Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

QUALITY vs QUANTITY

TheAsianVillainTheAsianVillain Portland, AKPosts: 39Member Uncommon

QUALITY of'a game's contents?

or

QUANITITY of'a game's contents?

 

PS:

A game that should have reasonably "modern" graphic design. Not too fancy, yet can open up to the lower-end gamers who can't handle your "top'a the line" game.

A game should have a large sum of content that can withstand the heaviest gamer, yet still has purpose to the lighter gamers.

 

Comments

  • DancingQueenDancingQueen LA, CAPosts: 201Member
    I feel that game developers should focus 60% of their time on quality and 40% quantity as this will bring you a polished game rich in content.
  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,865Member Uncommon


    Quantity wins hands down.

  • DancingQueenDancingQueen LA, CAPosts: 201Member
    Originally posted by Gdemami


    Quantity wins hands down.

    Really?! Haven't we had enough of quantity with all the sub-par clones to better games throughout the video and computer gaming history?

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,865Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by DancingQueen

    Really?! Haven't we had enough of quantity with all the sub-par clones to better games throughout the video and computer gaming history?

    Oddly, those "sub-par" games are those that sell - read: people find them worthy enough to spend money on...

  • DancingQueenDancingQueen LA, CAPosts: 201Member
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by DancingQueen

    Really?! Haven't we had enough of quantity with all the sub-par clones to better games throughout the video and computer gaming history?

     

    Oddly, those "sub-par" games are those that sell - read: people find them worthy enough to spend money on...

    Sub-par games caused a video game crash back in 1983 and maybe we will have a new one in 2013? /grins

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,865Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by DancingQueen

    Sub-par games caused a video game crash back in 1983 and maybe we will have a new one in 2013? /grins

    ..or more reasonably, sadly you missed the point, those games are far from "sub-par", they are just not your taste.

  • LadyEupheiLadyEuphei Indianapolis, INPosts: 223Member
    Originally posted by DancingQueen
    Originally posted by Gdemami


    Quantity wins hands down.

    Really?! Haven't we had enough of quantity with all the sub-par clones to better games throughout the video and computer gaming history?

    I believe the OP was saying quantity in the effect of more features. Basically 1 game that has tons of content or  1 game that looks really pretty. So your 60 40 would mean you have a moderatly pretty game with a moderate amount of content. I would go more for a 40-60 to a 30-70 split because to many games come out that look pretty but lack substance. I believe we have enough games that focus on how they look more than how fun they are.

    image

  • KarahandrasKarahandras Sible HedinghamPosts: 1,673Member Uncommon
    After playing swg(nge) where they would just chuck any old crap at it but often, I would go for quality over quantity.  Or are you refering to the graphics? i.e. style or substance?
  • TheAsianVillainTheAsianVillain Portland, AKPosts: 39Member Uncommon

    I am speaking of graphic AND substance. 

    You don't only want the food to look good, but taste good as well, correct?

    Or would you prefer something that looks amazingly delicious, yet has no unique taste?

    How about chocolate that literally looks like feces?

    You get my point.

     

  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid hell, NJPosts: 6,778Member Uncommon
    In my very own opinion, If developers arent capable enough to give us both Quality and Quantity then they should not be developing games anymore. I know they are capable and the hell i know they have the technology and resources to do both at this point in time. Dont take the easy way out because we wont tolerate that as gamers.

    image
  • harrygrantharrygrant FrankfurtPosts: 4Member
    Why this has to be put on argument, I mean it's given in anything that can be applied on that quality is the one where to be  focused and the quantity should follow.
  • YakkinYakkin irvine, CAPosts: 919Member

    I'd want both to be frank.

    But if I really had to choose, I would focus on developing a few high quality features at the beginning, and then expand outwards as I see fit. It's nice to have a lot of features, but if they are all half-assed/boring, then whats the point of having them in the first place?

  • DancingQueenDancingQueen LA, CAPosts: 201Member
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by DancingQueen

    Sub-par games caused a video game crash back in 1983 and maybe we will have a new one in 2013? /grins

     

    ..or more reasonably, sadly you missed the point, those games are far from "sub-par", they are just not your taste.

    A sub-par game is no ones taste unless you can't get the good ones.

  • sanshi44sanshi44 BrisbanePosts: 1,088Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by LadyEuphei
    Originally posted by DancingQueen
    Originally posted by Gdemami


    Quantity wins hands down.

    Really?! Haven't we had enough of quantity with all the sub-par clones to better games throughout the video and computer gaming history?

    I believe the OP was saying quantity in the effect of more features. Basically 1 game that has tons of content or  1 game that looks really pretty. So your 60 40 would mean you have a moderatly pretty game with a moderate amount of content. I would go more for a 40-60 to a 30-70 split because to many games come out that look pretty but lack substance. I believe we have enough games that focus on how they look more than how fun they are.

    If its Graphic vs lots of content ill take lots of content assuming they took the time and did it right. When it comes to gameplay they need to do both quality and quantity. ATM to many company focus on the graphics or appearance of the game over the acualy gameplay itself this is because they can sell a pirtty looking game easier than to sell one that looks a little rough round the edges but has great content. Although they dont seem to relise that if they focus on graphic and not gameplay u may get lots of sales short term buyt players will get bored and quit shortly after while focusing on gameplay over graphic is more long term you will retain more player over the period of time and even pick up more player though word of mouth this is what Devs should be focusing on doing retaining players with good gameplay over shiny graphics. atm dev spend to much money on the appearance of the game  and not enough on the gameplay/features.

  • MukeMuke BredaPosts: 2,172Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by TheAsianVillain?

    How about chocolate that literally looks like feces?

     

     

    if it tastes good, yes.

     

    Played enough "OMG LOOK AT THOSE UBERRRRR GRAPHICS" games that played like 'feces'.

    "going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,865Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by DancingQueen

    A sub-par game is no ones taste unless you can't get the good ones.

    Yes, that is your point of view, however as pointed out not very reasonable.

  • ExzearExzear StockholmPosts: 64Member
    quality!

    Youtube.com/TheNorseGamer

  • DancingQueenDancingQueen LA, CAPosts: 201Member
    Originally posted by Muke
    Originally posted by TheAsianVillain?

    How about chocolate that literally looks like feces?

     

     

    if it tastes good, yes.

     

    Played enough "OMG LOOK AT THOSE UBERRRRR GRAPHICS" games that played like 'feces'.

    I would be interested if you could post or link the boxart of those games, please. :)

  • RyphtRypht Henderson, NVPosts: 37Member

    it's kind of a nasty trade off isn't it?

    I've played games that have had great quality, but if that quality runs out in just a handful of hours of play, I feel far more cheated than if playing a game with mediocre quality that goes on forever.  I may have had a far more rewarding experience with the high quality game, but when it's weighed against the money you spent on a game coupled with how long it provided you with entertainment, give me something that lasts a little longer with a little less quality.

     

  • TheAsianVillainTheAsianVillain Portland, AKPosts: 39Member Uncommon

    This is a game where lots of questions arise.

    Take a look, C:

     

    http://wollay.blogspot.com/

    -a cross between minecraft, and a 3d zelda is how I personally look at it.

    Been waiting for some time now. :P

  • DancingQueenDancingQueen LA, CAPosts: 201Member
    Originally posted by TheAsianVillain

    This is a game where lots of questions arise.

    Take a look, C:

     

    http://wollay.blogspot.com/

    -a cross between minecraft, and a 3d zelda is how I personally look at it.

    Been waiting for some time now. :P

    This single player PS3 game is similar to that one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_Dot_Game_Heroes

  • TheAsianVillainTheAsianVillain Portland, AKPosts: 39Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DancingQueen
    Originally posted by TheAsianVillain

    This is a game where lots of questions arise.

    Take a look, C:

     

    http://wollay.blogspot.com/

    -a cross between minecraft, and a 3d zelda is how I personally look at it.

    Been waiting for some time now. :P

    This single player PS3 game is similar to that one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_Dot_Game_Heroes

    Wow, that really is, nice to know. :P Thanks for showing that.

    I really want to give WollayFX some hype. He's been working quite independantly on that project for some time. 

Sign In or Register to comment.