I was reflecting the other night on what makes a particular game a winner... There are so many out there now that you would think that software developers would have been able to identify those elements that are likely to click within the various subsets of the gaming community. For example, those who like driving games cotton on to Gran Turismo's customization options and the need to compete in order to earn money to pay for those customizations - which adds an element to a driving game that really appeals to our need to shop. RPGs do much the same thing - making it a necessity to purchase new weapons and gear as you advance through the various levels. Action adventure games, on the other hand, require a compelling story and an engaging battle system. In general, regardless of the game, all must be held together with good atmosphere, backgrounds, graphics, cutscenes and compelling music.

I know that these are many of the basic elements that professional reviewers focus on when they are looking to rate a game - I rely on those reviews to ensure that my money is invested in products that represent good value. My question is, why do bad games still exist? What goes through a developers head when they put a crappy product on the market? A case in point - I rented a game on the weekend called ghost hunter. Now, its not a bad premise, but the damn thing is full of bugs - characters actually can walk through walls and completely out of the game's scenario. I know that if I found this, beta testers must have. The other issue is that elements of the game make no sense - switching from one character to another to accomplish specific tasks is not obvious and can be downright frustrating.

So where do bad games come from? A game is costly to design, complicated to market, and likely yields little in terms of profit if it stinks... so how does it happen? does anybody know? And can I have my 5.99 rental fee back?