publishers or developers...who's to blame??

[kx11]

many games are out there and thanx to the commercial sites like ign.com-gamespot.com they overhype every single next-gen game comes out , sadly 2 out of 10 games comes out R good not great however those nerds does'nt effect your desicions to buy a game ((unless you got ps3 and got stuck with lair and HS)) they normaly hit on the publishers and take a line or two on the developers < who's the one to blame for a game to suck really bad ??

i think it lays more on the publishers who opened a blank check for the little developing company and change thier project *bioshock* to whatever they imagine and drove it out of it's course


one reason y the publishers do what they do with the little guys

game developers are not the only ones who benefit from making good games. Publishers live and die based on the success of the games they fund. If we had our way, every single game we funded would be a good game, in fact, if we could do it, every game we funded would be a great game, for the very simple reason that we make more money the better the game does in the marketplace. Gamers are a discerning lot, and the great games do better than the good games, and the good games do better than the bad games, with some notable exceptions. The only way for us to stay in business is to put the best games we can out to the market with the best support we can muster and convince gamers to buy them. Developers can stay in business just on the development costs; if the game they make doesn't recoup its costs, they still got paid to develop it. Publishers, if the game tanks, they don't get the money they spent back. Bad games hurt publishers more than they hurt developers, at least economically.

many games from many great developers sucked because of the producers/publishers who put thier ideas and plant it on the game wich lead the game to the bottom

bioshock will get the GOTY for graphics...etc , storywise the game is'nt much wich's to me more important than everything else so i have to blame 2K who released nothing but low minded games with nudity/blood/gore ... that's cheap to buy and bring a lot of money in US but not that much anywhere else


SE worked with tri-ace and gave us great games wich did'nt break the charts but delivered the goods for thier fans

let me put it this way

2K: quantity over value

SE: the opposite



so to me the one to blame for the final version of the game is the publisher


that's my opinion fell free to disagree without flaming please ((members not companies just to keep this from getting closed))

[reiella]

Square-Enix puts out alot of games for the sake of milking the market.

Consider : Dirge of Cerebrus, Bouncer, Drakengard.

Good stories [well, for Dirge and Drakengard anyway :P], but ultimately really not that great gameplay [for their genre].

You also got alot of bulk titles that folks just don't think much about, stuff like Robot Alchemist Drive,

Some franchise titles that were middle of the road [Full metal alchemist series, imo, FF: Crystal Chronicles.]

[GasCat]

The publishers are the ones to blame. They have a time when the game must get out. These are called "drop dead dates." Things that are problems are yanked out of the program. This ruins the game and you play it thinking, "wheres the rest". I don't mind games that are delayed at all.

I want to see the game as it was envisioned.

[Blu-dock Saint]

Originally Posted by GasCat

The publishers are the ones to blame. They have a time when the game must get out. These are called "drop dead dates." Things that are problems are yanked out of the program. This ruins the game and you play it thinking, "wheres the rest". I don't mind games that are delayed at all.

I want to see the game as it was envisioned.

Totally agree with you, and this has been happening all too often lately. EA comes to mind......

[reiella]

Originally Posted by GasCat

The publishers are the ones to blame. They have a time when the game must get out. These are called "drop dead dates." Things that are problems are yanked out of the program. This ruins the game and you play it thinking, "wheres the rest". I don't mind games that are delayed at all.

I want to see the game as it was envisioned.

Well, with those, you also get to a situation where the developers are spending too long on a given project.

Consider : Duke Nukem Forever.

Further, look at Wizardry 8, similar example as what you said, but in this case, the publisher didn't have a "Drop Dead Date" so much as a "This is how much money you have to work with the project" number, which got exceeded.

Admittantly, I do feel alot of developers get blamed by the publisher in producing a game, but at the same time, you can't just keep writing blank checks to someone to get a game done.