The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Why is it that franchised games sell more than original titles that are just as good, if not better, than their big name counterparts?
No doubt Agent Under Fire has sold sheds loads of units despite its short, limitted gameplay. Meanwhile, original FPS titles, like Operation Winback, are left with second rate sales despite their excellent qualities.
Even more depressing is the games that are really pushing the idea of "brand stretching". Fifa games are released twice a year, with a planned third for world cup years. And do you honestly think that the improvements in gameplay are enough to warrant a new game? Maybe an upgrade to the game; maybe even a FREE patch (have EA ever considered such a thing?); but a whole new game is just the limit of money-grabbing capitalism.
Now, before you get me wrong, I have nothing against franchises. In fact, the idea is great- you can now play the role of your favourite secret agent, or drive your dream car. Goldeneye and GT are perfect examples of this.
What does get at me is the amount of second rate franchised games that are clearly just made to make money on the back of their name- not their quality. This is clearly unacceptable, and it's things like this that cause people to lose faith in the industry and turn towards pirating.
Of course, there is the other side of the coin- gamers should read up on games befoe they buy them. But when a developer spends millions advertising what they know to be a second rate product, it's no wonder people buy them.
So, if any of you work for developers, please please please think before you try to do a quick money grabbing stint- in the long term all it does it degrade the quality of games, and give a bad impression of the industry.
Sonic
No doubt Agent Under Fire has sold sheds loads of units despite its short, limitted gameplay. Meanwhile, original FPS titles, like Operation Winback, are left with second rate sales despite their excellent qualities.
Even more depressing is the games that are really pushing the idea of "brand stretching". Fifa games are released twice a year, with a planned third for world cup years. And do you honestly think that the improvements in gameplay are enough to warrant a new game? Maybe an upgrade to the game; maybe even a FREE patch (have EA ever considered such a thing?); but a whole new game is just the limit of money-grabbing capitalism.
Now, before you get me wrong, I have nothing against franchises. In fact, the idea is great- you can now play the role of your favourite secret agent, or drive your dream car. Goldeneye and GT are perfect examples of this.
What does get at me is the amount of second rate franchised games that are clearly just made to make money on the back of their name- not their quality. This is clearly unacceptable, and it's things like this that cause people to lose faith in the industry and turn towards pirating.
Of course, there is the other side of the coin- gamers should read up on games befoe they buy them. But when a developer spends millions advertising what they know to be a second rate product, it's no wonder people buy them.
So, if any of you work for developers, please please please think before you try to do a quick money grabbing stint- in the long term all it does it degrade the quality of games, and give a bad impression of the industry.
Sonic
Page:
Surely its to do with reputation. EA and FIFA acquired a decent reputation for making Footie games, thus further down the line people who are unsure what to buy take what they believe to be the "safe bet". They stick to what they know to be good.
However, Pro Evo comes along and is a far superior game, but as they don't have the rep, people (stoopid people) are reluctant to buy.
Its not always a good thing though, having "the name" that is. Imagine tomorrow a "supposedly" amazing Army Men game comes out.... how many of you would rush out and buy it?
I wouldn't!
However, Pro Evo comes along and is a far superior game, but as they don't have the rep, people (stoopid people) are reluctant to buy.
Its not always a good thing though, having "the name" that is. Imagine tomorrow a "supposedly" amazing Army Men game comes out.... how many of you would rush out and buy it?
I wouldn't!
won't get any arguments from me about that. pro evo totally thrashes Fifa in every way possible except for the name thing. once they get proper names for all the players then people will start switching over. then probably switch back again moaning it's too hard too score, where's the 22-21 scorelines we're used to with fifa waaaaaaaaaaaa
Ah... I loved ISS- easily better than Fifa!
Sonic
Sonic
Who makes Pro Evolution footie btw? IS that just the new name for ISS?
Sonic
Sonic
fifa have been ripping the industry for years, every year they add a small amount of features and rip the whole world off. its a good thing for the industry that pro evo came out and showed that you really can make good football games.
Sméagol wrote:
> Fifa it seems will always sell more, its just people generally haven't a clue
> about games and go for the game with the official endorsements and fancy cover.
It's a sad sad thing that the casual gamers who allow the industry to invest in better games also pull the industry down by buying second rate games.
Sonic
> Fifa it seems will always sell more, its just people generally haven't a clue
> about games and go for the game with the official endorsements and fancy cover.
It's a sad sad thing that the casual gamers who allow the industry to invest in better games also pull the industry down by buying second rate games.
Sonic
Fifa it seems will always sell more, its just people generally haven't a clue about games and go for the game with the official endorsements and fancy cover.
Your talking about EA, these guys can market there games like no ones business thats why some people have never heard of Pro Evo Soccer they only play FIFA.
Page: