• 63 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by tourgen (4542 posts) -

copyright reform - get the duration down to something reasonable that promotes the original intent of copyright: to promote and reward original creators and stimulate further artistic development. The current trend of robbing the public domain of our shared culture is going to end with or without the industry's consent.

#52 Posted by Lord_Xp (606 posts) -

@UlquioKani: When I read this I immediately thought of Heavy Rain's developer, Quantic Dream. When I read a recent interview with one of the developers he had said that they were making major changes half way through the development process. I can't remember exactly what the changes were but it's a but of a risk to do this late. The developer was saying that it's probably a bad idea what they decided to do but they feel like being different and trying something completely different. Now it might just be a publicity ploy but I kind of got more excited for this game now and a bit more respect for that developer.

#53 Posted by hermes (1610 posts) -

@mcmax3000 said:

@hermes: There is no "enough money" for a company, especially a public company, where they are legally required to maximize profit as best they can for their shareholders.

That is the point.

The idea that "once [publishers] have money they'll actually try something new" is quite naive.

#54 Posted by Bell_End (1203 posts) -

developer and publisher just need to stop being greedy. i mean i know they need to earn money but they just earn to much and its just greed. i mean anything more than £9 an hour is just silly. i earn £5 an hour and can live on that just fine so i don't see why they need to earn so much.

#55 Posted by Salarn (469 posts) -

@zpa: I think that the biggest change needed is for gamers to not assume every game made needs to meet there expectations and realize that literally hundreds of games come out each year. If someone can't find enough enjoyable games out of the ocean of released games, the problem might not be the industry.

#56 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

I wasn't even aware that games were bad at the moment. 
There's a lot they can do to change the industry but since it's a business and they have to get paid, there's not a lot of things they want to do.  
 
It's worked out fine for many years now so I don't see a problem with it. 

#57 Posted by HellknightLeon (467 posts) -

Oh Oh!!! I know this answer!!! I know I know!!!

Answer is...(drum roll)...

PEOPLE.

You're welcome.

#58 Posted by mcmax3000 (290 posts) -

@hermes said:

@mcmax3000 said:

@hermes: There is no "enough money" for a company, especially a public company, where they are legally required to maximize profit as best they can for their shareholders.

That is the point.

The idea that "once [publishers] have money they'll actually try something new" is quite naive.

It's not completely naive. A publisher is going to be more likely to take a risk on something new if they're doing well, and can afford it if that risk bombs. That said, they're still not likely to do it.

@Bell_End said:

developer and publisher just need to stop being greedy. i mean i know they need to earn money but they just earn to much and its just greed. i mean anything more than £9 an hour is just silly. i earn £5 an hour and can live on that just fine so i don't see why they need to earn so much.

I cannot stand this attitude, that a company has "enough", or "too much" money. The job of a company is to make as much money as they can. In fact, if it's a public company, like most game publishers are, they are legally required to maximize profits for their shareholders. They can't just say "oh, we have too much money already". They can be sued by their shareholders for that kind of attitude.

If you believe a company has "too much money", then don't buy that company's products. Simple. Then they'll have less money.

#59 Posted by oldenglishC (1008 posts) -

If they really wanted to improve the industry, they could show an SMT x Fire Emblem cross over and a Xenogears sequel on the same day.

Oh wait, this industry is just fine.

#60 Posted by oraknabo (1514 posts) -

More studios like Looking Glass, Black Isle & early LucasArts where games are made on personal vision instead of trying to make the biggest blockbuster that pleases the widest audience. I wouldn't call most AAA games shovelware, but I am really sick of this "entry every year" franchise bs.

#61 Posted by Jnorman (67 posts) -

I don't know if anything "needs to change". I feel like the free market will probably decide what stays and what goes. Then you will have independed developers and gamers who are focused on what they want to play seeking and finding each other. I feel like every industry goes through this phase when they are new. Cars were probably all the rage when they were new, and then they went through a period where they were all the same, then someone took a bold step in one direction, or another, and so on and so forth. Not that cars are video games, but that the progression of the industry will go forth regardless. , I mean if games get really really bad, and people stop buying them, then it will change.

#62 Posted by Wacomole (836 posts) -

It's also telling that, whenever there is a "What game do you want to see?" question, the vast majority of the answers start with "a sequel to..." or "another..."

#63 Posted by Dacnomaniac (444 posts) -

In most cases developers need to get out of the mentality of, "oh, that worked for them, let's do the same thing!". No. Let's not do the same fucking thing. Let's actually look at why that game was so successful in the first place, build from that foundation, or even try to innovate. I know it's easier said than done, but I think quite a lot of these developers forget what 'imagination' is.