Rockstar: Make Good Games and the Money Will Follow

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Not true. Make a good game that has broad appeal and the money will follow. Persona 4 and Shadow of the Colossus are examples of good games that didn't have broad appeal and they made meager profits.

I don't know; those games are constantly referenced as being quality and influential. Shadow has been redone for HD this year and I can't find Persona 4 easily (and I'd like to play it.)

I suppose it depends on what you mean by 'meager'. Those games were profitable for the companies who made them to continue making games; isn't that enough?

When Black Ops makes over a billion dollars, no it isn't enough. Especially since both games met great critical reception. Great games deserve more sales than just enough to get by.

 

[mjc0961]

This is a start but not 100% accurate; Take Cover Studios for example, they made a three radically original games each gamwe being lovingly crafted and having unique stlyes. They folded up financially due to lack of sales, or should i say were folded up by capcom.

Maybe if they had remembered to make good games instead of original games, they wouldn't be in that mess. Okami being an original game doesn't magically fix the utterly broken controls and make it playable, now does it? Not that it's terribly original anyway: if Clover ripping off Zelda even further would have made for a better game, they should have. Preferably they should have started by ripping off proper controls.

"And also fuck the original platform that made your games known."

Because they should really continue supporting the PS2, right? Remember, you said "platform that made their games known", not "platform they put their very first games on", and GTA III on PS2 is what made them known.

Hey don't forget about:
Okami

Don't get me wrong, their games ARE good, but at this point the true statement is more "make popular games and the money will follow". Plenty of GOOD games have driven their studios bankrupt.

The problem here is that Okami is not a good game! Did anyone else actually play it? How can this many people have played that broken pile of trash and still claim that it's good? At this point I'm seriously willing to bet that most people who praise it haven't actually played it and are just doing it to fit with the "in crowd" or whatever. The opposite of hating Duty or Halo without actually playing it. Gaming is an interactive medium, and when the interactivity is next to impossible because the controls are broken, that game is objectively a bad game. And Okami is the prime example of just such a game. There's no way this many people who have actually played it would seriously forgive it for such a grievous flaw and act like it's a 10/10 underrated gem. It sold poorly and put its studio out of business because it sucked and the people who made that piece of crap were bad at their jobs and deserved to be told to go find a new line of work.

As for everyone else out there, please, go out and actually try that game and see how bad it is first hand. Stop praising it without playing it because it's unpopular.

 

[nukethetuna]

The problem here is that Okami is not a good game! Did anyone else actually play it? How can this many people have played that broken pile of trash and still claim that it's good? At this point I'm seriously willing to bet that most people who praise it haven't actually played it and are just doing it to fit with the "in crowd" or whatever. The opposite of hating Duty or Halo without actually playing it. Gaming is an interactive medium, and when the interactivity is next to impossible because the controls are broken, that game is objectively a bad game. And Okami is the prime example of just such a game. There's no way this many people who have actually played it would seriously forgive it for such a grievous flaw and act like it's a 10/10 underrated gem. It sold poorly and put its studio out of business because it sucked and the people who made that piece of crap were bad at their jobs and deserved to be told to go find a new line of work.

As for everyone else out there, please, go out and actually try that game and see how bad it is first hand. Stop praising it without playing it because it's unpopular.

Actually I did play it. I never finished it because I PERSONALLY didn't enjoy it. I was just listing games that were critically well-received but flopped financially. Just because YOU personally didn't care for it doesn't change that the vast majority of critics adored it.

Man, talk about thinking your own opinion is the only one that matters haha.

 

[Ghengis John]

Rockstar's philosophy is to concentrate on creativity and let the income flow from there.

Rockstar: Also, slave labor. Don't forget the delicious, delicious slave labor.

 

[Irridium]

[qu

Games becoming "cult classics" or "late bloomers" is nice and all if the developer is still afloat, but a lot of times the IP is abandoned because it didn't sell well. Baten Kaitos, for example, will probably never get another game because of low sales, so it's not like no damage is done. I'll agree it's less of an issue now though, since most "underrated classics" can be re-released digitally with great ease and can possibly re-kindle a franchise.

It seems like "Make good games that have decent marketing" rather than just "make good games" is the winning formula. Unfortunately, (correct me if I'm wrong) you need a fair amount of money (or a deal with a good publisher) to do decent marketing in the first place, right? Either way it seems like there's a lot more to selling well than just "making what you like and making it well". Actually the fact that BAD games sell well with decent marketing (HELLO DUKE) really just emphasizes how important marketing is.

Either be one of the big boys that crushes less marketed releases, find good marketing, or avoid competing with established franchises at all costs, I guess?

Also I'd like to hear your opinion on Chinatown Wars, which had quality, solid marketing, and a strong IP backing it up. I sort of consider its low sales as a fluke. Maybe GTA lovers just don't own DSes.

If a game doesn't get a decent marketing push before release, the publisher already gave up on it. If they didn't, they would have marketed it. They wouldn't even have to put that much money into the marketing. There's plenty of levels between "nothing" and "go all-out". In fact, the middle road will most likely be best, since you'd have to get creative with the marketing. And people will remember creative marketing far more than your standard commercial or internet ad, though those things do help.

However, its important to market to the right audience. You mentioned Chinatown Wars, and that's a good point. However I think the reason it didn't sell was because of what you said, those who own DS's just aren't that interested in GTA games. That'd be another good thing to do, know the audience of whatever platform your selling the game on.

 

[Nurb]

Rockstar's philosophy is to concentrate on creativity and let the income flow from there.

Then they should stop the sequels and focus on creative original gmes... Digging up the Max Payne IP wasn't neccessary, especially since it's going to suck with all the "Updating" from the original play style, and instead use the resources to try something new and creative.

Slapping a big graphics engine on a sequel that forces artists to limit the size of the environment doesn't demonstrate creativity

 

[Irridium]

I think the problem with Chinatown Wars is actually based on how much more people enjoy GTA III and on over the older perspective and look of the game. I personally loved the game, yet I also still sit around and play Dynasty of an Emperor, and love titles like Yakuza or Earthbound, so my game choice is fairly broad and open. Whereas not all gamers are, especially younger crowds that have never played anything older than a PS2 or Xbox. So someone who might love GTA 3-4, still might be a little confused on where the fun is at if you hand them Chinatown. It's got to do with each of our perspective on what is good in a game.

Yet marketing has a strong use in gaming, current example of ad failure being Kirby: Return to Dreamland. Honestly I caught one random ad while someone was watching the Disney channel. This makes me think two things.

First: Why haven't I heard of a title that I'd love a ton until about a week or two before it released? No gamer news, no commercials on anything I've seen, and no buzz about, finally, another game which returns to form.

Second: Does NOA believe that only children like Kirby? Do they think that wasting said advertising money on a more broad base would just be for naught? And why not double advertise with the recently released Mass Attack to double charge up any fan's Kirby excitement?

Honestly I don't think Nintendo of America has a clue of what it's consumers want, yet this is a topic for another time. I think this is another good title that I won't be suprised if it doesn't sell well, but really hope it does.

AAAAAuuuuugghhhhhh Nintendo, why do you hate us?


DANGER ZONE! Great show.

Didn't even think about that with Chinatown Wars. Something to think about for sure.

And yeah, the lack of Kirby marketing pissed me off. I LOVE Kirby. I was actually wondering to myself "when does that Kirby game they announced for the Wii come out", and a day later I read Jim Sterling's review of it and freaked the hell out it was so close to release.

NINTENDO! WHY U NO TELL ME KIRBY IS COMING OUT!!

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

They have been kinda meh since San Andreas, but all that says to me is they are due for another spectacular game, so as long as they stick to that philosophy I'll buy their games

What games have you played? Red Dead Redemption has some of the best writing is recent history, and GTA IV, once you got over the initial disappointment of how small it was, was a fantastic character drama. LA Noire was pretty underwhelming, with its disappointingly shallow gameplay and lackluster story, but the acting was decent, which is more than i expected from it. Bully is still one of my favorite games ever made.

 

[Smokescreen]

snip for space

Let me guess, played the Wii PORT?[/quote]

That'd be my guess, because the PS2 version was excellent. One of the few games I've kept to show other people/future generations.

Not true. Make a good game that has broad appeal and the money will follow. Persona 4 and Shadow of the Colossus are examples of good games that didn't have broad appeal and they made meager profits.

I don't know; those games are constantly referenced as being quality and influential. Shadow has been redone for HD this year and I can't find Persona 4 easily (and I'd like to play it.)

I suppose it depends on what you mean by 'meager'. Those games were profitable for the companies who made them to continue making games; isn't that enough?

When Black Ops makes over a billion dollars, no it isn't enough. Especially since both games met great critical reception. Great games deserve more sales than just enough to get by.

I agree-but isn't that true of nearly every medium? Best movie you saw this year: Transformers 3 or...uh anything else, really. Best book: Twilight Breaking Dawn or...again, damn near anything else.

I don't mean this to break down into a popularity thing but it has been shown that many artists can make a living doing what they love, so long as they keep life modest. Rockstar (for all their pluses and minuses) is a bit of a breakout when it comes to overriding philosophy + popularity-and we need that.

I don't see anything wrong with non-AAA games doing well enough to a) keep a high reputation and b) make a modest amount of money so that those studios can continue to make great games and more importantly, attract new fans due to a great reputation that they repeatedly live up to. What am I missing?

 

[Svenparty]

Although Saints Row kind of beat GTA:IV in pure fun factor, I think Rockstar have always been just as upstanding as a Pharaoh...

 

[ResonanceGames]

I agree, focus on quality and creativity...and when that doesn't work *LA Noire* announce yet another GTA to pay the bills.

 

[Furioso]

They have been kinda meh since San Andreas, but all that says to me is they are due for another spectacular game, so as long as they stick to that philosophy I'll buy their games

What games have you played? Red Dead Redemption has some of the best writing is recent history, and GTA IV, once you got over the initial disappointment of how small it was, was a fantastic character drama. LA Noire was pretty underwhelming, with its disappointingly shallow gameplay and lackluster story, but the acting was decent, which is more than i expected from it. Bully is still one of my favorite games ever made.

Rockstar games since San Andreas:

-Grand Theft Auto IV - I HATED this game for the reasons everyone else hated about it
-Grand Theft Auto IV: The Lost and Damned - I liked this one
-Grand Theft Auto: The Ballad of Gay Tony - Liked this one too (Got them due to friends constantly telling me they were good)
-Red Dead Redemption - I love this game to death
-Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare - I love this one even more to death, pun intended
-The Warriors - Never played, no opinion
-Bully - I despise this game
-Manhunts - Hated this one too
-Midnight Club Series - Did not like this game, but I don't like racing games so it doesn't really count

Do not misunderstand me, when I say meh, I don't mean every game was average, I mean I thought some were bad and others were good.