| omoneru said: @HappySqurriel Well, that's one way to look at it. By that logic, however, any developer that has constantly released shovelware has a good shot at making a high quality title because they could build up enough money by reliably delivering ... shovelware. Certainly possible. But I see too much of optimism here. But then again that's understandable. If I was a FPS fan in my 20s who's been suffering from the perceived drought of AAA FPS titles on Wii, I would also be hyped up about the game. Besides, all logic aside, it's kinda fun to get hyped up about any game. |
You could say that it is optimistic, but I just look at things with my software development background and try to relate it to my own experience ...
As much as no one ever wants to admit it I have developed some crap in my time; the gaming equlivalent would probably be games in the 50% to 60% range. The fact was I knew I was developing crap when I was working on the project but we had a limited time and a limited budget so the project triangle ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_triangle ) was working against us.
Now, when you have experienced people who know how to budget, and you have experienced developers, you can loosen up the budget and lengthen the timeframe (both in somewhat minor ways) and dramatically increase the overall quality of the project. Personally, the best projects I ever worked on really only required (roughly) 10% to 25% more people working on it for 10% to 25% more time; these projects would probably be the gaming equlivalent of a 80% to 90% rated game.
I personally think that with the proper motivation from management (like bankrolling your own game), and with experienced developers (like producing games for several years on similar platforms) a well run developer should be able to rise up and produce games that average scores between 75% and 85%. Higher quality than that tends to come from experience developing products in this range and seeing how things can be done better.
