Outpost

NotAdmin · Oct 21, 2020

A few weeks ago, I somehow found out that Ken Williams, former CEO of Sierra On-Line (and husband of Roberta Williams) wrote a book about his time at Sierra. The book's name is "Not all fairytales have happy endings", and you can find it at www.kensbook.com.

A particular chapter somehow struck a note with me. It's regarding a game called Outpost, and Mr. Williams quotes wikipedia as to why this game was a mistake to release under the Sierra name:

“…Initial reviews of Outpost were enthusiastic about the
game. The American version of PC Gamer rated the game
at 93%, one of its highest ratings ever for the time. It was

later made known that the reviewers had in fact played
beta versions of the game, and had been promised certain
features would be implemented, but never were.

Indeed, many of the features described in the game’s own
documentation simply did not exist in the game at all. These
included the ability to enter diplomatic relations with the
rebel colony and the ability to build roads, orbital colonies,
or the mass driver. Many of these gameplay aspects were
later patched in, though in appearance only, as many of
them failed to have any meaningful effect on gameplay.

Following the release of the game, the game’s general
bugginess and perceived mediocre gameplay, along with
the lack of features described in most of the game’s reviews
and the game’s own documentation led to a minor backlash
against the computer game magazines of the time by
consumers who bought the game based on their reviews.

In 1996, Computer Gaming World declared Outpost the worst
computer game ever released. …”
Click to expand...

Now what does that remind me of?

The one-sentence explanation for why Outpost failed was simply that:
It shipped before it was complete.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm...

During our quarterly product reviews I would ask Bruce how the project
was going, and what percent complete it was. I would finish the meetings
thinking the game was “almost there” and that only a few features needed
to be added.

Unfortunately, outside of those product review meetings I would hear
rumors that there were features in the manual that were not yet implemented,
and that the engineers had no idea how they could ever implement
some of the features that Bruce wanted.
Click to expand...

Taming 2.0 was coming. It was going to be great. Right up until Kim admitted it only existed as an idea on a napkin. When taming 2.0 came, it was shit, rushed, incomplete, and useless.

I wonder if Team Cyrene was promised mechs would be coming soon when the switch to CryEngine would be made. And only after were informed the
had no idea how they could ever implement some of the features that Ed and Kris wanted.
engineers

Wistrel · Oct 21, 2020

Biggest issue with taming as they never conceived of it from the perspective of the player. They never asked, "ok what else is out there? What would provide entertainment, usefulness or value for money?". No. All they did was come up with an expensive coin op that cost more than the value it returned.

The value of pets is largely cosmetic/"fun" and as such the leveling/capture should have been priced as such. IIRC there is only one or a small number of pets with buffs that might have a (tiny) financial impact on the game as regards returns/expenditure/balancing and they cost so much it would never pay to bother anyhow.

But indeed the wider point about bringing in stuff visually that has no purpose is a big let down for me, always has been. I don't want to find doors I cannot open.

McCormick · Oct 21, 2020

After beeing 16+ years in here...I have seen it all...a dozen times...

I wont waste my precious life and energy on this criminal institution anymore.

Let the fanboys talk, how its all about the skills and...*puke*

Log in / Register

Forums

Outpost

NotAdmin Administrator

Wistrel Kick Ass Elf

McCormick

Log in / Register

Useful Searches

Outpost

NotAdmin Administrator

Wistrel Kick Ass Elf

McCormick