How do you feel about pre-ordering games?

[ijustposthere]

I was watching a trailer for a game on youtube (I forget which) and there was a giant spat going on in the comments about pre-orders. People going apeshit on others for pre-ordering. Their reasoning was that by not pre-ordering, it forces devs to include all the extras that come with a pre-order, instead of forcing people to pay for it later on.

I don't really care. If I want the game enough, or if I want the exclusives enough, why can't I pre-order? It's not like I'm paying extra at the pre-order. I don't think I've ever pre-ordered a game for the exclusives anyway. Take that back, Madden 25 came with a year of Direct TV NFL Ticket for an additional $40. Where do you stand on this? Do you care?

 

[remydat]

I always pre-order. Haven't bought a brand new game without pre-order in like 4 or 5 years. I actually have the EA access deal where I also get to play games 5 days before release just to get a head start although they usually just allow you to play it for a set amount of hours prior to the full release.

And the reality is the ship has sailed when it comes to including the extras in the game. All that would happen if people didn't pre-order is that developers would just sell the extras a la carte.

 

[ijustposthere]

See, I'm with you 100%. If it's a game I like enough, I'm pre-ordering. If not, I'll wait until it's price comes down and buy it used from Gamestop. I don't think pre-ordering is making them more money. If anything, not pre-ordering makes them more money in the long run.

 

[ijustposthere]

Just to add, I know there are more expensive "Collector's Editions," but I don't think I ever see them offer more exclusive game content. It's usually a steel book, poster, statue, etc. that raises the price.

 

[fatbeard]

Pre-ordering is quite simply the most astoundingly stupid decision that a consumer can make, especially in gaming. When you pre-order, you are literally giving up the only real leverage you have as a customer to ensure that a game is released in a polished and finished state. You're surrendering your money before you've even test-driven the car, usually in exchange for some insignificant swag like a special weapon/upgrade that will last you all of 3 levels before it's obsolete. There is a reason that companies like EA push pre-orders so heavily for certain games, and it's because they know it's being released unfinished and they're trying to capitalize on marketing hype to get guaranteed dollars before the reviews start coming in. The momentum of companies pushing for a greater percentage of game revenue coming from pre-orders is exactly why we are seeing so many games released in an unfinished or outright broken state. When you pre-order, you are part of the the problem.

 

[clonetrooper264]

I've never pre-ordered a game. I guess most of the time I can't justify that I like it enough to do so, plus I generally like hearing what other people say about the game first. The idea of a pre-order is fine and dandy if you know the game is going to be quality...or I guess at least up to your standard. It's just not the case most of the time.

 

[ijustposthere]

I've never pre-ordered a game. I guess most of the time I can't justify that I like it enough to do so, plus I generally like hearing what other people say about the game first. The idea of a pre-order is fine and dandy if you know the game is going to be quality...or I guess at least up to your standard. It's just not the case most of the time.

The only games I've ever pre-ordered were Batman Arkham titles, after Arkham Asylum, and God of War, after 1 and 2. Also Madden, but that stopped when the game started to suck, aside from the 25th anniversary where I was more into the NFL Ticket extra than anything. That said, I don't agree with using EA as an example as fatbeard did above, since their product has been pretty bad in general so they are a bad example of putting out an unfinished product. Have you ever placed a pre-order from someone like Naughty Dog or Rocksteady Games and gotten a bad product?

 

[clonetrooper264]

The only games I've ever pre-ordered were Batman Arkham titles, after Arkham Asylum, and God of War, after 1 and 2. Also Madden, but that stopped when the game started to suck, aside from the 25th anniversary where I was more into the NFL Ticket extra than anything. That said, I don't agree with using EA as an example as fatbeard did above, since their product has been pretty bad in general so they are a bad example of putting out an unfinished product. Have you ever placed a pre-order from someone like Naughty Dog or Rocksteady Games and gotten a bad product?

No, I've never pre-ordered anything. I suppose for a game like GTA perhaps I would consider it a safe bet as I've enjoyed every GTA game I've played. I've don't play a ton of games so that probably plays into it.

 

[ijustposthere]

No, I've never pre-ordered anything. I suppose for a game like GTA perhaps I would consider it a safe bet as I've enjoyed every GTA game I've played. I've don't play a ton of games so that probably plays into it.

Sorry, I meant you as a general sense towards the reader, not you personally. I just want to know where the unfinished product argument comes in. I've heard it a few times now, but I've never experienced it. Granted, I don't pre-order very many games as I've said, so I want to know if anyone has ordered from a good developer and experienced an unfinished, buggy product as opposed to a developer that just puts out rushed, buggy products in general.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Sorry, I meant you as a general sense towards the reader, not the board personally. I just want to know where the unfinished product argument comes in. I've heard it a few times now, but I've never experienced it. Granted, I don't pre-order very many games as I've said, so I want to know if anyone has ordered from a good developer and experienced an unfinished, buggy product as opposed to a developer that just puts out rushed, buggy products in general.

I think that's pretty fair. Imo the sports games are the ones where you gets shafted the most on pre-ordering. Madden has been generally pretty junky as we all know. NBA 2k has been pretty lazy as well. In and of themselves they are technically solid games, but since they have a monopoly on that type of game, there's no motivation for them to improve.

 

[RoseMVP1]

I pre order if I'm getting a game at mid night release. I used to go to mid night released without doing it and they kept bitching about it.

 

[Ares]

Kind of on the topic of extras and pre-ordering.... I am getting annoyed with the DLC component of gaming now...

Basically Developers can write half a game.... release it and make you bug test it.... patch it for a while to get it "complete" and then go ahead and release the finished product as a piece of DLC..... Rome II Total War basically did this.... though they balked at asking people to pay for the "Emperor Edition" and tacked it on like DLC for free if you already owned the game. But what would stop them from basically finishing the game, putting the truly complete game patching in as DLC and saying "Hey I know you paid me 60$ for an unfinished product but you need to pay 10$ more for the piece that completes the vanilla stock version of the game"?

The other thing I don't like is that the Devs and producers can kind of **** up as much as they want to say on a story and then like with Mass Effect 3 go "Oh well we will release some DLC to sort of fill in the story where we fucked up". DLC is not a bad idea in principle but I fear it is being used so game makers can half ass their work and drop it on the market early and then not only fill the gaps in later but potentially ask us to pay them more for the DLC that fills in the shit they didn't complete for the original release.

 

[remydat]

Pre-ordering is quite simply the most astoundingly stupid decision that a consumer can make, especially in gaming. When you pre-order, you are literally giving up the only real leverage you have as a customer to ensure that a game is released in a polished and finished state. You're surrendering your money before you've even test-driven the car, usually in exchange for some insignificant swag like a special weapon/upgrade that will last you all of 3 levels before it's obsolete. There is a reason that companies like EA push pre-orders so heavily for certain games, and it's because they know it's being released unfinished and they're trying to capitalize on marketing hype to get guaranteed dollars before the reviews start coming in. The momentum of companies pushing for a greater percentage of game revenue coming from pre-orders is exactly why we are seeing so many games released in an unfinished or outright broken state. When you pre-order, you are part of the the problem.

Except it isn't. If EA came to me and said, I can get an incomplete version of Dragon Age right now or wait 4 or 5 months until we worked out all the kinks then I will tell them give me the game now. You on the other hand may be content to wait for the game to be complete.

Point is there are two types of gamers. The people that want the game as soon as possible so they pre-order or buy it on the day of release and the people that don't mind waiting for a bug free version of the game. In the end, if you want a bug free game then you can wait 6 months after a game is released for all the bugs to be worked out while I get to play the game for 6 months because I am not as hung up on bugs as you. There is no reason I should have to wait an extra 6 months just because you want a bug free game.

As to why it is the way it is, the reality is most games cost a hell of a lot more to produce than 59.99. With the advent of HD and 3D, and the new generation of systems with higher levels of technology, the cost involved in making the game is a lot higher than it used to be. All that is happening is that instead of charging $80 or $90 out of the gate for a complete game that would come out 6 months later, you are being charged 59 bucks for the basic game. And if you wait 6 months you get the basic game with all the bug fixes cheaper. If you think the additional content isn't worth the money then don't buy it. When you are already getting like 40-60 hours of game time, complaining about additional content being paid for is just silly because again, you likely got more than your money's worth with the basic game.

 

[remydat]

Kind of on the topic of extras and pre-ordering.... I am getting annoyed with the DLC component of gaming now...

Basically Developers can write half a game.... release it and make you bug test it.... patch it for a while to get it "complete" and then go ahead and release the finished product as a piece of DLC..... Rome II Total War basically did this.... though they balked at asking people to pay for the "Emperor Edition" and tacked it on like DLC for free if you already owned the game. But what would stop them from basically finishing the game, putting the truly complete game patching in as DLC and saying "Hey I know you paid me 60$ for an unfinished product but you need to pay 10$ more for the piece that completes the vanilla stock version of the game"?

The other thing I don't like is that the Devs and producers can kind of **** up as much as they want to say on a story and then like with Mass Effect 3 go "Oh well we will release some DLC to sort of fill in the story where we fucked up". DLC is not a bad idea in principle but I fear it is being used so game makers can half ass their work and drop it on the market early and then not only fill the gaps in later but potentially ask us to pay them more for the DLC that fills in the shit they didn't complete for the original release.

This really isn't true. You are getting more than enough playing time to have gotten your money's worth. Mass Effect 3 was a great fucking game that some people didn't like the ending. So fucking what. Doesn't mean you didn't get 40-50 hours of excellent gameplay and story up to that point. If you don't like the ending of the movie, do you think a movie studio is going to just shoot some additional scenes to satisfy you? Do you think a novelist is going to rewrite the ending of his book?

No one half assed it on Mass Effect 3. The developers simply had a different vision for how the game ended than some of their customers. That happens in just about every entertainment related industry, it's only the video game fanboys are more vocal and self-entitled about it. Then the developers actually tried to appease them which again a movie studio would have just told you to **** off, and the fanboys still weren't satisfied.

 

[ijustposthere]

It's not even that Remy. All the examples so far have been EA products in one form or another, and they've been putting out rushed, buggy products for a while now. Again, I don't have very much experience with pre-orders, but I've seen God of War and Batman delayed because the devs didn't want to release a less than maximum product. I used Rocksteady and Naughty Dog off the top of my head originally, but what about Nintendo? Game Informer had them as one of the top 10 devs of 2014. Were they putting out unfinished products? What about Rockstar? I just want to know if this is a real problem, or if it's just a couple crappy companies doing a cash grab that people are applying to the whole industry.

 

[remydat]

Mass Effect 3 wasn't rushed or buggy though. The main complaint of the game was the ending. So it's a completely unrelated issue of fans disagreeing with the artistic vision of the developers. I can't recall a single bug or anything in that game that felt rushed.

So you (speaking generally for remainder of the post) want a bug free game. Let's say that version of the game is available June 30. Let's say a substantially complete version is available on January 30. You basically want EA to wait 5 months to release the game and I am saying to you why? I am fine with getting a substantially complete version on Jan 30 so why shouldn't EA give that to me? If you aren't fine then wait until June 30 which is when you would have received the game anyways or go buy Rocksteady or Naughty Boy games if their philosophy on games is consistent with yours. The only thing that is changed is I get to play the game for 5 months and it seems the people content to wait are somehow upset that I get to play it before them. If not then just wait 6 months later and you get a bug free game for like 39 or 49 bucks so how are you harmed?

This is like any market. There are companies like Rocksteady and Naughty Boy that perhaps cater to the market that want high quality bug free games the day of release. Then there are other companies like say EA that cater to the market that want the games as soon as it is substantially complete and they are fine with EA working out the kinks over the next few months. To each his/her own.

 

[Novak]

I pre-order games if it's something I want to play day 1. There is little difference between pre-ordering a game a week ahead of time, or buying it on day 1.. Nearly every game is released buggy now. They can patch it and fix it later so I don't understand why so many people get upset at "unfinished games" in the first place.

tl;dr - Shit is buggy/glitch filled regardless. Pre-order it if you deem necessary. Or don't.

 

[botfly10]

Just to add, I know there are more expensive "Collector's Editions," but I don't think I ever see them offer more exclusive game content. It's usually a steel book, poster, statue, etc. that raises the price.

This. The in-game bonuses are almost always purely cosmetic and never that attractive to me.

I almost never pre-order. When I do, its cause I absolutely know I'm going to buy the game anyway and like to give the devs a bump for their economic forecasting.

But I do my best to avoid new games for at least a month after release. It sucks to play before the first couple patches. And I also like to wait for the modding community to get going. Imagine skyrim without mods. No thanks.

 

[botfly10]

Mass Effect 3 wasn't rushed or buggy though. The main complaint of the game was the ending. So it's a completely unrelated issue of fans disagreeing with the artistic vision of the developers. I can't recall a single bug or anything in that game that felt rushed.

So you (speaking generally for remainder of the post) want a bug free game. Let's say that version of the game is available June 30. Let's say a substantially complete version is available on January 30. You basically want EA to wait 5 months to release the game and I am saying to you why? I am fine with getting a substantially complete version on Jan 30 so why shouldn't EA give that to me? If you aren't fine then wait until June 30 which is when you would have received the game anyways or go buy Rocksteady or Naughty Boy games if their philosophy on games is consistent with yours. The only thing that is changed is I get to play the game for 5 months and it seems the people content to wait are somehow upset that I get to play it before them. If not then just wait 6 months later and you get a bug free game for like 39 or 49 bucks so how are you harmed?

This is like any market. There are companies like Rocksteady and Naughty Boy that perhaps cater to the market that want high quality bug free games the day of release. Then there are other companies like say EA that cater to the market that want the games as soon as it is substantially complete and they are fine with EA working out the kinks over the next few months. To each his/her own.

ME3 was definitely rushed. Er, at least forced to release rather than getting pushed back like should have happened.

 

[Icculus]

I've only pre-ordered GTAV and Zelda A Link Between Worlds.