2 ms·
Those were also the days when, according to a famous interview with the same devs: > The general argument is that if you know you are going to need to release
by red_admiral 3y ago
Those were also the days when, according to a famous interview with the same devs:
> The general argument is that if you know you are going to need to release a patch, then you shouldn't be shipping the game in the first place.
- qingcharles 3y agoAs a game dev in the mid-90s patches had just started to appear; you usually got them from a cover disk as most still did not have Internet access. The thought that a title I published might need to be patched after release was something that horrified me.
- HeckFeck 3y agoThis quote shall be summoned every time I open Steam and note there is yet another 22GB 'rebalancing patch' for a certain game.
- alpaca128 3y agoWell, in certain online games the balancing can't just stay static. But update sizes really are quite insane. One Baldur's Gate 3 update had 100GB and of course that required 100GB additional free space. At that point it was easier to just reinstall the whole game.
- red_admiral 3y agoThe balancing in AoE2:DE can't stay static either - and the pathing seems to have a different bug every other patch. Still a fun game though.
- noqc 3y agoThe difference in quality of the game designers who worked on the original AoE2 versus AoE2:DE is pretty apparent. I think what is most annoying to me is how much harder it is to parse the visual information of "what kind of unit am I fighting" now that the graphics are "better".