The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Today, the gaming industry has a lot of money to be made. Whether it is making games or peripherals, there is a lot of money to be made. This gives some game developers the idea that they can make games, good or bad, and make loads of cash, but it doesn’t work like that, or does it?
It seems to me that game developers are taking advantage of the way the gaming industry is today. With games constantly coming out with some kind of attraction to the younger and even older gamer, it makes them buy the game even if it isn’t that good. It also seems that some game developers are becoming more interested in making an extra buck, rather than spending extra time making the best it can be for the gamer. Of course, like everything, there are a few exceptions. Developers like Nintendo, Rare and maybe even Sega, always try to make their game the best they can for the gamer, so that it would be very enjoyable.
I know for a fact that games with a lot of violence and gore always sell with the teenage gamer. To them, it doesn’t really matter if the game is actually good or not, it just matters what happens to one of the people when you shoot them with a bazooka in the head. Don’t get me wrong; some ‘violent’ games can be great. Take Resident Evil for example. That is a fine example of what violent gaming should be like. But when game developers try and take advantage of this, that’s when you get games like Carmageddon, and that’s when you get younger gamers thinking that a game like that is really great, when they really only think it’s great because of the blood involved.
To add to this, it isn’t just violence that game developers wanting money take advantage of. What about ‘movie licensing.’ This is one of the, if not the best, form of trying to con people out of their £40, so that you can earn a few quid. I think that games that have a movie license can turn out good if their made by the right person, but when their not, that’s when you have games in the shops as best sellers like Monsters Inc. and Disney’s Emperor’s New Groove. Sad isn’t it. But like I said before, when made but the right developer that have the gamers interests at mind, the end result is a game like Goldeneye, which was made by Rare. Another great example of this is the FIFA series. Every year a FIFA game comes out and every year it reaches the top of the charts and why? Does it have something new added? No. The same game come out with enhanced graphics, but still everyone buys it. Now isn’t that the best example of conning people into buying games that are practically the same as the one before.
I noticed on TV the other day, a Harry Potter advertisement showing some excellent graphics. It bet it was not only me, but also a few other people noticed it too, but in the small print at the bottom of the screen, it said ‘Not in-game footage’. Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that just the worst case of false advertising. Not only did it have the wrong graphics, but also it only showed about a second of the actual game. This links back to before, about movie licensing. Again, Harry Potter, one of the most anticipated films ever in the UK, and game developers not only take advantage of the name, but they also advertise it so the game looks brilliant.
Alright, so a great new, totally original game comes out on the PC. It’s name. The Sims. Wow. This game is great. It’s got brilliant gameplay value and is totally additive. What could go wrong? How about the fact that after finding that the Sims was hugely popular, they decided to try and milk as much money as they could out of it, and bring out eight, yes eight, add-ons for it. Now that’s taking it to the extremes. Eight add-ons. Each costing about twenty quid. Now, my maths might not be perfect, but if you were to buy all eight, including the actual original game, you would be spending a massive £200. Shocking, isn’t it.
So, I think that there is something seriously wrong with the world that is gaming it game developers are trying it con you out of your money. Whether it be, using names, violence, add-ons, or false advertising they all come down to the same thing. Developers trying to con the average gamer, so they’re not short of a few bob.
Thanks for Reading
Liquid
It seems to me that game developers are taking advantage of the way the gaming industry is today. With games constantly coming out with some kind of attraction to the younger and even older gamer, it makes them buy the game even if it isn’t that good. It also seems that some game developers are becoming more interested in making an extra buck, rather than spending extra time making the best it can be for the gamer. Of course, like everything, there are a few exceptions. Developers like Nintendo, Rare and maybe even Sega, always try to make their game the best they can for the gamer, so that it would be very enjoyable.
I know for a fact that games with a lot of violence and gore always sell with the teenage gamer. To them, it doesn’t really matter if the game is actually good or not, it just matters what happens to one of the people when you shoot them with a bazooka in the head. Don’t get me wrong; some ‘violent’ games can be great. Take Resident Evil for example. That is a fine example of what violent gaming should be like. But when game developers try and take advantage of this, that’s when you get games like Carmageddon, and that’s when you get younger gamers thinking that a game like that is really great, when they really only think it’s great because of the blood involved.
To add to this, it isn’t just violence that game developers wanting money take advantage of. What about ‘movie licensing.’ This is one of the, if not the best, form of trying to con people out of their £40, so that you can earn a few quid. I think that games that have a movie license can turn out good if their made by the right person, but when their not, that’s when you have games in the shops as best sellers like Monsters Inc. and Disney’s Emperor’s New Groove. Sad isn’t it. But like I said before, when made but the right developer that have the gamers interests at mind, the end result is a game like Goldeneye, which was made by Rare. Another great example of this is the FIFA series. Every year a FIFA game comes out and every year it reaches the top of the charts and why? Does it have something new added? No. The same game come out with enhanced graphics, but still everyone buys it. Now isn’t that the best example of conning people into buying games that are practically the same as the one before.
I noticed on TV the other day, a Harry Potter advertisement showing some excellent graphics. It bet it was not only me, but also a few other people noticed it too, but in the small print at the bottom of the screen, it said ‘Not in-game footage’. Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that just the worst case of false advertising. Not only did it have the wrong graphics, but also it only showed about a second of the actual game. This links back to before, about movie licensing. Again, Harry Potter, one of the most anticipated films ever in the UK, and game developers not only take advantage of the name, but they also advertise it so the game looks brilliant.
Alright, so a great new, totally original game comes out on the PC. It’s name. The Sims. Wow. This game is great. It’s got brilliant gameplay value and is totally additive. What could go wrong? How about the fact that after finding that the Sims was hugely popular, they decided to try and milk as much money as they could out of it, and bring out eight, yes eight, add-ons for it. Now that’s taking it to the extremes. Eight add-ons. Each costing about twenty quid. Now, my maths might not be perfect, but if you were to buy all eight, including the actual original game, you would be spending a massive £200. Shocking, isn’t it.
So, I think that there is something seriously wrong with the world that is gaming it game developers are trying it con you out of your money. Whether it be, using names, violence, add-ons, or false advertising they all come down to the same thing. Developers trying to con the average gamer, so they’re not short of a few bob.
Thanks for Reading
Liquid
Page:
Do developers take advantage of you alot? :)
Yay! A b!tch fight!
Liquid H²O wrote:
> Then why to games like Monster Inc. and Superman etc keep on coming
> out.
What? Didn't I make this clear?
Publisher want money, and so buys licence for a big film. Gives to a developer to make, however, the deadline is very tight (have to make it before the films release).
So, with the pressure, a bad game is released.
"I know they don't want to make a bad game, but they do."
WHAT>??!?!??!!?
I would
> rather wait to get a RARE game than get most other games on the Market
> today.
I agree. However, massmarket gamers buy games like Fifa instead of ISS because LICENCES SELL!
Sonic
> Then why to games like Monster Inc. and Superman etc keep on coming
> out.
What? Didn't I make this clear?
Publisher want money, and so buys licence for a big film. Gives to a developer to make, however, the deadline is very tight (have to make it before the films release).
So, with the pressure, a bad game is released.
"I know they don't want to make a bad game, but they do."
WHAT>??!?!??!!?
I would
> rather wait to get a RARE game than get most other games on the Market
> today.
I agree. However, massmarket gamers buy games like Fifa instead of ISS because LICENCES SELL!
Sonic
Then why to games like Monster Inc. and Superman etc keep on coming out. I know they don't want to make a bad game, but they do. I would rather wait to get a RARE game than get most other games on the Market today.
Liquid H²O wrote:
> Yeah, but they could still try and make it a good one then. It's when
> they just make a really rubbish game
What nonsense! No developer tries, or wants, to make a bad game. However, due to pressure from the publishers to make tough release dates, they are forced to.
Not everyone can delay games for months and months like RAre!
> Yeah, but they could still try and make it a good one then. It's when
> they just make a really rubbish game
What nonsense! No developer tries, or wants, to make a bad game. However, due to pressure from the publishers to make tough release dates, they are forced to.
Not everyone can delay games for months and months like RAre!
Well youve already posted this before and I replied in the other one when you did it a few days or weeks or whatever ago.
Yeah, but they could still try and make it a good one then. It's when they just make a really rubbish game
Liquid, perhaps you missed my point...
Developers DON'T chose what games they make! Publishers do (in the West at least). The reason they make so many bad games is because PUBLISHERS decide they need the money. Developers are not taking the advantage- thay are being taken advantage of.
As for the add ons- almost every one of these is made with good reason for the dedicated gamer. Oh, and most of them are made by the companies you name as being more concerned with quality than profit- Sega, Nintendo and Namco!
Sonic
Developers DON'T chose what games they make! Publishers do (in the West at least). The reason they make so many bad games is because PUBLISHERS decide they need the money. Developers are not taking the advantage- thay are being taken advantage of.
As for the add ons- almost every one of these is made with good reason for the dedicated gamer. Oh, and most of them are made by the companies you name as being more concerned with quality than profit- Sega, Nintendo and Namco!
Sonic
I can understand what your saying about retailers, but they don't make all the add ons that cost about £20 and they don't make games with loads of violence in just to make money. Overall, it's the developers that are making the games and making them bad, but it's the retailers that decided how much to make it cost.
Liquid, I think you're hopelessly mixing up developers and publishers, and that the cause of the problem is neither of the above- it is the retailer.
You see, the retailers are the people who control the industry at the moment. To get your game good sales you have to go through the following process:
1) To get a game on shelves you need to pay for it to be in the shop catalogue- a few thousand pounds. A lot more just to get a good slot in the catalogue.
2) To get a good shop position (eg, have posters around the store advertising it) will cost tens of thousands more
3) After the game sales reduce, the retailers will force the publisher to buy back unsold copies of the game at the original price.
And none of that even covers advertising costs!
The result of the above is that publishers and developers are losing money, whereas retailers had record sales last year!
So, as you'd expect, big publishers (and remember, in the West publishers own almost every deveoper) have to make their money some how. So, they buy licences that they make their developers base games on, and demand sequals of games like Tomb Raider.
Meanwhile, they're happy to kill off original games that developers propose if there is a chance they won't sell. THAT is why Western game developers will never create a game as original as Rez, Jet Set Radio or Super Monkey ball- they won't take the risk.
Oh, and why do the Japanese publishers let their developers do this? Well, usually the publisher and developer are one in the same! Nintendo, Sega and Namco are the 3 biggest publishers in the world, and their development teams can do pretty much what they want.
Sonic
You see, the retailers are the people who control the industry at the moment. To get your game good sales you have to go through the following process:
1) To get a game on shelves you need to pay for it to be in the shop catalogue- a few thousand pounds. A lot more just to get a good slot in the catalogue.
2) To get a good shop position (eg, have posters around the store advertising it) will cost tens of thousands more
3) After the game sales reduce, the retailers will force the publisher to buy back unsold copies of the game at the original price.
And none of that even covers advertising costs!
The result of the above is that publishers and developers are losing money, whereas retailers had record sales last year!
So, as you'd expect, big publishers (and remember, in the West publishers own almost every deveoper) have to make their money some how. So, they buy licences that they make their developers base games on, and demand sequals of games like Tomb Raider.
Meanwhile, they're happy to kill off original games that developers propose if there is a chance they won't sell. THAT is why Western game developers will never create a game as original as Rez, Jet Set Radio or Super Monkey ball- they won't take the risk.
Oh, and why do the Japanese publishers let their developers do this? Well, usually the publisher and developer are one in the same! Nintendo, Sega and Namco are the 3 biggest publishers in the world, and their development teams can do pretty much what they want.
Sonic
Page: