By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
noname2200 said:
Xen said:
noname2200 said:
Xen said:
noname2200 said:
Xen said:
Roma said:

Right...which is why your blanket (implied) statement is incorrect. Releasing quality games does not guarantee a good result for the developers. Clover is just one example.

Not entirely correct... the result for them is bad from one side since they are now defunct, but good from the other since their work lives on.

A more correct way of showing this statement as incorrect would be showing a company that releases crap and gets away with it.

I'm not an artist, just a dude with bills to pay, so I'm willing to say that having my work live on is zero consolation to being unemployed...I guess I'm funny that way. But considering how bitter some of Clover's ex-employees were in interviews, I don't think I was the only one.

But very well, we can see companies releasing crap and profiting off it too. Ubisoft's "casual" games (until recently, at least) are probably the lion's share of their profits. EA was king when it pumped out crap (now that it's making good games? Not so much). D3 actually reached a profit making stuff like Ninjabread Man, and a profit it something most Western publishers can't seem to do any more. And so on and so on. Happy?

Edit: That came out sounding testier than I intended. My bad.

 

Umm.. well... yes

It's a personal thing for me, dude. Because doing some of my work (I happen to be an artist, kinda) with little return but with having my work somehow adored is good consolation to me... that's why I didn't like that Clover example... although I can understand their bitterness and share it.

Maybe I was kinda straying off topic with it, but Ubisoft and most western devs atm are exactly what I meant.