• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Are publishers out of touch with consumers?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
192
106
In recent years they've gotten pretty good with the graphics, now they just need to finish figuring out the rest of the puzzle. Yeah its an art, but its also a science and business and these things don't happen overnight.
Developers have known what works for over a decade - just look at Doom, Diablo, Diablo II, Warcraft II, Half-Life, Duke Nukem,,,,,,. All of those games were made over a decade ago, and are still considered some of the best games ever made.

Its a matter of developers taking the time, and having the imagination to make a quality product. Just because someone that can write C++ code and played halo while in college does not make them good at making video games.


I bet if you had focus group of gamers and asked them if they wanted to play a game with a load of Russian guys living in a subway they would say no.
I am willing to bet that Metro2033 appeals to a certain group of gamers, people that want to play games set in some kind of worldwide disaster.

Its kinda like cars appeal to one type of consumer, and trucks appeal to a different type of consumer. Take a focus group from down town New york and ask them how many need a 1 ton truck for pulling a horse trailer, how many are going to say yes.

I would much rather play a game like metro2033, borderlands or left 4 dead, then play a call of duty style game.
 
Last edited:

lamedude

Golden Member
Jan 14, 2011
1,206
10
81
I equate the amount of A's to budget size and DNF probably cost more than GTA4's 100 million.
 

imaheadcase

Diamond Member
May 9, 2005
3,850
7
76
Misleading title, should be "Are developers out of touch with gamers". :p

Most of the problem with games now is to much political bs between devs and publishers/marketing. You can thank the last 2 for DLC, rushed games out. Those two are what needs fixing.

Is it any wonders Indie games are the best sellers this year?
 

xboxist

Diamond Member
Jun 25, 2002
3,026
0
71
History has shown that developers generally (not always) get punished with low sales for taking huge risks.

Psychonauts, Beyond Good & Evil, Oddworld, Okami, etc.

Why make original, fresh, good games when the gaming masses have shown time after time that all they care about are Maddens, Call of Duty-s and [random FPS title #73].
 

Jschmuck2

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2005
5,623
2
81
demo of serious sam didn't do anything for me
L4D series is shit, Borderlands is shit
Haven't played Metro 2033 yet

but none of those are modern warfare types of games. There really is no god alternative to CoD and BF games. The other modern warfare type games are pretty bad.
This post sums up every post you've ever made in a whiny, whiny nutshell.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
192
106
L4D series is shit,
The left 4 dead series requires actual teamwork - something that a lot of people do not want to do. If your idea of a first person shooter is acting like rambo, your not going to last long in l4d/l4d2.

How much play time do you have in either l4d or l4d2? I have about 700 hours in l4d, and around 1,200 hours in l4d2.

http://steamcommunity.com/id/old-school-player

On top of that, l4d/l4d2 requires skill, its not a spray and pray type of game. Your not going to run around with your guns blazing and rush through a level all by yourself.
 
Last edited:

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
78
86
The left 4 dead series requires actual teamwork - something that a lot of people do not want to do. If your idea of a first person shooter is acting like rambo, your not going to last long in l4d/l4d2.

How much play time do you have in either l4d or l4d2? I have about 700 hours in l4d, and around 1,200 hours in l4d2.

On top of that, l4d/l4d2 requires skill, its not a spray and pray type of game. Your not going to run around with your guns blazing and rush through a level all by yourself.
Depends what you're talking about. L4D MP? Yeah, I can John Rambo that with very little resistance. Single player isn't much harder if you're smart about it. Tanks are the only real problem because they have so much health you need to molotav them and run for a bit.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
192
106
Depends what you're talking about. L4D MP? Yeah, I can John Rambo that with very little resistance. .
I'll call you on that. A link to my steam profile is posted above. Anytime you want to get in a game, let me know.

I would like to see how good your rambo skills hold up in a game of versus.
 

M0oG0oGaiPan

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2000
7,858
0
0
digitalgamedeals.com
I thought AAA title just meant it was a big budget game or a big franchise.

I think the problem with some gamers is they just stick to one franchise and become elitist. They'll switch to another game and it'll be too different so they'll cry about it. I mean even Counterstrike 1.6 vs CS:S has people b*tching about how one game is better than the other.

As for l4d. Even in versus you can actually rush through the maps (need a good squad). The AI director can't keep up. If you look in the forums you'll see people whining about this strategy and asking for a nerf. Hitboxes in l4d are very generous so you can spray and pray. Doesn't mean you'll survive but it's definitely spray and pray. You can hit a zombies leg and they'll drop. Bad Company 2 is the opposite of spray and pray.
 

Sulaco

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2003
3,821
6
81
I'll call you on that. A link to my steam profile is posted above. Anytime you want to get in a game, let me know.

I would like to see how good your rambo skills hold up in a game of versus.
He has probably played through twice on Normal and now thinks he's a total bad ass...

:cool:
 

pontifex

Lifer
Dec 5, 2000
43,806
44
91
This post sums up every post you've ever made in a whiny, whiny nutshell.
thats funny because it doesn't. if you'd ever bothered to read any of my posts instead of just drinking the anti-pontifex koolaid, you'd see that.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
192
106
He has probably played through twice on Normal and now thinks he's a total bad ass...

:cool:
I am still waiting for smackababy to post a link to his steam profile. Its going to be interesting to see how he does in a game of versus.

In my almost 2,000 hours of combined l4d and l4d2, I have only seen a couple of people that could go rambo through even part of a map, much less all the way through.
 

pontifex

Lifer
Dec 5, 2000
43,806
44
91
The left 4 dead series requires actual teamwork - something that a lot of people do not want to do. If your idea of a first person shooter is acting like rambo, your not going to last long in l4d/l4d2.

How much play time do you have in either l4d or l4d2? I have about 700 hours in l4d, and around 1,200 hours in l4d2.

http://steamcommunity.com/id/old-school-player

On top of that, l4d/l4d2 requires skill, its not a spray and pray type of game. Your not going to run around with your guns blazing and rush through a level all by yourself.
no idea on hours. my friend and I finished L4D and started L4D2 but had no interest in it after playing L4D.

It's just a bunch of zombies coming after you time and time again. it gets extremely tedious and repetitive and boring.
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
469
126
no idea on hours. my friend and I finished L4D and started L4D2 but had no interest in it after playing L4D.

It's just a bunch of zombies coming after you time and time again. it gets extremely tedious and repetitive and boring.
I got bored of L4D1/2 as well. Fun at first but not enough content to keep it fresh.
 
Dec 28, 2001
11,391
3
0
Well, going to the OP's quote, how else would he answer?

"Well . . . no. It's really an indie game"
"No, it's just some game that we're working on"
"Well, the game is a generation or two behind in terms of technology"

He can't really say that about any game that they're working on, let alone the fact that the game's been in development for over a decade, building up more anticipation about the game - people's general curiosity of "will it release this time?" Turns into "how good will it be?" as soon as a solid release date is announced, effectively dooming the game to never be as good as the hype - but then again, I suspect everyone knew that going in. But going back to the original point, what else could Randy Pitchford say?
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
192
106
effectively dooming the game to never be as good as the hype ?
I do not think DNF was overhyped, because nobody thought it was ever going to be released.

It appears to me that the major part of the development on DNF was was done by console fanboys. There is a difference in playing games on the playstation, and having enough creativeness to produce a game. Just because someone can play a game, does not mean they can make a game.

To me, it looks like whoever did the major development on DNF could not tell the difference between a developer and a fan.

DNF is not a victim of overhype, its a victim of failed development.
 

postaled

Senior member
Feb 20, 2007
254
0
0
I got bored of L4D1/2 as well. Fun at first but not enough content to keep it fresh.
If it wasn't for the people I play it with I could definitely see Left 4 Dead 2 being boring.


But I play 4-5 hours a week and its just incredibly fun almost every time.
 

dpodblood

Diamond Member
May 20, 2010
4,020
1
81
If it wasn't for the people I play it with I could definitely see Left 4 Dead 2 being boring.


But I play 4-5 hours a week and its just incredibly fun almost every time.
Especially since there is an almost infinite amount of community created maps, and missions for the PC version.
 

wuliheron

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2011
3,536
0
0
Developers have known what works for over a decade - just look at Doom, Diablo, Diablo II, Warcraft II, Half-Life, Duke Nukem,,,,,,. All of those games were made over a decade ago, and are still considered some of the best games ever made.

Its a matter of developers taking the time, and having the imagination to make a quality product. Just because someone that can write C++ code and played halo while in college does not make them good at making video games.
That's like saying the original Planet of the Apes and Star Wars were big hits. So What? The technology has moved forward and they now have new territory to figure out. The original Doom had 2D sprites for monsters and you couldn't even look up much less squat, jump, or anything else. It was somewhere between a 2D scroller and full 3D game with zero plot, zero character development, etc.

Games like Half Life 2 showed just how much more you could do with the same kind of corridor shooter brought to a fully 3D engine with a little physics thrown in for good measure. Real characters, real plots, and real interactive dynamics with the environment instead of merely run-n-gun. It was like going from silent films to talkies and the next generation of consoles and computers should finally bring us color.

I am willing to bet that Metro2033 appeals to a certain group of gamers, people that want to play games set in some kind of worldwide disaster.

Its kinda like cars appeal to one type of consumer, and trucks appeal to a different type of consumer. Take a focus group from down town New york and ask them how many need a 1 ton truck for pulling a horse trailer, how many are going to say yes.

I would much rather play a game like metro2033, borderlands or left 4 dead, then play a call of duty style game.
Its the limitations of the technology again. Think of special effects movies before Star Wars and you'll understand. Rubber suit monsters, claymation, puppets, bad makeup, and cheap models on wires. For the most part the only movies that used special effects were all horror and science fiction, but the public kept going to see them and kept demanding better special effects. When the special effects became good enough, they started to use them more often in other kinds of films.

These days its the comic book heroes that rule the world of Hollywood special effects. Not because people didn't want to see these kinds of movies before, but because the special effects sucked.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
192
106
That's like saying the original Planet of the Apes and Star Wars were big hits. So What? The technology has moved forward and they now have new territory to figure out. The original Doom had 2D sprites for monsters <snip> These days its the comic book heroes that rule the world of Hollywood special effects. Not because people didn't want to see these kinds of movies before, but because the special effects sucked.
Just about everything that you mentioned is dealing with graphics, not actual gameplay.

Developers have known for over a decade what kind of games players want. There have been some changes, such as moving away from a "find the key" system, to more of an open world / semi-open world system.

Story plots like Doom, half-life, half-life and left 4 dead keep people interested.

What made doom great, part of it was starting out in a military base and ending up in hell.

What makes l4d and l4d2 great, the world has gone to hell and your team has to survive.

Stories like that keep people interested, and its been that way for the past 15 years.
 
Dec 28, 2001
11,391
3
0
I do not think DNF was overhyped, because nobody thought it was ever going to be released.

It appears to me that the major part of the development on DNF was was done by console fanboys. There is a difference in playing games on the playstation, and having enough creativeness to produce a game. Just because someone can play a game, does not mean they can make a game.

To me, it looks like whoever did the major development on DNF could not tell the difference between a developer and a fan.

DNF is not a victim of overhype, its a victim of failed development.
building up more anticipation about the game - people's general curiosity of "will it release this time?" Turns into "how good will it be?" as soon as a solid release date is announced
I'd say otherwise; DNF has been the butt-end of (stale) jokes for so long that it's been fairly well-known throughout gamers. If Silent Storm 2 came out today, would we be making such a fuss about whether it lives up to the standard or not? I would certainly, but not to 99.99&#37; of the gaming crowd. Hundreds of crappy games are released each year; if this game wasn't hyped, why all the fuss?

I'm not defending the game - if it's crap, then it's crap, no other way to put it - but it was doomed to failure both in terms of development cycle hell as well as overhype; one not necessarily put out by the developers, but built up by the community and existing nevertheless.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY