I was under the impression that there was a very long drawn out process involving hundreds of people to turn an idea into a game and put it on the market.
Now i may be wrong about this, and please correct me if I am wrong here... but is there not enough time during the process of making a game in which SOMEBODY might say "Oh my God, this is horrible! we can't release this, it would be a disaster!"
Not only that, but its not like the people involved in this process have never played a videogame before. Do they not try the finished product? and on that note... they have people that test these games for a living!!!
My question is, why with all these professional people involved, do games get released that just plain suck in every way (terrible gameplay, bugs, etc)?
Someone has to:
1. publish the game
2. design the game
3. actually MAKE the game
4. Test the game
5. agree to begin production on the game
so with all these people that have been involved with the final product, not one of them flagged the game as a piece of crap??
There ARE GOOD GAMES OUT THERE, so its not like we are trying this for the first time and figuring out the formula...
Now, I would say there is an exception to this... the "A for effort" type games. Games that attempt to create something revolutionary that will change the industry, but ultimatly bite off more than they can chew. these games actually deserve our respect for trying to deliver something that they knew would be great.
then there are the shameless licence and franchise games that attempt to further capitolize off the fans of the subject but really just pump out a crappy game with a nice label on it. (there are exceptions to this as well btw)
so what are YOUR thoughts on why some games are truly terrible (and im not talking about games that YOU didn't like personally, i am talking about games NOBODY liked so don't say halo just because you didn't like it or command and conquer because you prefer shooters)
Log in to comment