By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
KLAMarine on 13 May 2016
Edit Thread
AEGRO said:

KLAMarine said:


Because developers have more control over the quality of the product they make than the reception the game might get. If publishers want to reward good work, they themselves should rely on their own opinion of a product rather than the opinion of the internet.

Yes, I worked fast food during my college years. Employee of the month didn't rely on an internet aggregator and any complaints were investigated to see if they were valid or not. For a publisher to just rely on an average on an internet website is ridiculous.

If the quality of the game was guaranteed, shitty games wouldnt exist. Developers fuck up too, and theres a press that is supposedly specialized in gaming that judge the game quality. Ideally without a bias. 

Well nothing in life is perfect: developers aren't perfect, publishers aren't perfect, reviewers aren't perfect.

AEGRO said:

Without deviating the topic, i isist that any extra incentive from the publisher to the developer is well received, including the press reception.

And I would heartily disagree and any publisher with a ridiculous policy would not be one I'd want to work with.

AEGRO said:

Also, my fast food example could be compared with what we are talking about.

The Employee of the Month bonus or whatever depends on the opinion of a human being aka the manager. If he happens to hate you for whatever reason, you can kiss good bye that bonus.

Your hard work is being threatened by a person who is not looking at you from an objective point of view, so you are being directly fucked no matter how good your performance was on the job.

That's not the same thing: I worked alongside my manager (worked my way up there too), developers don't work alongside the gaming press. Also, if my manager had something against me, I could file a complaint with the higher-ups or walk out and get a different job. Naughty Dog can't do a thing against potential abuse from the gaming press.

AEGRO said:

Case in point, the Uncharted 4 review for example.

Lets say that Sony promised Naughty Dog a Million Dollar bonus if the game achieved a 94 or more on Meta.

Well, because of some fucking retard who gave the game a 4 out of 10 and lowered the score to 93, they lost a bonus for their hard work of years.

There are 90 reviews, that is the ONLY negative review of the bunch.

That would be messed up but thankfully, as far as I know, Sony does not exercise such a policy. Also, if that were the case, I'd direct my anger at Sony for such a dumb policy, not the lone reviewer expressing his opinion.

AEGRO said:

Who says that maybe he is a disguised XXXXX fanboy? Which is mostly the case?

This can go both ways.