Bakerman on 13/12/2009 at 01:17
Quote Posted by Bakerman
"Games will be shit until developers stop trying to make profit off them."
Quote Posted by Zygoptera
"Developers or Publishers making large amounts of money, which is better and why?"
I think what I was thinking was:
"Games will be shit until
publishers stop trying to make profit off them."
Obviously that wasn't how it came out :p
Quote:
Without the industry we would have a fraction of the games made as we have now.
I've heard many a game critic say that they would welcome less games (as in less chaff - the same number of 'good' games). I'm of the same opinion. The industry does encourage more games to be made - but do we need umpteen iterations of minigame collections and recycled shooters?
Which I meantersay, unnecessarily restrictive DRM that harasses genuine consumers.
CCCToad on 13/12/2009 at 02:55
I don't really have a problem with people making money off good games.
What we need for the health of the games industry is to kill the hype monster. Its what leads to sucky, mass market and movie knockoff games profiting handsomely while well designed, more cerebral games go unknown as their studios close down.
The interesting thing is, though, that as the hype monster is now focused almost exclusively on consoles, it means that the PC community is seeing a bit of a return to community verdict and word of mouth when deciding which games deserve attention. For example, Torchlight (which I haven't played, but I hear its good) is in the STEAM top sellers list.
Phatose on 13/12/2009 at 04:49
We don't need to do anything, except maybe realize that we're elitist bastards for not simply acknowledging that the reason games make money is because those are the games people want to play.
If a game with a $20 million dev budget and a $100 million dollar advertising budget, entirely made of recycled concepts is the years number one best seller, it is because people actually *want* heavily advertised, heavily derivative games.
The machinery of capitalism exists to make sure resources get put where society wants them. And they work very well. I'm terribly sorry to inform you that most of society does not share your taste in games.
EvaUnit02 on 13/12/2009 at 04:50
Quote Posted by CCCToad
The interesting thing is, though, that as the hype monster is now focused almost exclusively on consoles, it means that the PC community is seeing a bit of a return to community verdict and word of mouth when deciding which games deserve attention. For example, Torchlight (which I haven't played, but I hear its good) is in the STEAM top sellers list.
A lot of good this is when most of the traditional games are being released in unmoddable states. Not everyone wants to play fucking indie physics puzzle games or tarted up retro throwbacks exclusively. Eg the wasted potential of the Dunia Engine, simply because a Far Cry 2 SDK was never released. God forbid that the community makes better quality shit than your premium DLC.
Hopefully the free release of the Unreal Engine 3 SDK will work towards remedying this trend.
Bakerman on 13/12/2009 at 04:54
Quote Posted by CCCToad
I don't really have a problem with people making money off good games.
I'll reiterate, just to be clear - I agree, but what I do have a problem with is games that are created for the express purpose of making money, as opposed to being created because some developer has had an awesome idea for a fun new game.
Quote:
The interesting thing is, though, that as the hype monster is now focused almost exclusively on consoles, it means that the PC community is seeing a bit of a return to community verdict and word of mouth when deciding which games deserve attention. For example, Torchlight (which I haven't played, but I hear its good) is in the STEAM top sellers list.
Funny you should mention Steam - do you reckon simply having that (not Steam specifically, but any form of digital distribution) as a widespread and viable option to PC games aids developers avoid the hype machine/profit motive? To ship a game to retail requires investment in discs, shelf space, etc. - requires the game to be published. But all that's cut out with digital distribution.
Quote Posted by Phatose
We don't need to do anything, except maybe realize that we're elitist bastards for not simply acknowledging that the reason games make money is because those are the games people want to play.
The machinery of capitalism exists to make sure resources get put where society wants them. And they work very well. I'm terribly sorry to inform you that most of society does not share your taste in games.
Fair enough. I've based my assumptions on what I hear from the majority of the gaming press, but in reality they're also an elite minority. EDIT: That sounded sarcastic, but it wasn't :p. I agree there's a dichotomy between what the 'critical' side wants, and what gamers vote for with their wallets - same thing in the film industry, and probably music.
SubJeff on 13/12/2009 at 11:24
Quote Posted by Bakerman
"Games will be shit until developers stop trying to make profit off them."
Quote Posted by Bakerman
budget constraints causing features to be cut or existing ones to be dumbed down
Does not compute, Einstein.
If they don't make profits then
of course there will be budget constraints. Wtf are you talking about?
And your initial topic is just wrong, as is Zygoptera's suggestion. Surely you mean "Games will be shit until developer are allowed to make games based on quality and artistic merit rather than run-of-the-mill genre pieces purely on the basis of appealing to the lowest common denominator, and thus the largest possible market base, that by its nature clamours for something generic, simple, and unrefined."
Bakerman on 13/12/2009 at 12:30
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
If they don't make profits then
of course there will be budget constraints. Wtf are you talking about?
I've acknowledged I phrased my initial post awfully :p.
Anyway, I never thought it'd be practical - but if a game project is started with the express end goal of having created profit, the game gets designed with that in mind. And will turn out shit. For some people. Or most people. Or whatever. Because to turn a profit you need to constrain the initial budget, work to a timeframe, etceteral, corporate evil, blah blah. Yes, I'm an idealist - I just don't see any way for developers to make 'good' games from an artistic standpoint as well as a corporate standpoint. (Granted, it's been done before, but far too rarely.) One of those standards has to give - and far too often, it's the artistry that is sacrificed.
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
until developer are allowed to make games based on quality and artistic merit
Developers are not allowed to make games like these precisely because they are forced to turn a profit. Developers don't
enjoy making mass-market mush; it's what sells. So actually we're saying the same thing.
EvaUnit02 on 13/12/2009 at 12:37
Quote Posted by Bakerman
. Developers don't
enjoy making mass-market mush; it's what sells.
That's a real stretch of an assumption, cowboy. How do you know what goes on in people's heads?
Quote:
Funny you should mention Steam - do you reckon simply having that (not Steam specifically, but any form of digital distribution) as a widespread and viable option to PC games aids developers avoid the hype machine/profit motive? To ship a game to retail requires investment in discs, shelf space, etc. - requires the game to be published. But all that's cut out with digital distribution.
(
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/10/12/the-steamy-issue-of-digital-distribution/) Ahem.
Koki on 13/12/2009 at 13:45
*Looks at top rated games available at Steam*
Well here goes that theory
CCCToad on 13/12/2009 at 17:52
Quote Posted by Bakerman
Funny you should mention Steam - do you reckon simply having that (not Steam specifically, but any form of digital distribution) as a widespread and viable option to PC games aids developers avoid the hype machine/profit motive? To ship a game to retail requires investment in discs, shelf space, etc. - requires the game to be published. But all that's cut out with digital distribution.
I wasn't really looking at it that way, but I do suppose you are correct. Its a fairly regular occurance that Steam pitches me a cool-looking game that hasn't gotten any significant mainstream press coverage.
