The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Are publishers the reason for the death in originality in the games industry?
If you’re a developer, before you can make a game you’ve got to get a publisher on board. The reason for this is that they will then fund you while your making the game.
So to make a game you either take a game idea to a publisher and if they like it they will then fund you to make it, or a publisher asks a developer if they would like to develop a certain game for them.
When you take a game design to a publisher they are going to be taking a risk when they accept your idea. What this means is that unless you can convince the publisher that this game will make money, they will just discard your game idea. This results in quite a lot of original gaming ideas being ignored because as there not tried and tested games, there’s a risk that the game won’t be very well accepted by the public, and so won’t make much money. Thus from a developers perspective the easiest way of getting a game passed by a publisher is to make a clone of a game, use a tried n tested genre, base the game on an up coming film, or make a SEQUEL! By making a game created on one of those, you can guarantee that the game will do well because games like the one you’re making have done well before.
That is the reason why there’s sooo many sequels about. It’s far more easy for a developer to churn out a tried and tested game, which they and the publishers know will work and sell well, than risk making a huge loss and years of development time producing an original game that might not be accepted by the gaming massive.
That’s another point. A game takes a good two years to make. To try and persuade a publisher to fund you for that amount of time your gonna have to really convince them that your game will make them money. Thus using tried and tested games will help.
As for film licensed games, there a really easy way of getting a game the go ahead from a publisher. Most films that come out nowadays have games based on them. About the only ones that have been any good have been Goldeneye on N64 and Star Wars Episode 1 Racer {hey I liked it!}. There’s probably some others, but I can’t think of any at the moment. But generally games based on films are PISH! Utter disgraces! But get released because they’re guaranteed sales based on the fan base generated by the film they’re based on.
Another bad thing about publishers is that as part of your contract with them, you the developer, have to show them a demo / work in progress of your game every few months, so that the publisher can see that the money they’re investing isn’t just going to waste. This puts added pressure on the developer who has to then keep producing certain things just to show the publisher. Also the publisher likes to have a game produced by a certain time which poses huge problems for developers. This can be seen in many PC games, where the game has had to be rushed towards the end of its development, and is not tested fully, and is thus filled with loads of bugs.
This is one of the reasons why companies like Nintendo can come up with some really great original titles. As they publish their own games, they can take as long on them as they want. They can make anything they want. And they only have themselves to prove their game to while making a game. If they need more time to finish a game, they’ll give themselves that time without having to justify themselves to some publisher who might get very angry at the casual developer and force them to finish the game ASAP, when really the game needs a few more months work.
So are publishers the death of originality?
Well for some developers I think so, yes. Not many publishers are going to trust some small time developer, which might have just come into being, with a new original game, as it’d be a huge risk. The only developers, which generally get to show great signs of originality, are the big developers like Nintendo, Sega, Square, Konami, and Rare etc. These developers are very highly respected and every publisher knows that if they produce a game, it’s gonna be pretty dam good and sell loads of copies.
:)
If you’re a developer, before you can make a game you’ve got to get a publisher on board. The reason for this is that they will then fund you while your making the game.
So to make a game you either take a game idea to a publisher and if they like it they will then fund you to make it, or a publisher asks a developer if they would like to develop a certain game for them.
When you take a game design to a publisher they are going to be taking a risk when they accept your idea. What this means is that unless you can convince the publisher that this game will make money, they will just discard your game idea. This results in quite a lot of original gaming ideas being ignored because as there not tried and tested games, there’s a risk that the game won’t be very well accepted by the public, and so won’t make much money. Thus from a developers perspective the easiest way of getting a game passed by a publisher is to make a clone of a game, use a tried n tested genre, base the game on an up coming film, or make a SEQUEL! By making a game created on one of those, you can guarantee that the game will do well because games like the one you’re making have done well before.
That is the reason why there’s sooo many sequels about. It’s far more easy for a developer to churn out a tried and tested game, which they and the publishers know will work and sell well, than risk making a huge loss and years of development time producing an original game that might not be accepted by the gaming massive.
That’s another point. A game takes a good two years to make. To try and persuade a publisher to fund you for that amount of time your gonna have to really convince them that your game will make them money. Thus using tried and tested games will help.
As for film licensed games, there a really easy way of getting a game the go ahead from a publisher. Most films that come out nowadays have games based on them. About the only ones that have been any good have been Goldeneye on N64 and Star Wars Episode 1 Racer {hey I liked it!}. There’s probably some others, but I can’t think of any at the moment. But generally games based on films are PISH! Utter disgraces! But get released because they’re guaranteed sales based on the fan base generated by the film they’re based on.
Another bad thing about publishers is that as part of your contract with them, you the developer, have to show them a demo / work in progress of your game every few months, so that the publisher can see that the money they’re investing isn’t just going to waste. This puts added pressure on the developer who has to then keep producing certain things just to show the publisher. Also the publisher likes to have a game produced by a certain time which poses huge problems for developers. This can be seen in many PC games, where the game has had to be rushed towards the end of its development, and is not tested fully, and is thus filled with loads of bugs.
This is one of the reasons why companies like Nintendo can come up with some really great original titles. As they publish their own games, they can take as long on them as they want. They can make anything they want. And they only have themselves to prove their game to while making a game. If they need more time to finish a game, they’ll give themselves that time without having to justify themselves to some publisher who might get very angry at the casual developer and force them to finish the game ASAP, when really the game needs a few more months work.
So are publishers the death of originality?
Well for some developers I think so, yes. Not many publishers are going to trust some small time developer, which might have just come into being, with a new original game, as it’d be a huge risk. The only developers, which generally get to show great signs of originality, are the big developers like Nintendo, Sega, Square, Konami, and Rare etc. These developers are very highly respected and every publisher knows that if they produce a game, it’s gonna be pretty dam good and sell loads of copies.
:)
I suppose developers do kill out the originality in games. They are producing too many games, and in effect the original games are being taken quicker, thus leaving less and less.
Are publishers the reason for the death in originality in the games industry?
If you’re a developer, before you can make a game you’ve got to get a publisher on board. The reason for this is that they will then fund you while your making the game.
So to make a game you either take a game idea to a publisher and if they like it they will then fund you to make it, or a publisher asks a developer if they would like to develop a certain game for them.
When you take a game design to a publisher they are going to be taking a risk when they accept your idea. What this means is that unless you can convince the publisher that this game will make money, they will just discard your game idea. This results in quite a lot of original gaming ideas being ignored because as there not tried and tested games, there’s a risk that the game won’t be very well accepted by the public, and so won’t make much money. Thus from a developers perspective the easiest way of getting a game passed by a publisher is to make a clone of a game, use a tried n tested genre, base the game on an up coming film, or make a SEQUEL! By making a game created on one of those, you can guarantee that the game will do well because games like the one you’re making have done well before.
That is the reason why there’s sooo many sequels about. It’s far more easy for a developer to churn out a tried and tested game, which they and the publishers know will work and sell well, than risk making a huge loss and years of development time producing an original game that might not be accepted by the gaming massive.
That’s another point. A game takes a good two years to make. To try and persuade a publisher to fund you for that amount of time your gonna have to really convince them that your game will make them money. Thus using tried and tested games will help.
As for film licensed games, there a really easy way of getting a game the go ahead from a publisher. Most films that come out nowadays have games based on them. About the only ones that have been any good have been Goldeneye on N64 and Star Wars Episode 1 Racer {hey I liked it!}. There’s probably some others, but I can’t think of any at the moment. But generally games based on films are PISH! Utter disgraces! But get released because they’re guaranteed sales based on the fan base generated by the film they’re based on.
Another bad thing about publishers is that as part of your contract with them, you the developer, have to show them a demo / work in progress of your game every few months, so that the publisher can see that the money they’re investing isn’t just going to waste. This puts added pressure on the developer who has to then keep producing certain things just to show the publisher. Also the publisher likes to have a game produced by a certain time which poses huge problems for developers. This can be seen in many PC games, where the game has had to be rushed towards the end of its development, and is not tested fully, and is thus filled with loads of bugs.
This is one of the reasons why companies like Nintendo can come up with some really great original titles. As they publish their own games, they can take as long on them as they want. They can make anything they want. And they only have themselves to prove their game to while making a game. If they need more time to finish a game, they’ll give themselves that time without having to justify themselves to some publisher who might get very angry at the casual developer and force them to finish the game ASAP, when really the game needs a few more months work.
So are publishers the death of originality?
Well for some developers I think so, yes. Not many publishers are going to trust some small time developer, which might have just come into being, with a new original game, as it’d be a huge risk. The only developers, which generally get to show great signs of originality, are the big developers like Nintendo, Sega, Square, Konami, and Rare etc. These developers are very highly respected and every publisher knows that if they produce a game, it’s gonna be pretty dam good and sell loads of copies.
:)
If you’re a developer, before you can make a game you’ve got to get a publisher on board. The reason for this is that they will then fund you while your making the game.
So to make a game you either take a game idea to a publisher and if they like it they will then fund you to make it, or a publisher asks a developer if they would like to develop a certain game for them.
When you take a game design to a publisher they are going to be taking a risk when they accept your idea. What this means is that unless you can convince the publisher that this game will make money, they will just discard your game idea. This results in quite a lot of original gaming ideas being ignored because as there not tried and tested games, there’s a risk that the game won’t be very well accepted by the public, and so won’t make much money. Thus from a developers perspective the easiest way of getting a game passed by a publisher is to make a clone of a game, use a tried n tested genre, base the game on an up coming film, or make a SEQUEL! By making a game created on one of those, you can guarantee that the game will do well because games like the one you’re making have done well before.
That is the reason why there’s sooo many sequels about. It’s far more easy for a developer to churn out a tried and tested game, which they and the publishers know will work and sell well, than risk making a huge loss and years of development time producing an original game that might not be accepted by the gaming massive.
That’s another point. A game takes a good two years to make. To try and persuade a publisher to fund you for that amount of time your gonna have to really convince them that your game will make them money. Thus using tried and tested games will help.
As for film licensed games, there a really easy way of getting a game the go ahead from a publisher. Most films that come out nowadays have games based on them. About the only ones that have been any good have been Goldeneye on N64 and Star Wars Episode 1 Racer {hey I liked it!}. There’s probably some others, but I can’t think of any at the moment. But generally games based on films are PISH! Utter disgraces! But get released because they’re guaranteed sales based on the fan base generated by the film they’re based on.
Another bad thing about publishers is that as part of your contract with them, you the developer, have to show them a demo / work in progress of your game every few months, so that the publisher can see that the money they’re investing isn’t just going to waste. This puts added pressure on the developer who has to then keep producing certain things just to show the publisher. Also the publisher likes to have a game produced by a certain time which poses huge problems for developers. This can be seen in many PC games, where the game has had to be rushed towards the end of its development, and is not tested fully, and is thus filled with loads of bugs.
This is one of the reasons why companies like Nintendo can come up with some really great original titles. As they publish their own games, they can take as long on them as they want. They can make anything they want. And they only have themselves to prove their game to while making a game. If they need more time to finish a game, they’ll give themselves that time without having to justify themselves to some publisher who might get very angry at the casual developer and force them to finish the game ASAP, when really the game needs a few more months work.
So are publishers the death of originality?
Well for some developers I think so, yes. Not many publishers are going to trust some small time developer, which might have just come into being, with a new original game, as it’d be a huge risk. The only developers, which generally get to show great signs of originality, are the big developers like Nintendo, Sega, Square, Konami, and Rare etc. These developers are very highly respected and every publisher knows that if they produce a game, it’s gonna be pretty dam good and sell loads of copies.
:)