Perfect Dark scaled down to meet launch deadline
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Sep 27th 2005 at 1:00PM }
Rare has been forced to make some last minute cuts to ensure that
Perfect Dark Zero will be at the forefront of the Xbox 360 launch. Initially, Rare had promised 50-player
online multiplayer capabilities; that number has been scaled back to 32, which is still twice the number of standard,
current generation titles on Xbox Live. In addition, the DataDyne TV mode was scrapped; a feature that would have
allowed players to watch and upload multiplayer matches.
However, Rare has suggested that these cutbacks may be implemented via an Xbox Live download at a later date. No
word yet on whether or not this download would cost money. But having to pay extra to enjoy the features we've been
looking forward to all along would make for some unhappy gamers. Seriously. Unhappy. Gamers.
[Thanks, JamesO]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
jc @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
I would have rathered that they finish the game, and then release it. Imagine Dodge releasing the newest viper, and saying that you can buy the seatbelts later when they finish designing them.
Maybe if they didn't spend so much time with the stupid looking ragdoll physics and actually worked on the features they promised... (anyone see the Mythbusters eppisode where they were shooting a dead pig with every gun imaginable, and the dead pig didn't even move an inch??)
I understand deadlines, but to release an unfinished product is just a bad idea... too bad cause I was really thinking of getting the X360 because of this game.
Leon @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
Yet more confirmation that Microsot's strategy to try and upstage Sony at the console wars is based on being the first to release their product, quality and completeness issues aside.
As a casual consumer and console player I can only stress that I try to make the most educated decisions when it comes to consoles and video games. I'd rather wait for a complete and not rushed product, than actually throw my money at the first thing that comes out, especially when there are reports of rush productions, just like this one.
MumbleyJoe @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
Meh, seems like a non-issue to me. There are always things that developers talk about wanting to implement that they don't have the time or resources to complete. 50 vs 32 players, some people will care so that's unfortunate, personally I prefer a smaller room with players I know. I never got the impression it was "promised" per se either, but something they were striving for and optimistic they'd acheive. I'd never heard of DataDyne TV either, so I can't say I'll miss it.
It depends on your outlook, but anything that's offered after release could be looked at as somethat that also "could have" been originally included in the game, at some point they need to be released though, particularly if it's a launch title. But for that reason with DLC, you'll always have "seriously unhappy gamers".
watership @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
I wonder if anyone here knows the politics the deadlines and logistics of Launch titles. For the past decade it's been the same. The dev kits are late, the time is short, the pressure is high. Microsoft didn't introduce this sort of atmosphere just for the Xbox 360. Let's not slam the games until their out and finished. Remember the complaints about all the things the Original Halo had to cut out to miss the deadline for xbox? No one seems to complain about that now.
kevan @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
For me, as long as no compromises have been made to the single-player content then I will be quite satisfied. I have very little desire to face 49 other Live gamers anyway...
Christopher7xii @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
93% of the people that buy the game won't know the features were supposed to be in the initial release of the game anyways.
This is exactly the reason why I hate hardline dates(thank you Square for pushing you releases back instead of rush jobs), and why I hate the idea of pay-per-download services. Expect to see this a lot more often. Not because the designers are lazy, but the producers have to put less money into the game to get it out the door, get just as much(if not more with that $60 price of next gens), then release originally intended features via live or whatever. Wipeout Pure did this with the rushjob thing, but they didn't charge for it so I lived.
Thryon @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
These features are online specific. For players not wanting to play online, why should they be denied this game at launch. Online players can download the extra functionality later.
Laughing Man @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
If only the truth would come out about Halo 2 and why the ending is so dissapointing...
Not that I know anything about that. Ahem.
Martez @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
You can't seriously be surprised Microsoft is forcing an unfinished product out the door. Just look at every release of Windows.
The 32 players instead of 50 isn't really that big of a deal, and it's a shame if people are going to bitch endlessly about something like that. The DataDyne TV mode is something I thought would be a fun, though. If Rare doesn't charge for these things once they're available over Live, that would be very smart of them. Pulling a "oops, we don't have time to include this, but you can pay more money for it later" would really smudge their already wobbly reputation. Oh well, it's not like I had high hope for this game in the first place.
b @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
I've been always skeptic about buying an Xbox 360, not only because it doesn't have the games I'm expecting most for the next generation, but because I actually have to pay for Playing online.
But, If I have to pay even more just to experience more levels or see more guns, there is no way I'll get a 360, because even If I bought it, i'd miss everything it can offer, because after all, it will cost extra to fully experience the game I have, and I don't only mean Online Multiplayer gaming. PS3 and Revo will both offer (supposedly) FREE ONLINE SERVICE (Free online multiplayer gaming).
And if you think 360 is cheaper than a PS3, think again. 4 years of LIVE (an Xbox lifespan)is 240 dollars plus "extra levels/guns/Etc." I don't wanna know. Think how much will it cost when "Xbox 360 1.5" comes out (with HD-DVD or blu-ray), a bigger hard drive (because PS3's is ranging from 4 to 6 times the space of a 360's) and with a WiFi Router (that both the revolution and PS3 will include for free when they come out).
The only thing you'll have to pay for in revolution is for actual games, not "add-ons", and you don't really have to buy those games to fully experience any other game you buy.
Smiling Politely @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
Way to sacrifice quality to meet a deadline. Who knows what else they left out of the game that they won't mention. At least Valve (HL2) and Nintendo (Zelda:TP) had the balls to delay their big games because they did not think the games were up to par.
Jason Cross @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
Wow, someone managed to read those Edge magazine scans. *clap clap*
As for "cut features..." hey guess what? This happens to easily 3/4 of all games released on all platforms, even long after the launch of a system. It happens to PC games all the time. Features get cut, trimmed, changed - all to get the game done sooner.
Now we're somehow complaining that the game "only" allows for like twice the players of Halo 2, and doesn't have the TV option that they never really talked about and certainly never promised? Sheesh.
Why don't we all just wait until the game is done and out and we can play it to judge its quality?
Scott @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
"No word yet on whether or not this download would cost money." and some of you folks are talking like it's written down as law that it will in fact cost you money.
I fail to see the big deal though. Cutting from 50 down to 32 and removing the DataDyne TV thing... None of that severely, seriously, or kind of hampers the game otherwise.
This is part of software development though. Doesn't matter if it is games or banking software. Compromises are made to get the software out on time. The compromises listed above for PDZ to get it out for launch don't seem like a big deal.
Sharpizer @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
Halo 2 took forever to make and the game didn't even have an ending. The problem with Rare is either the scope of the project was larger than what they could handle or they didn't establish realistic goals & deadlines. But when does a project ever go as planned? Losing 50 multiplayers and the DataDyne thing don't seem to be such big issues.
Smiling Politely @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
@Scott: If they admit to cutting out two things, what makes you think there is the possiblity that they didn't cut other things from the game that they don't want to mention?
The article pretty much has them admitting they are in a time crunch and are trying to meet a deadline, hopefully that means don't find out that meeting the deadline is their #1 priority and the game turns out to be glitchy, buggy, or whatnot because they had to rush quality assurance or testing.
Martez @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
#15's got it.
If they're cutting features, who knows if they're slacking on other things. They certainly wouldn't release a press release about how "To meet deadline we had to scale back the number of levels and the physics engine." I don't think people are really complaining they can't play against 49 other people on Live. They're complaining that Rare and MS just admitted they're rushing the game for launch.
swoosh bnd @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
I don't care about the cutbacks for launch, all I care about is if they will charge for the updates, if they did, we'd all be mad.
TxdoHawk @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
I am in the "this isn't much of an issue" camp.
50 players is too much for a FPS without huge maps, and way too much for a game with a multiplayer mode that probably isn't trying to simulate a war like Battlefield series.
The Datadyne TV thing is just a little more dissapointing, but very few people watch matches anyway, aside from those fascinated with clan skills.
Spiza @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
I've found that games with lots of people on servers are noob fests. If there are more than 20 people on an fps server, its usually not a good sign.
I can't stand bf btw.
For guys that are crying about these features, remember that they are live features. They could always implement them later, and let you dl an update. They may have cut these on purpose to fix things in the single player to make sure it was good for launch.
I wonder how Rare feels about this though. They are used to being able to delay their games indefinitely. They did it for just about every game they've made since the snes. Are they being forced to finish the title by launch date, and are they happy about it? Could this be why there was a large group of employees that all left together earlier this year? Cuts and a demanded launch date could have done it for some of those guys/gals. I wonder if they are still happy to be in the M$ camp. Both PD0 and Kameo are really big titles for Rare to reprove themselves. I hope they are successes.
Giddieon @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
Rushing a game is always bad bad news... It looks as this game has been heading towards the krap bin....
Rushed job
Key selling points droped
Hardly and gameplay videos and the ones that are released are poor quality...
To much Hype the people pushing this game sound a lot like car salesmen...
Also huge factor Rare is nothing like it use to be all the alent left and created FreeRadical...
Sanitarium @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
Now just imagine if they had done the same with Halo 2 or Ocarina of Time. Would you guys rather the games be shortened and cheapened to meet a specific date or would you guys want the best quality game possible?
Remember all the people bitchin and whining about the Twilight Princess delay and saying Nintendo would go out of business and the Revolution would fail because they delayed the game? Who wants to bet the bitching and whining would be at least 5x worse if Nintendo announced Twilight Princess would be scaled down to meet a deadline?
And you know Microsoft is the one that made Rare do whatever they can do meet the deadline because M$ needs a FPS at launch.
MumbleyJoe @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
It sounds like a lot of people here have never worked under a deadline before... must be nice.
First mention of Perfect Dark Zero was years ago, I somehow don't feel like they're really being rushed.
Meh, I can't get worked up, as I said above.
Spartacus @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
NOT A BIG DEAL.
1. MOST games go through this process.
2. The cut features are not KEY features.
3. If they are implemented through LIVE, they will most likely be free. Why? Because Rare is a 1st party dev. Just like the 1st party stuff may be $10 cheaper than 3rd party stuff...
OTAM @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
It isnt a big deal. I didnt even know about these features in the first place so why should I care that they are cut?
All of you people just whine at the fact that they are cutting something regardless of what it is.
"They cut out the blue shoes for a deadline dude"
"I don't care! They still cut it out,it's the principal of it! *pulls out tissue and begins to sob*"
Why not focus on what they're cutting out rather than them cutting something period.
elmer @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
I have to say that mentioning features you're gonna include and then not including them is bad form if nothing else.
The fact is you can bet that PD0 has been in planning since they finished PD1 (perhaps even before) which would make it more than 5 years of development since that date.
That they still have to rush would have had me worried about the state Rareware's development ability is in, except I don't really care anymore, and i suspect this may be true for many.
RageOverdose @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
The stuff Rare is cutting from the game really isn't a big deal. Ever played UT 2004? Up to 32 people in a match. That is the max you should have in a simple deathmatch, CTF sort of thing. And that game owns, IMO (and many other's). Really, it can even be too much. That DataDyne thing is cool, but really not a big deal.
This is true, as most of you say, but others are trying to point out, what about the rest? What if Rare misses a bug, or doesn't polish the gameplay? Jeez, M$ needs to realize that they have enough money. They can hold back a couple of months so Rare can make sure the game is up to par. It could benefit them in the end. I just don't want this game to suck, since I'm seriously considering the 360, and I'm sure no one else wants disappointment either.
C @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
No big deal. If they do have a download to increase to 50 player matches that would be free. If someone had to pay for that, it probably would be difficult to consistantly get 50 people together for a death match. Most would continue to play with 32. The worst case scenario would be that they charge for downloads initially and have them for free later on like with Halo 2 maps. I don't see much of a use for the DataDyne TV mode. Couldn't you watch multiplayer matches live with Xbox live silver?
thies @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
"but, but.. I can't download stuff with my core package! I got a broken game :("
ZildjianKX @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
"but, but.. I can't download stuff with my core package! I got a broken game :("
Umm... you can download stuff on a memory card.
Whopping Wombat @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
It doesn't matter how many players a game has just as long as the amount fits the map. For example, Halo 2 only has 16 players, and Battle Field 2 has like what, 100-200? For some reason I stil find myself in action more in halo than in BF2 cause the map is too freaking big...Not to mention even Halo 2 can lag, so if 50 players means big lag, than I opt for the 32... and I'm aware players can be filled in for by bots...but I prefer ppl...
BTW to the second post, stop asserting that this is a typical MICROSOFT thing to do. everyone does it, more ppl would be pissed at this point to hear a delay than to hear this cut back.
thies @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
#29 uhm, I'm supposed to buy new memory cards every few weeks as developers need to fix their games as they wanted to meet a deadline? shitty deal that.
Sean O. @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
Oh waaah! Only 32 players... I'm crying like a girl. DataDyne TV... man nothing I like more than watching other people play. There are more serious problems to worry about... like their last two games... the beautiful but tedious Dinosaur Planet and the critically underwhelming Grabbed by the Ghoulies. You guys ought to be worrying about whether or not the game will be any fun.
Most launch games are pretty shallow anyway... with the exception of a few... like Mario 64, Mario World... maybe Sonic Adventure... oh and Rogue Leader was pretty sweet too.
PickyPants @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
Dude. Everyone. Listen.
No one cares about what is being LEFT OUT.
People are worried that this is a sign that other, more important things, will be LEFT OUT.
Please read the comments before you before spamming the "Add your comments" button with your big, meaty thumbs.
Slashbunny @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
If they are being forced to rush to get the game done, I doubt the only thing is going to be different in the final game is a lack of one feature and lower max player count. Lack of polish, balance, bugs, etc could all be there.
The player count thing is an indication of the netcode sucking and them not having time to fix it, so they lower the max players to compensate. There's no "50 player max feature" that they didn't get a chance to add. Capability for such would be designed into the game from the beginning, so for some reason (ie. a problem) they changed their minds and changed the number from 50 to 32, probably because of netcode or cpu/network load on the serving machine.
That being said, there could be other problems like this that won't be fixed in time for release. They certainly wouldn't say anything because I bet they are going to make sure everything else is top-notch, but it does make you nervous that they are being to rushed to force the game out.
Chris K @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
So you're bitching about some features being cut unless you subscribe to XBox Live. And those features are only useful if you actually subscribe to XBox Live.
Ummm.... that's digging.