ListerOfSmeg on 04 October 2013
| Kresnik said: The problem with listing "Sony" or "Nintendo" is that they're both publishers, as Moren says. Unless you're going to split them up into the individual studios, then they're just too broad to be listed here. Sure, on the whole, they both take a lot of risks, but they also play it safe far more often. I'd say Valve, potentially. While I think they do have a specialty (first person experiences), they definitely don't play it as safe as other developers. If they did, we'd have seen Half Life 3 a long time ago, purely because that would be a money maker for them however it turned out. They could've monetized TF2 more than they have a long time ago, but they didn't. Etc. etc. Otherwise, I can't really think of any big developer who I'd call risky. Like I say, plenty of them do take risks, but they're ofset by falling back on proven stuff, which kind of offsets everything. Of course, that's just the state our industry is in these days, so it's unsurprising. |
Valve is a publisher too though right? They publish games on steam. Allow 3rd parties to publish games on steam as well.
