Jump to content
Posted 18 February 2012 - 10:34 PM
Posted 18 February 2012 - 11:42 PM
Posted 19 February 2012 - 11:36 AM
Posted 19 February 2012 - 12:33 PM
Posted 19 February 2012 - 12:36 PM
I understand that people dont like to take risks to make games and therefor make sequels, i dont really mind sequels.
I should have emphasized more on the quality of those sequels. The last couple of years there's been decreas in developing times with a substantial decrease in game quality and content. That concerns me alot. There's been several games that are beyond having an acceptable ammount of bugs and should in reality still be in development. Just for the sake of an example i will mention Call of Duty BlackOps. That game had some really intense performance issues on the PC that made the game unplayable for several months. These issues ranged from lowend to highend computers. As well as having network problems on the PS3.
My point was actually to debate on how much quality and content a gamestudio can sacrefice to make the moste money? And is it really ok to do that?
Posted 19 February 2012 - 12:52 PM
Though games I've worked on might not be games I'd play myself, if I view them through the lens of personal development I find it's much easier not to regret them. I think that's an important mindset to stay in; it makes it much easier to keep moving forward.
That's a debate all of us have to come to grips with inside ourselves often, as long as we work in this industry. We all (once having worked in it long enough) have both products to be proud of, and products to regret.
Posted 19 February 2012 - 01:40 PM
i will mention Call of Duty BlackOps. That game had some really intense performance issues on the PC that made the game unplayable for several months. These issues ranged from lowend to highend computers. As well as having network problems on the PS3.
Posted 19 February 2012 - 02:02 PM
I've dont really know how to start this post i'm about to write but here it goes.
The past couple of years (3 years) i've been studying to become a computer engineer where i'm going to continue into game development after i'm finished. During these 3 years i've also been an avid gamer when i don't study school material and programming during free time. For these 3 years i've also had time to compare while also analyse games more closely for the sake of finding what's good in games and what's bad, both in my own preference of game types/styles and friends types/styles. I've been playing games for well over 18 years and have enjoyed moste of the games i've bought.
Lately i've found i've been regreting alot of my AAA games purchase with verry strong feelings. I'm not really qualified to pinpoint the exact reason for why, but if i've had to pick something i would say that moste AAA games from a specific set of companys are more interested in the overall shorte term profits instead of the game it self. I'm fully aware that gamedevelopers need funding for their game but is there a limit to how far a company can compromise for the sake of making a overwhelming profit? I've noticed a steady decrease of gamequality, both in stability/bugfree gameplay and content, for 2 major players in the game industri the last 5 years. (I'm not going to mention them) This has started to lead me to a verry pesimistic view of some of the more known developers. It's basicly made me rethink if i want to work for a gamestudio that has no integrity and just spits out sequel after sequel with the sole intention of making more money for lesser quality game.
Where should the line actually be drawn?
Posted 19 February 2012 - 03:28 PM
The problem is for all the QA in the world you don't always see the problems people get out in the wild.
Posted 19 February 2012 - 04:44 PM
Sadly, if you want innovation then you need to stick with the indies. Unfortunately for the most part with that route unless you have an existing job or pull a Minecraft you won't be able to making a living doing that.
Posted 19 February 2012 - 06:31 PM