-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Iga on Bloodstained ROTN's Switch version: "we didn’t expect it to be as bad when it was released"
- Thread starter Mega Man Zero
- Start date
Because we all know publishers love just not releasing products. The conversation around games like these change the moment publishers get involved. Publishers drive hitting deadlines more than anything else. Not to mention that not only was the game externally developed but development started significantly after the other versions of the game.
I'm not saying the Switch version gets a pass or that people don't have a right to be upset about a product they were sold but people in this thread alone talk about IGA & his team now like they're idiots or swindlers, fucking come on people. like it or not when under a time crunch it's really not that hard to see why the one version of Bloodstained that was being externally developed for lower spec hardware was likely viewed as lower priority for the main team. I'm sure IGA and his team didn't want to pass the buck to Wayforward in the way they did but they probably needed to buckle down on the PC/PS4/X1 versions if they wanted to hit their release date so that's what they did. Really all versions of the game should've been delayed to probably around now but getting to work on a game for as long as you need is rarely how this industry ever works.
Glad they are working on it.
I already 100% it on Switch, but I'll definitely go back and play the harder mode and NG+.
I already 100% it on Switch, but I'll definitely go back and play the harder mode and NG+.
Yeah bullshit, I say that as a backer. They locked the version choice before announcing it wasn't looking good, and never wanted to go into details about it. They knew about its state and hoped people wouldn't complain too much.
Bloodstained really isn't an amazing looking game (even if it improved a lot compared to earlier versions), and it's UE4. Wayforward helping them now also shows they just did a late port with few resources and not cared about it at all. I've never heard of a dev sending a port studio a game and never checking how it looks/performs before release, even less when you have a publisher.
505 is a mess, and honestly really lowered Iga's reputation. Good on them they're working on fixing it, but they cheapened out on the version that sold the most and didn't care about it at all until after its release.
Bloodstained really isn't an amazing looking game (even if it improved a lot compared to earlier versions), and it's UE4. Wayforward helping them now also shows they just did a late port with few resources and not cared about it at all. I've never heard of a dev sending a port studio a game and never checking how it looks/performs before release, even less when you have a publisher.
505 is a mess, and honestly really lowered Iga's reputation. Good on them they're working on fixing it, but they cheapened out on the version that sold the most and didn't care about it at all until after its release.
It is one thing to keep in mind that developing games is challenging, and releasing on multiple platforms comes with formidable hurdles, but it's ridiculous to just dismiss broken and compromised releases because devs work hard.
I'm not one to complain about performance issues but I played the opening sequence and I've shelved it until the fix. And I was a high tier backer too so it's not like I wasn't dying to play it. I'm honestly disappointed by how this has ended up but at least they seem to be hard at work on it.
Nah, it is incompetence.
But is fine, you can keep defending mediocre ports if you want.
I´m calling bullshit, performance problems and bugs were blatant since day one, I was (still am) interested in the game but reading the horrible first impressions stopped me from buying it. Also this:
This was shady AF and has made me put any good will towards this game and its´ devs on hold. If they ever fix it to an acceptable state I may give it a chance, but it´s lost its´ novelty factor and once I´m done with Astral Chain I´m getting Link´s Awakening, then Daemon Ex or Blasphemous and then maybe it´ll be Bloodstained, but who knows what other games will be on the horizon by then. Most likely it´ll go in my "Interests" list behind Enter the Gungeon and others. This not being a Nintendo game I might just wait for a price drop.
Glad I simply waited on this. I'll buy it deeply discounted after its patched. Which btw, its a shame that this shit still isn't fixed on Switch. Game deserves 0 money for the state they launched it in.
Then please don't make these statements if you're basing your evaluation of development being hard or not on "ambitious visuals" only. The lazy/incompetent dev bullshit has gotten so old...
This is somewhat related. I fired up the game on Xbox One through gamepass over the weekend and it soft locked in the second room (the one with the chest with equipment on). The main character had no head in the pause screen and when I equipped the item and tried to back out I was stuck with an endless saving icon and couldn't get out of the equipment screen.
I wouldn't have the highest hopes about the Switch version being brought 'up' to the standards of the other platforms based on that experience.
I wouldn't have the highest hopes about the Switch version being brought 'up' to the standards of the other platforms based on that experience.
I think what he means is that they didn't expect to encounter so many issues during development. I have to expect that the issues were known at the time of release.
After the past several Igavanias were exclusive to handhelds (Aria, Dawn, Portrait, Order) you'd think it'd be obvious that the Switch'd be the most appealing place for people who grew up with those games to get it. That's why I held off on buying Hollow Knight for this long, and why I'll be waiting for that magic patch to be released before picking this up.
The Xbox version is still waiting on a new update that PC/PS4 got a while back. It's apparently happening sometime in the next week.
Eh, the Internet will be lining up to suck Iga's dick the next time he gives a theatrical, memeable one liner.
Well I'm hoping that the patch comes out soon enough so this version isn't so bad :P
I can be patient and wait as long as I need as I have other games to play at the moment but I really hope to go back to the game eventually as it is very good, just not well optimized
I can be patient and wait as long as I need as I have other games to play at the moment but I really hope to go back to the game eventually as it is very good, just not well optimized
I guess they also didn't expect it was going to be the best frikking selling version.
Glad that at least they're addressing it and hopefully they will end-up making it decent.
Glad that at least they're addressing it and hopefully they will end-up making it decent.
The reality is that most consumers don't notice (and even if they do) don't care about resolution / framerates / other visual / performance issues. Most of them couldn't tell you what resolution or framerate are. So games are shipped in what some would consider a bad state.
Me and the rest of us on forums like this and who care about DF etc are a tiny, tiny fraction of the overall market.
Me and the rest of us on forums like this and who care about DF etc are a tiny, tiny fraction of the overall market.
The thing you have to remember about the GBA/DS games, they were purpose built for those platforms. They were designed exclusively for those systems, not ported down from higher spec systems, and that's how they were so great.
never forget that these jokers intended to make a vita and wii u version too. now, that would be...interesting
it's fairly clear that they underestimated the difficulty of downporting from PS4/XB1/PC to Switch and didn't allocate significant resources to the Switch version, but AFAIK, the game was publicly demoed on Switch at PAX months before release displaying more or less the same issues as the released version, and they responded by claiming those issues were the result of overheating demo units instead of just delaying the game on Switch. I'm guessing that the percentage of Switch backers was high enough that they felt pressure to ship it at the same time as the other versions, but there's no denying that they handled the situation very poorly.
and yeah, the one-week launch delay was shady as fuck
and yeah, the one-week launch delay was shady as fuck
I bought this week's ago for 20 bucks at games top and I want to play it so bad but won't without a patch. Give us atleast a time frame!!
Ive had a couple of loading issues that were annoying but aside from that it's been fine for me.
This was a game that at one point was going to be released on Vita.
I don't think the entire problem is that the Switch port is bad, though that is a problem especially when you consider how they hid it from reviews, made up excuses about it at trade shows, and locked backers into it early. I think the larger problem announcing a port for a game they wouldn't have been able to do, either technologically or because of resources.
I don't think the entire problem is that the Switch port is bad, though that is a problem especially when you consider how they hid it from reviews, made up excuses about it at trade shows, and locked backers into it early. I think the larger problem announcing a port for a game they wouldn't have been able to do, either technologically or because of resources.
This isn't another mainstream casual release - I think a large part of the audience who would buy this game would know about reports of it running subpar on Switch.
The wouldn't address it if they thought most of their potential customers didn't care about it.
Something to note: I think the biggest issue is the version of Unreal Engine that the game is running on, which is an earlier version that didn't inherently support the Nintendo Switch. I'd imagine the only way to probably reasonably fix everything would be to upgrade the internal engine, but that creates other issues, so it may be why the major patch has been delayed on the Switch platform currently, if they are indeed going to try and do that.
I don't think it's unfair to say there are games that definitely do more and have less issues than the Switch version of Bloodstained, but that likely are on a version of the engine that supports the Switch, natively.
I do wonder if it wasn't Iga's fault for releasing the Switch version roughly the same time as they did. Could've been someone higher up (publishing or otherwise) that made the decision. I wouldn't be surprised if that's just PR speech (not defending it, for the record) that he's saying. Definitely needed more time, but eh...
Either way, hoping these problems get addressed sooner than later. I didn't mind the experience on the Switch version all that much, really, but there are definitely problems that need to be addressed. The Twin Dragon's Tower Upper outside area, in particular, is one of the worst areas on the Switch version.
I don't think it's unfair to say there are games that definitely do more and have less issues than the Switch version of Bloodstained, but that likely are on a version of the engine that supports the Switch, natively.
I do wonder if it wasn't Iga's fault for releasing the Switch version roughly the same time as they did. Could've been someone higher up (publishing or otherwise) that made the decision. I wouldn't be surprised if that's just PR speech (not defending it, for the record) that he's saying. Definitely needed more time, but eh...
Either way, hoping these problems get addressed sooner than later. I didn't mind the experience on the Switch version all that much, really, but there are definitely problems that need to be addressed. The Twin Dragon's Tower Upper outside area, in particular, is one of the worst areas on the Switch version.
There's something weird about the game's codebase across multiple platforms. It's fucked up that the best way to fix sound glitches in the PC version is to disable the number of cores the game runs on.
They should have gone with Sprites. Blasphemous just looks aesthetically so much better than this game, and it actually runs/performs well too.
tales from his butt, clearly.
Development is never the same across developers. Things happen during development that are completely unexpected or unforeseen, and in the case of Bloodstained, not only were they developing the game for higher spec platforms, but the original Nintendo platform they were developing for got discontinued mid development and they had to switch platforms (no pun intended). The effect that has on development is significant.
It's not like they could press the "convert this to switch" button and it automagically makes an optimized switch port. Time, budget, and resources are also a significant factor, and publishers are very tight with all three. Even a week delay has to be fought tooth and nail for when making video games, because it has a cascading effect on development and any other plans for the project (like dlc, new features, and general bug fixing). Performance always takes top priority, but when resources are limited, and the publisher is pushing for a certain release date, you try to get as much optimized as possible for that, then scramble to continue support post launch and hope that the fanbase will be understanding and patient as the optimizations and bug fixes roll out as they can.
Making games is hard as shit, and it rarely if ever goes smoothly. In the off chances a launch does go smoothly, you can bet your ass it's because the entire team sacrificed a lot of blood, sweat, tears, sleep, family time, and much needed r&r to do it. Even when a launch goes poorly, the same applies. The "lazy devs," or "incompetent devs" rhetoric is insanely insulting and untrue. These men and women bust their asses to make a game they can be proud of, but the realities of game development, and devs having very little to no control over things like delaying the game when they aren't also the publisher of said game, means that they can't always release a super polished, top notch game day one. Especially when a publisher is breathing down your neck.
Yeah, it's super disappointing that the switch version released in the state it's in. I have no doubt they've been heads down working on optimizations, but these things take time. Not all developers have the same resources at their disposal, and it's such a disservice to the general health of the gaming industry and the people that work in it to think that because dev 1 was able to do xyz in terms of patches and bug fixes and optimizations that dev 2 should be able to do the same. That mentality fosters things such as crunch time and overwhelming working conditions for developers, because they feel if they can't produce those results within days of launch, they are judged to be incompetent, or shady, or lazy. :/
Last edited:
He addressed it because he was asked about it. Again 99% of people don't care or aren't clued up enough to care.
I'm not defending it in anyway it's just the reality of the situation and why games are released all the time in this industry clearly not finished / optimised.
I'd be all for Switch versions coming out a month or two later if it meant they were optimised properly.
Its not just one thing though, its the input delay, severly downgraded effects and textures and more bugs than the other versions like, most gamers aren't used to play a game like Bloodstained with lots of bugs and crashes