Slashdot Mirror


Wired News: 2002's Greatest Vaporware

Quill writes "Wired News has once again compiled a list of last year's greatest (worst?) pieces of vaporware. The winner (I won't spoil the surprise) has been on the list three times now! The nomination process was mentioned a few weeks ago on Slashdot."

3 of 349 comments (clear)

  1. Game-to-be-left-unmentioned by MrWa · · Score: 5, Interesting
    And people wonder why it is so hard to make money in the computer game industry...how many people, getting paid how much, have worked for so long to make this game? What are the chances it will come even close to breaking even? If every person that owned a computer bought a copy of this game, at the insane price it would have to be, would that even be enough?

    It has been said before but bears repeating: the games of yesteryear had something that all these new games, with their fancy graphics and supposedly advanced AIs, still can't seem to replace. Repeat after us Mr. Game developers: it's all the gameplay.

  2. Glad Duke Nukem is taking forever.. by xchino · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Persoanlly I'm glad Duke Nukem has been taking forever. I know this company has the ability to make a great game, and that they WANT to make a great game. Taking their time to do it right means alot to the overall gameplay. Even the best game ideas can be slaughtered by lack of attention to details.
    They've updated the engine a few times and started over a few times.
    Any coders out there know that sometimes intense modification or starting over is just what has to be done to make your program what you want. Or you could take the easy route and compromise your program concept to account for a mistake. A poor analogy would be that this is like shoveling all the crap in your roomunder the bed instead of cleaning up.

    --
    Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
    1. Re:Glad Duke Nukem is taking forever.. by GlassHeart · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Any coders out there know that sometimes intense modification or starting over is just what has to be done to make your program what you want.

      Yes, in many cases a rewrite is better than reuse. However, you do not discover major faults in your code that require a rewrite (much less "a few times") in the middle of development. To do so indicates that your team does not understand the code base it was to reuse, or did not understand the requirements. Either form of incompetence rightfully results in failure, especially in a cutthroat market like games.

      Also, "started over a few times" does not say "taking time to do it right" to me. It says they don't know how to do it right, and are just fumbling in the dark.

      Note that I am not familiar with their actual development practices, so I am assuming your description is accurate, and basing my comments on that.