Rentals and second-hand sales are quite lucrative for game developers, even if they don't like to admit it.4RM3D said:People actually still buy games based on (just) box art?
If you are going into a store to pick up a rental copy (game or movie), I could understand you just take a look at whatever the store currently has. But actually buying a game based on just box art? No...
It tells you what the game's about.CardinalPiggles said:I can't understand why people would care about what the box art looks like. Much less rage about it. What matters is the game.
I read your post and I know exactly what you mean. I too grew up with video games, where it was just a niche thing. You can thank greed for inviting in the uninitiated. Video games (as are movies) are a business first and an art form second. Publishers will always do whatever they think will net them more profits, thus, you will continue to see video games go down this road towards mass appeal. Sure, there will still be good games out there, but your going to have to accept the fact that the lowest common denominator determine how things are marketed and, unfortunately, what content there will be. This is why things like Kickstarter are so exciting, because it gives developers who want to do something outside the box, the opportunity to appeal to people like us, to help fund it. Until then get off your high horse and go complain about something important.Sylveria said:BrionJames said:You know what anyone getting their panties in a twist over this, needs to re-evaluate what makes a game good. Is it the cover art? Of course not. This is the second thread I've seen on here about this. Unless the content of the game has changed, who fucking cares if it's got Stubble-Chin-Shotgunwielder on the cover. It could be a picture of puppy dogs, as long as the core of everything I've read about this game hasn't changed.Take a step back and look at the bigger picture. If you can't figure out what I mean, then this cover was made for you.CardinalPiggles said:I can't understand why people would care about what the box art looks like. Much less rage about it. What matters is the game.
It is? Don't publishers hate second-hand sales because of the loss of profit? Minus DLCs, maybe.Scow2 said:Rentals and second-hand sales are quite lucrative for game developers, even if they don't like to admit it.
That's the thing. This cover is the opposite of that. This looks so thoroughly generic it's off-putting. It looks like Generic Shooter #223423. But it doesn't look like it'd draw in the CoD crowd. The more I see of this game, the more I feel like it's going to be a huge disappointment. Putting in that call now.Sylveria said:As much as I want to condemn this decision... I can't. There's been more than a few times that the cover of a game has caught my eye because it was relevent to my interests and caused me to look at it. Conversely, as someone who couldn't be less interested in dude-bro shooters, this cover wouldn't warrant a second glance, let alone a closer inspection. But, this industry is ruled by the whims of the dude-bros, sadly. I miss the days when gaming was just for the nerds and artistic integrity wasn't so readily sacrificed to bring in "the main-stream."
Your avatar clashes so hugely with this statement I couldn't help but laugh. I read it in my head in Jane's voice for the full effect.roushutsu said:I've said before in another thread about the box art and I'll say it again: even if the image is horribly generic, if it's what works then that's what they'll use. I can't really blame them for resorting to the lone hero image since that's what's popular right now.
Heh, I didn't even realize that until you brought that up. That is pretty damn goofy, isn't it?Frostbite3789 said:Your avatar clashes so hugely with this statement I couldn't help but laugh. I read it in my head in Jane's voice for the full effect.
Seriously...isn't it a bit late to be complaining about box art at this point? Not just for this game, but for the industry in general. Don't we currently live in the era where if you want to - just as Levine pointed out - grab someone's attention with box art, you either A: have a grissled guy with a gun looking much like BS Infinite's cover or B: Have a pair of big tits on a scantily clad female character? Gamers know full well that unless they're buying some creepy japanese import, they'll never see said female character in a sex scene, but they still might consider buying the game just to see more of her.Grey Carter said:Levine does have a point; Game packaging is meant to attract customers to the product, and the majority of people complaining about the box art were going to end up buying BioShock Infinite anyway.
You'd be surprised at how diverse the tastes of "Dude-bros" can be. A lot of "Dudebros" absolutely loved the other Bioshock games.Ed130 said:At least he is honest about it.
Still on the fence about cancelling my pre-order although. Either they are skirting the line of false advertising trying to make a Bioshock/System Shock style game look like CoD or that the game is something that a 'Dude-bro' would like.
I don't recall Call of Duty having Zepplins in it.Smertnik said:I can very well imagine it having the opposite effect as well.
For instance, if I knew nothing about the game and its predecessors and I saw the box in a shop (if I still actually went to retail shops to purchase games, that is), I'd think "Meh, it's just another dumb FPS. Could be a spin off of Call of Duty, for all I know" and walk by.