Rockstar Admits GTA Remasters 'Did Not Meet Our Own Standards of Quality' (arstechnica.com) 25
Rockstar has issued an apology for the "unexpected technical issues" that marred the release of Grand Theft Auto: The Trilogy - The Definitive Edition last week and led to the quick removal of the PC version from Rockstar's online store. From a report: Last week, Rockstar said that the PC version of the game was being taken down "as we remove files unintentionally included in these versions." That led to reports that the package included copies of original soundtrack songs that had not been re-licensed for the new release. Other reports suggested that the original package accidentally included uncompiled source code and revealed some interesting programmer comments, including references to the infamous "hot coffee" scene that caused the game so much controversy back in 2005. Today, though, the developer admitted in a blog post that "the updated versions of these classic games did not launch in a state that meets our own standards of quality, or the standards our fans have come to expect."
We noted some of the remaster's many issues in our initial impressions, which recommended that you skip the bundle for now. Since then, players have chronicled countless bugs and questionable "remastering" decisions. Those range from disturbing textures to eye-searing rainfall to hilariously broken cutscenes to car-inflating wiggles to odd-looking character models and plain old typos that weren't in the original game.
We noted some of the remaster's many issues in our initial impressions, which recommended that you skip the bundle for now. Since then, players have chronicled countless bugs and questionable "remastering" decisions. Those range from disturbing textures to eye-searing rainfall to hilariously broken cutscenes to car-inflating wiggles to odd-looking character models and plain old typos that weren't in the original game.
We're sooowwwyyyy (Score:4, Informative)
Who gave it the green light (Score:2)
How does this happen? They're basically printing money with their ancient game but couldn't postpone this enough to make sure everything works properly?
Re: (Score:2)
How does this happen? They're basically printing money with their ancient game but couldn't postpone this enough to make sure everything works properly?
And miss out on a quarterly bonus for finishing under time and under budget?
The only "games" the suits in charge of these kinds of companies play themselves involve the stock market, not the computer games their company produces.
Re:Who gave it the green light (Score:5, Insightful)
It's the same thing with the Warcraft 3 remaster. Complete shitshow. I'm not sure why it happens, but it could be that from the very conception to remaster an old classic, the narrative in the company is "lets make easy money by reselling this old, classic of ours". They set their B-team on it, quality controls and testing are de-emphasized (it was already shipped before, right?) and the outcome is somehow worse than just playing the original. There's already such a pattern with botched remasters of old classics, it can't be coincidence.
Re: (Score:2)
The Warcraft 3 remaster wasn't remotely as bad as this. It failed to live up to what they had promised, but it wasn't nearly as fundamentally broken as this one.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a B-team. Rather this "remastered" bullshit is largely not given to a team at all. Someone writes a modern graphics engine, someone else codes a translation tool, someone runs the old textures through an AI upscaling algorithm, and then they press the green "Go" button on their money printing machine.
Those people who say these games are a "re-write" don't seem to understand how little of it is being written at all.
smack yo bitch up (Score:2)
Re: smack yo bitch up (Score:2)
Re: smack yo bitch up (Score:1)
...were too busy objectifying women
Concepts that sound good on paper - yet disappear into semantic nonexistence when analyzed critically - are remarkably easy to be guilty of engaging in.
Thanks for admitting it (Score:3)
So you'll give people their money back for the faulty product, right?
What was funny about that, why are you laughing?
I think I could forgive them for a bad lunch (Score:2)
Here is the link to Rockstar's apology (Score:4, Informative)
The link in the summary should go to Rockstar's apology, but doesn't.
Here is the link to Rockstar's apology:
https://www.rockstargames.com/... [rockstargames.com]
Re: (Score:2)
"TypeError: Not enough arguments to Window.postMessage. 399" :/
When a remake after 20 years is worse... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is, this could be a huge thing in terms of advertising, brand recognition and customer retention. First, you need time to push out a new version of your game. And if it's a successful franchise, others will come along and create clones (hello Saint's Row, how you doing over there?). And the people who liked your games and liked the genre will shop around when they are done with your game and you don't have something new in store. And, as has happened with me and Saints Row, they may actually enjoy
Yes it did (Score:3)
The standard you walk by or deliver is the standard you accept.
The only way that it didn't meet your standards is if you changed your standards after release, and I somehow think you didn't do that until you got the negative press.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
yours is much more likely though.
then again, their implementation of euphoria physics after gtaIV points to ineptitude again.
Low standards (Score:2)
High prices.
We still need to charge $60 for a game that we barely developed. I'm not saying this is illegal and that Rockstar should go to prison. But they are shameless.