Lajciak: I disagree with the notion that pre-orders are inherently bad. Some companies have earned my trust sufficiently that I am willing to "reward" them by pre-ordering their games, even though I could wait until release to purchase them. CD Project is an example of one such company -
rampancy: Gearbox was once highly esteemed in the minds of many gamers, thanks to their work on Halo PC/Halo CE, and Borderlands. Then came Duke Nukem Forever, and the debacle that was Aliens: Colonial Marines. BioWare was once considered to be almost infallible among gamers -- then came DA2, and the ME3 debacle. Then we have Bungie and the controversy surrounding Destiny and its DLC-heavy piecemeal story.
BioWare is indeed a good example of how gamer trust can be lost (Gearbox might be too, but I am not interested in the type of games they made/make, so I cannot speak from experience). Having been a superb developer with a stellar reputation, their first debacle, in my eyes, was ME1, which was the first BioWare game to implement online DRM. But that was know prior to release and I avoided pre-ordering or indeed buying the game. I did buy Dragon Age: Origins - an excellent game indeed, and again, the debacle of Dragon Age 2 was predictable before release and I successfully avoided it.
This just shows that pre-orders can be a cheap way of rewarding developers/publishers that have been good thus far and of building mutual trust, so long as you don't pre-order blindly. Some risk remains, but the developer/publisher also taking risks if they don't implement DRM and presume their customers are potential pirates (online DRM means automatic non-purchase from me). Don't assume that everyone who pre-orders does so merely on the basis of hype and marketing.
rampancy: I'm not saying that CD Projeckt/CDP Red are going to screw up with Witcher 3, or Cyberpunk 2077, or any other game they make. But It's dangerous to simply assume that a product is going to be good just because of the name of the developers.
And I am not saying that they will automatically meet my expectations (though mine are much more realistic than implied by some of the hype) - but if they mess up, they will lose my trust and that of many others and gone will be the pre-orders in the future. They have much more to lose from messing up - especially considering that their reputation is based on quality and trust.
Lajciak: This can even have a positive effect on some companies, as the ones who consistently deliver and earn the trust of their customers can get rewarded by getting money earlier...
rampancy: The problem is that there's no accountability here. The temptation is just too great for a company/publisher/studio to ask for money today, and then deliver a cheaply-made, chopped-up piece of garbage tomorrow. The many failed or underperforming crowdfunded games out there can attest to this. So they lost some good will on shipping a bad game that was a Steam best-seller in the preorders? They don't have to worry. They can count on the customers coming back again and again (all they have to do is prepare some slick marketing materials).
The premise of no accountability applies only if this is a one-off relationship. In a continued relationship, there is accountability, which will manifest with respect to future games.
They absolutely cannot count on this customer coming back again and again if I feel they have cheated/burned me. Slick marketing materials simply won't do it. You are assuming too much about my and other people's behavior - after all I don't buy from the former darling BioWare anymore and that's without even being personally burnt.
Lajciak: some of the pre-order money might can even be funneled into polishing the game the company in question is still working on, thus ensuring a less buggy game on release.
rampancy: Unless the pre-orders are started fairly early on in development, I doubt that there would be enough time/opportunity for the QA team or others across the other departments (design, art, coding) to see that money. Otherwise, you'd might as well go for crowd funding (FTL is an example of this; the game was almost done when the KS for it was started, and the money all went into testing, fixes and general polish).
As I said, I don't really expect them to funnel the money into Q&A, but with long enough time before release and more money flowing in from pre-orders, they just might.
Lajciak: ...it keeps the company on its toes, as trust is easily lost if expectations are dashed... and then the company loses the benefits of pre-orders.
rampancy: Again, there is actually no accountability here. They've
already gotten your money. All you have is the promise from them that they'll deliver a good product (or even deliver anything at all, in some cases). As we've seen time and time again, it doesn't matter if they garner anger from their customers for shipping a bad product. All they have to do is issue a public apology, draft some good bullshots or prepare an excellently made vertical slice demo, and they're all set for the next round.
Same gist of the answer regarding accountability as before. There is accountability. Trust has been earned based on past performance (positive accountability) and accountability will continue to apply through future purchases or (lack thereof if I get burned).
Lajciak: Of course, my theory only works if people pre-order judiciously based on consistency of quality outputs from the given company. That pretty much precludes pre-orders from Ubisoft or EA, for example, which have made some great games, but also a plethora of mediocre ones - that certainly does not inspire confidence in their consistent performance.
rampancy: On that note, how much are you willing to bet that in 6-12 months, everyone will have forgotten about Assassins Creed Unity, and people will be rushing to preorder the next Assassins Creed game, on the promise that "No, really, it'll be good this time..."
I have no idea - you could be right. I certainly wouldn't behave that way though. We are discussing models of purchasing behavior here that includes pre-orders. I am positing, based on my own pre-order purchases, which are rare and judicial, that pre-orders can have a positive effect on the gaming industry by reinforcing the mutual trust between the developer/publisher and the customer, provided that the developer/publisher has a history that justifies earning that trust. But it definitely depends on how the customer in question approaches and decides on pre-orders. If it is based on hype, marketing and impulse purchasing than it is destructive. That does unfortunately appear to be the case most of the time.
However, it is not the case for all customers and I resent the fact that everybody who pre-orders should be the subject of some sort of pre-order witch hunt (hmm, maybe that's why I like the Witcher so much - I feel some affinity there ;) ), declaring us to be tools and fools, without the accusers (and I am not referring to you here - just the general attitude that seems to prevail) possibly being able to know the details of of our decision-making and reasoning behind each pre-order purchase, which is for some of us very deliberate and targeted, weighing risk versus trust-building, and certainly far removed from hype-based purchasing.
