LucasArts = The Weakest videogame Publisher

Well, considering the amount of complaining that has been coming from your side of the table, you'd probably say you'd feel happy,

 

Why are you guys so bitter to eachother?

 

I have no respect for someone that does not use facts and is out to make a reputation and name for themselves through the use of critizing a good gaming company.

 

I?m pretty sure that everyone here wants the same thing: quality Star Wars games. Obviously, some people in this thread feel that, in recent years, the quality of SW games has gone downhill. Others seem to like things the way they are. I myself am part of the former category so I can understand the frustration on their part. What I really don?t understand is how some people here, on both sides of the argument (not going to name names) are starting to take this whole thread very, very personally. Everyone here is entitled to his or her own opinion. Draco and Zev have, IMO, both shown us some compelling arguments. Neither one of them though, seems to be ?converting? the other camp. It looks as if this thread may last a long time as both sides seem to be holding steadfast. I think that?s a good side as I really enjoy reading other people?s opinions when they are thought provoking and well thought out. I think that all the baiting and personal attacks really detract from the argument as a whole and make both sides look foolish. It makes me loose respect for the poster when I see these kinds of things. OK, I?m done trying to be mature now.

All right, first off, I don?t see how delaying the release of a game two or three months is going to make LucasArts go bankrupt. But Zev, I do agree with you when you say that delaying ROTS to come out months after the movie would be a mistake. Obviously, they need to come out at the same time. Nowadays, if there is a game for a new movie (and it seems like there ALWAYS is now) it generally comes out at the same time. But, among the games that were mentioned in Draco?s very first post on the first page, the games which seem to be the heart of this thread are Battlefront and KOTOR 2. You mentioned LA?s lack of promoting KOTOR 2, and I agree with you. I don?t even think that KOTOR 2 needed that much promotion. It was still riding the coattails of the original. The issue that Draco and others have (myself included) is that LA could have pushed back it?s release date to create a better game overall. We all know about the bugs and the dropped storylines. Given more time, Obsidian could have fixed the bugs and incorporated the dropped parts to make a truly superb game. Instead, LA, wanting to catch on to the holiday buying season, released the game in December. And we all bought into it, myself included.

This is something that you didn?t address with your inside knowledge. Yes, you told us of the developers who worked hard to make the best possible game. I applaud these people. But they?re not the people that we?re upset with. It?s the people who actually make the timetables for the games and don?t allow the designers to finish what they started. How would you feel if you were writing a book and your publisher came to you while you still had the last 50 pages to write and said, ?OK times up. Give me what you have.? I would be upset at that. I?m sure the people who actually worked on the games are too. Someone high up the ladder at LucasArts figured out that by cutting corners on game quality they could make more money. From a purely business standpoint I?m sure it?s a wonderful idea. For them. Not for the consumer. George Lucas is famous for making sure that his movies get made the way he wants them to be made. He doesn?t cut corners. He does whatever he can to make his movies the way HE wants them to be. There?s no movie studio calling the shots. This is a wonderful philosophy that has led to the creation of six movies that are beloved by millions of people. It?s just a shame that this philosophy is not shared within his own companies and game developers are forced to release a game that they aren?t finished with.

 

This is how I see it. At first we had nothing against each other, we were just two people who shared a similar like....Star Wars. But the tide started to turn when I created this thread.

DroidGeneral holds loyal support and respect for LucasArts. Is there anything wrong with that? No, he is a dedicated fan of the company and thats good. He is to LucasArts what I am to Square-Enix.

So when I created this thread, I did something that really touched DG's nerve....and that was to disrespect LucasArts. Like I said, DG holds high value in them and for me to speak out the way I did against them really hurt him.

Now what really put gasoline on the fire was when everyone started to agree with me. I mean you look at most of the replies here, I would say that about 70%-80% of the people who contributed in this thread agrees with me and sees the situation how I see the situation. Plo-Koom (Which we are now cool), DG, and about 2-4 others didn't see things my way. The difference between those people and DG is that they don't hold the same respect for LA as DG does, so of course DG is going to take it a bit personal. So what really really really got to him was when people started to agree with me and stuff like that. So at first it was just one perosn (me) speaking out about LucasArts...and that quickly turned into almost a whole thread of people speaking out against LucasArts. So all of that right there gives DG to have something against me. I took something that he really takes pride in and I exploited it and many others followed me.

Second is the way people respond to me. I don't ask for it, but some people, not all but some people in a sense look up to me. Why? Because of the situation I'm in. I'm like the only one here in the forum who has actually played the game. It maybe a demo, but it was the game non-then less. So people is always coming to me with questions about the game and I'm always answering them. Sometimes I give a negative answer, sometimes I give a positive answer, but I help them out no matter what. With this being said, I've came to gain a lot of respect from many forum members because of that. Also you take it into account that people are already agreeing with me when it comes to the LA situation. So this is where the popularity issue comes up. DG believes that I'm doing all of this for the fame and to be the most known person here and stuff like that. DG doesn't like that, he thinks that I think that I'm better then everyone and this and that. In other words, in his eyes I have a "ego" and I'm "looking down" on you all and I'm only doing this for the popularity.

Third the LucasArts Q&A interview. DG believes that thats only another reason for me to further my popularity campaign throughout TFN: Games. In all that isn't the truth. I'm doing this interview for myself and for the fans. I didn't have to give you all the chance to help me out with the interview, but I saw that since its 20 questions and coming up with 5 questions is hard enough, I wanted you all to help me out. Why come here? Well this is in my mind the largest Star Wars/LucasArts fanbase on the net. I mean the LA forums maybe bigger, but they don't carry the same intellect as everyone here. But again, DG sees different. In his eyes I was just doing that so I can gain...the respect of you all. By letting you all come up with questions, he believes that you all will like me more and stuff like that. Hence....playing into the popularity game.

So eventually it came to the point where many people started to like me and respect me. I'm not here for the fame as I have said earlier. But for some odd reason, I have established a name for myself as of late. Did I try to do that on purpose? No. Because to tell you the truth, I really expected to be the most hated person here. When I created this thread, I thought that everyone would hate me and bash me. But I created it anyways. So if I'm here for everyone to like me....why did I even crea

 

You have to realize that we don't actually know the state of LucasArts' fiances. It has been assumed in this thread that they are super rich (and that may be true, not saying it isn't) but maybe things aren't as good over there as we think.

Also, I'm sure that certian people are alloted to certian projects for a set peroid of time then they have other projects to do. If project A is delayed, then project B that depends on those people, will also be delayed.

It is very easy for us to tell the company how it should be run when it's not our money or our asses on the line. Personally I know little of what it takes to run a successful video gaming company and I really doubt anyone else in here does either. The marketing, business, publishing, packaging, and other such are just as much part of the game as the actual CD's and program.

I have nothing against LucasArts. What games I have I enjoy. I almost never buy one as soon as it's released, [actually I can only think of one that I have bought for full new release price (Galactic Battlegrounds, because I was so anxious for a stragety game)], but that's not because I want to see how it does, it's the money aspect. I'm too poor to buy many $50 games. Sadly I can't play many of the new games like Battlefront, the graphics make me really sick, really fast. Even KotOR bothers me after a time, God forbid I play something like Jedi Outcast for more than 10 mins.

My point in this rambling post is that until we work for the video game companies and see the process from all angles (marketing, game creation, story development, et. al.), we can't really tell them how they should be run. Sure we can clamor (sp?) for better games, longer, better stories, improved graphics, less bugs, and we should be listened to as their marketing audience, but at the end of the day they have to figure out how to please everyone and still have a successful company.

 

Wow! Jedi_Dajuan finally adds her opinion to this....thread lol. But yeah, what you say also makes much since, same thing with you Darth-Lando.

 

I wouldn't agree with that- Star Wars films are made to very strict deadlines, which are set in stone. There's no real need for that to be the case when there's no studio breathing down Lucas' neck and so on, but that's the way it's run.

I'd say that the problem is possibly the other way around- Lucas expects the games industry to work the same way as the film industry. Given the photorealistic CG he's churning out, maybe it's understandable why he would think that it would be quicker and easier to put together the low poly models and low resolution meshes that the games use.

The significant difference is that cutting corners in filmmaking doesn't affect the story; cutting corners in making games definitely does affect the playability.

 

Just my $0.02

I just found out this morning that The Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess was delayed. I had been looking forward to this game since E3 2004. I was going to run out and buy this game on the first day despite what reviewers would rate it. Nintendo had a huge money maker on their hands that would've boosted their software and hardware and might have slowed down the Xbox 360 sales a bit.

Instead, they delay this money maker until early next year. And why would they do this? Oh yeah that's right, quality issues.

Does this story sound similar to anyone, because it sorta reminds me of KOTOR II. I mean KOTOR II was my second most anticipated game and I was going to buy it first day despite what the reviewers said. However, LucasArts did something a little funny, instead of delay a game for it's quality, they instead moved the game up three months! Now when you play KOTOR II, it's a good game, maybe even a great game, (I personally like KOTOR II better than KOTOR, but I'm in the minority there.) but it is not all it could and should be.

Now I know I'm taking this a little out of context, Nintendo is a much bigger company than LucasArts despite the latter having a lincence much older and more loved than Mario! However, I think this shows that there is a philosophical difference between Nintendo and LucasArts. LucasArts is a company on the edge, that despite good software sales, lack profits. LucasArts will do anything to make profits, even if it skimps on quality. Nintendo is a company that although still makes profits is losing ground in the console wars. They could have easily put out a half baked product and see the $$$ coming in. However they instead chose to make the game as good as it could be, despite possibly upsetting its fans.

Now I hate to pick on LucasArts because they are not the only publisher who does this. (Though perhaps the most notorious) E.A. is known to rush developers also, the wife of the programmer who made a blog about the problem comes to mine. E.A. has no excuse for this IMO, because they are the biggest publishers in the world. They should stop signing exclusive deals and start improving their developer quality, but that's a rant for another thread. (Hey I should make a E.A.=Worst Publisher EVARRR!!!!!!!)

In the end, I believe that rushing games is a crime that happens to nearly every game developer and they all have to deal with it except the "big boys" (a.k.a. Rockstar, Bungie, Valve, Bioware, ect.) and in the end it's just hurting our industry.

Just my $0.02

 

I wouldn't agree with that- Star Wars films are made to very strict deadlines, which are set in stone. There's no real need for that to be the case when there's no studio breathing down Lucas' neck and so on, but that's the way it's run.

That's exactly my point. Lucas gives himself a set timetable and deadline and sticks to it. No one came to him and said "Oh, by the way, we're releasing ROTS in February instead of May." Yest this is basically what happened to KOTOR 2.

Kopolee11, I really like the Shigeru Miyamoto quote you posted in the Zelda thread so I'm reposting it here: "A delayed game is eventually good, a rushed game is bad forever."

 

Darth Lando asked me to address another issue, and it's only fair that I do, because it's pertinent to this whole issue.

What about the people who create the timetables for the games-- when they release and when they are done...

This is a collaboration between the sales people, the producers, and the developers. And when I say collaboration I mean it-- because the sales people would love us to ship games in 6 months. But it can't be done. So when a date is agreed upon, it's generally a date that the developers believe is achievable and will allow them to make the best game in the right window. Sometimes that window is a movie release, or a DVD release, or a holiday season. (In the case of Republic Commando, it was actually a window where there wasn't much competition.)

Developers are generally smart enough to know that the difference between hitting Christmas and not hitting is huge for the game sales. Obsidian wanted KOTOR II to do big money just as much as anyone else did.

Also, I've got to address this irrational notion that somehow LucasArts forced Obsidian to ship with bugs. True, they did move up the schedule, but Obsidian agreed to that schedule, and it was partly their responsibility to make sure they were tying up the loose ends and fixing the bugs.

The title of this thread is "LucasArts = The Weakest videgame Publisher." I think everyone can probably agree that this is an exaggeration and just false. I mean, really, there is NO other publisher who is maybe slightly weaker than LucasArts? They really ARE the weakest? (Are you saying that Republic Commando was worse somehow than the worst game released by the smallest fly-by-night publisher?) Draco says he's a journalist, so maybe he's engaging in some flashy-headline-type behavior, but he also knows this isn't GOOD journalism.

If we are to believe that LucasArts is weak, then we must believe that Galactic Battlegrounds was weak, Mercenaries was weak, and Republic Commando was weak, and Battlefront was weak. I think that stretches the bounds of the believable. Surely, in those four games somewhere you had some fun and found some gaming pleasure.


And I don't want anyone to think I'm trying to "convert" Draco. I mean, Dumbledore couldn't convert him, how could I? [nerd] Make up your own minds. I'm just here to try and give you some more information, stuff directly from the source.

 

Just one more thing: This is an incorrect analogy. The more accurate analogy would be...

You are writing. Your publisher comes to you in October and says "Lando, if we can put this book out at Christmas, you will sell 1 million copies. If it goes to February, it may only be 250,000 or less. Can you finish what you have in 2 months?"

What's your answer going to be?

The author analogy is actually still a bad one, because writing a book is a solitary process, and you generally don't have to think about anything except yourself and your family (if you're supporting one.) A games company is a much bigger, much more interdependent entity.

The point is: The publisher asks you if you can make a new deadline, and you agree or disagree and take your lumps either way. I am personally happy for Obsidian's success and I've been having fun with KOTOR II.

 

Interesting. I'm not familiar with the inner workings of the gaming industry so thanks for all you input. What still dosen't make sense to me is why the game was pushed back. Obviously, everyone knows that a game that comes out Nov-Dec is going to sell more. Why didn't they just make that the original release date, rather than aiming for one timeframe, and then changing it. Obsidian could have had more people working on the game or put more hours in or something, if they knew when they were supposed to be done. I don't know about other people but when i need to get something done (school, work, etc.) I pace myself so I do an even amount of work over the time alloted. If I had 9 weeks to write a paper and then, 5 weeks in I find out I only have 7 weeks, those last two weeks are going to be a mad dash and I'm going to wind up with a lower quality of work. I just think that if LA wants a game for christmas that's fine. They should just tell the deveoper up front.

 

Ah, that question is actually very simple to answer: Management turnover. When the original deal was made, LEC had a different management team. When the new management took over, they took a very serious look at what was in the pipe and when it was all slated to come out-- and the schedule looked something like a ten-car pile-up.

New management tried to place KOTOR II as best they could, still fitting everything else into a logical schedule, not only to make money, but to also try and keep from overloading and confusing the license. So they proposed a Xmas release to Obsidian, who said that, with cuts, it could be done.


oh and for terminology's sake, when we shortened a game's schedule, we called that "pulling it in." You said "pushed back" which is what we called it when we moved a schedule out a bit. Not that it really matters.

 

I guess that makes sense. It's just a shame really...

 

New management tried to place KOTOR II as best they could, still fitting everything else into a logical schedule, not only to make money, but to also try and keep from overloading and confusing the license.

If they were worried about overloading the license they should have delayed a game or 2 instead of bumping up the dates. It isn't going to break the company. While if they keep this **** up they just might.

So they proposed a Xmas release to Obsidian, who said that, with cuts, it could be done.

That is sad. Obsidian never should have agreed to that.

On side notes.

Cheers to Mr. Miyamoto and the people at Nintendo. I am not a Nintendo fan and have never really been into Zelda, but that attitude just earned them a lot of respect from me. I wish there were more people in the industry like him. Nintendo is one of the greatest developers/publishers in the world because of that attitude. I'll bet TP got delayed until after Christmas. This will cost Nintedo a good amount of money. But they did it anyway.

I think LA made a mistake making a RotS game. I played it in Best Buy and it was crap. Clunky and not fun. I don't know if the multiplayer duels redeem it at all or not. But single player sucked. Movie tie-ins are great marketing. But only 3 recent ones have been good. Spiderman 2, Two Towers and Return of the King.

 

But see you don't know that. You can't make statements like that when you are not from the inside. Zev is from the inside and knows how they work, stop denying the truth that he is telling you.

 

Delaying the game means risking its fiscal success. At a certain point, a game costs more to make than it will bring back in revenue. And then you are in the red, and that is bad-- no matter if you're George Lucas or George the Garage Game Developer.

A "game or 2" that don't make money, yes... that will break the company.

I think that the sales charts support the notion that the majority of people bought and enjoyed these games in the way they were intended to be enjoyed. There were some bugs and some cut features, but no game is perfect. (Okay, maybe the first Half-Life was perfect.. )

I never saw anything in the KOTOR II development that suggested that 2-3 months of additional development was going to make the game light years better. At that point, they were just adding content, and they knew it. Now we're talking about spending millions merely to take the game from 50 hours to 60 hours. For 90% of the market, that's not an issue. 50 hours of gameplay is plenty.

And one can never be sure that 2-3 additional months of development would not introduce 2-3 months of new bugs. The tone of the discussion here seems to be that additional time would somehow clean up all the code, and I'm not sure about that. It doesn't fit with my experience of development.

 

But see you don't know that. You can't make statements like that when you are not from the inside. Zev is from the inside and knows how they work, stop denying the truth that he is telling you.

Zev was on the inside. He hasn't said how long ago.

And I can tell you that sooner or later the fans will get sick of substandard games and LA will be scrambling to cover their asses. Just like after the late '90s when we got such gems like Jedi Power Battles and Demolition.

Delaying the game means risking its fiscal success. At a certain point, a game costs more to make than it will bring back in revenue. And then you are in the red, and that is bad-- no matter if you're George Lucas or George the Garage Game Developer.

Nintendo isn't worried about this. Why should LucasArts?

A "game or 2" that don't make money, yes... that will break the company.

I'm not talking about complete flops. I'm talking not selling as well as possible but still selling well.

I think that the sales charts support the notion that the majority of people bought and enjoyed these games in the way they were intended to be enjoyed. There were some bugs and some cut features, but no game is perfect. (Okay, maybe the first Half-Life was perfect.. )

I bought KotOR II right when it came out because I was expecting more KotOR goodness. But it was nowhere near as good and I was disappointed. At first I wished Bioware had stuck around. But then I learned it was bumped up.

I never saw anything in the KOTOR II development that suggested that 2-3 months of additional development was going to make the game light years better. At that point, they were just adding content, and they knew it. Now we're talking about spending millions merely to take the game from 50 hours to 60 hours. For 90% of the market, that's not an issue. 50 hours of gameplay is plenty.

HOW ABOUT BETA TESTING?

And one can never be sure that 2-3 additional months of development would not introduce 2-3 months of new bugs. The tone of the discussion here seems to be that additional time would somehow clean up all the code, and I'm not sure about that. It doesn't fit with my experience of development.

Because filling in the gaps would have obviously done the following.

Made the game sell horribly.
Broke LucasArts financially.
Delayed the game until May.



If not for Dajuan's warnings you would be getting some insults right now.

All games have the occasional bugs. But most aren't painful to play like KotOR II.

 

Nintendo isn't worried about this. Why should LucasArts?

To be fair, Nintendo is a much bigger company than LucasArts. Plus they know that a new Zelda game will sell big. Especially if the buzz around it now is any indication. But then again, the same could be said about KOTOR 2...

 

Um.... thanks?

That's really.. great.

 

Try selling Christmas tree ornaments months after Christmas and see how sales shoot through the roof. Profits will be better at Christmas time for any video game and it was a wise choice to send KOTOR out there. The game isn't as badly cobbled together as some would have you believe. It's still a great game and it was a nice surprise seeing it on the shelves so early. They just don't work so well on the 4-5 year old Xboxes out there with inferior disc drives and on the PC and the community for the PC version has already found most of the glitches and anyone with half a mind can find a solution to most game stopping problems. I found that the game played smoothly on the Xboxes with newer drives and never encountered a single freeze compared to the quite frequent freezes on the old Thompson drive.

 

I heavily doubt so. I'd rather say that the developers are exploited - at least in bigger companies.

I even have an example : the RPG game "Divine Divinity". Apart from it's title I liked it, but the point is that the publisher at one point simply stopped paying the devs. That's how the rumor goes. Fact is - anyway - that the developing company - Larian Studios - had to "publish or perish it. They woulD've gone bancrupt without the very much needed money, so they completed the game hastily. They not only had no time to fix bugs anymore - they even had no chance to do so. All they could do was endure the laments of customers over found bugs and fixing them. I know what I'm talking about - I was in the front line of the community (together with some more people), helping these angry customers and filtering relevant information for better bugfixing towards the devs.

I have since then always had the impression of publishers exploiting the fact that they give the devs money in advance for developing. With that, they build up a position of power, of dominating over the devs.

That's my opinion.

In principle, yes, but at christmas time there is only one cake and x companies wanting a piece of that cake. I try to say that too many competors wanting too much of the same cake can in the end get only very little. Even Nintendo is beginning to realize that, as I have heard.

Outside this season, sales are in general much smaller, but more constant, imho.

 

I can only speak for LEC.

Anyway, on that note, I'm going to duck out of this thread. I just wanted to add an extra dimension to the arguments, and let people know that there was no global conspiracy to defraud Rogue Wookiee of his Star Wars experience and his $$. And to let you have a peek at the other motivations that drive a game from concept to store shelves.

Just remember that nothing in game development is ever cut and dry. And if someone is telling you there's only one reason for something happening (like "it's all about the $$") you have good reason to be suspicious of that explanation. Especially if it fits conveniently with the anger you feel about bugs and half-baked design of certain games.

Not trying to make excuses, or tell anyone they don't have a right to feel ripped off- just trying to give the other side of the story.

See you around the boards. If you want to PM me with specific questions, feel free.

 

Try selling Christmas tree ornaments months after Christmas and see how sales shoot through the roof.

True, Christmas ornaments only really sell in the holiday season (which for some reason starts in October now but thats beside the point). But games go on sale and sell throughout the year. Halo 2 had the biggest release of any game ever and it came out in early November. I highly doubt that most of the people who bought it on day 1 were buying it as a Christmas gift. Games sucessfully sell year round. Otherwise they would ONLY be released around Christmas.