The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Okay, so there is a game coming out soon, magazines have run endless previews, DVD movies, loads of hype....the big day arrives when the first review is out.....and it's rubbish, or at least not as good as expected.
Sound familiar ? It ought to because gamers have been treated to it ever since the Master System. More recently, Turok Evolution on all formats proved that just looking good in screenshots doesn't make a good game.
Turok isn't the only one though, Conflict Desert Storm was let down by 'iffy' graphics and low difficulty, Waverace bluestrom (slightly) by the PAL framerate, Max Payne (PS2) by framerate and slowdown, Operation Flashpoint by endless gliches and bugs, and on and on....even Sony's The Getaway looks like being a bit of a stinker at the moment.
So, whose fault is it ?
Ours, for expecting too much ?
Developers, for not properly finishing a game and bug testing it ?
Magazines, for hyping up games to a point where they can never reach our inflated high expectations ?
If you think about it then it's a combination of the three which may actually cause such flawed gems as Turok.
Lets face it, any developer can knock out decent screenshots for the consoles and PC's, and any developer can produce a small pile f wiriting that says how the game will be the greatest thing since slice bread and rock the genre. Gamer's, like kids with sweets, like nice pretty screenshots. Show most of us a phtorealistic guy with a gun bounding across a bright sunlit desert with lens flare and you'll get out attention. We want to believe that games we like will be good, like with Turok, and the imminent Tomb Raider Angel Of Darkness. In their hearts the developers also want the games to be good, but this is where I think the problem is....
Competition. No sooner has one great game come out then along comes another, especially at this time of year. If you're a developer the pressure is now on to get games out onto the shelves for Christmas to sell. Stuff bugs, forget flaws, get the games out and cross fingers for good reviews and hope gamers will buy them.
Luckily, not all games are disastrously flawed. Turok Evolution is okay - if you can forgive the frame rate, stealth dinosaurs, black borders e.t.c. But a lot of games are blatant offenders and evidence of developers willingness to cash in on a flawed game before the reviews of magazines can be published. Scooby Doo anyone ? Appaling on all formats it is on. This games flaws are so fatal that if it we're a human then it'd be on life support ! Yet it still sold and made money.
Basically, bad, and flawed games, exist because they sell, often better than a game that has taken years to make and has been finely crated to perfection. Licenses and PR manipulate many people into buying badly flawed or unimaginative games e.g. Scooby Doo, Hooligans, State Of Emrgency, nearly every Lego game, Obi Wan......
Is there really any incentive for developers to make original high quality games anymore ? Maybe not, but at the moment one moustachioed sprite seems to be doing pretty well for himself, and his company....
~~Belldandy~~
Sound familiar ? It ought to because gamers have been treated to it ever since the Master System. More recently, Turok Evolution on all formats proved that just looking good in screenshots doesn't make a good game.
Turok isn't the only one though, Conflict Desert Storm was let down by 'iffy' graphics and low difficulty, Waverace bluestrom (slightly) by the PAL framerate, Max Payne (PS2) by framerate and slowdown, Operation Flashpoint by endless gliches and bugs, and on and on....even Sony's The Getaway looks like being a bit of a stinker at the moment.
So, whose fault is it ?
Ours, for expecting too much ?
Developers, for not properly finishing a game and bug testing it ?
Magazines, for hyping up games to a point where they can never reach our inflated high expectations ?
If you think about it then it's a combination of the three which may actually cause such flawed gems as Turok.
Lets face it, any developer can knock out decent screenshots for the consoles and PC's, and any developer can produce a small pile f wiriting that says how the game will be the greatest thing since slice bread and rock the genre. Gamer's, like kids with sweets, like nice pretty screenshots. Show most of us a phtorealistic guy with a gun bounding across a bright sunlit desert with lens flare and you'll get out attention. We want to believe that games we like will be good, like with Turok, and the imminent Tomb Raider Angel Of Darkness. In their hearts the developers also want the games to be good, but this is where I think the problem is....
Competition. No sooner has one great game come out then along comes another, especially at this time of year. If you're a developer the pressure is now on to get games out onto the shelves for Christmas to sell. Stuff bugs, forget flaws, get the games out and cross fingers for good reviews and hope gamers will buy them.
Luckily, not all games are disastrously flawed. Turok Evolution is okay - if you can forgive the frame rate, stealth dinosaurs, black borders e.t.c. But a lot of games are blatant offenders and evidence of developers willingness to cash in on a flawed game before the reviews of magazines can be published. Scooby Doo anyone ? Appaling on all formats it is on. This games flaws are so fatal that if it we're a human then it'd be on life support ! Yet it still sold and made money.
Basically, bad, and flawed games, exist because they sell, often better than a game that has taken years to make and has been finely crated to perfection. Licenses and PR manipulate many people into buying badly flawed or unimaginative games e.g. Scooby Doo, Hooligans, State Of Emrgency, nearly every Lego game, Obi Wan......
Is there really any incentive for developers to make original high quality games anymore ? Maybe not, but at the moment one moustachioed sprite seems to be doing pretty well for himself, and his company....
~~Belldandy~~
There have been no replies to this thread yet.
Okay, so there is a game coming out soon, magazines have run endless previews, DVD movies, loads of hype....the big day arrives when the first review is out.....and it's rubbish, or at least not as good as expected.
Sound familiar ? It ought to because gamers have been treated to it ever since the Master System. More recently, Turok Evolution on all formats proved that just looking good in screenshots doesn't make a good game.
Turok isn't the only one though, Conflict Desert Storm was let down by 'iffy' graphics and low difficulty, Waverace bluestrom (slightly) by the PAL framerate, Max Payne (PS2) by framerate and slowdown, Operation Flashpoint by endless gliches and bugs, and on and on....even Sony's The Getaway looks like being a bit of a stinker at the moment.
So, whose fault is it ?
Ours, for expecting too much ?
Developers, for not properly finishing a game and bug testing it ?
Magazines, for hyping up games to a point where they can never reach our inflated high expectations ?
If you think about it then it's a combination of the three which may actually cause such flawed gems as Turok.
Lets face it, any developer can knock out decent screenshots for the consoles and PC's, and any developer can produce a small pile f wiriting that says how the game will be the greatest thing since slice bread and rock the genre. Gamer's, like kids with sweets, like nice pretty screenshots. Show most of us a phtorealistic guy with a gun bounding across a bright sunlit desert with lens flare and you'll get out attention. We want to believe that games we like will be good, like with Turok, and the imminent Tomb Raider Angel Of Darkness. In their hearts the developers also want the games to be good, but this is where I think the problem is....
Competition. No sooner has one great game come out then along comes another, especially at this time of year. If you're a developer the pressure is now on to get games out onto the shelves for Christmas to sell. Stuff bugs, forget flaws, get the games out and cross fingers for good reviews and hope gamers will buy them.
Luckily, not all games are disastrously flawed. Turok Evolution is okay - if you can forgive the frame rate, stealth dinosaurs, black borders e.t.c. But a lot of games are blatant offenders and evidence of developers willingness to cash in on a flawed game before the reviews of magazines can be published. Scooby Doo anyone ? Appaling on all formats it is on. This games flaws are so fatal that if it we're a human then it'd be on life support ! Yet it still sold and made money.
Basically, bad, and flawed games, exist because they sell, often better than a game that has taken years to make and has been finely crated to perfection. Licenses and PR manipulate many people into buying badly flawed or unimaginative games e.g. Scooby Doo, Hooligans, State Of Emrgency, nearly every Lego game, Obi Wan......
Is there really any incentive for developers to make original high quality games anymore ? Maybe not, but at the moment one moustachioed sprite seems to be doing pretty well for himself, and his company....
~~Belldandy~~
Sound familiar ? It ought to because gamers have been treated to it ever since the Master System. More recently, Turok Evolution on all formats proved that just looking good in screenshots doesn't make a good game.
Turok isn't the only one though, Conflict Desert Storm was let down by 'iffy' graphics and low difficulty, Waverace bluestrom (slightly) by the PAL framerate, Max Payne (PS2) by framerate and slowdown, Operation Flashpoint by endless gliches and bugs, and on and on....even Sony's The Getaway looks like being a bit of a stinker at the moment.
So, whose fault is it ?
Ours, for expecting too much ?
Developers, for not properly finishing a game and bug testing it ?
Magazines, for hyping up games to a point where they can never reach our inflated high expectations ?
If you think about it then it's a combination of the three which may actually cause such flawed gems as Turok.
Lets face it, any developer can knock out decent screenshots for the consoles and PC's, and any developer can produce a small pile f wiriting that says how the game will be the greatest thing since slice bread and rock the genre. Gamer's, like kids with sweets, like nice pretty screenshots. Show most of us a phtorealistic guy with a gun bounding across a bright sunlit desert with lens flare and you'll get out attention. We want to believe that games we like will be good, like with Turok, and the imminent Tomb Raider Angel Of Darkness. In their hearts the developers also want the games to be good, but this is where I think the problem is....
Competition. No sooner has one great game come out then along comes another, especially at this time of year. If you're a developer the pressure is now on to get games out onto the shelves for Christmas to sell. Stuff bugs, forget flaws, get the games out and cross fingers for good reviews and hope gamers will buy them.
Luckily, not all games are disastrously flawed. Turok Evolution is okay - if you can forgive the frame rate, stealth dinosaurs, black borders e.t.c. But a lot of games are blatant offenders and evidence of developers willingness to cash in on a flawed game before the reviews of magazines can be published. Scooby Doo anyone ? Appaling on all formats it is on. This games flaws are so fatal that if it we're a human then it'd be on life support ! Yet it still sold and made money.
Basically, bad, and flawed games, exist because they sell, often better than a game that has taken years to make and has been finely crated to perfection. Licenses and PR manipulate many people into buying badly flawed or unimaginative games e.g. Scooby Doo, Hooligans, State Of Emrgency, nearly every Lego game, Obi Wan......
Is there really any incentive for developers to make original high quality games anymore ? Maybe not, but at the moment one moustachioed sprite seems to be doing pretty well for himself, and his company....
~~Belldandy~~