前《DayZ》製作人評《方舟:生存進化》正式版翻倍漲價 是「無法容忍的貪婪」!

隨著《方舟:生存進化》(ARK: Survival Evolved)正式版即將上線,遊戲迎來了一波漲價,雖說同行是冤家,不過前《DayZ》製作人Dean Hall對這事的評價可能深得玩家人心。

Hall近日就《方舟:生存進化》從30美元翻倍漲到60美元一事,在Twitter上發表了一系列評論,他說方舟的漲價「讓人無法容忍」並且指責這是「純粹的貪婪」

Hall稱他自己是Wildcard遊戲的「大粉絲」,「如果遊戲達到了堅實的程度,我絕對支援這個價格,」他說,《方舟:生存進化》離著完成「還十萬八千里」這款恐龍生存遊戲「bug太多」

蝦米攻略網

Pcgamer通過郵件聯繫了Hall,問到《方舟:生存進化》需要如何做才值得60美元的價格,開發者又是何以在離開Early Access決定遊戲漲價等問題。

問:作為遊戲粉絲,《方舟:生存進化》需要怎樣才能值這60美元?

Dean Hall:我對這個「AAA」級的價格有很高期望,很多人都在糾結為何遊戲處在Early Access階段那麼久,但是我覺得遊戲應該有足夠所需的Early Access時間,來保證遊戲的質量,而不是匆忙的開發完成,然後突然的漲價,我認為《方舟:生存進化》、《DayZ》等其他Early Access的遊戲,應該在這個階段內達到他們價格所值得的水平。我只玩《方舟:生存進化》的永久死亡模式,所以困擾大家的bug對我來說更加致命。

Dean Hall: I put a pretty high expectation on a “AAA” price. Many focus obsessively on how long a game is in early access but I would far rather a game take as long as it needs in Early Access to be bug free rather than a rushed development and then a rushed price increase. I believe Ark, like DayZ or any other Early Access game, should remain in Early Access until it achieves the expected performance and bug standards of it’s price.

I play the game exclusively on permadeath so the bugs killing you are just so much harsher for me!

問:Wildcard在2016年推出付費DLC的決定和這次的漲價你怎麼看?

Dean Hall:我覺得我不喜歡這個DLC主要原因是它導致了玩家的群體的分裂,我有一個一起玩的朋友,但是他並不像我們這樣喜愛這遊戲,所以他就沒入手DLC,在多人類遊戲內推出DLC總是有風險的,我認為之前付費DLC的決策正好對應,並凸顯出他們當時的成功,而這次做出漲價決策的人忽視了遊戲的現今狀況。

I think that DLC split the community which is the main reason I wasn’t a fan of it. I had many friends who would play Ark with us, but not into it enough to buy the DLC. It’s always a risk with DLC in a multiplayer title. As I say below, I think that decision is symptomatic of how successful they are and that those making the pricing decisions don’t care about the state of the game.

問:當遊戲離開Early Access時,開發商時如何決定其適當的價格提升的?

Dean Hall:就像Garry Newman在Twitter評論的一樣,他們在做對的事情,《方舟:生存進化》已經很成功了,漲價的決定並不會對其產生影響,所以你可以說漲價多少都可以隨他們來,但是作為一名消費者,我覺得作出這個決策的人只想儘快推出零售版而不管遊戲品質。

所以,價格不是我所擔心的,而是決策者和遊戲開發的脫節,在我看來,遊戲是被急於正式發售的意願影響而武斷的離開Early Access階段,而不是由於沒有bug且平衡的遊戲品質可以正式發售了。

As Garry Newman pointed out in a tweet to me: they’re doing something right! Ark has been incredibly successful and this decision will not undermine that in the least. So you could argue they can set whatever price they want. But as a consumer myself, I think it’s symptomatic that those making the price decisions don’t care about the state of the game and just want to get into boxed retail as quickly as possible.

So, it’s not so much the price that worries me. But those making the pricing decisions seem so disconnected from the development. It seems to me, that the release of Early Access is fairly arbitrary and being driven around the desire to have boxed sets on shelves—rather than actually having a relatively bug-free and balanced game.

問:還有什麼想要說的嗎?

Dean Hall:通常玩家都關心遊戲已經處於Early Access的時間,我們這裡呼籲玩家,要鼓勵遊戲多進行Early Access直到正式完成,而不是接受開發商匆忙發售的決定,我評價一個遊戲的水平並不是從完成時間來看的,而是它在完成之後的表現。

There is a general obsession with gamers about how long a game is in Early Access. We should be encouraging games to stay in Early Access until they are finished, not accepting games leaving Early Access because the developer wants to put retail boxes on shelves. The standard that I hold a game up to is not how long it took to get to the finish line, but where the finish line was drawn and how much it charged to get there.

Via: Pcgamer


玩家討論版