Kylotan: It's not clearcut - it's a little of both. Of course it's a business, as much as composing music is a business, but somehow I don't think that a large amount of the people in the industry go into it for the money - maybe I'm wrong. But, generally speaking , if a game company focuses on making the game fun for themselves to play, then it should be a good ame - at least to some people out there. The problem is that the game developers could be whacked out and think that stapeling pieces of paper in full 3D is the most entertaining thing since sliced bread. So the trade aspect comes into play to keep the aspiriations of the developers within reasonable boundries. Sometimes, though, it's the developers that just throw out those checks and balances that make the best games. If it was all about making the money we'd have a lot more Barbie dress up and deer hunting games.
[edited by - SantaClaws on February 23, 2004 5:53:48 PM]
Are games too long?
I defitnitly like the idea about cheaper games and i see your point about breaking up teams into smaller teams. But as you know there are allot of games thats suck and they were made with 50+ people, if a sucky game was made by even fewer people it would suck even more.
I was interested in game development for the artistic end of it. The technical challenge was fun, too. But if the industry is just run by the need to pay the bills, then that comes out in the quality of the game. Sure, they will sell their games, and pay their bills... but it wouldn't be an industry that I would want to be a part of, if that's ALL it is.
Artistic games get more of my attention than the ones that cater to the buying masses. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way, even if the mass audience keeps game companies afloat more than I do.
If genuinely artistic games don't sell well, then I guess that's that.
On that note, I don't consider a game like GTA3 to simply be craft. Those game designers had some ideas. Not the kind of ideas I like, but they were definitely ideas.
[edited by - Waverider on February 23, 2004 6:06:52 PM]
Artistic games get more of my attention than the ones that cater to the buying masses. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way, even if the mass audience keeps game companies afloat more than I do.
If genuinely artistic games don't sell well, then I guess that's that.
On that note, I don't consider a game like GTA3 to simply be craft. Those game designers had some ideas. Not the kind of ideas I like, but they were definitely ideas.
[edited by - Waverider on February 23, 2004 6:06:52 PM]
When I bought Serious Sam it was only $20, I thought it was a bargain. It was a great game with graphics ahead of its time. I still enjoy playing it, and its great at lans.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
