Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Things game companies need to understand

12357

Comments

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Distopia
     

    Sims was so successful because it was a truly casual gaming experience. It was the farmville of it's day.

    of its day it was also the only high budget game that didn't involve killing.

    Ironically the only attempt at a high dollar non-murder game ended up as a best seller?

    no demand for non-killing games?

    really?

    seriously?

    I really don't know how true that is, I mean we had tetris and stuff like that back then. Lots of adventures games at the time as well that didn't involve killing. I'd also bring up Shenmue which really wasn't a game about killing, which was my favorite game of that age.

     

     

    wrong decade.

    Tetris was about 20 years earlier.

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by silverreign
     

    sims was released during a time where there were nearly zero non-combat focused games.

    sims quickly became the best selling PC game of all time and held that record for a long time.

    I fail to see the lack of understanding here..

    Nearly zero? There were a crap ton of Adventure games back then.. that was the genre's heyday more or less.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Distopia
     

    Sims was so successful because it was a truly casual gaming experience. It was the farmville of it's day.

    of its day it was also the only high budget game that didn't involve killing.

    Ironically the only attempt at a high dollar non-murder game ended up as a best seller?

    no demand for non-killing games?

    really?

    seriously?

    I really don't know how true that is, I mean we had tetris and stuff like that back then. Lots of adventures games at the time as well that didn't involve killing. I'd also bring up Shenmue which really wasn't a game about killing, which was my favorite game of that age.

     

     

    wrong decade.

    Tetris was about 20 years earlier.

    Not the versions I was referring to for GBA and other handhelds, again though it was also the peak of adventure gaming at the time as well.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Distopia
     

    Sims was so successful because it was a truly casual gaming experience. It was the farmville of it's day.

    of its day it was also the only high budget game that didn't involve killing.

    Ironically the only attempt at a high dollar non-murder game ended up as a best seller?

    no demand for non-killing games?

    really?

    seriously?

    I really don't know how true that is, I mean we had tetris and stuff like that back then. Lots of adventures games at the time as well that didn't involve killing. I'd also bring up Shenmue which really wasn't a game about killing, which was my favorite game of that age.

     

     

    wrong decade.

    Tetris was about 20 years earlier.

    Not the versions I was referring to for GBA and other handhelds, again though it was also the peak of adventure gaming at the time as well.

    oh for the love of god. Tetris is a AAA game?

     

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • NadiaNadia Member UncommonPosts: 11,798
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

    sims was released during a time where there were nearly zero non-combat focused games.

    sims quickly became the best selling PC game of all time and held that record for a long time.

    i used to be a huge fan of MAXIS in the 90's   -- first Sims wasn't until 2000

    i guess post 2000 noncombat games were less popular  (read:  did not sell well)

     

    Myst was very popular the 90s

    Maxis did other noncombat games before Sims,  notably SimEarth  (1990)  and SimCity

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Maxis_games

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,590
    I would call Tetris AAA game. Absolutely.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by silverreign
     

    sims was released during a time where there were nearly zero non-combat focused games.

    sims quickly became the best selling PC game of all time and held that record for a long time.

    I fail to see the lack of understanding here..

    Nearly zero? There were a crap ton of Adventure games back then.. that was the genre's heyday more or less.

    1. there was NOT a crap ton of adventure games in 2000

    2. it was the BEST SELLING GAME OF ALL TIME.

    3. Tetris is not a AAA game and it was made in the 80s

    4. are you trying to suggest that because sims was the best selling game of all time it means people prefer games with violence? or that there isn't a huge demand for games like sims?

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by silverreign
     

    sims was released during a time where there were nearly zero non-combat focused games.

    sims quickly became the best selling PC game of all time and held that record for a long time.

    I fail to see the lack of understanding here..

    Nearly zero? There were a crap ton of Adventure games back then.. that was the genre's heyday more or less.

    1. there was NOT a crap ton of adventure games in 2000

    2. it was the BEST SELLING GAME OF ALL TIME.

    3. Tetris is not a AAA game and it was made in the 80s

    4. are you trying to suggest that because sims was the best selling game of all time it means people prefer games with violence? or that there isn't a huge demand for games like sims?

    Neither I'm saying that non violent games used to be popular. Not a crap ton of adventure games in 2000? What? The OG tetris was made in russia in 84, and saw many revisions once it shipped to other countries, those additions came for years after the fact.

     

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • Pratt2112Pratt2112 Member UncommonPosts: 1,636
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

     


    Originally posted by Benedikt

    Originally posted by SEANMCAD but as I have said...please read carefully....if the flavor of kool aid hasn't been on the market how do you know people do not like it? What was the last AAA game that didn't involve killing?....exactly.
    sorry, but what is better "proof" "there are no aaa games w/o killing" => people want such game or "there are no aaa games w/o killing" and people massively buy the ones about killing => people want games about killing

     

    I have said the same thing more than three times now and everyone is ignoring it.

    You eat what is served, not what you want.

     

    That's because many people tend to cherry pick the parts they think they can address or otherwise twist to their benefit, while ignoring anything they can't, often filling in the gaps created (by their cherry-picking) with strawman arguments.

    That more or less describes just about every discussion/debate that takes place around here, and any other forum that discusses gaming (or politics, or religion.. etc. etc.).

    Because many people are more interested in "being right" than they are in being accurate or honest.

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by silverreign
     

    sims was released during a time where there were nearly zero non-combat focused games.

    sims quickly became the best selling PC game of all time and held that record for a long time.

    I fail to see the lack of understanding here..

    Nearly zero? There were a crap ton of Adventure games back then.. that was the genre's heyday more or less.

    1. there was NOT a crap ton of adventure games in 2000

    2. it was the BEST SELLING GAME OF ALL TIME.

    3. Tetris is not a AAA game and it was made in the 80s

    4. are you trying to suggest that because sims was the best selling game of all time it means people prefer games with violence? or that there isn't a huge demand for games like sims?

    Neither I'm saying that non violent games used to be popular. Not a crap ton of adventure games in 2000? What? The OG tetris was made in russia in 84, and saw many revisions once it shipped to other countries, those additions came for years after the fact.

     

    that is not how it works!

    the population of gamers do not wake up one day and get whatever game in the market that they deem they want. Its BOTH.

     

    its both what game developers create balanced with what players want. When John Carmack sat down to create doom he didn't get an email from gamers telling me exactly what kind of game they wanted..he basically guessed.

    So why was there so many adventure games back in the day? because people where creating them NOT because they all got an email saying 'here is what people want now'

     

    correction: wolfenstine..not doom. doom came later

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by silverreign
     

    sims was released during a time where there were nearly zero non-combat focused games.

    sims quickly became the best selling PC game of all time and held that record for a long time.

    I fail to see the lack of understanding here..

    Nearly zero? There were a crap ton of Adventure games back then.. that was the genre's heyday more or less.

    1. there was NOT a crap ton of adventure games in 2000

    2. it was the BEST SELLING GAME OF ALL TIME.

    3. Tetris is not a AAA game and it was made in the 80s

    4. are you trying to suggest that because sims was the best selling game of all time it means people prefer games with violence? or that there isn't a huge demand for games like sims?

    Neither I'm saying that non violent games used to be popular. Not a crap ton of adventure games in 2000? What? The OG tetris was made in russia in 84, and saw many revisions once it shipped to other countries, those additions came for years after the fact.

     

    that is not how it works!

    the population of gamers do not wake up one day and get whatever game in the market that they deem they want. Its BOTH.

     

    its both what game developers create balanced with what players want. When John Carmack sat down to create doom he didn't get an email from gamers telling me exactly what kind of game they wanted..he basically guessed.

    So why was there so many adventure games back in the day? because people where creating them NOT because they all got an email saying 'here is what people want now'

    I didn't say how anything works.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Nadia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

    sims was released during a time where there were nearly zero non-combat focused games.

    sims quickly became the best selling PC game of all time and held that record for a long time.

    i used to be a huge fan of MAXIS in the 90's   -- first Sims wasn't until 2000

    i guess post 2000 noncombat games were less popular  (read:  did not sell well)

     

    Myst was very popular the 90s

    Maxis did other noncombat games before Sims,  notably SimEarth  (1990)  and SimCity

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Maxis_games

    after doom violent games exploded and are just now starting to settle. It was an easy bet for many developers for a long time. Not so much anymore

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    I've driven a car for decades I must be an expert on hot to design one. I've used my body for decades Imust be an expert in how it functions. I've watched tv for decades I must be an expert in tv programming.

    Observing or even using something for long periods of time does not make you an expert in anything more than how you use that product

    I am not suggesting that. Designing a car and building a car are two entirely different skill sets.

    Driving a car however does give you some insight but it also doesn't make you an expert but it might. your expert skills in design are related to just that, design.

    Now..I need to ask. Who suggest I am an expert at game design? I don't have to be a game designer or an expert at game design to have an opinion on how they should be designed and  I don't have to have those items to be right etiher as it turns out.

     

     

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • NadiaNadia Member UncommonPosts: 11,798
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

    after doom violent games exploded and are just now starting to settle. It was an easy bet for many developers for a long time. Not so much anymore

    i agree

    as gaming tech got better - it opened the flood gates for first person shooters

    i could count the # of PC fps games on 1 hand during the 90s   (Doom, DukeNukem, CastleWolfenstein, Quake, Half Life)

     

    even Halo didnt make a splash until 2001

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775

    EXAMPLE:

    Kerbal Space Program is a game that has been possible for decades. Sure with less graphics and perhaps even 2D but never the less possible.

    Here is a game in which I had an idea of (vaugely) before being exposed to it but clearly didn't play because it didn't exist (or at least I was not aware of it).

    Once I learned about it and started playing it I completely love it well beyond what I thought I would.

     

    So two things are happening in this example

    1. a game I imagine but doesn't exist, at least that I was aware of so I didn't buy it which is either because it didn't exist or marketing failed.

    2. a game exceeds my desires and creates new demands I didn't have before hand.

     

    make any sense to anyone here?

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • VendakuVendaku Member Posts: 77
    I really do wish the gaming industry was at all innovative. We might have gotten some really great games out by now. =)
  • AnzielAnziel Member Posts: 6

    Designing a car and building a car are two entirely different skill sets.

    I've been following this discussion quite a bit and well, that statement is to me, untrue. I've been studying Physics in school and I am sorry to inform you that yes, as much as a physicist and an astronaut differs, both knows pretty much the same. The astronauts are most of the time physicists that have been trained to fly spaceships, they have a very complex understanding of space and so does any normal physicist. 

    You can take a sheet of paper and draw a car as much as you like, but you won't fool anyone. Not only can a car designer build a car, they're in most case, the same job. Big car brand, ferrari, lamborghini,bentley, aston martin, most of the time, the builder are the one who designed it. you ever watched * orange county chopper on TV?*

     How can one know how to design something and not to build it? makes no f?@&;#king sense.

     

    Be honest here, would you allow someone to Design your home if that person has no clue on how to build one? there's pressure point, electricity has to go a certain way, the plumbery. How can one design without knowing how to build? 

     

    What I see here, is a 12 pages long post of a 1 single human trying to prove he's right above all other human beings.

     

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Anziel

    Designing a car and building a car are two entirely different skill sets.

    I've been following this discussion quite a bit and well, that statement is to me, untrue. I've been studying Physics in school and I am sorry to inform you that yes, as much as a physicist and an astronaut differs, both knows pretty much the same. The astronauts are most of the time physicists that have been trained to fly spaceships, they have a very complex understanding of space and so does any normal physicist. 

    You can take a sheet of paper and draw a car as much as you like, but you won't fool anyone. Not only can a car designer build a car, they're in most case, the same job. Big car brand, ferrari, lamborghini,bentley, aston martin, most of the time, the builder are the one who designed it. you ever watched * orange county chopper on TV?*

     How can one know how to design something and not to build it? makes no f?@&;#king sense.

     

    Be honest here, would you allow someone to Design your home if that person has no clue on how to build one? there's pressure point, electricity has to go a certain way, the plumbery. How can one design without knowing how to build? 

     

    What I see here, is a 12 pages long post of a 1 single human trying to prove he's right above all other human beings.

     

    disagree completely.

    I do not want the astronaut or the guy who builds the communications equipment creating the flight path for the spaceship for me, nor vice versa.

    I am sorry guys but no...an architect does not build the building. actually building a building and designing one are completely different skill sets.

    there is a reason they have different job titles and there is a reason the educational background is different. Do some skills intersect? yes but they are still different skill sets and one is not required to be proficient at the other

     

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 28,793
    Originally posted by alkarionlog

    they will never learn and never will change as long you guys still pay for the same crap over and over, they don't need the success, they don't care for good review or bad ones, they don't even care if you like they games or not if you play or not, as long you are paying, getting DLCs, defending bad games design, or saying its alpha they will fix it.

     

    want better games? start to pay for only the ones who deserve

    But who decides what is deserving?

     

    Many of the posters here don't even remotely share my taste in "things" let alone the few who share some overlap in games. Which of course is fine. The way it should be.

    I am really enjoying myself in ESO, despite it not being what I would have initially wanted in an "Elder Scrolls Game", and I would much prefer a grindy game that had little to no quests than a "quest based game". How many people here hate ESO and hate grinding?

    I think people will spend money on the things they think are deserving and will get what they "get" out of the experience.

     

     

     

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by alkarionlog

    they will never learn and never will change as long you guys still pay for the same crap over and over, they don't need the success, they don't care for good review or bad ones, they don't even care if you like they games or not if you play or not, as long you are paying, getting DLCs, defending bad games design, or saying its alpha they will fix it.

     

    want better games? start to pay for only the ones who deserve

    But who decides what is deserving?

     

    Many of the posters here don't even remotely share my taste in "things" let alone the few who share some overlap in games. Which of course is fine. The way it should be.

    I am really enjoying myself in ESO, despite it not being what I would have initially wanted in an "Elder Scrolls Game", and I would much prefer a grindy game that had little to no quests than a "quest based game". How many people here hate ESO and hate grinding?

    I think people will spend money on the things they think are deserving and will get what they "get" out of the experience.

     

     

     

    I started my MMO career playing EQ2. I can say if I knew of Wurm and Darkfall then I never would have touched it.

    Determining the demand of players based only on what they buy is a risky endevour despite many developers thinking its safe.

     

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • QuirhidQuirhid Member UncommonPosts: 6,230
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by alkarionlog

    they will never learn and never will change as long you guys still pay for the same crap over and over, they don't need the success, they don't care for good review or bad ones, they don't even care if you like they games or not if you play or not, as long you are paying, getting DLCs, defending bad games design, or saying its alpha they will fix it.

     

    want better games? start to pay for only the ones who deserve

    But who decides what is deserving?

     

    Many of the posters here don't even remotely share my taste in "things" let alone the few who share some overlap in games. Which of course is fine. The way it should be.

    I am really enjoying myself in ESO, despite it not being what I would have initially wanted in an "Elder Scrolls Game", and I would much prefer a grindy game that had little to no quests than a "quest based game". How many people here hate ESO and hate grinding?

    I think people will spend money on the things they think are deserving and will get what they "get" out of the experience.

     

     

     

    I started my MMO career playing EQ2. I can say if I knew of Wurm and Darkfall then I never would have touched it.

    Determining the demand of players based only on what they buy is a risky endevour despite many developers thinking its safe.

    It is infinitely better than speculation.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by alkarionlog

    they will never learn and never will change as long you guys still pay for the same crap over and over, they don't need the success, they don't care for good review or bad ones, they don't even care if you like they games or not if you play or not, as long you are paying, getting DLCs, defending bad games design, or saying its alpha they will fix it.

     

    want better games? start to pay for only the ones who deserve

    But who decides what is deserving?

     

    Many of the posters here don't even remotely share my taste in "things" let alone the few who share some overlap in games. Which of course is fine. The way it should be.

    I am really enjoying myself in ESO, despite it not being what I would have initially wanted in an "Elder Scrolls Game", and I would much prefer a grindy game that had little to no quests than a "quest based game". How many people here hate ESO and hate grinding?

    I think people will spend money on the things they think are deserving and will get what they "get" out of the experience.

     

     

     

    I started my MMO career playing EQ2. I can say if I knew of Wurm and Darkfall then I never would have touched it.

    Determining the demand of players based only on what they buy is a risky endevour despite many developers thinking its safe.

    It is infinitely better than speculation.

    not really.

    Have you ever heard the phrase 'past behavior does not predict future behavior'

    Determining what the market really wants is a complicated process that involves much more than just basing one what consumers buy now because its what is aviable.

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,283


    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

    Now..I need to ask. Who suggest I am an expert at game design? I don't have to be a game designer or an expert at game design to have an opinion on how they should be designed and  I don't have to have those items to be right etiher as it turns out.

    Opinion of an ignorant is worthless though...yet, you want to lecture someone from such position?

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775

    Here is another example:

    As it turns out in reality I am a programmer. Now my knowledge of SQL and C# is clever but me knowing what a SOA is doesn't make me good at determing what a game player might want his character to do on the screen. It DOES however help me make it happen.

    The skills most likely good for game design are actually NOT programming but rather psychology. Determinging what a person might want to do in a situation is a skill that requires development and knowing what a programming interface is will not help in that

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • QuirhidQuirhid Member UncommonPosts: 6,230
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Quirhid
     

    not really.

    Have you ever heard the phrase 'past behavior does not predict future behavior'

    Determining what the market really wants is a complicated process that involves much more than just basing one what consumers buy now because its what is aviable.

    Have you heard of this thing called empirism? It is sorta what modern science is based on. The idea is to observe and experiment to try to explain and predict stuff.

    It is far better than guessing.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

Sign In or Register to comment.