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

13567

Comments

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by CrazKanuk

     

    Sims Online, Sim City Online, Spore (arguably), Second Life

     

    As far as the flavor of kool aid goes, just because there isn't a diarrhea flavor of cool aid doesn't mean someone should make one. On top of that, if kool aid told you that to make this flavor it would cost you $30 million dollars, do you think you could sell enough to get your money back? You don't need to be a CEO to figure out those numbers. 

     

    You obviously think game developers are stupid. I've worked with a number of business development managers in the gaming industry in the past, but my introduction to them was that they really didn't care about my "ideas". They'd heard them all before. "A dime a dozen" is the term one used, actually. All your talk about the theoretical mountains of money that there is to be made with these games will fall on deaf ears, because they're stuffed full of REAL money they are making from REAL games that have proven track records. 

     

    Time is finite. It's the reason that we all don't simply work at McDonalds. I mean if you could make 6-figures making fries at McDonalds, who wouldn't? I mean all the fries you can eat?!?!? No, you need to maximize the return on investment of your own time. A game company is no different. They have finite resources and want to focus on maximizing their return on investment in those resources. Once and a whlie, you might get skunkworks projects (like H1Z1?), but in the gaming industry these are rare, rare, rare activities. How H1Z1 was done boggles my mind. Hopefully means Sony is going to be doing more innovative work in the future. 

     

    In summary, everything you think you know has been thrown around a boardroom a thousand times and shot down more than Bubba at the local strip joint on a Friday night. 

    Let me help you try and contextualize this.

    Have I played the BEST SELLING PC GAME IN WORLD HISTORY...The Sims? YES and I like it.

    Do I play a plenty of other games that have shoot em ups? YES HOWEVER...I wish I had an option to play a game of that high quality GRAPHICS and not have to go around blowing everything up.

     

    I am unclear why this is hard to understand. I as a gamer play games where a lot of killing is involved and its boring me, but why do I play? BECUASE I DONT HAVE ENOUGH OTHER OPTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Try The Repopulation. Based on my understanding, it'll offer that option. 

     

    Other than that, you're right, there is a distinct lack of games that offer high quality graphics, but without killing. Well, I suppose Sim City Online is pretty close, but it's not really what you're looking for I don't think. The Sims might do something with updated graphics at some point? Maybe? However, I don't see games like "Shop Owner Online", "Fast Food Worker Online" or "A Day In The Life Of An Accountant: Online" coming any time soon with updated engines. 

     

    That's just reality. Instead of arguing about it, though, why don't you pitch a game and actually show measurable return on investment using factual data. That's what really creates change. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,571
    Err gamer equals hammer
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • fs23otmfs23otm Member UncommonPosts: 503
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

    Not in order

    -Gaming is an innovation industry, if you copy what has been done before you will suffer for it.

    -There is more to gaming the killing

    -There is more to RPG then fantasy

    -Its cheaper to make a good game then it is to advertise a mediocre game

    -classes and quests where a great concept in the 70s but its time to move on to skill based systems.

    -if it looks like its popular chances are the popularity (like bow ties) is about to die.

    -Gaming should be looked at as a service rather than a product

    -There is more money to be made (and at a smaller cost) in innovation then there is advertising and convincing the public of your non-innovative agenda. (This is true for most industries though)

     

    added: ( I can tell I said the same thing more than once above and in so doing I forgot the other items)

    -to pvp you have to dehumanize your opponent which is the same social structures 'clans' take on. If you are in the clan you are good and exceptions are made, If you are out of the clan then you are different. Understanding the social system is important when creating a game. People really pvp for collaboration work

    All your points are incorrect, except the "more to RPG then fantasy"

    This industry is not about innovation. COD, Battlefield, Mario... etc. It is about providing games that people want to play. People want to play what is familiar, they don't want to play some odd game. That is what indie games do, and there is a market for that.

     

     

     

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,571
    It does work that way in every industry. I'd they don't di it themselves they work hand ib glove with the people that do to see the effectiveness of the design.

    You are reallyshowing your ignorance here.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • UhwopUhwop Member UncommonPosts: 1,791

    There was an article I read about a year ago that interviewed someone that does work for game developers.  They were some kind of consultant and data analyst that did work for development studios.  

    They said pretty much the same thing the OP said.  

    In a nutshell they said that its a common fallacy that sticking with what has been tried is safer than doing something new from a financial standpoint.  What they found was that, outside of SEQUELS and REBOOTS, games that simply copied what other successful games did failed and cost more than games that attempted to innovate.  (From a profit and investment standpoint.)

    They showed, with real data, that it was better to spend less making something new and innovative than to spend more trying to emulate another game.  

    They pointed out that its the risk of failing to hit the mark when trying to make something different that holds the larger studios back because of the amount of money they invest into development.  

    They pointed out that large studios would rather make smaller profits off something they consider safe, than take a chance making more on something new.  Hence sequels, reboots, and "clones".  

    GTA, CoD, WoW always do better than then the games that come after and try to be like them.  

    Watch-dogs, BF, ToR.  

     

    The OP is more right than people here will ever give him credit for.  

     

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

     

    Sims Online, Sim City Online, Spore (arguably), Second Life

     

    As far as the flavor of kool aid goes, just because there isn't a diarrhea flavor of cool aid doesn't mean someone should make one. On top of that, if kool aid told you that to make this flavor it would cost you $30 million dollars, do you think you could sell enough to get your money back? You don't need to be a CEO to figure out those numbers. 

     

    You obviously think game developers are stupid. I've worked with a number of business development managers in the gaming industry in the past, but my introduction to them was that they really didn't care about my "ideas". They'd heard them all before. "A dime a dozen" is the term one used, actually. All your talk about the theoretical mountains of money that there is to be made with these games will fall on deaf ears, because they're stuffed full of REAL money they are making from REAL games that have proven track records. 

     

    Time is finite. It's the reason that we all don't simply work at McDonalds. I mean if you could make 6-figures making fries at McDonalds, who wouldn't? I mean all the fries you can eat?!?!? No, you need to maximize the return on investment of your own time. A game company is no different. They have finite resources and want to focus on maximizing their return on investment in those resources. Once and a whlie, you might get skunkworks projects (like H1Z1?), but in the gaming industry these are rare, rare, rare activities. How H1Z1 was done boggles my mind. Hopefully means Sony is going to be doing more innovative work in the future. 

     

    In summary, everything you think you know has been thrown around a boardroom a thousand times and shot down more than Bubba at the local strip joint on a Friday night. 

    Let me help you try and contextualize this.

    Have I played the BEST SELLING PC GAME IN WORLD HISTORY...The Sims? YES and I like it.

    Do I play a plenty of other games that have shoot em ups? YES HOWEVER...I wish I had an option to play a game of that high quality GRAPHICS and not have to go around blowing everything up.

     

    I am unclear why this is hard to understand. I as a gamer play games where a lot of killing is involved and its boring me, but why do I play? BECUASE I DONT HAVE ENOUGH OTHER OPTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Try The Repopulation. Based on my understanding, it'll offer that option. 

     

    Other than that, you're right, there is a distinct lack of games that offer high quality graphics, but without killing. Well, I suppose Sim City Online is pretty close, but it's not really what you're looking for I don't think. The Sims might do something with updated graphics at some point? Maybe? However, I don't see games like "Shop Owner Online", "Fast Food Worker Online" or "A Day In The Life Of An Accountant: Online" coming any time soon with updated engines. 

     

    That's just reality. Instead of arguing about it, though, why don't you pitch a game and actually show measurable return on investment using factual data. That's what really creates change. 

    repopulation isn't even out.

    I am going to say this just one more them then not say it again.

    Because its not in the AAA space DOES NOT MEAN PEOPLE DONT WANT IT. I means the meal is not being served.

    Do you honestly think that most of gamers want to only go around killing monsters all day and watch reality tv? seriously?

     

    economics is NOT just demand side...its also supply side

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

    Please do not respond to me

  • NIIINIII Member UncommonPosts: 113
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    snip

    if you are a designer then you know how idiotic is it to suggest one has to be able to build a building in order to be a good architect. That is the silliest thing I have ever heard.

    You don't have to build a car to be a good car designer, same for buildings, same for business models, same for consumer products, same for boats, same for space travel, same for .....well...EVERYTHING

    Yes, actually, yes you do.

    Because when you are an untested developer, your ideas carry absolutely zero weight or meaning, as they do not exist, until you rely on someone else to make them a reality, which will always mean changes to your original idea, unless you're some kind of genius, and that's a very distorted view of reality if you think no one else in these boards have had the ideas you have, let alone the people actually getting paid to make the decisions at the dev studios.

    On top of that, when an architect isn't able to build things, it usually results in endangerment of lives, buildings collapsing, or at the very least, problems that will piss everyone off and reduce property value. The same goes for literally every product or service on the planet. If you can't make your words mean anything, then they don't.

    Now that is not to say that sharing your ideas is wrong. It's just saying that doubting everyone else, and considering yourself on a higher state of knowledge about a subject they're getting paid for IS.

    Get some respect for the people at least TRYING to make games, or go do it yourself, very few people want to spend their day reading some person state over and over how much more smart they are than everyone else.

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    It does work that way in every industry. I'd they don't di it themselves they work hand ib glove with the people that do to see the effectiveness of the design.

    You are reallyshowing your ignorance here.

    sorry but your wrong.

    Architects do not build buildings and physicists do not fly space ships and they do not have to have someone do it in order to be recognized as valid.

     

    Having said that my points aren't even being addressed by you two. Basically what you are saying is this.

    'if you haven't created a video game then you can not have any opinion about game design that will be even addressed or listened to'

     

    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 Uhwop

    GTA, CoD, WoW always do better than then the games that come after and try to be like them.  

    Watch-dogs, BF, ToR.  

     

    The OP is more right than people here will ever give him credit for.  

     

    COD before BF? Wait what? 1942 (02) COD 1 (03), also you do realize Watchdogs is selling really well right? You might be correct about the article you read, but your examples are horrible.

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


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

    if you are a designer then you know how idiotic is it to suggest one has to be able to build a building in order to be a good architect. That is the silliest thing I have ever heard.

    You don't have to build a car to be a good car designer, same for buildings, same for business models, same for consumer products, same for boats, same for space travel, same for .....well...EVERYTHING

    Yes, actually, yes you do.

    Because when you are an untested developer, your ideas carry absolutely zero weight or meaning, as they do not exist, until you rely on someone else to make them a reality, which will always mean changes to your original idea, unless you're some kind of genius, and that's a very distorted view of reality if you think no one else in these boards have had the ideas you have, let alone the people actually getting paid to make the decisions at the dev studios.

    On top of that, when an architect isn't able to build things, it usually results in endangerment of lives, buildings collapsing, or at the very least, problems that will piss everyone off and reduce property value. The same goes for literally every product or service on the planet. If you can't make your words mean anything, then they don't.

    Now that is not to say that sharing your ideas is wrong. It's just saying that doubting everyone else, and considering yourself on a higher state of knowledge about a subject they're getting paid for IS.

    Get some respect for the people at least TRYING to make games, or go do it yourself, very few people want to spend their day reading some person state over and over how much more smart they are than everyone else.

    so basically you are saying nobody in these forums should post anything they think about game design unless they have created a game. In fact, if they have offered advice and console to another company about game design that is also not good enough, they have to have made the game themselves or have had their idea directly implemented by someone else

    This is going to be a very slient game forum

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

    Please do not respond to me

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,571
    The reality is there are other meals being served. The reality is most people are choosing, for whatever speculative reason you insert, not to eat those.

    The market as a while responds to what people areactually doing.

    A speculator, And those do exist in all markets, tries to anticipate what thepeople want next. The market will then respond to the results of that speculation.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    The reality is there are other meals being served. The reality is most people are choosing, for whatever speculative reason you insert, not to eat those.

    The market as a while responds to what people areactually doing.

    A speculator, And those do exist in all markets, tries to anticipate what thepeople want next. The market will then respond to the results of that speculation.

    incorrect.

    I am sorry but 'paper boy throwing' is NOT a AAA game.

    ironically since Steam early access has come out there has been a LOT more diversity of games and they have been becoming successful which of course validates my point that people are not being served in the past and that it might be changing

     

    REMINDER: sims was the BEST SELLING PC GAME EVER....hmmm and its the only AAA game that doesn't involve killing....hmmmmm...

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

    Please do not respond to me

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,571
    No we are saying until you are involved in the creation just ad the architect is involved in the planning and building and the physicist is involved in the planning and use of their ship's you are nit an expert. Using it doesn't make you an expert in anything other than how you use it.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • UhwopUhwop Member UncommonPosts: 1,791
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by CrazKanuk
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by CrazKanuk

     

    Sims Online, Sim City Online, Spore (arguably), Second Life

     

    As far as the flavor of kool aid goes, just because there isn't a diarrhea flavor of cool aid doesn't mean someone should make one. On top of that, if kool aid told you that to make this flavor it would cost you $30 million dollars, do you think you could sell enough to get your money back? You don't need to be a CEO to figure out those numbers. 

     

    You obviously think game developers are stupid. I've worked with a number of business development managers in the gaming industry in the past, but my introduction to them was that they really didn't care about my "ideas". They'd heard them all before. "A dime a dozen" is the term one used, actually. All your talk about the theoretical mountains of money that there is to be made with these games will fall on deaf ears, because they're stuffed full of REAL money they are making from REAL games that have proven track records. 

     

    Time is finite. It's the reason that we all don't simply work at McDonalds. I mean if you could make 6-figures making fries at McDonalds, who wouldn't? I mean all the fries you can eat?!?!? No, you need to maximize the return on investment of your own time. A game company is no different. They have finite resources and want to focus on maximizing their return on investment in those resources. Once and a whlie, you might get skunkworks projects (like H1Z1?), but in the gaming industry these are rare, rare, rare activities. How H1Z1 was done boggles my mind. Hopefully means Sony is going to be doing more innovative work in the future. 

     

    In summary, everything you think you know has been thrown around a boardroom a thousand times and shot down more than Bubba at the local strip joint on a Friday night. 

    Let me help you try and contextualize this.

    Have I played the BEST SELLING PC GAME IN WORLD HISTORY...The Sims? YES and I like it.

    Do I play a plenty of other games that have shoot em ups? YES HOWEVER...I wish I had an option to play a game of that high quality GRAPHICS and not have to go around blowing everything up.

     

    I am unclear why this is hard to understand. I as a gamer play games where a lot of killing is involved and its boring me, but why do I play? BECUASE I DONT HAVE ENOUGH OTHER OPTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Try The Repopulation. Based on my understanding, it'll offer that option. 

     

    Other than that, you're right, there is a distinct lack of games that offer high quality graphics, but without killing. Well, I suppose Sim City Online is pretty close, but it's not really what you're looking for I don't think. The Sims might do something with updated graphics at some point? Maybe? However, I don't see games like "Shop Owner Online", "Fast Food Worker Online" or "A Day In The Life Of An Accountant: Online" coming any time soon with updated engines. 

     

    That's just reality. Instead of arguing about it, though, why don't you pitch a game and actually show measurable return on investment using factual data. That's what really creates change. 

    repopulation isn't even out.

    I am going to say this just one more them then not say it again.

    Because its not in the AAA space DOES NOT MEAN PEOPLE DONT WANT IT. I means the meal is not being served.

    Do you honestly think that most of gamers want to only go around killing monsters all day and watch reality tv? seriously?

     

    economics is NOT just demand side...its also supply side

    You're demonstrating the problem.  

    Consumers believe that because its not made, no one wants it.  

    They can't seem to fathom the idea that its not made because of the risk that people may not want it.  

     

    If blizzard never made WoW the mmo genre may have never become mainstream today.  Developers may have never been willing to risk investing in a genre that had yet to be proven.  

    And people today would be saying that no one wants to play an MMO, and they evidence for them would be that no one makes them.  

     

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,571
    I didn't say as aaa i said other games were being offered. Most people are not choosing them for whatever speculative reason you insert.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Uhwop
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by CrazKanuk
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by CrazKanuk

     

    Sims Online, Sim City Online, Spore (arguably), Second Life

     

    As far as the flavor of kool aid goes, just because there isn't a diarrhea flavor of cool aid doesn't mean someone should make one. On top of that, if kool aid told you that to make this flavor it would cost you $30 million dollars, do you think you could sell enough to get your money back? You don't need to be a CEO to figure out those numbers. 

     

    You obviously think game developers are stupid. I've worked with a number of business development managers in the gaming industry in the past, but my introduction to them was that they really didn't care about my "ideas". They'd heard them all before. "A dime a dozen" is the term one used, actually. All your talk about the theoretical mountains of money that there is to be made with these games will fall on deaf ears, because they're stuffed full of REAL money they are making from REAL games that have proven track records. 

     

    Time is finite. It's the reason that we all don't simply work at McDonalds. I mean if you could make 6-figures making fries at McDonalds, who wouldn't? I mean all the fries you can eat?!?!? No, you need to maximize the return on investment of your own time. A game company is no different. They have finite resources and want to focus on maximizing their return on investment in those resources. Once and a whlie, you might get skunkworks projects (like H1Z1?), but in the gaming industry these are rare, rare, rare activities. How H1Z1 was done boggles my mind. Hopefully means Sony is going to be doing more innovative work in the future. 

     

    In summary, everything you think you know has been thrown around a boardroom a thousand times and shot down more than Bubba at the local strip joint on a Friday night. 

    Let me help you try and contextualize this.

    Have I played the BEST SELLING PC GAME IN WORLD HISTORY...The Sims? YES and I like it.

    Do I play a plenty of other games that have shoot em ups? YES HOWEVER...I wish I had an option to play a game of that high quality GRAPHICS and not have to go around blowing everything up.

     

    I am unclear why this is hard to understand. I as a gamer play games where a lot of killing is involved and its boring me, but why do I play? BECUASE I DONT HAVE ENOUGH OTHER OPTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Try The Repopulation. Based on my understanding, it'll offer that option. 

     

    Other than that, you're right, there is a distinct lack of games that offer high quality graphics, but without killing. Well, I suppose Sim City Online is pretty close, but it's not really what you're looking for I don't think. The Sims might do something with updated graphics at some point? Maybe? However, I don't see games like "Shop Owner Online", "Fast Food Worker Online" or "A Day In The Life Of An Accountant: Online" coming any time soon with updated engines. 

     

    That's just reality. Instead of arguing about it, though, why don't you pitch a game and actually show measurable return on investment using factual data. That's what really creates change. 

    repopulation isn't even out.

    I am going to say this just one more them then not say it again.

    Because its not in the AAA space DOES NOT MEAN PEOPLE DONT WANT IT. I means the meal is not being served.

    Do you honestly think that most of gamers want to only go around killing monsters all day and watch reality tv? seriously?

     

    economics is NOT just demand side...its also supply side

    You're demonstrating the problem.  

    Consumers believe that because its not made, no one wants it.  

    They can't seem to fathom the idea that its not made because of the risk that people may not want it.  

     

    If blizzard never made WoW the mmo genre may have never become mainstream today.  Developers may have never been willing to risk investing in a genre that had yet to be proven.  

    And people today would be saying that no one wants to play an MMO, and they evidence for them would be that no one makes them.  

     

    exactly.

    people have bought into the idea that the consumer has 100% control of the economy and they don't.

    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
     

    incorrect.

    I am sorry but 'paper boy throwing' is NOT a AAA game.

    ironically since Steam early access has come out there has been a LOT more diversity of games and they have been becoming successful which of course validates my point that people are not being served in the past and that it might be changing

     

    REMINDER: sims was the BEST SELLING PC GAME EVER....hmmm and its the only AAA game that doesn't involve killing....hmmmmm...

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

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


  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    I didn't say as aaa i said other games were being offered. Most people are not choosing them for whatever speculative reason you insert.

    wrong again.

    indie games are EXPLOSIVE in demands and the Sims was the BEST SELLING PC GAME EVER...

     

    hello???????????????????????????????

    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 Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
     

    incorrect.

    I am sorry but 'paper boy throwing' is NOT a AAA game.

    ironically since Steam early access has come out there has been a LOT more diversity of games and they have been becoming successful which of course validates my point that people are not being served in the past and that it might be changing

     

    REMINDER: sims was the BEST SELLING PC GAME EVER....hmmm and its the only AAA game that doesn't involve killing....hmmmmm...

    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?

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

    Please do not respond to me

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 11,938


    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    pure bullsh*t. its not true for anything else.Architects don't build buildingsPhysicists don't fly space spaceshipsCar designers don't build carscomputer designers don't build computersbusiness consultants don't implemtent their suggestions. it doesn't work that way in...well...any industry

    Architects do build buidlings, they oversight the construction.
    Engineers do assembly and design spaceships and it is engineers who fly them, engineering degree is one of of primary requesite to become an astronaut.

    They do build things, just they are in different position than construction works or mechanics. It is them telling the workers and mechanics what to do.


    Same goes for game design, until you actually create something, it's just your belief.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,571
    I guess you missed the part where I said speculators try to anticipate what people want nextand the market will respond to their results.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Uhwop
     

    You're demonstrating the problem.  

    Consumers believe that because its not made, no one wants it.  

    They can't seem to fathom the idea that its not made because of the risk that people may not want it.  

     

    If blizzard never made WoW the mmo genre may have never become mainstream today.  Developers may have never been willing to risk investing in a genre that had yet to be proven.  

    And people today would be saying that no one wants to play an MMO, and they evidence for them would be that no one makes them.  

     

    exactly.

    people have bought into the idea that the consumer has 100% control of the economy and they don't.

    I'd flip this around and ask what games aren't being made? There are games covering just about everything today, you can play as a  goat, you can build trains, you can build farms and operate the machinery, you can drive a truck across a country, you can go fishing, you can go hunting, you can build cities, you can build in space, you can kill things, you can raise things etc. etc. etc...so on and so forth.

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


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

     


    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    pure bullsh*t.

     

     

    its not true for anything else.

    Architects don't build buildings

    Physicists don't fly space spaceships

    Car designers don't build cars

    computer designers don't build computers

    business consultants don't implemtent their suggestions.

     

    it doesn't work that way in...well...any industry


     

    Architects do build buidlings, they oversight the construction.
    Engineers do assembly and design spaceships and it is engineers who fly them, engineering degree is one of of primary requesite to become an astronaut.

    They do build things, just they are in different position than construction works or mechanics. It is them telling the workers and mechanics what to do.


    Same goes for game design, until you actually create something, it's just your belief.

    1. they do not build the buildings. Because I oversea the spaceship design doesn't mean I actually fly it. Suggesting that the arhchitect builds the building is insulting to those who actually do.

    2. the argument wasn't made that I have never overseen a game project. the arugement was made that I have never MADE a game. very different.

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

    Please do not respond to me

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,773
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
     

    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?

    No demand is a bit strong. But no one can argue that  there is a huge strong demand for combat games. If you look at all the money spent on games, for every non-violent one that is successful, there is probably 10x more combat centric one that sells as well.

     

  • UhwopUhwop Member UncommonPosts: 1,791
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    GTA, CoD, WoW always do better than then the games that come after and try to be like them.  

    Watch-dogs, BF, ToR.  

     

    The OP is more right than people here will ever give him credit for.  

     

    COD before BF? Wait what? 1942 (02) COD 1 (03), also you do realize Watchdogs is selling really well right? You might be correct about the article you read, but your examples are horrible.

    You missed the point.  

    EQ was before WoW, but WoW made the MMO mainstream.  

    Watchdogs doing well is not the same as doing GTA5 well.  

    The point the analyst was making is that developers can succeed emulating another game, but the data tends to show that they never reach the same level of success.  Developers are aware of that, and do it because its the SAFE bet.  

    They pointed out that game development, within larger studios, has a failure is not an option mentality that has lead to less innovation and large success than the games they attempt to emulate.  

Sign In or Register to comment.