Member
Uh....yes. What is so great about Trials Fusion in its current state? The game being more tire glitchy? The most pointless story in existence? The less rider customization (seperate "outfits" was the worst idea for making a unique rider)? It is sickening that Redlynx releases downloadable content before completing their god damn game, before covering their false advertisement on retail copies. It makes more sense in the Ubilynx perspective than it ever would for ours. Why should customers keep dropping money on content that brings little to no replay value (Challenges are one and done)?Originally Posted by S-Wallis Go to original post
The only realistic benefit Trials fusion brings is the ability to play Trials on the Xbox One and PS4. Even then, that splits the community.
Evo remains better than this. It's just unfortunate that so many people have moved on that Evo's track central is a joke.
Member
I agree with you that tyre glitches should have been fixed before release, but they've carried over from Evo so I don't think that they can fix them. I'm not saying that they shouldn't have released the game before glitches were fixed, I'm just saying that I'm glad they released it before MP was ready so I've been able to play it for these last few months.Originally Posted by KorIash Go to original post
For me, the relay value is in trying to stay in the top 500, and slowly improving to make to the top 400, then 300, etc.
Junior Member
Hell yeah they should've waited with the release! What would you think if they released FIFA 15 without the MP or insert any other franchise here? Especially when they advertised it with a MP. I just can't get my head around it. I get that it's difficult to code it on multiple new platforms, but then they just need to have released it half a year later.
Member
It was mentioned that online mp wouldn't be included on release. If you didn't know that, and brought the game without doing any research, that's just dumb. You have to research pretty much every game that you're interested in these days. After Evo I knew that i was definitely going to buy fusion, but I still looked for as much info as I could before buying it.
I don't get why you would have preferred RL to delay release until mp was ready. If you didn't want to play the game without mp, then why did you buy it? Also, can you imagine how annoying it would have been to be playing online and getting beat by noobs doing the FMXploit all the time? At least now that's been patched to make mp fair.
With regards to other games, if I only wanted to play mp, then I wouldn't buy the game until it was ready. Take Fifa for example. I would buy that before mp was released because I never play that online. But if it was the new COD, then i wouldn't buy the game until mp was ready.
However, having said all of that, I am very disappointed that mp isn't ready yet. I was expecting it to be ready by now!
Senior Member
I don't think the only reason people complain is because mp is still not here. It's a combination of several things. From what I see is, ALOT of companies these days seem to not care about the state of their game at launch. There are sooo many games that are released with problems that need day 1 patches that it's borderline ridiculous. You used to be able to buy a game, and that was it. Now, the early-access/pre-orders/dlc culture has infected the gaming-industry for the worst. You don't need to have a finished game anymore for people to buy it, and I think alot of people are getting sick of it. Specially if AAA companies do this.Originally Posted by S-Wallis Go to original post
I strongly agree people should research first before buying a game, but that doesn't make it more acceptable. And saying "I don't use X feature, so I don't mind" isn't a good attitude towards this problem in my opinion and it certainly doesn't sustain a healthy and stable community. The bigger companies don't care about the community, they only want profit, so they only need to sell X amount of copies and they are happy. Even tough I am not entirely happy with the the way Fusion was released, I still appreciate the people at RL who help the community. They are still one of the most community engaging studio's I have seen and I am sure they want the same as us, a quality game where we can have fun with. It's just a shame there have been made alot of questionable descisions in the process...
Member
I completely get where you're coming from, and I think that fusion shouldn't have been released when it was. Track central wasn't ready, the FMXploit has ruined the LBs forever. I was just talking exclusivity about mp. It's like GTA online. That wasn't ready before release, but again I'm glad that they released the game before if was ready because I got to play single player for a few months. Same with fusion. If rather have single player game to play while I'm waiting for mp, otherwise the only reason to delay release would be so they have mp on release.
I think my main point is, what difference does it make if they hold off release until mp is ready? As long as releasing the game 'early' doesn't hold up the development of mp, I don't see it as a big deal.
But again, I 100% believe that glitches and bugs should be fixed before release, and I'm talking exclusively about online mp.
Senior Member
Because mp is one of the highly anticipated features in games these days and gives alot more replayability than just a base game. Alot of people will stop playing a game without mp, and maybe even just forget about it and never come back. And it just creates a negative vibe overall, just look at the forums with all the people whining about it. Also alot of people who bought it where dissapointed because it said multiplayer on the box, but it was only local. So it is a big deal for alot of people.
Also releasing fusion has basically killed evolution, if Fusion was released later, alot of people would still just be playing evo. Now, evo is pretty much dead, and fusion just doesn't have the same replayability at the moment, so less people are playing overall. And there is no certainity for people coming back for mp when it finally gets implemented because most where dissapointed, this certainly affects alot of the non-regular player numbers.
Releasing a game with missing features is never a good idea. People buy a game and rightfully expect to be able to play all of it. Getting half a game at launch, while getting the next half +6 months later is just one of the worst bussiness descisions ever. You are better off just holding it off, or keep it in a beta state. Specially if you are even adding extra-dlc content during that time, when the game isn't even finished properly. Like I said, people are getting annoyed by these things alot more because it is happening too much these days. If you buy an early-access game you know what to expect, if you buy a full game, you don't want missing features. That's stuff for alpha/beta stages.
Member
They are both extremely good points that I didn't think about - I completely agree. Especially that Fusion killed Evo.Originally Posted by bassline001 Go to original post
I brought Fusion knowing that it was a work in progress. I realise now that I've been letting my own views cloud what others think of the game.
Senior Member
i have absolutly no issues with day 1 patches, its way better than having no patches at all and having your game stay a buggy mess forever
dlc exist because people want it and want to pay for it, if they like a game they want more of it
preorders is something stupid and only exists to make more money
early acces i don't really have an issue with, but imo its way better than pre orders, the info about what you are gonna get is all available, its up to you if you want it already or not and are willing to accept the risks
also what is a finished game? is minecraft finished? will it ever be? would it have been better game if they used the "release a finished game mentality"?(i would answer all these pretty much with no)
and minecraft is far from the only game that uses the "lets just keep improving the game" mentality succesfully
now what redlynx did a horible job at is marketing these changes
the mentality change from "release a finished game" to "lets support the game after release with new features even ones whe didn't think of yet when we released the game"
also compared to gta5's mp people here didn't really know that mp was gonna be implemented later even now we don't know anything about it besides "its comming eventually"
with gta people that weren't even interested in it knew that mp was gonna be implemented later making the people well informed
Senior Member
I have no issue either with day 1 patches, but most of the time those are issues that could have been fixed before launch, since they are able to fix them in a matter of hours.
Dlc is not that bad, except it divides a community and alot of studio's these days have dlc's ready from the launch of the game. Day/week 1 dlc are not about expanding the game, but making more money.
Pre-orders are indeed stupid. Specially nowadays where you have like 5 different version pre-orders on different sites...
The problem at the moment is that early access isn't regulated properly. Anyone can start an idea for a game but never finish it and they just take off with the money. Yes, there is a risk, but there are alot of people trying to scam that way and it should be regulated more.
With finished, I mean, all the features, and a stable game on launch. I know a game is never truly finished, and that's not a problem. But if you buy a game it shouldn't be a buggy mess or they should have released it as alpha/beta. 15-20 years ago, when games where almost only bought on disc, nobody had fast internet to download patches, they all had to be pretty stable on launch. Nowadays that mentality has changed, they think "we'll just make a patch whenever there is a problem"
