Questions in the title. Which one annoys you more, a good game that is unsuccessful and makes very little money, or a bad game that makes millions?
Poll: Which is worst? A bad game that does well or a good game that doesn't?
- Thread starter SomeBritishDude
- Start date
Definitely a good game that is unsuccessful.
Bad games doing well is slightly annoying, but people are free to buy all the bad games they want to. Good games doing poorly, though, just pisses me off because then we end up getting threads all the time about how original and innovative games aren't being made. News flash people - if you don't fucking buy them, publishers won't fucking fund them.
Bad games doing well is slightly annoying, but people are free to buy all the bad games they want to. Good games doing poorly, though, just pisses me off because then we end up getting threads all the time about how original and innovative games aren't being made. News flash people - if you don't fucking buy them, publishers won't fucking fund them.
The problem with the question is that both options are relative to one another, so really neither.
But if we define 'bad' as phoning it in, and 'good' as wacky and innovative, I'd say the former is worse. Like it or lump it, stuff like Psychonauts and Scott Pilgrim will never be popular because they are TOO innovative.
But that doesn't give the right for men in grey to dump the same old shit on our doorstops. There's a reason Halo 3 and MW2 are constantly ripped on now, and it's not because they are popular (although that helps) it's because -despite being solid games - they barely changed anything and got away with it. When that happens, you can't blame them for doing it over...and over...
But if we define 'bad' as phoning it in, and 'good' as wacky and innovative, I'd say the former is worse. Like it or lump it, stuff like Psychonauts and Scott Pilgrim will never be popular because they are TOO innovative.
But that doesn't give the right for men in grey to dump the same old shit on our doorstops. There's a reason Halo 3 and MW2 are constantly ripped on now, and it's not because they are popular (although that helps) it's because -despite being solid games - they barely changed anything and got away with it. When that happens, you can't blame them for doing it over...and over...
I say a bad game that's successful. Rarely a bad game spawns a good series of games for being popular. Actually, I can't think of any examples right now, but I would be happy to find some.
I say a bad game, cos then it shows devs thats all we want, look at MW2 it's not bad but not good and it was big now alot of devs we'll say hay lets make game with a shitty online mode where every kill can be considered noobish.
Good games that go unnoticed are worse. Much worse, in fact. All entertainment markets will always be full of shit, be that shit successful or not. It doesn't matter to me. What does matter to me are good games that go unnoticed and can never have any sequels or be improved upon just because they didn't make enough money.SomeBritishDude said:
this. they are both connected so its a flip on either orMayonegg said:
but alottt of people hate when a bad game makes millions..you can easily see it around you some gamers straight up rage trolling over it.
me personally i'd like to see good games do better (but then again thats all subjective, as we have lots of different tastes)
Dude are you kidding a bad game that does good is way worse! Thats the reason they think they can keep releasing the same shit over again because a bunch of F***ING morons keep buying it so they just make the same game for more money. Mario ring any bells? How about Sonic? and a little more personal Halo. Yes even Halo because what was originally a good game turned into a series of bad ones. But because alot of people keep buying there crud we will continue to see Halo fall into its inevitable downward spiral. Would you agree?
...Not really no. Nintendo are still making good if not great Mario games. Mario Galaxy is one of the best platformers of this generation, if not one of the best of all time. Doesn't matter how long it's been going as long as it's still good, especially with a series like Mario which has no story to mess up.ForensicYOYO said:
See these are the type of people im talking about. Mario has been using the same games over and over again. The original game Super Mario Galazy originates from Super Mario 64. So what? its in space. Same game, but they will keep making it till people understand to stop buying them.SomeBritishDude said:
I think bad games that are successful.
When a poor game does badly, it tells the publisher/developer that they can continue to churn out shitty, similar games, and that they will still sell like hot-cakes shaped like boobs.
If the shitty game/s is/are successful enough, it can lower gaming as a whole, as other game-makers can see that those kind of games sell well.
Does that make any sense?
I think you get my drift...
When a poor game does badly, it tells the publisher/developer that they can continue to churn out shitty, similar games, and that they will still sell like hot-cakes shaped like boobs.
If the shitty game/s is/are successful enough, it can lower gaming as a whole, as other game-makers can see that those kind of games sell well.
Does that make any sense?
I think you get my drift...
... I voted one way, but the similarity between the results more closely resembles reality.
They're equally bad. Every time genius fails, genius is seen as a poorer investment. Every time mediocrity succeeds, mediocrity is viewed as a wiser investment. Psychonauts barely performing sent a clear statement that originality, creativity, wit, and humor won't sell a game. While halo went on to completely redefine an entire genre save for a few determined outliers.
The real problem is the video game industry being viewed as nothing more than an opportunity to turn 2 dollars into 3, but its not like we're going to grow out of capitalism in this lifetime.
They're equally bad. Every time genius fails, genius is seen as a poorer investment. Every time mediocrity succeeds, mediocrity is viewed as a wiser investment. Psychonauts barely performing sent a clear statement that originality, creativity, wit, and humor won't sell a game. While halo went on to completely redefine an entire genre save for a few determined outliers.
The real problem is the video game industry being viewed as nothing more than an opportunity to turn 2 dollars into 3, but its not like we're going to grow out of capitalism in this lifetime.