admit that we do cut corners. BUT most of the time it is due to the publisher breathing down our backs. We get multiple dead lines and a mountain of things must be done before said deadline. It is not like it use to be where publishers were willing to give that extra time. I feel sad for the devs of today, i actually had to quit my job due to the stress it added. So yes we do see a huge lack of attention to detail compared to old. But 90% of the time its due to being rushed.

scruffycavetroll

MrSnoopy wrote: »

First, a really good read! Seriously, I enjoyed that.

So just looking at this from my point of view with a background in marketing, once a title is announced and a date set, many games (with the exception of indie games and some AAA titles) must be finished by that date. Not because they want to save money (although it does factor into it), but because the image that it sets for the company, in the case of ESO, Bethesda and Zenimax.

Think of it this way, if you hire someone to make you a website for your company and they set a definate date of 15th July for it to be finished. At the last moment they let you know that it wont be ready on the 15th of July, but the 15th of August instead. What impression would that give you of the company you hired to make the website? Now that's only your opinion in that case, with things like AAA title games, they dont have to please one person at launch, but hundreds of thousands. That's why they launch a game when they say they will, to avaoid the negative light that delaying the game would portray on the developers.

Its a lose-lose situation to some extent. By getting the title out on time, they appear to be rather professional, but if the game isnt complete or the finer details are not quite up to scratch, then they are seen as rushing the title. They would be able to reassure the community that they are still fixing issues and by involving the wider community (through a bug reporter like the one ESO is using), they will be able to resolve a lot of issues over time.

If they get the finer details finished, while delaying the release, they are seen as unconfident in their game and less professional. Sales will be slow to start with (most people are not patient and would likely cancel their orders and pick it up at a later date), but would gradually pick up as the content of the game was seen as superior to others.

But as far as the money part goes, it costs the developers money when they have to perform maintenance on their servers to fix these issues. I think they would rather have everything finished to a high standard and release ontime, but its not a perfect world.

Like you said, it's the industry in general, not just one or two developers.

Of course a rep is soiled, but the difference in this example is that you paid for a delivery date, if said developer doesn't meet that date, you can renegotiate the price, get a discount or work something business-wise out...or at least you'd ask if you didn't get what you paid for right? i think you would.

here, we can't negotiate our sub fees / purchase prices. HOWEVER, they can push things back, but that costs money.

I understand what you're saying but I think you over thought it....everything boils down to money...pushing anything back to fix / adjust costs more money.

Reputations don't mean much..they do hold weight but only up to a point, and can change at the drop of a hat, so reps aren't that important as you'd think.

Remember the Firestone Tire issue years and years ago? they're still around..the tylenol thing from the 80's...they're still here. MMO's are notoriously expensive to develop, and at some point the dev house NEEDS to put it out there to start generating income or risk taking a huge loss / very very long time to recoup them.


@jircris...that's what I mean by the deadlines, Publishers are setting UNREALISTIC DEADLINES to start making a profit, rather than putting forth a quality product. Imagine if they said during the meetings:

"ok, deadline is 2 years from now"

Imagine what could be done, if every dev / publisher then added another 4 - 6 months to that...imagine the quality improvement.

Gix

Where you see laziness, I see a conscious design decision.

- You have the struggles of each Alliance that have their own stories.
- Then you have the various guilds and their own troubles.

When you talk about guild quests, everyone can relate. Using the same characters is a conscious decision to design unique fleshed out characters. There's no point of watering down everything for the sake of making each Alliance more unique than they're already are.

If they had the exact same quests with just different looking NPCs as you suggest, it would would be terrible. "Why does this guy sound like Shalidor?" "Why are the Ebonheart Pact stuck with Bob when the Dominion has Jacob? Jacob is a much cooler character!" etc, etc.

It makes more sense to just believe that these characters are nowhere else. They're not situated at the other Alliances, they're here with YOU.

There's nothing lazy about this and, as a bonus, it saves up on resources.

scruffycavetroll

Gix wrote: »

Where you see laziness, I see a conscious design decision.

- You have the struggles of each Alliance that have their own stories.
- Then you have the various guilds and their own troubles.

When you talk about guild quests, everyone can relate. Using the same characters is a conscious decision to design unique fleshed out characters. There's no point of watering down everything for the sake of making each Alliance more unique than they're already are.

If they had the exact same quests with just different looking NPCs as you suggest, it would would be terrible. "Why does this guy sound like Shalidor?" "Why are the Ebonheart Pact stuck with Bob when the Dominion has Jacob? Jacob is a much cooler character!" etc, etc.

It makes more sense to just believe that these characters are nowhere else. They're not situated at the other Alliances, they're here with YOU.

There's nothing lazy about this and, as a bonus, it saves up on resources.

I understand what you're saying and sure, you can just think that they don't exist anywhere else, and I don't disagree with you...but also don't agree.

but it is a conscious decision to cut corners, and you also in a way prove my point by the last sentence...well you don't prove it, but you echo it...They're doing this to save time & money...both of which are resources that would've been used had they made a new character to give the line...by NOT doing it, they move on to the next thing, instead of adding a little more 'depth' to it.

REMEMBER THIS ISN'T JUST ESO AND IS NOT AN INDICTMENT OF THE GAME

Zorak

Gix wrote: »

Where you see laziness, I see a conscious design decision.

- You have the struggles of each Alliance that have their own stories.
- Then you have the various guilds and their own troubles.

When you talk about guild quests, everyone can relate. Using the same characters is a conscious decision to design unique fleshed out characters. There's no point of watering down everything for the sake of making each Alliance more unique than they're already are.

If they had the exact same quests with just different looking NPCs as you suggest, it would would be terrible. "Why does this guy sound like Shalidor?" "Why are the Ebonheart Pact stuck with Bob when the Dominion has Jacob? Jacob is a much cooler character!" etc, etc.

It makes more sense to just believe that these characters are nowhere else. They're not situated at the other Alliances, they're here with YOU.

There's nothing lazy about this and, as a bonus, it saves up on resources.

Not when you use the same MODEL for many different characters.

Or same 4 custom layouts for ALL your public dungeons.

What you call a conscious design decision I call laziness.

MrSnoopy

@scruffycavetroll I know exactly what you mean. Its just an opinion from one particular view point and I definately understand that money 'not' a major factor but THE major factor when push comes to shove.

As a gamer I'd rather wait for a high quality, no corners cut, epic of a title that I couldn't fault. Hopefully one day we will get that but at the moment, its not likely to be soon.

Gedalya

My response: Skyrim. Blows you "Indictment" out of the water.

Also...

scruffycavetroll

Here's a question...

how much could the competitions role play? I wouldn't think much, since an existing MMo has had more time, $$, and work put into it...a new MMO really can't compete.

So how can they? by rushing things? or taking time to make sure things are almost perfect..i say almost because here we're talking about an MMO nothing will work 100% of the time.

scruffycavetroll

Gedalya wrote: »

My response: Skyrim. Blows you "Indictment" out of the water.

Also...

i don't understand how you can compare a single player game to an MMO, that's probably worse....Skyrim is pretty much the same in that every VO is repeated, so it's really no different.

and even if i were to agree with you...1 example does not debunk an entire...theory when there are many many more out there that hold to it.

Chryos

Does this coincide with the new generation of players wanting instant gratification? I think the quality of the player base has gone downhill therefore so are the games.

Zorak

Chryos wrote: »

Does this coincide with the new generation of players wanting instant gratification? I think the quality of the player base has gone downhill therefore so are the games.

+1

scruffycavetroll

Chryos wrote: »

Does this coincide with the new generation of players wanting instant gratification? I think the quality of the player base has gone downhill therefore so are the games.

wouldn't rule it out.

but if you're at least 30 year old or older and have been playing games for awhile, i think we've all seen a decline in overall quality over the years. at least the 'out of the box' quality...now we usually need a patch or two.

Thechemicals

They did many quick choices to get the game out. Its what happens when you have the option to fix the game once its released because its an online mm.

It is about money and time....but what isnt?

Shimond

Thechemicals wrote: »

They did many quick choices to get the game out. Its what happens when you have the option to fix the game once its released because its an online mm.

It is about money and time....but what isnt?

Indeed, the perfect MMO launch is the MMO that never launches.

Audigy

The lack of tiny things is indeed a problem in todays games, I could name a ton of these things about Vanilla, Ultima, D1, SWG, WC2 and other games which are so simple, yet so mesmerizing.

Personally I think ESO is a lot better than most recent games, but yes they cut things short as well. You see this best with some of the NPC´s that have nothing to say and that some quest´s are a copy of another. (yet its much better than at SWTOR, WoW or GW2 as example)


However, the issue are we players, or better put those that rush through games and want to spam dungeons all day. They don't care about a dog sitting on a street, trying to catch a butterfly. The love story of 2 NPC´s or an orc that lost its pants and is running around in a barrel.
These players wont even notice a candle in a window, a letter on a table or a wonderfully voiced NPC, I bet most of them don't even know that we have weather in Tamriel.

For them its all about max level, min maxing, being the best and the greatest gamer at ESO. While the majority isn't like that, a lot of potential development time is scrapped for these people so that they can rush dungeons and raids.

Games lack depth because of the players who don't want depth anymore. You can see this best by checking the history of World of Warcraft. With every addon the game lost more story & lore, the smaller things which enhanced your day at Vanilla were removed and instead you have 10 dungeons, 5 raids and that's enough to keep the kiddies entertained these days

Ultima Online didn't had dungeon finders, pet battles, recount, raids, levels, epic loot etc. There was a cave and the actual "way" to that cave was more challenging than anything we get today in MMO´s. To find the cave, to survive the mobs on your way that was just great fun.

You can say that back in the days the journey was the game, today its the destination.

It was incredible to know that you suck so much with your sword, that you just die if you don't use bandages until you make a hit. And if you lost the key to your house, then it was gone It was all so simple, yet so entertaining.

Still, ESO is giving me a good time and I hope to see more stuff in future which is for the "older" fans of MMO´s

Gix

scruffycavetroll wrote: »

Gix wrote: »

Where you see laziness, I see a conscious design decision.

- You have the struggles of each Alliance that have their own stories.
- Then you have the various guilds and their own troubles.

When you talk about guild quests, everyone can relate. Using the same characters is a conscious decision to design unique fleshed out characters. There's no point of watering down everything for the sake of making each Alliance more unique than they're already are.

If they had the exact same quests with just different looking NPCs as you suggest, it would would be terrible. "Why does this guy sound like Shalidor?" "Why are the Ebonheart Pact stuck with Bob when the Dominion has Jacob? Jacob is a much cooler character!" etc, etc.

It makes more sense to just believe that these characters are nowhere else. They're not situated at the other Alliances, they're here with YOU.

There's nothing lazy about this and, as a bonus, it saves up on resources.

I understand what you're saying and sure, you can just think that they don't exist anywhere else, and I don't disagree with you...but also don't agree.

but it is a conscious decision to cut corners, and you also in a way prove my point by the last sentence...well you don't prove it, but you echo it...They're doing this to save time & money...both of which are resources that would've been used had they made a new character to give the line...by NOT doing it, they move on to the next thing, instead of adding a little more 'depth' to it.

REMEMBER THIS ISN'T JUST ESO AND IS NOT AN INDICTMENT OF THE GAME

I totally understand. I used ESO as an example because, well, we're in the ESO forums and you also used ESO as an example.

I guess the question at hand is where do you draw the line between "lack of creativity and trying to make a quick buck" and "doing what's best for the game".

Negotiating for more development time does not guarantee a better game. In fact, history shows us that the complete opposite is true. Some of the best games ever created has really tight deadlines and those who had all the time in the world just ended up being a smelly pile of turd.

Duke Nukem anyone? Ok, that's a low blow but you get the idea.

A good developer will build their games with the deadline in mind. Cutting an entire feature out is a smart move when it has so many advantages like "streamlined/intuitive gameplay, cheaper cost, plot makes more sense, computers don't run out of memory, etc". Sometimes it even benefits the players without them realizing it.

Oblivion's AI nerf is a good example of this. Sounds terrible on paper when you think that Bethesda cut down on the AI that they promised, but they realized that free-roaming AI was harming gameplay more than doing what it was supposed to do.

Could they have spent extra money and time to fix it? Maybe, but they most likely didn't see the worth in that. It might not be the holy grail of gaming (like every fans wants), but it still ended up being an amazing game.

How much is that holy grail? You could say that I'm going back to money and time, what I'm trying to say is that some things aren't worth fixing. Let it go and try again.

I guess that's the advantages of being an Indie developer; your ever-slowly-draining sanity is the only real deadline you have.

Chryos

"As a gamer I'd rather wait for a high quality, no corners cut, epic of a title that I couldn't fault. Hopefully one day we will get that but at the moment, its not likely to be soon."

Try and see this side of the coin. Companies cant make any money developing a game, eventually they have to put the game out so they can make some of that money back, so they can put some of that money back into the game. Sure there are MMO mills out there, churning out crappy products, but I do not think ZOS is one of them. No company sets out with the intent to fail. However, it is a business with real life business problems. I guess they try to strike a balance.

This being my perspective I signed on early and play the game at a leisurely pace, because it just came out. ZOS is now getting a boost of income to make up for years of losses while devloping this game and I am sure they will add more depth to the game now.

Remember all MMOs start off small and grow bigger, more detail, more depth etc etc. I am going to at least give them time to do that. If we all waited another 6 or 12 more months they might have a nice game, but be out of money on the technical server side. Something like that.