By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Why Destiny’s Critical “Failure” Could be Great for Games

Nope.. Core gamers are spoiled.. Cause of the sheer amount of choice we get with waaay too many games released for a waaay too smal audience.. Expect even less new ips and more marginaly improved sequels.. cod, fifa, ac, just dance proves it works.. We don't actually want new ideas or new gameplay.. They are scary



 

Face the future.. Gamecenter ID: nikkom_nl (oh no he didn't!!) 

Around the Network

I see your point, but sales speak more than reviews. Watch Dogs sold and Destiny is selling.



Gamertag, PlayStation Network ID, and Nintendo Network ID: Look at username. Huzzah for originality.  3DS Friend Code: 4038-6546-0886

Currently own PS3, Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox One, GameCube, Wii, Wii U, Switch, and 3DS

So she says it's good for the gamers because Nintendo rehashs got more valued but rehashing is bad??? Quite the loop this writer done.

And MS/Sony had quite a good E3, and Gamescom/TGS for Sony was pretty good.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

I get where she's coming from, and yes it would be awesome if Destiny causes devs to step up, get creative again, and not do the same ol same ol. However I fear Destiny could cause just the opposite to happen. Once other devs see the massive success a mediocre game like Destiny had, they could take it to mean that game quality is no longer what matters. All that matters is that you throw fists fulls of money into marketing and hyping them. Hopefully that's not the case, and hopefully Destiny's long term sales are poor.



And yet, it's selling really well. So.......I guess a lot of gamers don't care so much about quality, or creativity.

Big surprise.



Around the Network

How to make a Good Game:

1. Determine Unique Gameplay first and prototype early. If the gameplay doesn't work, discard it now and come up with a better idea.
2. Write the story to match the gameplay, and then choose the art-style to serve both.
3. Set a minimum quantity of content and budget a certain percentage of that (10-25%) to be far outside the box. If these experiments don't work, the game can still fall back on the bulk of its gameplay, but if they work you have something you can build off in the future.

Credits to Matthewmatosis in his Zelda Comparison video.


I would actually say FF XIII *should* have been the game which made developers rethink their processes, but it wasn't. This one won't, either.



DonFerrari said:
So she says it's good for the gamers because Nintendo rehashs got more valued but rehashing is bad??? Quite the loop this writer done.

And MS/Sony had quite a good E3, and Gamescom/TGS for Sony was pretty good.


That's not what she said. What she said is that E3 would have been boring if Nintendo wasn't there. While i agree, you are free to disagree.



DonFerrari said:
So she says it's good for the gamers because Nintendo rehashs got more valued but rehashing is bad??? Quite the loop this writer done.

Pretty sure it's referring to Splatoon, Mario Maker, Fantasy Life, Hyrule Warriors, Captain Toad, Code Name STEAM, and Project Guard/Project Giant Robot. You know, the stuff that sends the message of changing up of formulas being a good thing?



Big studio's don't innovate, indies do and it's going to get better with powerful and easy-to-develop engines like UE4, CryEngine and Unity.



mZuzek said:
DonFerrari said:
So she says it's good for the gamers because Nintendo rehashs got more valued but rehashing is bad??? Quite the loop this writer done.

And MS/Sony had quite a good E3, and Gamescom/TGS for Sony was pretty good.

Because new games withing existing franchises (and actual new franchises altogether) = rehashes.


That was the kind of confusion I saw from her.

vkaraujo said:
DonFerrari said:
So she says it's good for the gamers because Nintendo rehashs got more valued but rehashing is bad??? Quite the loop this writer done.

And MS/Sony had quite a good E3, and Gamescom/TGS for Sony was pretty good.


That's not what she said. What she said is that E3 would have been boring if Nintendo wasn't there. While i agree, you are free to disagree.

Well if any of the 3 wasn't there the E3 would be boring... and deciding any of the 3 were the best at there you know is a useless exercise.

 

Aielyn said:
DonFerrari said:
So she says it's good for the gamers because Nintendo rehashs got more valued but rehashing is bad??? Quite the loop this writer done.

Pretty sure it's referring to Splatoon, Mario Maker, Fantasy Life, Hyrule Warriors, Captain Toad, Code Name STEAM, and Project Guard/Project Giant Robot. You know, the stuff that sends the message of changing up of formulas being a good thing?

Well we haven't saw much from those games to say if they won't fall for hype (and HW at least now that was release we know is basically a rehash of tried franchise). And we aren't sure of what she meant because she wasn't explicity, she could be talking about the general Nintendo games that are criticized a lot of being rehashes.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."