N'Al on 18/2/2008 at 20:28
Jesus, those enhancements do sound mighty impressive indeed. Now that my new gaming rig has finally arrived I was going to pick up the Witcher at some point. Guess I'll wait for the Enhanced version instead now, though.
Koki on 18/2/2008 at 20:49
So I am the only one who thinks it's an insane thing to do?
"Hey guys, remember that game we released two months ago? It actually sucked, here is the real version, sorry about the delay"
That's wrong on so many levels, mostly marketing ones.
At least GSC tries to hide it by making it a prequel, heh.
Digital Nightfall on 18/2/2008 at 20:58
Anyone remember the other European RPG which had something similar happen with it? I can't remember the name, but it was from a fairly small time developer/publisher. One of the features of the enhanced version was to replace all the graphics of the female lead with a (local? famous? I dunno.) porn star. I am not sure how much that helped sales of the new version.
-- Edit: Hah, found it. (
http://www.gods-game.com/article.html?a=162500e1d7bbfe95d0b42013595b4f44)
bukary on 18/2/2008 at 21:12
Quote Posted by Koki
So I am the only one who thinks it's an insane thing to do?
Yes, you are.
june gloom on 18/2/2008 at 21:27
Don't worry, Koki. I'm sure you'll find something you like some day.
Ben Gunn on 18/2/2008 at 21:37
Quote Posted by Koki
So I am the only one who thinks it's an insane thing to do?
"Hey guys, remember that game we released two months ago? It actually sucked, here is the real version, sorry about the delay"
That's wrong on so many levels, mostly marketing ones.
At least GSC tries to hide it by making it a prequel, heh.
Did you actualy read it before posting? Have you played the game at all?
a. Polishing a game does not mean it sucks.
b. Fixing things only observed by the customers (the best and largest "beta" testers and ffs dont start quoting me on the "beta"- the originial release was in a better state than most products.) needs to tell you there was no "real" version that was abandoned due to time/budget considerations.
c. On a marketing level it is a brilliant step for a young company trying to establish itself. It will attract new customers.. well, excluding the ones who will look down upon them cos they are addicted to being fucked in the rear. Seems like you are one of them.
If you need an example- look at Tripwire (Red Orchestra), winners of the make-something-unreal contest, their mod went retail and got their support in patches, updates, bugs/exploits fixes and free content for more than a year (even two, cant remember exactly) thus establishing a devoted community who anxiously look forward for their next upcoming title.
fett on 18/2/2008 at 22:17
Quote Posted by Koki
So I am the only one who thinks it's an insane thing to do?
"Hey guys, remember that game we released two months ago? It actually sucked, here is the real version, sorry about the delay"
That's wrong on so many levels, mostly marketing ones.
At least GSC tries to hide it by making it a prequel, heh.
I would think that if the game hadn't gotten rave reviews and already done really well in the retail market. The point is, they didn't *have* to do this and it's most likely not financially motivated, but rather a 'thank you' to the folks who bought the first version and enjoyed it. What you're talking about is what happens with games like Dark Messiah, etc. that have major, game-stopping bugs. Not the case here. This game was already very polished by comparison to most new releases. It's especially telling that many of the changes they made were due to customer feedback.
Zillameth on 18/2/2008 at 22:22
Quote Posted by bukary
Yes, you are.
Actually, knowing Polish GameDev the way I do, I think Koki has a point. But I've also found an article claiming they've sold 600 thousand copies. Which is not very sensational (especially with most of sales occurring in Poland and Russia), but surprisingly nice nevertheless.
There are two things I can say about Witcher: 1) it's a good game in some respects, 2) it's very "underdone". So I think someone decided the game had potential to sell much better, if some improvements were made, and some mistakes corrected. This "enchanced version" is a kind of patch, but it does seem like a very rational business decision.
N'Al on 18/2/2008 at 22:34
Quote Posted by Digital Nightfall
Anyone remember the other European RPG which had something similar happen with it? I can't remember the name, but it was from a fairly small time developer/publisher. One of the features of the enhanced version was to replace all the graphics of the female lead with a (local? famous? I dunno.) porn star. I am not sure how much that helped sales of the new version.
-- Edit: Hah, found it. (
http://www.gods-game.com/article.html?a=162500e1d7bbfe95d0b42013595b4f44)
More like Gods: lol
As for the alleged bad marketing; they
are calling it Enhanced Version, and not Polished-cause-the-original-was-shit Version. Doesn't seem like bad marketing to me.
Zillameth on 18/2/2008 at 22:38
Of course, calling it "Enchanced Version" is the best thing they could do. The release itself is risky, because they are openly admitting there are issues to be addressed. But it's the risk they're certainly aware of, and something they are not going to regret, I think.
