Here is my problem with the sentiment a good deal of steadfast defenders have used in regards to this game, as well as others out there. Yes, they can and should release patching for their games and yes there is far more variety in configuration options available out there that must be tested for compatibility on a game in order to ensure effective performance with their new wares... However, in the industry as a standard (meaning it is the exception, not the rule) most companies have gotten so bad about pre-release testing that they have massive fatal issues within the game, some to the point that in the release-for-purchase version you can't even progress through the whole storyline out of the box because of a glitch that should've been caught well within testing the software. Add on top of that the number of games released that simply put cannot run on the top-20 GPU's and CPU's available out there? Come on now in any other industry this would be considered a defective product. The sad truth is the gaming community for PC has gotten to the point that they accept this as the normal flow of things for most PC games, so they continue to support the offenders just for the fact that they make a product they could like.
This is why the PC gaming field is slowly falling by the wayside, anyone who wishes to argue this point merely needs to look at a game selling store/site and note the fact of how many wares are available for a console vs. PC. Yes in the console versions you have the same hardware configuration you are working with, but on the same page they can't just drop a product that doesnt work as-promised, turn around 3 months down the line and re-release a patched version and have any confidence the consumer market will re-purchase the game for their patches within it to play the game. People with consoles KNOW that the product they are going to get for the most part is at least polished enough to call a completed work. Yes they still have bugs within them, but unlike PC they are rarely fatal bugs that end the experience, nor do they have the spotty coverage of performance issues. Such is why the console option appeals to so many of the former PC gaming communities, it is just far more stable in the premise that you ARE getting what you paid for.
What is extremely sad to me in this instance is the fact that I feel (this is my opinion, I have no idea whether or not it is indeed the case or not)... I feel that with this game they just simply put did not properly test the product at all on any variety of systems out there, even using a few purchased off the market out-the-box computers would've enabled them to see the types of issues people are running into. It is very sad to me that it appears that mod makers; people doing the work for FREE spend more effort ensuring appropriate performance of their mods than the company did on their for-profit product. I have been involved in several instances of BETA tests where different rigs were not only desired, but sought out in order to ensure that the mods would work on several varying types of system setups. On the same flip of the coin though, if one of the mod teams were to release a mod that looked pretty, but doesnt run right and has tons of fatal bugs, everyone gets up in arms for US releasing broken products.. Isnt it a bit unfair to hold the free modders to a higher standard that the people who are actually getting paid, and paid at a certainly professional level for their product?
Testing cannot and will not ever ensure that a product is completely flawless, but at the same time when you expect to get paid upper mid to high per copy of your product, you better be matching that level of quality on day 1 if you don't want to have people feeling very much like they were conned. People forget that patching really was intended when the gaming industry for PC started as a means to fine-tune the end product, in most instances today patching is done so frequently because of the fact that proper testing and quality assurance was simply overlooked as a cost-saving mechanism in order to make a larger profit. This of course comes at the peril of making products that simply don't work as intended for a decent base of the consumers out there, which is why the PC gaming industry is in a much lower standing than it once was.
I know comparing games generally does not apply, especially when they are from genres that do not share much in common, but if you look at EM5's graphics, they certainly are not at a 2014 level.. A game that looks nice in a screenshot is fine compared to its predecessor, but what about the rest of the games available on the market today and from just a few years ago? Would you consider EM5's graphics to be on par with some of the other games you also enjoy but are within 3 years of em5's release? In my opinion the game looks pretty good, but it isnt onto the par of other performance chugging games out there, from racing, to shooters, to even RTS games that are out there, there are many of them that look just as good, in some instances better. IF you want to look at the appearance of the visuals, in gaming it can be compared in spite of the fact the games are totally different in setup.
For me, I feel this game is very similar to emergency 2013 but with the promise that it can be modded (albeit not as easy as advertised). Ya'll can disagree with me and probably will do so, that is fine. The graphics are improved over emergency 4, that is undeniable, the gameplay is a bit dumbed down compared to EM4, in some ways this could be good or bad, depends on the user. But when you have a game that was released in 2005-6 vs a game made in 2014. One would certainly hope that it looks improved over the previous entry (8 years between them both I believe). Yes it is an all-new engine that they made for this game, but that's part of game design is that you DO have to make new engines for your wares, esp when you're talking 8 years since the game that is your target for replacement.
I don't see it as any type of favor that they made a new engine for this game, just because an engine is new does not mean that it is always better than the previous generations (IE more stable, better performance, etc.). Unless they can get the performance issues resolved and fix the fatal bugs, all of the PR touting the benefits of the all-new game simply will fall upon deaf ears. These guys are getting paid quite well to make a product that is supposed to be on the edge, but also deliver said product in working fashion. Hopefully their all new engine can be tweaked to fix the fatal issues the game is currently showing on many people's systems. It ran fine on mine, but given what I paid for this laptop, it autta.
