The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Game developers. Who are the best? Why are they the best?
In my opinion the best games developers have to be the ones that get games finished, without leaving them full of bugs. Only then do we get masterpieces like Half-life, Deus Ex and even games like Championship Manager. These games play on your system without crashing, without having glitches and only play like a game should. And why are games so buggy? It all depends on how good a developer really wants their game to be. Lets take Hidden and Dangerous for instance. A fantastic game, when you can get it to run properly on your computer. This would be one of the PC's masterpieces if it wasn't for graphics glitches and game bugs. If the game developers were more interested in making a game for all to enjoy then they would sort out any problems before releasing it. Instead what they seem alot more interested in is making money. Their lazyness to sort out any problems is brought on by the need of money.
Also, after-sales service is a big step to making a game excellent. Take Half-life, in my opinion (and alot of other peoples too) the greatest PC game made. Sierra have takne time and money to make upgrades, patches and mods for this game. If it wasn't for these this game would not be so great. Take all the other multiplayer mods made by other people. These would only be made if the game was great, and in order for it to be great the developers have to work hard. The result is an unimaginable reputation for Sierra and money in their pockets too.
My conclusion to all this is that the PC would have many more 'excellent' games rather then 'mediocre' ones if developers would put the work in to make them good. If there were more developers like Sierra who are actually interested in providing customers with a good service then instead of having maybe 3 or 4 'excellent' games we could have 9 or 10. This would excel PC gaming beyond all console gaming.
In my opinion the best games developers have to be the ones that get games finished, without leaving them full of bugs. Only then do we get masterpieces like Half-life, Deus Ex and even games like Championship Manager. These games play on your system without crashing, without having glitches and only play like a game should. And why are games so buggy? It all depends on how good a developer really wants their game to be. Lets take Hidden and Dangerous for instance. A fantastic game, when you can get it to run properly on your computer. This would be one of the PC's masterpieces if it wasn't for graphics glitches and game bugs. If the game developers were more interested in making a game for all to enjoy then they would sort out any problems before releasing it. Instead what they seem alot more interested in is making money. Their lazyness to sort out any problems is brought on by the need of money.
Also, after-sales service is a big step to making a game excellent. Take Half-life, in my opinion (and alot of other peoples too) the greatest PC game made. Sierra have takne time and money to make upgrades, patches and mods for this game. If it wasn't for these this game would not be so great. Take all the other multiplayer mods made by other people. These would only be made if the game was great, and in order for it to be great the developers have to work hard. The result is an unimaginable reputation for Sierra and money in their pockets too.
My conclusion to all this is that the PC would have many more 'excellent' games rather then 'mediocre' ones if developers would put the work in to make them good. If there were more developers like Sierra who are actually interested in providing customers with a good service then instead of having maybe 3 or 4 'excellent' games we could have 9 or 10. This would excel PC gaming beyond all console gaming.
I must agree with you there Dr. Gonzo. You would think that in this day in age hardware would be much more efficient. We pay well over the top prices but still we stumble across problems with everything we get. I don't think I've ever had a sound card or graphics card without coming across problems when using it.
You're blaming the wrong people though - if you want to moan about patches direct your abuse at the publishers, not developers. They rush the developers to release, leaving insufficient time and/or funding for proper testing on the infinite host of set-ups out there. It is only after the game is released when they being to get complaints through their customer service that they find out about these and can fix them.
Or you could look at it from another angle and blame the hardware people. They're the ones who can't come up with some sort of standard and/or instruct the developers how to code for their hardware's particular peculiarities.
Or you could look at it from another angle and blame the hardware people. They're the ones who can't come up with some sort of standard and/or instruct the developers how to code for their hardware's particular peculiarities.
Yep i definately agree with you there mate.
It all goes back to the constant row about console v PC. In my mind the PC is still better because they have far superior graphics, gameplay, and sound. Different people have different views on gaming and everybody should respect that.
It just depends what type of person you are. But if you don't have a PC then you can't defend the console can you!!!
It all goes back to the constant row about console v PC. In my mind the PC is still better because they have far superior graphics, gameplay, and sound. Different people have different views on gaming and everybody should respect that.
It just depends what type of person you are. But if you don't have a PC then you can't defend the console can you!!!
Game developers. Who are the best? Why are they the best?
In my opinion the best games developers have to be the ones that get games finished, without leaving them full of bugs. Only then do we get masterpieces like Half-life, Deus Ex and even games like Championship Manager. These games play on your system without crashing, without having glitches and only play like a game should. And why are games so buggy? It all depends on how good a developer really wants their game to be. Lets take Hidden and Dangerous for instance. A fantastic game, when you can get it to run properly on your computer. This would be one of the PC's masterpieces if it wasn't for graphics glitches and game bugs. If the game developers were more interested in making a game for all to enjoy then they would sort out any problems before releasing it. Instead what they seem alot more interested in is making money. Their lazyness to sort out any problems is brought on by the need of money.
Also, after-sales service is a big step to making a game excellent. Take Half-life, in my opinion (and alot of other peoples too) the greatest PC game made. Sierra have takne time and money to make upgrades, patches and mods for this game. If it wasn't for these this game would not be so great. Take all the other multiplayer mods made by other people. These would only be made if the game was great, and in order for it to be great the developers have to work hard. The result is an unimaginable reputation for Sierra and money in their pockets too.
My conclusion to all this is that the PC would have many more 'excellent' games rather then 'mediocre' ones if developers would put the work in to make them good. If there were more developers like Sierra who are actually interested in providing customers with a good service then instead of having maybe 3 or 4 'excellent' games we could have 9 or 10. This would excel PC gaming beyond all console gaming.
In my opinion the best games developers have to be the ones that get games finished, without leaving them full of bugs. Only then do we get masterpieces like Half-life, Deus Ex and even games like Championship Manager. These games play on your system without crashing, without having glitches and only play like a game should. And why are games so buggy? It all depends on how good a developer really wants their game to be. Lets take Hidden and Dangerous for instance. A fantastic game, when you can get it to run properly on your computer. This would be one of the PC's masterpieces if it wasn't for graphics glitches and game bugs. If the game developers were more interested in making a game for all to enjoy then they would sort out any problems before releasing it. Instead what they seem alot more interested in is making money. Their lazyness to sort out any problems is brought on by the need of money.
Also, after-sales service is a big step to making a game excellent. Take Half-life, in my opinion (and alot of other peoples too) the greatest PC game made. Sierra have takne time and money to make upgrades, patches and mods for this game. If it wasn't for these this game would not be so great. Take all the other multiplayer mods made by other people. These would only be made if the game was great, and in order for it to be great the developers have to work hard. The result is an unimaginable reputation for Sierra and money in their pockets too.
My conclusion to all this is that the PC would have many more 'excellent' games rather then 'mediocre' ones if developers would put the work in to make them good. If there were more developers like Sierra who are actually interested in providing customers with a good service then instead of having maybe 3 or 4 'excellent' games we could have 9 or 10. This would excel PC gaming beyond all console gaming.