The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Do you game for the name? What I mean by this is, that do you play a game because a certain developer makes it? Or, do you play a game because of its name? I have noticed when reading a magazine or talking to some of my friend that they think a game is automatically good because a developer that is well know has made it, or do you automatically play a game because the name is catchy, or well known?
It you look at a certain developer and see what kind of games that they have made and the quality of them, they will automatically get a good reputation with the buyers and the critics. But when they make a game, that isn’t up to the standard that precedes them, you still might think it’s good because they have made it. I think a lot of supposed ‘gamers’ do this, as they think that if a developer makes a game, and here well known they will think it’s good. Weird.
The FIFA series is a good example of this. They come out every year and to be honest, there practically the same apart from the graphics have been enhanced. The gameplay is the same as always, the controls might change, but certainly not for the best and the way the players look and move is still the same. But, in spite of all this, I know for a fact that it is still one of the most popular games around. I can constantly hear my friends talking about how good the new (but still the same old game) FIFA game is.
I have known people that hear about a games name and automatically think that the game itself is going to be as good as the name. Take State of Emergency. I know for a fact that everyone thinks it’s a really good game. Now, is it the name of the game that attracts people, or is it because of the violence in it? I have hear people everywhere talking about how good it was, when really they had heard or read nothing about it, because they didn’t know what the actual game was about, all they know about the game is the name sounds good, and from what they had seen of it, it looks okay too. I think that is where people who play computer games, that consider themselves to be ‘gamers’ go in the wrong direction, as they rate a game by its graphics.
I have noticed that games that have a film license always do well, whether it is a Disney film/game or a James Bond film/game. Whatever the actual game is like, if it’s a rubbish game with rubbish graphics and poor gameplay value like Monsters Inc, or it’s a game like Goldeneye, which was a revolutionary shoot ‘em up, it will always sell because it is a well-known film and because most people will recognise the name. And that is the whole point of this post. That people will buy a game, or rent it out, because they are aware of the name, and because it might have been a good film they will automatically think it’s going to be a good game. Oh, of course, this doesn’t count for all games, like I have mentioned before, Goldeneye is definitely not like that. The graphics were great and the gameplay value was exception.
I think also, that the way the name is written on the box can attract an audience. If you saw a game that had a lot of typography and it was a good design, and there was a game that just had the name, that was just plain, you would get attracted to the one that looked good, when it might be the game with the plain writing that is the better box. Take Zelda: Ocarina of Time for example. That game doesn’t really have the best looking box, and compared to a game like Resident Evil, you might go and look at Resident Evil’s box first not knowing that Zelda is probably the better game.
So, I think overall, that some people to game for the name, and don’t always think about buying a game, before they actually know anything about it. The name of a game can attract people, because of the name itself, or the way it is written. And, as far as the gaming for the name, you have to take you time to find out about the game, and you never know, next time your in a games shop, check out the game with a dull box, you never know what could be in it.
Thanks for Reading
El Liquido
It you look at a certain developer and see what kind of games that they have made and the quality of them, they will automatically get a good reputation with the buyers and the critics. But when they make a game, that isn’t up to the standard that precedes them, you still might think it’s good because they have made it. I think a lot of supposed ‘gamers’ do this, as they think that if a developer makes a game, and here well known they will think it’s good. Weird.
The FIFA series is a good example of this. They come out every year and to be honest, there practically the same apart from the graphics have been enhanced. The gameplay is the same as always, the controls might change, but certainly not for the best and the way the players look and move is still the same. But, in spite of all this, I know for a fact that it is still one of the most popular games around. I can constantly hear my friends talking about how good the new (but still the same old game) FIFA game is.
I have known people that hear about a games name and automatically think that the game itself is going to be as good as the name. Take State of Emergency. I know for a fact that everyone thinks it’s a really good game. Now, is it the name of the game that attracts people, or is it because of the violence in it? I have hear people everywhere talking about how good it was, when really they had heard or read nothing about it, because they didn’t know what the actual game was about, all they know about the game is the name sounds good, and from what they had seen of it, it looks okay too. I think that is where people who play computer games, that consider themselves to be ‘gamers’ go in the wrong direction, as they rate a game by its graphics.
I have noticed that games that have a film license always do well, whether it is a Disney film/game or a James Bond film/game. Whatever the actual game is like, if it’s a rubbish game with rubbish graphics and poor gameplay value like Monsters Inc, or it’s a game like Goldeneye, which was a revolutionary shoot ‘em up, it will always sell because it is a well-known film and because most people will recognise the name. And that is the whole point of this post. That people will buy a game, or rent it out, because they are aware of the name, and because it might have been a good film they will automatically think it’s going to be a good game. Oh, of course, this doesn’t count for all games, like I have mentioned before, Goldeneye is definitely not like that. The graphics were great and the gameplay value was exception.
I think also, that the way the name is written on the box can attract an audience. If you saw a game that had a lot of typography and it was a good design, and there was a game that just had the name, that was just plain, you would get attracted to the one that looked good, when it might be the game with the plain writing that is the better box. Take Zelda: Ocarina of Time for example. That game doesn’t really have the best looking box, and compared to a game like Resident Evil, you might go and look at Resident Evil’s box first not knowing that Zelda is probably the better game.
So, I think overall, that some people to game for the name, and don’t always think about buying a game, before they actually know anything about it. The name of a game can attract people, because of the name itself, or the way it is written. And, as far as the gaming for the name, you have to take you time to find out about the game, and you never know, next time your in a games shop, check out the game with a dull box, you never know what could be in it.
Thanks for Reading
El Liquido
I kinda had this written for a while but never got round to posting it, and so instead of starting another topic about almost the same thing, i thought i might aswell post it in here so not to spread the topic around, also it has my thoughts on it.
Good Post by the way.
------------------------------------------
If you here about a film, and you here that Russell Crowe is in it, you think that might be good, if you here a film with Nicole Kidman in, you think that will be very good. Basically, if you here that a film has got a certain star in that is very popular and known for good things you assume the film will be good just because the stars are big celebrities. So is this the same for games, and are they always good.
There are many games out on the market that have a big star in there name, Tony Hawks, Matt Hoffman’s, Ronaldo V Football, and most recently David Beckham Soccer, and many more. All of these above are all big sport stars and well known for what they do, even non-footie fans will know who Beckham is, but just because there name is in the game, is it good?
You can really understand why the names of the stars are put in the game in the first place, its obvious that if you put a well known name in the name game that it will create a lot of interest, if you know nothing about games are which are good, David Beckham Soccer is going to sound a lot more appealing than Pro Evo Soccer. So it makes sense that to get good advertising put some ones well known name in the game. Surely if He or she is working in the game its going to be good, right? There not just in it for the money are they? Well I have to say that the first thing Beckham probably said when this was offered to him was “how much will I get?” Would he really have been bothered about been seen in a game when he’s on the TV all the time, after all, lots more people watch TV than play games don’t they. But its not just names that they put on the front of the covers, on Fifa games there are always big stars on the front, whether it be Paul Scholes or Henry, if someone sees there picture its going to catch there eye and make them think that’s good. But are the games good, or are they just and excuse for Christmas time pap?
Well to start with, Tony Hawks may not be the most well known sport star in the world, but his games still sell very well, but that’s because the game is so good. Here in the UK, skateboarding as a sport on TV is not the most well known one out there, so the chances are that most people over here would not know who he was so that may not make much of a difference. The fact that it sold so well was that this was a truly great game that was very enjoyable to play, the graphics were great, all the characters look and behaved how you would expect, the game play was some of the best we have ever experienced before we had SSX, lots of tricks to pull off, huge areas to pull tricks off and just generally a great game. This did not rely on cheap marketing ideas to sell, and the first game set the standards for the next two, which again sold well, but because they were great games. There is no denying that the games made Tony a bigger star than he was before, he is well known all over the world now, even in countries where skateboarding is not such a big thing. This was one of the rare games with a name that did not rely on it to sell.
To my knowledge though, that’s where the games like that stop, all the rest I know turned out to be crap. Ronaldo V Football was a big let down and it really offered nothing in footballing genius that you would really expect from him. The graphics were under par and not at all up to the standard that even Fifa could produce, the game play was sluggish and did not even resemble the way the game should be played. This was one of those games that solely relied on the name to sell it, and that it did, it by no means did sell quite a few copies and no doubt a lot of that ended up in the star himself back pocket, and he really should take a look at himself for this reason, and the developers should too, tricking people into buying a crap game with a good name.
Matt Hoffman’s for me is a strange one, there is no doubt that the game was good, how could you fault a game that was just the same engine from Tony Hawks but with a BMX, and that’s it, it was the same game with a different name, the only real difference was that the tricks looked different and it was on a BMX. They took a formula from a game that was already good and put a different name on it. The game was good if you were a BMX fan, or did not have any of the Hawks games, other wise it was just the same really and a waste of good money. But again, Matt was not one of the best know sports person in the world, so what sold the game this time, was it the name of the developer, Actvision, well known for the hawks games? I doubt it was that, maybe it was the look of the cover, it was very similar to Tony’s games and so people must have thought that it would be good. Whatever the reason, it sold well, with the name, and for being the same game as Tony hawks.
So what of the new David Beckham game. Well from what I have seen so far, is very little, so for starters that cant be good, all I have seen is an advert on TV where most of it is a small film where he is being implanted with something, then an unclear picture of in game footage taking a free kick. The fact that this is a PS1 only game tends to make you think that to sell there is going to have to have a good marketing campaign, and what better way to do so than by putting the England captains name bang on the front cover, that sure is going to stir up some attention, and the fools who see it will by it without a thought. Sure, the game might be good, im not saying it wont be, but more people will by the game because of the name rather than the game, which is what the developer is planning on. David Beckham is a class player, and deserves to have a good game to his name, not some shabby marketing plan that will bring the developers and him lots of cash, but that’s the way the world works, the more money they make the better.
But of course, I just had to mention Harry. Harry Potter is one of the worlds greatest story books ( so I have heard!) and millions of kids have read them and can instantly recognise him. Then with the film coming out, his popularity rose even more as all the people who were not bothered to read the books could go and see what all the fuss was about. With both the film and the books being very successful, there was no surprise to my mind when I heard a game was coming out, and of course, the name theory comes into play here. Millions of kids will see little Harrys face on front of the box and just on that little picture they will want to buy the game, and that’s what the game relies on to sell as its not all that good. This can even be seen on the TV adverts, none of the in game footage is shown, just a short computer created film showing off some of the ‘magical’ things that happen, and at the top it says “not actual in game footage”. What a surprise. But still the game will probably be the best selling game this Christmas, being on nearly all formats, bright thinking if your there for the money right.
So to my conclusion, unlike most films, when you here whose in it then usually the film is a good watch, and you are glad you spent the money to see it. But in games, more often than not, if there is a big name in it then its probably crap. But why is this all the time, well it seems that this happens because these games come from developers that are actually only interested in the money and not there quality of games, so with a big name in the game, they don’t need to spend such a big amount of time on the actual game. So, they just rush it, get a start, middle and end, get it on the shelves in time for Christmas and watch the money come rolling in.
Make sure you do the research first.
Good Post by the way.
------------------------------------------
If you here about a film, and you here that Russell Crowe is in it, you think that might be good, if you here a film with Nicole Kidman in, you think that will be very good. Basically, if you here that a film has got a certain star in that is very popular and known for good things you assume the film will be good just because the stars are big celebrities. So is this the same for games, and are they always good.
There are many games out on the market that have a big star in there name, Tony Hawks, Matt Hoffman’s, Ronaldo V Football, and most recently David Beckham Soccer, and many more. All of these above are all big sport stars and well known for what they do, even non-footie fans will know who Beckham is, but just because there name is in the game, is it good?
You can really understand why the names of the stars are put in the game in the first place, its obvious that if you put a well known name in the name game that it will create a lot of interest, if you know nothing about games are which are good, David Beckham Soccer is going to sound a lot more appealing than Pro Evo Soccer. So it makes sense that to get good advertising put some ones well known name in the game. Surely if He or she is working in the game its going to be good, right? There not just in it for the money are they? Well I have to say that the first thing Beckham probably said when this was offered to him was “how much will I get?” Would he really have been bothered about been seen in a game when he’s on the TV all the time, after all, lots more people watch TV than play games don’t they. But its not just names that they put on the front of the covers, on Fifa games there are always big stars on the front, whether it be Paul Scholes or Henry, if someone sees there picture its going to catch there eye and make them think that’s good. But are the games good, or are they just and excuse for Christmas time pap?
Well to start with, Tony Hawks may not be the most well known sport star in the world, but his games still sell very well, but that’s because the game is so good. Here in the UK, skateboarding as a sport on TV is not the most well known one out there, so the chances are that most people over here would not know who he was so that may not make much of a difference. The fact that it sold so well was that this was a truly great game that was very enjoyable to play, the graphics were great, all the characters look and behaved how you would expect, the game play was some of the best we have ever experienced before we had SSX, lots of tricks to pull off, huge areas to pull tricks off and just generally a great game. This did not rely on cheap marketing ideas to sell, and the first game set the standards for the next two, which again sold well, but because they were great games. There is no denying that the games made Tony a bigger star than he was before, he is well known all over the world now, even in countries where skateboarding is not such a big thing. This was one of the rare games with a name that did not rely on it to sell.
To my knowledge though, that’s where the games like that stop, all the rest I know turned out to be crap. Ronaldo V Football was a big let down and it really offered nothing in footballing genius that you would really expect from him. The graphics were under par and not at all up to the standard that even Fifa could produce, the game play was sluggish and did not even resemble the way the game should be played. This was one of those games that solely relied on the name to sell it, and that it did, it by no means did sell quite a few copies and no doubt a lot of that ended up in the star himself back pocket, and he really should take a look at himself for this reason, and the developers should too, tricking people into buying a crap game with a good name.
Matt Hoffman’s for me is a strange one, there is no doubt that the game was good, how could you fault a game that was just the same engine from Tony Hawks but with a BMX, and that’s it, it was the same game with a different name, the only real difference was that the tricks looked different and it was on a BMX. They took a formula from a game that was already good and put a different name on it. The game was good if you were a BMX fan, or did not have any of the Hawks games, other wise it was just the same really and a waste of good money. But again, Matt was not one of the best know sports person in the world, so what sold the game this time, was it the name of the developer, Actvision, well known for the hawks games? I doubt it was that, maybe it was the look of the cover, it was very similar to Tony’s games and so people must have thought that it would be good. Whatever the reason, it sold well, with the name, and for being the same game as Tony hawks.
So what of the new David Beckham game. Well from what I have seen so far, is very little, so for starters that cant be good, all I have seen is an advert on TV where most of it is a small film where he is being implanted with something, then an unclear picture of in game footage taking a free kick. The fact that this is a PS1 only game tends to make you think that to sell there is going to have to have a good marketing campaign, and what better way to do so than by putting the England captains name bang on the front cover, that sure is going to stir up some attention, and the fools who see it will by it without a thought. Sure, the game might be good, im not saying it wont be, but more people will by the game because of the name rather than the game, which is what the developer is planning on. David Beckham is a class player, and deserves to have a good game to his name, not some shabby marketing plan that will bring the developers and him lots of cash, but that’s the way the world works, the more money they make the better.
But of course, I just had to mention Harry. Harry Potter is one of the worlds greatest story books ( so I have heard!) and millions of kids have read them and can instantly recognise him. Then with the film coming out, his popularity rose even more as all the people who were not bothered to read the books could go and see what all the fuss was about. With both the film and the books being very successful, there was no surprise to my mind when I heard a game was coming out, and of course, the name theory comes into play here. Millions of kids will see little Harrys face on front of the box and just on that little picture they will want to buy the game, and that’s what the game relies on to sell as its not all that good. This can even be seen on the TV adverts, none of the in game footage is shown, just a short computer created film showing off some of the ‘magical’ things that happen, and at the top it says “not actual in game footage”. What a surprise. But still the game will probably be the best selling game this Christmas, being on nearly all formats, bright thinking if your there for the money right.
So to my conclusion, unlike most films, when you here whose in it then usually the film is a good watch, and you are glad you spent the money to see it. But in games, more often than not, if there is a big name in it then its probably crap. But why is this all the time, well it seems that this happens because these games come from developers that are actually only interested in the money and not there quality of games, so with a big name in the game, they don’t need to spend such a big amount of time on the actual game. So, they just rush it, get a start, middle and end, get it on the shelves in time for Christmas and watch the money come rolling in.
Make sure you do the research first.
I don't look at the game for it's developers but maybe the name if it has had good predecessors. Tekken is a good example of this. As soon as tekken 4 is out, i will buy it because i love it. Another example is final fantasy. Again as soon as this comes out i will buy it. If there are games i have never heard of, then i tend to look for a demo of it first.
what was that all about
what was that about
!
i suppose if it had of been called State of Shooting or something along them lines and didnt have a cool front cover maybe not as many people would have bought it
Maybe not on this forum, but I know a lot of people who like it, when they know nothing about games.
Good post.
you wrote "i know that every one likes State Of emergency"
quite the opposite on this forum now, hardly any one likes the game here, i think it is ok.
Anyways i bought Gran Turismo 3 today but with a name like that it doesnt sound too interesting but it is made by Sony who also made the console so you know that it wont be rubbish because then it will make their console look bad
you wrote "i know that every one likes State Of emergency"
quite the opposite on this forum now, hardly any one likes the game here, i think it is ok.
Anyways i bought Gran Turismo 3 today but with a name like that it doesnt sound too interesting but it is made by Sony who also made the console so you know that it wont be rubbish because then it will make their console look bad
Do you game for the name? What I mean by this is, that do you play a game because a certain developer makes it? Or, do you play a game because of its name? I have noticed when reading a magazine or talking to some of my friend that they think a game is automatically good because a developer that is well know has made it, or do you automatically play a game because the name is catchy, or well known?
It you look at a certain developer and see what kind of games that they have made and the quality of them, they will automatically get a good reputation with the buyers and the critics. But when they make a game, that isn’t up to the standard that precedes them, you still might think it’s good because they have made it. I think a lot of supposed ‘gamers’ do this, as they think that if a developer makes a game, and here well known they will think it’s good. Weird.
The FIFA series is a good example of this. They come out every year and to be honest, there practically the same apart from the graphics have been enhanced. The gameplay is the same as always, the controls might change, but certainly not for the best and the way the players look and move is still the same. But, in spite of all this, I know for a fact that it is still one of the most popular games around. I can constantly hear my friends talking about how good the new (but still the same old game) FIFA game is.
I have known people that hear about a games name and automatically think that the game itself is going to be as good as the name. Take State of Emergency. I know for a fact that everyone thinks it’s a really good game. Now, is it the name of the game that attracts people, or is it because of the violence in it? I have hear people everywhere talking about how good it was, when really they had heard or read nothing about it, because they didn’t know what the actual game was about, all they know about the game is the name sounds good, and from what they had seen of it, it looks okay too. I think that is where people who play computer games, that consider themselves to be ‘gamers’ go in the wrong direction, as they rate a game by its graphics.
I have noticed that games that have a film license always do well, whether it is a Disney film/game or a James Bond film/game. Whatever the actual game is like, if it’s a rubbish game with rubbish graphics and poor gameplay value like Monsters Inc, or it’s a game like Goldeneye, which was a revolutionary shoot ‘em up, it will always sell because it is a well-known film and because most people will recognise the name. And that is the whole point of this post. That people will buy a game, or rent it out, because they are aware of the name, and because it might have been a good film they will automatically think it’s going to be a good game. Oh, of course, this doesn’t count for all games, like I have mentioned before, Goldeneye is definitely not like that. The graphics were great and the gameplay value was exception.
I think also, that the way the name is written on the box can attract an audience. If you saw a game that had a lot of typography and it was a good design, and there was a game that just had the name, that was just plain, you would get attracted to the one that looked good, when it might be the game with the plain writing that is the better box. Take Zelda: Ocarina of Time for example. That game doesn’t really have the best looking box, and compared to a game like Resident Evil, you might go and look at Resident Evil’s box first not knowing that Zelda is probably the better game.
So, I think overall, that some people to game for the name, and don’t always think about buying a game, before they actually know anything about it. The name of a game can attract people, because of the name itself, or the way it is written. And, as far as the gaming for the name, you have to take you time to find out about the game, and you never know, next time your in a games shop, check out the game with a dull box, you never know what could be in it.
Thanks for Reading
El Liquido
It you look at a certain developer and see what kind of games that they have made and the quality of them, they will automatically get a good reputation with the buyers and the critics. But when they make a game, that isn’t up to the standard that precedes them, you still might think it’s good because they have made it. I think a lot of supposed ‘gamers’ do this, as they think that if a developer makes a game, and here well known they will think it’s good. Weird.
The FIFA series is a good example of this. They come out every year and to be honest, there practically the same apart from the graphics have been enhanced. The gameplay is the same as always, the controls might change, but certainly not for the best and the way the players look and move is still the same. But, in spite of all this, I know for a fact that it is still one of the most popular games around. I can constantly hear my friends talking about how good the new (but still the same old game) FIFA game is.
I have known people that hear about a games name and automatically think that the game itself is going to be as good as the name. Take State of Emergency. I know for a fact that everyone thinks it’s a really good game. Now, is it the name of the game that attracts people, or is it because of the violence in it? I have hear people everywhere talking about how good it was, when really they had heard or read nothing about it, because they didn’t know what the actual game was about, all they know about the game is the name sounds good, and from what they had seen of it, it looks okay too. I think that is where people who play computer games, that consider themselves to be ‘gamers’ go in the wrong direction, as they rate a game by its graphics.
I have noticed that games that have a film license always do well, whether it is a Disney film/game or a James Bond film/game. Whatever the actual game is like, if it’s a rubbish game with rubbish graphics and poor gameplay value like Monsters Inc, or it’s a game like Goldeneye, which was a revolutionary shoot ‘em up, it will always sell because it is a well-known film and because most people will recognise the name. And that is the whole point of this post. That people will buy a game, or rent it out, because they are aware of the name, and because it might have been a good film they will automatically think it’s going to be a good game. Oh, of course, this doesn’t count for all games, like I have mentioned before, Goldeneye is definitely not like that. The graphics were great and the gameplay value was exception.
I think also, that the way the name is written on the box can attract an audience. If you saw a game that had a lot of typography and it was a good design, and there was a game that just had the name, that was just plain, you would get attracted to the one that looked good, when it might be the game with the plain writing that is the better box. Take Zelda: Ocarina of Time for example. That game doesn’t really have the best looking box, and compared to a game like Resident Evil, you might go and look at Resident Evil’s box first not knowing that Zelda is probably the better game.
So, I think overall, that some people to game for the name, and don’t always think about buying a game, before they actually know anything about it. The name of a game can attract people, because of the name itself, or the way it is written. And, as far as the gaming for the name, you have to take you time to find out about the game, and you never know, next time your in a games shop, check out the game with a dull box, you never know what could be in it.
Thanks for Reading
El Liquido