Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [Eurogamer] Hitman:Absolution to be "more accessible."
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Eurogamer] Hitman:Absolution to be "more accessible." - Page 8

post #71 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artev View Post
small indie companies make games on shoe string budgets with non-pros or as side projects for professional game developers. they aren't out millions of dollars in investment if their games tank, they are out their own personal time and whatever they put in for marketing. Most independent companies don't really even market their stuff, going off word of mouth or the press for their publicity... unless I missed all the commercials for Braid and Minecraft on TV Small companies also have more flexibility because there aren't share holders and management to make them stick to the status quo, so the developers have more leeway in going off the beaten path if they choose. Someone making a game on their own or with their buddies as a hobby aren't going to be as concerned with turning profit compared to bringing their ideas and "art" to life.

but yeah, im ignorant so what do i know?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artev View Post
also, "This is Vegas" killed Midway after costing 40-50m. i could go on...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artev View Post
i was asked for examples of game companies that failed because of poorly received games, so i demonstrated them
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artev View Post
It is a lot easier to take risks and not compromise for the sake of sales when you are only held accountable to yourself and your team, and not executives and share holders whose main focus is profit. How is this a misguided or ignorant statement. Big companies don't take a lot of risks because they care about money above all else, independent start ups are still idealistic and don't have to tow any lines other than their own. Guess what though? Small companies fail CONSTANTLY. We only hear about the successes but small developers go under or are bought out or disbanded all the time, BECAUSE they take risks. When they are successful, they end up becoming big and bloated and profit driven and less likely to take risks because they have something to lose and they are not just representing themselves but investors and board members whose JOB it is to make sure the company remains profitable.

think about it. For a big company game to get made it has to be written out, approved by a committee, approved by investors, the concept has to be mocked up and run past focus groups, and then, if everything is kosher and all the execs sign off, the game gets put into production.

a small company says "lets make a game!" and they do it.

which of those two has the best ability to take risks and innovate?

How exactly am i misguided? I'd really really really like to know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artev View Post
also, i don't really understand how "Witcher 2" is a response at all. Is there context there? I haven't played the game... is it an example of innovation? or an example of basically ripping off concepts from games like Oblivion and Two worlds? I really have no idea what that was in reference to
You see what I did? I multi-quoted and am currently making one post. Please. Do this from now on. There is also an 'Edit' button amongst the 'Quote', and 'Multi-Quote' buttons.

I can't tell what's more annoying, though; you being proven wrong multiple times and not getting the point, or you making multiple posts.
 
OverCoaster
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 7700K [4.5GHz] ASUS Z270i STRIX Titan X Pascal + Hybrid Corsair Vengeance LPX 3K [16GB] 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 960 Evo [500GB] Mushkin Enhanced Reactor [1TB] Corsair H75 + F120MP Windows 10 Professional [x64] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Acer Predator X34 Dell P2012Ht Razer Blackwidow X TE Corsair SF600 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
NCASE M1 [v5] G403 Wireless QcK+ [Vault 111 Ed.] Schiit Bifrost Uber + Schiit Asgard 2 + TH-X00 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4670K ASRock Z97E-ITX/ac ASUS GTX 1070 FE Kingston HyperX Fury DDR3 1866 [White Ed.] 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 [250GB] Kingston HyperX Savage [480GB] Phanteks PH-TC14PE  Win 10 Pro [x64] 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell S2716DGR [144hz] KC60 [Miami Ed.] EVGA 550 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ITX [White] 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G403 SS QcK Heavy AudioQuest Dragonfly Black + Sennhesier HD650 
  hide details  
Reply
 
OverCoaster
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 7700K [4.5GHz] ASUS Z270i STRIX Titan X Pascal + Hybrid Corsair Vengeance LPX 3K [16GB] 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 960 Evo [500GB] Mushkin Enhanced Reactor [1TB] Corsair H75 + F120MP Windows 10 Professional [x64] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Acer Predator X34 Dell P2012Ht Razer Blackwidow X TE Corsair SF600 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
NCASE M1 [v5] G403 Wireless QcK+ [Vault 111 Ed.] Schiit Bifrost Uber + Schiit Asgard 2 + TH-X00 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4670K ASRock Z97E-ITX/ac ASUS GTX 1070 FE Kingston HyperX Fury DDR3 1866 [White Ed.] 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 [250GB] Kingston HyperX Savage [480GB] Phanteks PH-TC14PE  Win 10 Pro [x64] 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell S2716DGR [144hz] KC60 [Miami Ed.] EVGA 550 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ITX [White] 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G403 SS QcK Heavy AudioQuest Dragonfly Black + Sennhesier HD650 
  hide details  
Reply
post #72 of 82
when exactly have i been proven wrong? what have i said that was incorrect? The only post that said I was wrong said "figure it out yourself"... the fact of the matter is no one has even attempted to prove me wrong.

Also, congrats on your ability to multiquote. I am not even sure how that is relevant except that I did 3 posts in a row earlier because I was at work and had 3 separate thoughts. How that is so annoying to you, is frankly, beyond me.

so yeah, basically you've made no point, you've said that ive been proven wrong multiple times when no one has even attempted to "prove" me wrong about anything.

please, tell me what it is that angered you by what i said, and how exactly I am wrong at all.
post #73 of 82
oh no, a multiple post!!! someone call the internet police.

you know what I personally find annoying? people lecturing me about how i am wrong without engaging a single point I made to even demonstrate how I am incorrect. I am a reasonable person. If we disagree, fine, but what point do you disagree with, exactly? All i am saying is, smaller companies have more flexibility because they are more independent, whereas bigger companies have multiple levels of bureaucracy, reputations to uphold, stockholders to answer to, so they have less flexibility and less ability to take risks.

Do you disagree with that point? And if so, on what basis?
Edited by Artev - 5/31/11 at 11:14am
post #74 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artev View Post
It is a lot easier to take risks and not compromise for the sake of sales when you are only held accountable to yourself and your team, and not executives and share holders whose main focus is profit. How is this a misguided or ignorant statement. Big companies don't take a lot of risks because they care about money above all else, independent start ups are still idealistic and don't have to tow any lines other than their own. Guess what though? Small companies fail CONSTANTLY. We only hear about the successes but small developers go under or are bought out or disbanded all the time, BECAUSE they take risks. When they are successful, they end up becoming big and bloated and profit driven and less likely to take risks because they have something to lose and they are not just representing themselves but investors and board members whose JOB it is to make sure the company remains profitable.

think about it. For a big company game to get made it has to be written out, approved by a committee, approved by investors, the concept has to be mocked up and run past focus groups, and then, if everything is kosher and all the execs sign off, the game gets put into production.

a small company says "lets make a game!" and they do it.

which of those two has the best ability to take risks and innovate?

How exactly am i misguided? I'd really really really like to know.
this is how you are misguided.

Small companies dont just say lets make a game. First of all they need investors, people who can keep the company alive and the employees and their families feed for as long as it takes to develop the game, then they have to find a publisher, who is willing to take the risk to publish a unknown dev and game against the likes of EA, Activision, Ubisoft and not get crushed. That is quite a bit to have to do, and probably harder than what you posted. They have to convince as many, if not more people that the game is worth investing in than people at large publishing studios i mentioned do.(Seriously, you tell me how you are going to tell people investing millions of dollars in your game how you are going to compete with Call of Duty). And they have less chance to do so, because they are going up against a huge opposition. This leads us to The witcher 2.

The reason that The witcher 2 is relavent is because of several reasons. Cd project is a small polish publishing studio that translate games into polish when requested, and also runs gog.com it fixes old games to run on current system, and sells them for cheap. CD projekt red studio is a small studio started up by cd projekt to create PC games. The studio has 2 games under its belt, The witcher 1 and 2. They had everything riding on each of these games. They are so small they had to find an larger publisher (Atari) so that they could get into stores around the world. The witcher is such a big deal, that the Polish Prime Minister actually gave a copy of the game to President of the USA. This game is quite possibly the biggest thing to ever come out of their country.

CDPR created was is likely the game of the year, the links you posted, none of those games were game of the year material. They were mediocre games that were destined to fail. It didnt matter who made the game, they were gonna be failures, or merely break even, which is no considered a failure. Large publishing studios wont release a game unless is guaranteed to sell multiple millions, and make tons of cash, they wont settle with lots of cash, they have to have tons.

Your logic is so flawed im pretty sure computers crash just because you walk by.
Edited by Vhati - 5/31/11 at 11:57am
Current build
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
q9950 stock asus p5n-d 5870 4 gb ocz 
OS
windows 7 
  hide details  
Reply
Current build
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
q9950 stock asus p5n-d 5870 4 gb ocz 
OS
windows 7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #75 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecchi-BANZAII!!! View Post

Duke Noob'em Forever has it
WHY are games meant for idiots?

Developers should get a taste of I Wanna Be The Guy...
LOL

text in bold, funny as hell
Small Black Box
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 955BE K9A2VM-FD ASUS GTX560 OCZ DDR2 PC2-8000 2 x 2 GB Platinum Edition 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 7200rpm WD Caviar Green  CM N520 Cpu Cooler Microsoft Sidewinder X6 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
PC P&C Silencer 610W CM Elite 342 Logitech G9x ARTISAN HIEN-Value 
  hide details  
Reply
Small Black Box
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 955BE K9A2VM-FD ASUS GTX560 OCZ DDR2 PC2-8000 2 x 2 GB Platinum Edition 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 7200rpm WD Caviar Green  CM N520 Cpu Cooler Microsoft Sidewinder X6 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
PC P&C Silencer 610W CM Elite 342 Logitech G9x ARTISAN HIEN-Value 
  hide details  
Reply
post #76 of 82
Quote:
Small companies dont just say lets make a game. First of all they need investors, people who can keep the company alive and the employees and their families feed for as long as it takes to develop the game, then they have to find a publisher, who is willing to take the risk to publish a unknown dev and game against the likes of EA, Activision, Ubisoft and not get crushed. That is quite a bit to have to do, and probably harder than what you posted.
Most people don't quit their jobs and dedicate themselves to game development professionally until they've proven themselves and earn enough capital or get far enough along in their game's development that they pick up investors/publishers to provide them capital. Starting to develop a game really is as simple as getting a group of talented people together and saying "let's start a game". That is how indie games start.

Quote:
The reason that The witcher 2 is relavent is because of several reasons. Cd project is a small polish publishing studio that translate games into polish when requested, and also runs gog.com it fixes old games to run on current system, and sells them for cheap. CD projekt red studio is a small studio started up by cd projekt to create PC games. The studio has 2 games under its belt, The witcher 1 and 2. They had everything riding on each of these games. They are so small they had to find an larger publisher (Atari) so that they could get into stores around the world. The witcher is such a big deal, that the Polish Prime Minister actually gave a copy of the game to President of the USA. This game is quite possibly the biggest thing to ever come out of their country.
this is all very fascinating but what does it have to do with anything I said? A small company took a risk and ended up succeeding. How does that contradict anything I wrote? Because they were small, they have the freedom to take that risk because they could do whatever the hell they wanted without being beholden to execs. I never once said that small companies can take risks because they won't lose anything, what I said was that small companies have the ability to take those risks because they don't have people telling them they aren't allowed to because of profits.

Quote:
Large publishing studios wont release a game unless is guaranteed to sell multiple millions, and make tons of cash, they wont settle with lots of cash, they have to have tons.
wow. you just advocated my point. that is exactly why I am saying smaller companies can take more risks, because large game studios won't invest their money into creating a game that isn't going to make money. That is literally EXACTLY what I have been saying.

Quote:
Your logic is so flawed im pretty sure computers crash just because you walk by.
you say that after writing a bunch of content that agrees with my logic/statements. so... uh.... *confused*
post #77 of 82
What part of this dont you get.

Small companies have just as many people to answer to as large ones, they have to be able to gather investors, who then also have a say in the product, along with finding a publisher, who will also have a say in the product. A publisher can say, hmmm i dont approve of the language in this game, change it or i wont publish it, or they force them to publish earlier than the product is ready, or they want them to lighten the tone and broaden its appeal. Same thing goes for investors, the investors need to know when they are going to get their money and profits back, and will say well ill invest if you are willing to make these changes because i feel it will sell more. You do realize this right?

Indie devs dont just gather a couple of guys together and make a product, they still have to eat and pay bills. Dabbling in their spare time isnt going to amount to anything.

Indie devs range from Gearbox software, to the angry birds developer, whoever that might be.
Current build
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
q9950 stock asus p5n-d 5870 4 gb ocz 
OS
windows 7 
  hide details  
Reply
Current build
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
q9950 stock asus p5n-d 5870 4 gb ocz 
OS
windows 7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #78 of 82
Quote:
Small companies have just as many people to answer to as large ones, they have to be able to gather investors, who then also have a say in the product, along with finding a publisher, who will also have a say in the product. A publisher can say, hmmm i dont approve of the language in this game, change it or i wont publish it, or they force them to publish earlier than the product is ready, or they want them to lighten the tone and broaden its appeal. Same thing goes for investors, the investors need to know when they are going to get their money and profits back, and will say well ill invest if you are willing to make these changes because i feel it will sell more. You do realize this right?
I realize that this happens sometimes. i also realize that indie companies can release their games for free, or tell those companies that ask for compromise to screw off, or self-publish (especially in the modern era where xbox live arcade, mobile smartphones, etc. allow independents to publish their games without investing a ton of money). Minecraft was created and released by one guy in under a year. He did whatever he wanted and was lucky to strike a cord with consumers so it became a big hit. He didn't worry about investors or publishers trying to push him around. How about Linerider? One guy making games in his house in his free time. No publisher. No one telling him he had to do things a certain way. What about Braid? Two developers, an artist and a coder, got together and made a game. It was a big hit, and they didn't have to bow down to any investors or make any changes... Those small companies created something new and unique and I am not sure if they could have been created by large companies because once bureaucrats get involved, things become more complicated and it ends up being "design by committee" rather than one person or a small team's artistic vision.

Now, I have given examples that contradict your point that all small developers have to answer to more people than big companies. Does this change your mind at all?

Quote:
Indie devs dont just gather a couple of guys together and make a product, they still have to eat and pay bills. Dabbling in their spare time isnt going to amount to anything.
Tell that to ID software
post #79 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artev View Post
I realize that this happens sometimes. i also realize that indie companies can release their games for free, or tell those companies that ask for compromise to screw off, or self-publish (especially in the modern era where xbox live arcade, mobile smartphones, etc. allow independents to publish their games without investing a ton of money). Minecraft was created and released by one guy in under a year. He did whatever he wanted and was lucky to strike a cord with consumers so it became a big hit. He didn't worry about investors or publishers trying to push him around. How about Linerider? One guy making games in his house in his free time. No publisher. No one telling him he had to do things a certain way. What about Braid? Two developers, an artist and a coder, got together and made a game. It was a big hit, and they didn't have to bow down to any investors or make any changes... Those small companies created something new and unique and I am not sure if they could have been created by large companies because once bureaucrats get involved, things become more complicated and it ends up being "design by committee" rather than one person or a small team's artistic vision.

Now, I have given examples that contradict your point that all small developers have to answer to more people than big companies. Does this change your mind at all?



Tell that to ID software
i never said all small devs have to answer to people. i was simply pointing out that fact that all your posts were flawed to the core, which you seem to have realized, and now are attempted tear my post apart, rather than defend your own.

lets look at respawn entertainment and bungie studios. When bungie was owned by microsoft, they had complete control over their products. Infinity ward was the same way, They were the only reason COD 4 was set in the modern times. Plenty of large dev studios have creative control of their products.

Now that we have both called out the examples outside the norm, would you care to restate your original arguement in a way that is not flawed and wrong.
Edited by Vhati - 5/31/11 at 1:01pm
Current build
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
q9950 stock asus p5n-d 5870 4 gb ocz 
OS
windows 7 
  hide details  
Reply
Current build
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
q9950 stock asus p5n-d 5870 4 gb ocz 
OS
windows 7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #80 of 82
Quote:
i never said all small devs have to answer to people. i was simply pointing out that fact that all your posts were flawed to the core, which you seem to have realized, and now are attempted tear my post apart, rather than defend your own.
no, I have stated the same position the entire time. Small companies are in a better position to take risks and innovate than larger ones. I don't think that is flawed at all, and I have posted examples and arguments supporting my case. On the other hand, you've just parroted the idea over and over again that my argument is flawed without being able to contradict a single point I made.

first you said:
Quote:
Small companies have just as many people to answer to as large ones
then you said:
Quote:
i never said all small devs have to answer to people.
which is it? I realize you gave yourself the "all" disclaimer in the second quote, but if you change the first quote to "Some small companies have just as many people..." then you undermine your point entirely.

bottom line is, the proof is in the pudding: Small indie companies tend to put out innovative or artistic games while big companies tend to milk franchises for every penny they are worth. Once these small companies get popular and bought up by big companies, they lose that edge of innovation. We see it happen all the time!

So I'm tired of all this, do you have a single argument that shows what I've said is flawed at all other than telling me I'm wrong over and over again?
Edited by Artev - 5/31/11 at 1:14pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Game News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Video Game News › [Eurogamer] Hitman:Absolution to be "more accessible."