Is an online game considered a W.I.P. or a completed game? I mean online game can always use some patching and upgrades, but there not 'complete' yet.

Simple question

Discuss

Oooh...
good question.

But...all games can have patches.

simple answer: once the creator decides it's basicly finished - and only bugs will be solved in the future.

A game is complete when the engine, plus the main storyline/game is completed, and any known bugs are fixed.

Patches are merely fixes of bugs that were discovered *after* the game was released, if there is a known (major) bug a game should not be released, sadly this guideline is not always followed. A patch can also be additional gameplay, but this is ususally called an add-on.

In the end it's really up to the game developer, and specifically the marketing branch. Add-ons and patches are great ways to put your game in the spotlights again after its release, and actual expansions (large add-ons that ususally add a new storyline/campaign) means you can charge money for something based on a released and payed-for engine as well.

There's definately no one-awnser, even if the developer calls it complete, a player's opinion might be different.

A completed game is when you release version 1.0

The number 1.0 means nothing. I name all of my first demos 1.0. They are no where near complete.

A game is complete is when you don't need to make any more changes, but you have the ability to...

Pre-release versions

A system for denoting pre-release versions is generally used, as the program makes its way through the stages of the software release life cycle. Programs that are in an early stage are often called "alpha" software, after the first letter in the Greek alphabet. After they mature but are not yet ready for release, they may be called "beta" software, after the second letter in the Greek alphabet. Alpha- and beta-version software is often given numerical versions less than 1 (such as 0.9), to suggest their approach toward a public "1.0" release. However, if the pre-release version is for an existing software package (e.g. version 2.5), then an "a" or "alpha" may be appended to the version number. So the alpha version of the 2.5 release might be identified as 2.5a or 2.5.a. Software packages which are soon to be released as a particular version may carry that version tag followed by "rc-#", indicating the number of the release candidate. When the version is actually released, the "rc" tag disappears.

A game is complete when you've done everything to it that you planned out in the beginning (or around there).

A completed game should also be polished.

Yer... it should be done to a completeness of everything. If it has a few bugs then its not technically complete. Unless the bugs were found after, (Said Above)

Game design is an art: its done when its done. You plain, excute and release. Its the when that seprates a good game from a bad one. That you have to learn for your self.

Engine: Make sure no bugs + make sure the engine does what you want it to do, (this is the hardest-to-find bug.)

Sprite check!: Make sure sprites are pretty and they do what they're supposed to (this goes along with every aspect I'm telling you.)

Description: Get a literalist to write a fitting description of the game. Make sure you make it very clear as to what the controls are, the story plot of the game, and where to download the game (plus a back-up downloaded, I prefer host-a.net and 69 digits.)

Sounds: Are the sounds one repeated loop of annoying music, or are they the blood of Mozart's good playing hand?

Game play: Most of all make sure the game is fun, either wise it's like the download it and find out it's pretty much pointless.

I'm out of here y'all, peace!

Do literalists ever make up words?

well, I guess your right, literalist is not as good of a word as others would have put it.

Perhaps what I meant was "describe the game as good as it is and try to get the reader sucked into it plot wise."

Not as good.

What you said didn't make sense.



A "literalist" is someone who interprets something "literally" or exactly as it was written. A literalist has more to do with reading than writing.

You really should stop making up words or using words that you don't understand.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think a game is ever truely complete-- be it an online game or not. At least it isn't for me.
There always seems to be things that can be or should be changed, added, removed, fixed, checked, or toyed with. That's especially true for an online game-- which needs (or perhaps "should have" is better to say) new content continuely added to keep people interested.

However, as already stated, the meaning of "complete" can change from person to person. One person may consider a game "complete" while another person may not. A game may be complete as soon as it launches, but in another sense it's only just begun.

I dont think you guys are getting the point.
I think an online game should never be complete.
There should ALWAYS be patches and stuff and updates
which the users may find tremendous. But i say it should belong in the WIP.

Very good point.

-Matt

I agree with him. Any game that the creator just quits working on, and it can still be considered finished, seems like a finished game to me. If the creator does happen to work on the game somemore, and the next version is basicly the same thing, but has, a bigger world, more outfits, more quests, whatever, would still be the same old game, but with more added features.

A game is complete when you have said it is complete. It doesn't really matter what has been accomplished, if you, the creator, say it is finished, it is finished!

A game is complete when I give it 10/10

A game is complete when you're done adding to it.

Thats my whole point...
Games cal always have things added to it. specifically online games, that have the ability to patch things to add new maps and new equipment. If people always had the same equipment it would be extremely boring.

An online game is complete when the developer saiys.

"I am done with this"

If he really doesnt want to add anythign to it.

I doubt that happens to many mmog...but....it happens

My games are complete when i get bored of working on them.

Lol
Thats not the case for me, because i would have hundreds of 'complete' games then.

I second that. There is no criteria. Once you say its done, its done! Version 2 is when you add on, but original is still done!

Once you need to add some major stuff, that's when you make an expansion pack. Otherwise I guess you could say it's finished and come out with patches to fix stuff...

Or you could make a part 2 if it's TOTALLY different.

I think this is just like asking, "Does God exist?"

It all depends on who you ask, I think. There is no one awnser, just a few dozen opinions till the topic dies.

Stop relating religion to a simple question.
Polar Productions is completely right. You have the say when it is finished

-Verion

When the creator releases it and has found no further bugs.

A game is something that is continuously being built up upon. Patches continue to come out, and fix unknown errors, and expansion packs come out to add more too the gaming experience.

So when is the game truly finished? When patches stop coming out, when mods stop becoming developed and when players stop playing it.

Thats when its finished, literally.

Thats my thoughts on this, anyway.

But then with GM you kind of have to predict what expansions and patches you are going to release aswell, because they, in some way, must be programmed to be added on. So you can't really continously create them.

I wasn't relating religion to a simple question. I was relating an equally unawnserable common question, to the question the topic creator asked here. I'm not religious, I have no need to bring up religion, I brought up an example question that many people have heard sometime in their lives.

I feel I'm completely right, when 'you' say it's finished, another may say it's not finished. It's one of the biggest differences between gaming developers and its players, I'm sure you've noticed, if you're part of a game's community, how players complain about the game not being finished? As I said, it depends on who you ask wether the game is finished.

If you say God exists (example, not religion, do not interpret it as such or make me out to be bringing up religion.) it doesn't mean he exists, it means you think he exists, if you ask another that he doesn't exist, it doesn't mean he doesn't exist, it means he thinks he doesn't exist. It depends on who you ask, there is no one awnser that is better than another, wether you say a game is finished or not, it is an opinion.

Arguably the owner of the game's opinion weighs more than that of a player, but others may say that the player's opinion, he for who the game is created, is more important.

WELL... me, being a follower of WoW since before even alpha testing, am not too sure. when the game was released, it stayed in the 'current projects' section (where they keep their WIPs) for a long time... until the burning crusade, in fact. I think. and now, 6 months after the burning crusade's release, the burning crusade is still a 'current project'.

But if its an online game, users can find more bugs. Do you continue to fix bugs if its 'complete'?

It seems that the true underlying point of this thread is whether 'Complete' is a desirable description for games that have surpassed the WIP status.

Perhaps we should call them 'Released' or something such.


Games are a bit like paintings, in that the creator works lavishly on them and at some point, the creator decides to stop. This can have multiple reasoins, such as deadlines, production quota, lack of motivation/ inspiration, new ideas that need to be applied on a fresh canvas...

Art is never truely finished, and it are often peers that perceive it to be 'complete' while the creator merely has accepted it's imperfections...

A completed game is when the creator make all of his ideas, and then it called completed, when the creator is asking for ideas so that mean he finished the game, and making addons (1.1, 1.2, 2.0...). That's called finished game.

Game is complete when comprehensive testing doesn't reveal new bugs...
If online game requires patching for game-balance or technical-compatibility, then it's badly tested game which was released too early... IMO, of course...

There are actually games that are always in development (Nethack f.e.), but I believe that they are a result of not comprehensively detailed (formulated) idea... The authors always change their mind about game-system, so such games can never be finished...

A game is never complete. Especially not an indie game. Why not? Because there's always more you can do to make it better.

I think it's pretty much up to the developer. When the developer says a game is complete, it is, whether others think it is or not. It may not be good, though, haha.