Good games vs Profitable games

[heyheysg]

I recently got to thinking, the Wii is the best selling console of this generation, yet has loads of shovelware.

On the other hand, PS3 and Xbox gamers now have high expectations for graphics which makes the release time longer than previously. I remember back in the PS2 days where I'd be swamped with AAA games all throughout the year, even rushing through some to try the rest. Now there are long breaks punctuated by Christmas sales.

So basically, game companies will release what ever sell nowadays, be it casual games or the next generic FPS/Open world/RPG

1) Do you think the game companies will go down the 'casual' route or 'whatever sells' route? What would be a good strategy if you were a developer to make money and yet retain artistic integrity.

2) Are the wait times between games going to be shorter? (i.e as more tools are developed, graphics are upgraded faster and automatically instead of painstakingly drawn). How can we convince devs to release lower res but higher quality gameplay?

 

[Pandalisk]

They'll go down both roads, Release Games for the casuals that can be joined in by anyone, but as i recall being casual doesnt mean you dont enjoy the finer things, they dont only enjoy Generic shooter games, thats a lie people tell themselves, they might not have alot of time spent gaming at one moment, but that by all means does not mean they will go away from playing some Epic game, thats nonsence.

We all buy those generic shooters, its only so quint that we can blame casuals.

but they will sell what sells and is cost effective, if it suceeds sequels that can have time taken to them, if the devolopers are willing not to rush it out for quick cash.

Thats one thing we know is coming, sequels, a shit ton of sequels.

as for your second point i guess it depends how soon the technology to make things go faster is developed in regards to our need to have the shiniest, smoothest game with 765 Kgs of bling on.

 

[Proteus214]

If initial sales are greater than the production cost, then they would consider it a successful game. Most companies aren't concerned about their game being the top download 10 years down the line. Staying power is more of an afterthought nowadays.

 

[Lord_Jaroh]

I'd like more companies think about their future rather than "Money, NOW!" If companies were to simply make good games, they would sell (case in point: Diablo II) now and into the future. Concentrating on day one sales only promotes aggrivation, especially when a customer gets a crappy game that was rushed out to hit the holiday release date.

I would like to see less milking of franchises and more adding to gaming as a whole. I want to see more "forwards compatability" as well as "backwards compatability". Reward me for being a customer. When I buy your next shooter, give me bonuses if I purchased your past games. Update old games with new engines and give them away to your customers. Promote good-will to your customers rather than milking them using more and more nickel-and-dime tactics.

In this day and age of downloadable content and patches, and the ability to patch games after release, why are we not getting improvements to older games. I'm still waiting for Resistance to get Trophy Support, let alone new maps or skins. How about Folklore? Marvel Ultimate Alliance? Why not add new characters or areas to the old game? Very few are the companies that actually support an older game rather than dropping it like a hot potatoe and forgetting about the fans that actually purchased it in favor of promoting the newest flavour of the week.

I reiterate, make me feel like a valuable customer rather than a breathing money pit and I will reward you in kind.

 

[heyheysg]

I'd like more companies think about their future rather than "Money, NOW!" If companies were to simply make good games, they would sell (case in point: Diablo II) now and into the future. Concentrating on day one sales only promotes aggrivation, especially when a customer gets a crappy game that was rushed out to hit the holiday release date.

I would like to see less milking of franchises and more adding to gaming as a whole. I want to see more "forwards compatability" as well as "backwards compatability". Reward me for being a customer. When I buy your next shooter, give me bonuses if I purchased your past games. Update old games with new engines and give them away to your customers. Promote good-will to your customers rather than milking them using more and more nickel-and-dime tactics.

In this day and age of downloadable content and patches, and the ability to patch games after release, why are we not getting improvements to older games. I'm still waiting for Resistance to get Trophy Support, let alone new maps or skins. How about Folklore? Marvel Ultimate Alliance? Why not add new characters or areas to the old game? Very few are the companies that actually support an older game rather than dropping it like a hot potatoe and forgetting about the fans that actually purchased it in favor of promoting the newest flavour of the week.

I reiterate, make me feel like a valuable customer rather than a breathing money pit and I will reward you in kind.

Good points, you should work for their marketing dept

 

[Lord_Jaroh]

I'd like more companies think about their future rather than "Money, NOW!" If companies were to simply make good games, they would sell (case in point: Diablo II) now and into the future. Concentrating on day one sales only promotes aggrivation, especially when a customer gets a crappy game that was rushed out to hit the holiday release date.

I would like to see less milking of franchises and more adding to gaming as a whole. I want to see more "forwards compatability" as well as "backwards compatability". Reward me for being a customer. When I buy your next shooter, give me bonuses if I purchased your past games. Update old games with new engines and give them away to your customers. Promote good-will to your customers rather than milking them using more and more nickel-and-dime tactics.

In this day and age of downloadable content and patches, and the ability to patch games after release, why are we not getting improvements to older games. I'm still waiting for Resistance to get Trophy Support, let alone new maps or skins. How about Folklore? Marvel Ultimate Alliance? Why not add new characters or areas to the old game? Very few are the companies that actually support an older game rather than dropping it like a hot potatoe and forgetting about the fans that actually purchased it in favor of promoting the newest flavour of the week.

I reiterate, make me feel like a valuable customer rather than a breathing money pit and I will reward you in kind.

Good points, you should work for their marketing dept

Heh, I'd have to swallow my pride some as I hate marketing. But then, I wonder how to get info like this to someone "in the know" without being there...

 

[Hutchy_Bear]

The whole purpose of a company is to make money - That is the main and arguabley the only goal for a diretor to achieve. That said however it may be more profitable in the long run to make good games as they will retain the 'hardcore' customers. But they will also make/sell some profitable over good games (e.g. football games and movie tie ins) as they will draw some of the big monies. However I doubt a comapny would release just bad games that sell well cause their reputation will be trashed.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I said it once and I'll say it again.

PSN and XBLA are the perfect platform for new cheaper last-gen qualitative games.

 

[cordeos]

Nintendo had problems with shovelware on the gamecube too, it has gotten worse on the Wii because its not really a 3rd generation console its more 2.5 generation, which means most of the multiplatform games don't go to the Wii at all, or if they do its in a diminished capacity.

 

[Proteus214]

I said it once and I'll say it again.

PSN and XBLA are the perfect platform for new cheaper last-gen qualitative games.

Exactly. You don't need a multi-million dollar budget to bring a great idea to life. I'd say that you could get more fun out of $50 on an electronic distribution service than you could with one mainstream AAA title.

 

[Captain Pancake]

Sadly, developers never think about the gaming conisseur. The mindless masses will buy whatever flashy piece of tech you show them, regardless of quality.

 

[Akai Shizuku]

I remember when games used to be considered an art form by developers. Or at least, the games had some real effort put into them and weren't all about marketing. -sigh-

You know what? Screw this gen, screw next gen, and screw everything else. I'm buying a freaking PS2 to go with my N64 and original Xbox.

I have a DS, too. Do you know how freaking hard it can be to find good games for that little gimmick machine? A great system with excellent potential limited to the puke puddles of casual puzzle games and FREAKING JONAS BROS./HANNAH MONTANA GAMES, with the monotony only broken by the JRPGs which for some reason are really good on the DS...if you pick them right. And even then, finding them can be such a clusterf**k. You know what I mean?

 

[saintchristopher]

Let's all say it together now:

Lowest. Common. Denominator

it's the reason why Larry the Cable Guy is popular despite not being funny, and why Transformers 2 broke box office records for no really good reason at all.

The broadest appeal to the basest amount of people.

 

[Thurmer]

If its an online game, for it to last it needs to be popular and make alot of money so they can invest it back into the game.

i also agree partially with plenty of the above comments except EA people...
the EA method: release a NEW fifa/madden/nba etc every year making it slightly better in some aspects and slightly worse in others so when the next ones slightly better on the part they made slightly worse it gives the appearance of a better game. EA is the devil basically

 

[GonzoGamer]

1) Do you think the game companies will go down the 'casual' route or 'whatever sells' route? What would be a good strategy if you were a developer to make money and yet retain artistic integrity.

2) Are the wait times between games going to be shorter? (i.e as more tools are developed, graphics are upgraded faster and automatically instead of painstakingly drawn). How can we convince devs to release lower res but higher quality gameplay?

1. Smart companies are going to make both and probably use the funds made from cheap casuals to fund the high budget titles they want to make.

2. Wait times are going to get longer. While more tools have been developed and everything companies now want to make dlc for every single game that the hard core gamers latch onto. For example, last generation: GTA Vice City came out a year after GTA3, and San Andreas a couple of years after that. We're now at a year and a half past gta4 and all we're getting is dlc. Just now we're getting hint at another full title which is probably a couple of years away because they have to finish beating the dead horse that is gta4. By making the dlc exclusive they can get their payoff from ms and rope all of the hardcore 360 fanboys into buying some new missions for $20. Why are they going to pass up that business?

 

[Nazulu]

Let's all say it together now:

Lowest. Common. Denominator

it's the reason why Larry the Cable Guy is popular despite not being funny, and why Transformers 2 broke box office records for no really good reason at all.

The broadest appeal to the basest amount of people.

Your shitting me? Transformers 2 broke box office records!

Well I think I know why, a lot of people these days just see movies for the sake of seeing movies. If it has a flashy trailer it will draw you in but a lot of people don't even bother doing research to see if it's really good or not. However, that isn't completely accurate, lets be honest here, most people now can like both good movies and shit! Same with everything else. It's a sad fact.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I said it once and I'll say it again.

PSN and XBLA are the perfect platform for new cheaper last-gen qualitative games.

Exactly. You don't need a multi-million dollar budget to bring a great idea to life. I'd say that you could get more fun out of $50 on an electronic distribution service than you could with one mainstream AAA title.

They can still be triple A. Think about some of the best looking last-gen games. Shadow of the Colossus, Okami, God of War 2. Making games that have that type of graphical quality. In todays market they would be 3 times cheaper to make, but just as enjoyable.