|
| T O P I C | |
|
The Dancing Bears Of Hypocrisy
August 25th 2000, 04:15 CEST by andy Yay, it's another 3D Realms thread! Yes folks, I've spent weeks trawling through every gaming web site, message board and newsgroup, hunting for any info or quotes I could use to formulate another of my spiteful, malicious and entirely biased rants against those poor 3DR folks, and finally I've found it! Rejoice! (Or maybe, just maybe, I followed a link from Blue's News and noticed something that I thought would be worth commenting on. And it just happens to be about 3DR. But shhh, don't tell George and Scott.) Duke Nukem : Endangered Species is a hunting game in which everyone's favourite five-years-out-of-date action hero sets off on a mission around the world to kill some creatures. Doesn't sound that great to me, and probably not to you either, but apparently this is a "mass-market design game" so I guess we're not exactly the target audience. Stomped recently interviewed several members of the DN:ES development team, Action Forms. The interview includes a few interesting tidbits that are, let's say, not very re-assuring about the level of quality to be expected, but there's one thing in particular that I think should be brought to people's attention... Regular readers of the 'Crap will have seen both George Broussard and Scott Miller commenting many times on how unscrupulous some publishers can be, and how they hold developers to strict deadlines with little care for getting the game finished to a decent standard. Well, in that case, it should be good news that Endangered Species is being published by the Gathering Of Developers subsidiary On Deck Interactive... shouldn't it? After all, these guys are supposed to be working on the side of developers -- no more bullying, no more oppressive deadlines, no more rushed games. Remember? Well, believe it or not, Endangered Species has a SIX MONTH development time. SIX MONTHS! That's less than half a year! ;-) So maybe On Deck Interactive are another of these evil publishers? Is that what this is about? Nope. See, apparently the six month limit has been imposed by none other than 3D Realms. Just a tad hypocritical of them, wouldn't you say? The biz folks at 3DR make a big deal of saying how much they disapprove of publishers rushing projects, but when it's 3DR calling the shots on another team, they're just as bad themselves. In fact, with a six month deadline imposed to hit the Christmas market, you could say they're actually worse...
|
| C O M M E N T S |
|
Home »
Topic: The Dancing Bears Of Hypocrisy
|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»| |
|
<b>#22</b> "Charlie Wiederhold" wrote... <QUOTE> Maybe I'm just a freak then, because I also pre-ordered Duke 3D without having ever heard of the first two games. </quote> But you played the shareware edition before ordering, right? I tell ya man, in those days demos stood out because there were so few. If only five games a year had demos/shareware episodes, those five games would all have greater impact a la Duke Nukem. (Of course it might help if they were actually good, which the Duke shareware definitely was...) God, I loved the Duke side-scrollers, as well as id's Keen games... --- "My life is a patio of fun."<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Andy, Yet another clueless thread. 1) Development time means nothing. If it's not fun/ready by Xmas it will not be released. 2) They've been working on it for a few months already. 3) It's a lower priced, budget game. Gimme a break. This isn't a 2 million dollar game. But it does have the best 3D engine of ANY hunting game and better than MOST 3D games out there. It will be an incredible value for it's $24 or so price tag. Hulka: <quote>Bruce has been saying this for years. I think it's his stock answer for the question because he gets that question a lot. </quote> Yeah, sorry but Bruse is uninformed and clueless. Rip off artists? People need to get a clue, get the facts and stop talking out of their asses. <quote>As far as Tachyon kicking Duke's ass? Was Bruce talking about sales figures? If so, I doubt it. What did Tachyon sell, three copies, if that many? Just kidding, we all know it sold four copies. </quote> Yeah, I'll take that bet any day. DNF sales vs Tachyon's? Tell Bruce I'll bet him $50,000 DNF sells more ;) And Andy, try not beating developers down for trying to growing a franchise - Gee, too bad most developers can't even get a franchise going... George Broussard, 3D Realms |
|
<quote>But you played the shareware edition before ordering, right? I tell ya man, in those days demos stood out because there were so few. If only five games a year had demos/shareware episodes, those five games would all have greater impact a la Duke Nukem. (Of course it might help if they were actually good, which the Duke shareware definitely was...)</quote> Yes, but I don't see what that has to do with whether Duke 1 and 2 had a major impact on Duke's ability to come out in an off season and be successful. :) Charlie Wiederhold |
|
Steve, <quote>Or maybe it's a game that NEEDS to be in stores at Christmas, unlike Duke Nukem. I've always felt it was a bit arrogant to say "We can skip Christmas" when you have a huge franchise. Perhaps they'd feel differently launching an unknown and untested property during, say, July... I dunno. </quote> NOPE. Releasing at Xmas is stupid. You heard it here first and you will learn and see over time that it's silly beyond marketing belief. If you have a truly great game, it's FAR better to release in March/April or off peak time because you will be the ONLY GAME IN TOWN! You will get ALL the press and be the only real game to buy. Why would ANY developer want to compete for mindshare and shelf space at Xmas with 100 other games? I'll take launching a kick ass unknown in April any day over Xmas. Duke 3D was unknown and went out in May. Starcraft March. Diablo 2, June. Shall I continue? Diablo 2 rocks. But it's also the BEST game out now and it will dominate the top spot for months. That build mindshare and "I gotta buy this game." As opposed to shipping Xmas and having to compete with Quake 3 and other games for the top spot. George Broussard, 3D Realms |
|
Andy, <quote>biz folks at 3DR make a big deal of saying how much they disapprove of publishers rushing projects, but when it's 3DR calling the shots on another team, they're just as bad themselves. In fact, with a six month deadline imposed to hit the Christmas market, you could say they're actually worse...</quote> You're clueless. We all want the game done this year, but if it isn't done, fun and quality it WON'T SHIP. Period. You have some magical ball that sees into the future? You somehow see conspiracy here? Trying to maintain a schedule and meet a deadline is totally different from RUSHING A GAME (like Wheel of Time, Sin, Daikatana - need I go on?). Which do you think is more likely? That we've lost our minds and will ship a piece of crap to cash in on Xmas dollars, or that we will hold the game until it's of reasonable quality? Why don't you STFU until we ship the game and judge it and our motives then? Oh wait....that's what respectable journalists do. New thread...this one's dead ;) Hey...why not start a thread about how very few (if any) other developers can even spin off a successful franchise to begin with? Maybe analyze why that's happening. George Broussard, 3D Realms |
|
Charlie, <quote>Yes, but I don't see what that has to do with whether Duke 1 and 2 had a major impact on Duke's ability to come out in an off season and be successful. </quote> You're right, Duke 1 and 2 had little to do with Duke's success. Duke 3D sold like 1.7 million and climbing. We sold maybe 30K copies of Duke 1 and 2. I hardly think that fanbase made Duke 3D what it was. What happened was a great game came out with lot's of new stuff in a time of year when there were no other majorly competing games to take the spotlight. So Duke 3D got entrenched and got mementum behind it and sold, and sold and sold. Much like Diablo 2 is doing now. Hey Andy. New thread...3D Realms rushes Duke beverage coasters and t-shirts to market! There's some hot scoop there too ;) Our next goal is to get Minesweeper turned into Babe Hunter featuring Duke for the next release of Windows. George Broussard, 3D Realms |
|
<b>George Broussard</b> (#28): <QUOTE>Hey Andy. New thread...</QUOTE> That's 2 requests in 2 posts. You seem awfully eager to bury this thread George. :) -- Warren Marshall - Professional Nuisance<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Six months is very reasonable for a hunting game. Christ, I could write the code for one in a couple weeks. |
|
3D Realms is Andy's rainy day punching bag. |
|
This game is what you call a "filler", just like Dominion was for ION storm, just like many many, MANY other games out there. Its a cheesy, quick fix, mass market deer-hunter clone based on a popular FPS franchise. Oh btw, who cares? |
|
ooooo catfight in the thread! -daren *flush*<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Oh, btw, the reason companies make "filler" games that hard core gamers despise is to keep revenue streams high while they supposedly make their "main game". Why do you think games like Deer Hunter sell thousands upon thousands of copies, while almost undisputedly awesome game developers like Looking Glass go out of business? Deer hunter type game is easier to make, cheaper to make, quicker to make, and sells just as many copies if not more then the hottest games out there. So just see it for what it is, and get over it. |
|
Vkg, </quote>Why do you think games like Deer Hunter sell thousands upon thousands of copies, while almost undisputedly awesome game developers like Looking Glass go out of business. </quote> I've seen this many times. Why do games like Thief, System Shock and even Deus Ex have such low sales, and cause companies hardships? Everyone agrees (critics and die hards anyway) that they are AWESOME games. And they are. So then why has Deus Ex only sold 40K copies, while even Vampire has hit the 70K mark? I doubt Deus Ex will break 150K (if lucky) in US sales. That's an ok hit, but certainly NOT one in line with a game that gets consistent 90%+ reviews. The reivews read like Half Life's, yet HL sold a million copies. The reason? Sit down, here it comes... They are too complex for the average gamer. That's it. No complex reasons. No lack of marketing (a favorite culprit). Just too complex with all their powers, complicated inventory systems, and depth of plot/missions. The learning curve is too steep. Bear in mind that us die hards are maybe 10-15% of the market. We don't cause games to sell 1 million copies. We cause them to sell 100K copies. Games like Thief, SS2, and Deus Ex need to be played a couple hours at least before you get into them, master the controls and depth of gameplay and get a handle on them. That's too daunting for Joe Gamer that buys 3 games a year. He has 3 kids, a mortgage and a lawn to mow. He doesn't have hours to learn a game. He doesn't care. He wants a quick fix for 20 minutes at a time as he escapes from his busy day. It's much like movies. A critically aclaimed / award winning movie like Shakespeare in Love pales in box office dollars to movies like Jurassic Park. The masses want popcorn games. Simple to learn and fun to play. Something you can play 20 minutes, save and pick up later without getting lost in mission onjectives. And don't bring up RPG's. See games like SS2 and Deus Ex aren't RPG enough to draw in those fans, so the lose lots of those sales, plus the people looking for quickie action. They are left with a small subset of the market, and that's why games like SS2, Thief and Deus Ex (while brilliant designs) are left holding the bag at the box office. George Broussard, 3D Realms |
|
<b>#35</b> "George Broussard" wrote... <QUOTE> Everyone agrees (critics and die hards anyway) that they are AWESOME games. And they are. So then why has Deus Ex only sold 40K copies, while even Vampire has hit the 70K mark? I doubt Deus Ex will break 150K (if lucky) in US sales. That's an ok hit, but certainly NOT one in line with a game that gets consistent 90%+ reviews. The reivews read like Half Life's, yet HL sold a million copies. The reason? Sit down, here it comes... </QUOTE> <i>* Vile glances at the too-numerous-to-count warez pages on the net...</i> It's a pity that a game's popularity is determined by the number of copies sold... if only it were possible to determine the number of times a game has actually been <i>played</i>. <b>Then</b> we'd probably see huge differences in popularity stats. It's unfortunate that warez sites proliferate the net... but then again, that's life, isn't it? -Vile<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Well anyway, though it is a perfectly understandable move, it's somewhat akin to making a pr0n site to support your other high quality but very specific site which does not turn in much profit. If Morn would decide to live off PC one day would he have to open planetcunt in parallel to cover expenses? Cheap trick ;)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
I'd like to look at RPG sales numbers. Have any RPGs other than Console RPGs really sold that well? |
|
<b>Broussard:</b> <quote>Why don't you STFU</quote> All hail the George Broussard school of media relations. |
|
George Broussard wrote:<quote>Bear in mind that us die hards are maybe 10-15% of the market. We don't cause games to sell 1 million copies. We cause them to sell 100K copies.</quote> That 10-15% of the market you mentioned also contains those die hards that run a good portion of all the fanboy sites out there, which creates multiple <i>free</i> avenues of advertising for games. The most die hard are usually the most vocal when it comes to scrutinizing said games, so I fail to see why it's improper to voice concern over making cookie cutter games with just a little more flash. I'm convinced that the 10-15% you mentioned was partly responsible for Half Life selling over 1 million copies in the big scheme of things. I'm convinced that the reason cookie cutter games are so prominent right now is because 3D is now so commonplace, and any new game requires some kind of special -hook- either in the form of eye candy or specialized gameplay which makes newer engine technology a necessity. So a developer is either forced to stay on the cutting edge by developing a new engine (which is costly), or they liscense an existing one and produce something with a great storyline and immersive gameplay in a -short- period of time.....not something that caters to the lowest attention span. I take offense at your notion that complexity is the main reason that games such as SS2 and Thief sold poorly. I'm convinced that the main reason they sold poorly is due to over saturation of the market coupled with ungodly high prices. I could(and would) afford to buy several more games a year in the $20-30.00 range than I can at the $40-50.00 range. Take a trip to the local EB store sometime and gaze at the racks upon racks of new games out there asking at least $30.00 or more for me to be able to take that title home, and maybe you'll appreciate what that 10-15% has to wade thru. I consider myself in that 10-15% range and I have a full time job, a house to keep up, and a yard to mow. But sometimes that yard doesnt get mowed on time, or laundry gets skipped a day or two when I'm busy being hell bent on killing that clawed tentacle thing in the missle silo in Half Life, or busy trying to figure out how the hell I prevent Lord Crystal Bearer from reaching that damned vile hero gate in DK2....:-) |
|
A hunting game with a 6 month schedule isn't very strange, Deer Hunter had something like a 3-5 month schedule. With the succesive releases getting increasingly more months of devlopment time. But I remember walking into the store not 3 months after Deer Hunter was out and seeing at least 2-3 knockoffs. Carnivores was/is totally 3d (and the only decent one out of them all, so I've heard, though I *did* own Deer Hunter at one point...) unlike most of the other hunting games. I think they can get the game done in six months, but I don't think 3d Realms should expect it to be any better than Carnivores was. But if "good" is all they're aiming for... |
|
<quote>They are too complex for the average gamer. That's it. No complex reasons. No lack of marketing (a favorite culprit). Just too complex with all their powers, complicated inventory systems, and depth of plot/missions. The learning curve is too steep. </quote> Look at Baldur's gate, that's as complex if not more so then dues ex and it has sold loads of copies. Dues Ex is a stroll in the park compared to some games I've played, its always obvious which way to run or what to do in this game its just that there's more then 1 way to do it. This should make easier if there's more then one way to solve a problem right? Maybe one reason people find it hard/complex is because they expect a game like quake(push the button) or halflife(push the scientist) because its an fps when they end up getting a game like Baldur's gate. I think the same thing happened to System Shock 1 & 2. The more mature people who are looking for a experience for testing their reflexes or tactical skill don't really see a FPS set in a si-fi background as a game that they would enjoy. They're too used to their bows and arrows. So I guess its not that the game is too complex its just been aimed at the wrong market. On a side note out of my clan of 8, 2 have bought dues ex and 4 have downloaded it. All say its a great game. |
|
<b>#41</b> "Seth" wrote... <QUOTE>Carnivores was/is totally 3d (and the only decent one out of them all, so I've heard, though I *did* own Deer Hunter at one point...) unlike most of the other hunting games. </QUOTE> <u>TNN Outdoor Pro Hunter</u> was the cream of the crop as far as the action/hunting genre went. Dreamworld Interactive (sp?) licensed the Unreal engine to make it. TNN Outdoor Pro Hunter 2 (developed by Monolith - yep that Monolith)then assumed that crown. It used the original Lithtech engine and even supported netplay. Sorry I couldn't provide any links but ASC Games' (the publisher) <a href="http://www.ascgames.com/">website</a> seems to be nonexistent. But check <a href="http://www.virtualoutdoorsman.com/reviews.html">this</a> out for a quick lineup of the "deer hunter genre". - [g.man]<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
To further clarify my muddled statement: Carnivores isn't really considered a part of the hunting genre by its die-hard supporters. It's really more of a general action type game with some hunting elements. - [g.man]<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Anyone interested in RPG sales figures (and general PC game sales figures by extension) needs to read this. http://desslock.gamespot.com/archives/200005/20000511.html PC Data is not the end-all be-all of computer game sales figures. Desslock is working a supplement to this as well but there is no ETA on it. -- Rambar |
|
<b>#12</b> "Charlie Wiederhold" wrote... <QUOTE>How many people would you honestly say bought Duke 3D based off the side scrollers? How many of the 2-3 million people who bought it do you think even knew of Duke before the game came out? I didn't and neither did any of my friends in college. Small subset but I doubt Duke 1 and 2 were very much in the public eye really. I don't even remember any reviews mentioning the first two games (though I'm certain there had to be a couple that did). </QUOTE> I know quite a few actually. Heh even my old man got it. He was disgusted they turned awy from a scroller into this motion sickness bonanza ! (his words not mine :P)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#15</b> "Ian" wrote... <QUOTE>I've always wondered what it's like to be a corporate shill. Now I can just ask selected employees of 3DR. </QUOTE> I do believe that title is restricted to only be used when describing. I would thank you kindly from refraining to use it in other contexts.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#47</b> "RahvinTaka" wrote... <QUOTE><B><A href="spy-internal:Load/140#15">#15</A></B> "Ian" wrote... <quote>I've always wondered what it's like to be a corporate shill. Now I can just ask selected employees of 3DR. </quote> I do believe that title is restricted to only be used when describing. I would thank you kindly from refraining to use it in other contexts.</QUOTE> grrr stoopid tags... I do believe that title "corporate shill" is restricted to only be used when describing Warren. I would thank you kindly from refraining to use it in other contexts.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#40</b> "Mankovic" wrote... <QUOTE>George Broussard wrote: <quote>Bear in mind that us die hards are maybe 10-15% of the market. We don't cause games to sell 1 million copies. We cause them to sell 100K copies.</quote> That 10-15% of the market you mentioned also contains those die hards that run a good portion of all the fanboy sites out there, which creates multiple <I>free</I> avenues of advertising for games. The most die hard are usually the most vocal when it comes to scrutinizing said games, so I fail to see why it's improper to voice concern over making cookie cutter games with just a little more flash. I'm convinced that the 10-15% you mentioned was partly responsible for Half Life selling over 1 million copies in the big scheme of things. </quote> What sold Halflife was it's great interface. A lot of my friends are not or only barely computer literate. I watched them play a number of games. Set them up with q3a. They hated it - the UI was archaic and difficult to use and the gameplay steps were huge. They played Unreal and they liked the UI better but it was so slow to load up and the bots moved unnaturally and they found it hard to follow them. Then I let them at Halflife and they loved it. The learning curve was smotth, the UI was mostly intuitive. They could spend a lot of time getting used to controls in the early exploring stage etc. They loved the first walkthrough bit because they could watch things talk and annoy people. (One guy spent 10 minutes or so walking up to characters and watching them get annoyed :P). Halflife is great because it gradually immerses you in the world, has intuitive UI, requires no manual and had much eye candy at the *begining* of the game. (Where first impressions are gathered). Neither UT or q3a can compare with that which is prolly why they never got a foot hold in less hardcore. <quote>I'm convinced that the reason cookie cutter games are so prominent right now is because 3D is now so commonplace, and any new game requires some kind of special -hook- either in the form of eye candy or specialized gameplay which makes newer engine technology a necessity. </quote> doubtful. Most of the gameplay is based on old gameplay styles. I keep waiting for the pacman and spaceinvader gameplay to come back as all the other basic styles have re-imerged in new world. <quote>So a developer is either forced to stay on the cutting edge by developing a new engine (which is costly), or they liscense an existing one and produce something with a great storyline and immersive gameplay in a -short- period of time.....not something that caters to the lowest attention span.</QUOTE> If the industry was as established as other industries (ie film) then this would be possible. Unfortunately (or fortunately) it is not. There are no standard tools, no standard repetoirs of communication and people have a long lead in time for each project. Compare that to a film guy who can move daily from set to set using standard equipement with minimal direction and still be damn good. No way is that possible with software engineering (at least not yet). Same to a degree with art. It would be possible for highly motivated individuals to do move project to project freely (within limits) however the games industry doesn't pay enough I would guess. For recompense many of the artists I suspect get satisfaction from seeing their work mixed in end game and working with designers to create a good game. <QUOTE>I take offense at your notion that complexity is the main reason that games such as SS2 and Thief sold poorly. I'm convinced that the main reason they sold poorly is due to over saturation of the market coupled with ungodly high prices. </QUOTE> your free to your opinion - but you are wrong. The majority of humanity is lazy. They don't want to learn en route to entertainement. They prefer to sit back with mindless gameplay. I know plenty of people who play the shooter games on playstation where people pop up and you have to shoot them before they shoot you. This repeats for near on twenty hours with slightly different locales and every now and again a special bad guy (like helicopter) pops up. Brain dead game play and much more popular with average non-hardcore player. I haven't seen these hunter games but my guess is that they have similar gameplay ? <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#49</b> "RahvinTaka" wrote... <QUOTE>Most of the gameplay is based on old gameplay styles. I keep waiting for the pacman and spaceinvader gameplay to come back as all the other basic styles have re-imerged in new world. </QUOTE> I think an argument could be made that deathmatch games are in their essence just an extension of the old Pacman gameplay model. Race around a maze picking up powerups while avoiding/killing the enemies within. The only difference is that the end goal is picking up all the powerups rather than killing all the enemies (since they respawn ad infinitum). Hrm actually sounds like a good idea for a mod. - [g.man]<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#42</b> "Thorbar" wrote... <QUOTE>On a side note out of my clan of 8, 2 have bought dues ex and 4 have downloaded it. All say its a great game. </QUOTE> Wow. I may be forced to re-evaluate how much a problem game piracy really is. This one sentence has been more effective than pages of your rhetoric, developers. I really hope you were talking about the demo Thorbar. -Whisp |
|
bah! Bruce is right... Hell, 3DR might as well of had Duke saying "Use the Force" or screaming "Adriannnnn..." . However, i don't understand why everyone's up in arms about this...i mean...COME ON, IT'S A HUNTING GAME!! WHO CARES?!? Unless your waiting on the edge of your seat for its release, i don't see whether it matters if it comes out in 6 months or 6 years. what's next, Duke Fishing?!? Duke Pong?? blech. Duke 3D was a great game, DNF will probably be a great game, but the rest is simply filler. ^M^ |
|
RahvinTaka wrote:<quote>The majority of humanity is lazy. They don't want to learn en route to entertainement.</quote> So if I understand you correctly, maybe you can explain the reason why Quake2 did so well considering all of the configs, server settings, console settings...ect that a player had to take considerable time to learn to properly use? I'm willing to bet my last beer that the hardcore portion of the Quake community was largely responsible for Quake2's success, as well as contributing to the initial success of Half Life out of the gates, seeing as how a good portion of the Mod community switched over when Half Life came out. Configuring these games for online play wasn't easy by any stretch of the imagination, especially for the server admins of the world. So I think your assertion that gamers; et al "humanity', as a majority are lazy is dead wrong considering the thousands of servers still in existence for both games, and the number of players still fraggin away on them. |
|
<b>#53</b> "Mankovic" wrote... <QUOTE>RahvinTaka wrote: <quote>The majority of humanity is lazy. They don't want to learn en route to entertainement.</quote> So if I understand you correctly, maybe you can explain the reason why Quake2 did so well considering all of the configs, server settings, console settings...ect that a player had to take considerable time to learn to properly use? I'm willing to bet my last beer that the hardcore portion of the Quake community was largely responsible for Quake2's success, as well as contributing to the initial success of Half Life out of the gates, seeing as how a good portion of the Mod community switched over when Half Life came out. Configuring these games for online play wasn't easy by any stretch of the imagination, especially for the server admins of the world. So I think your assertion that gamers; et al "humanity', as a majority are lazy is dead wrong considering the thousands of servers still in existence for both games, and the number of players still fraggin away on them. </QUOTE> hmmm you mean hard-core gamers are still playing hard to configure games with history. *shock* *horror*. Gee that really destroys my whole argument. BTW I don't think you know the meaning of "et al". And where did I ever suggest that humanity was only made up of gamers .. seems like a week assertion to me ... hmmm whats that phrase something to do with ... errr .. scare crows .. naah ... straw man ! ... yes thats it<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Yo, #53. <quote>So if I understand you correctly, maybe you can explain the reason why Quake2 did so well considering all of the configs, server settings, console settings...ect that a player had to take considerable time to learn to properly use?</quote> Easy. Check out the default controls for Quake 2. Arrow keys: move CTRL: shoot 1-10: change weapons And that's all you really need to know to start playing. Sure, you can gradually start to use the more complex stuff, like mouselook and sidestrafe and multiplayer options, but the key words there are gradual and optional. Compared to a game like Deus Ex, with its more demanding learning curve (you need to know how to crouch, sneak, set explosives, manage skill points, etc.) and the simplicity theory only gains more evidence in its favor. How many non-hardcore people bought Quake 2 and used all those complicated options first thing? Not many, I would guess. |
|
mortis - "what's next, Duke Fishing?!?" Mmm .. now that gives me an idea. How about a "Dopefishing" game, starring everyone's favourite character from the Commander Keen games? ;) I know I'd pay good money for that... |
|
Duke in hunting game... What´s next: Duke in a fishing game? Maybe they should rename Duke Nukem taking forever into: "Splatter for the elderly" or "How to lift a rocket launcher when you are 50+" They need to be careful that Duke doesn´t turn on them: "Damn, I´ll make you pay for my lumbago!" Sorry for the flamebait ... but there are so many babes to safe and Duke is out for hunting. Gee ... |
|
In response to Mankovic's post #53: Quake II did so well because it is a very well known franchise. Furthermore, the server admins are <b>not</b> the casual gamer. They are most definately the hardcore gamer. The casual gamers that bought Quake II never played online (which is the majority of the people who bought Q2). Instead, they were content with playing a few single player levels. I think your opinion on this matter is skewed because you interact with the hardcore gamers subset. This would include the mod makers, the mod players, and the online gamers. |
|
Gestalt- DopeFishing!! Now THERE'S an idea whos time has come...i can just see tossing back the lunkers, crates from various FPS games, and Nali healing fruit in a mad search of the BIG game...the DopeFish!!! it could be like the Hunting game, except you could drive around a little john boat packing a wide variety of bait to attract the Dopefish...i think you're ON to something here! ;) ^M^ "Hail to the Stink-Bait, Baby!" |
|
I think another reason why many comp games dont sell well is their lack of advertising. I have seen actual ads for Rollercoaster Tycoon on TV, even my g/f knows what that game is, in fact she forced me to buy it... :-( Also, George's point of waiting to sell a game now would be the perfect time, and hes right. Look at most computer gamers right now and were bored out of our fucking minds...only the diehards are playing Diablo2...and we want something new to try/play. Good thing I have Chrono Cross, and this *cough* demo of Parasite Eve 2... ;-) |
|
If you've ever worked at a sales desk, or known someone who has it's quite scary what your average person will buy. Name means everything, and it's one of the reason games like Quake, Myst and Half-Life keep walking off the shelves. Everyone has heard of Quake and Myst and more recently Half-Life and because of this they're what people go for. Next time you're in your local EB just watch for a minute and observe your average non-hardcore customer. They'll walk into the shop, and scan the array of shiny boxes if they see something they recognise by name, they'll pick it in favour of something newer 90% of the time. It's quite scary really. |
|
<b>#35</b> "George Broussard" wrote... <QUOTE>They are too complex for the average gamer. That's it. No complex reasons. No lack of marketing (a favorite culprit). Just too complex with all their powers, complicated inventory systems, and depth of plot/missions. The learning curve is too steep. </QUOTE> I'm in agreement with George 100% here. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#56</b> "Gestalt" wrote... <QUOTE>mortis - "what's next, Duke Fishing?!?" </QUOTE> Nope, what George and the girls have in the pipeline is as follows. I got this info from a trusted source within their secret lab. It's all legit. Duke: Origins (N64) Duke Fashion Designer for Girls (Yep!) Krazy Duke Karts Learn Your ABC's with Duke It seems they are branching way out with their character. I can't imagine a fashion designer game though, perhaps Duke jumped the fence? <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
I was sent an email that I would enjoy this post and I must say I am impressed. Way to go Andy. Can I give you the lead for your next piece. George Broussard kills babies and forces the elderly to wash his car. You can just base the thread on that quote. I will post it here again so you can say you read it in two places. George Broussard kills babies and forces the elderly to wash his car. And yes, I know Flamey, I just don't get it. Isn't it time Andy tried to redirect this thread with some off topic posting? |
|
<b>#64</b> "Chet" wrote... <QUOTE>George Broussard kills babies and forces the elderly to wash his car. </QUOTE> You're wrong Chet! George Broussard EATS babies, pees in the street and NEVER wipes.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<quote>I've always told publishers that they are clueless if they think time of year matters. <b>It certainly doesn't matter for good games</b>. And if nothing else you WANT to be alone ... I know we would skip Xmas and choose to polish a couple months if it meant shipping anytime in December. -- George Broussard 5 August 2000</quote> I've highlighted the important bit, and I think George is trying to say that this Duke Nukem game IS NOT a good game, merely an attempt to capitalize on stupid Wal-Mart game shoppers who thought both Duke and Deer Hunter were cool. I... AM BAYTOR!!!!<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#66</b> The Pagan God of Lust, "Baytor" wrote: <QUOTE>I've highlighted the important bit, and I think George is trying to say that this Duke Nukem game IS NOT a good game, merely an attempt to capitalize on stupid Wal-Mart game shoppers who thought both Duke and Deer Hunter were cool. </QUOTE> Add smiley face :) I... AM BAYTOR!!!!<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#35</b> The Pagan God of Lust, "George Broussard" wrote: <QUOTE>So then why has Deus Ex only sold 40K copies, while even Vampire has hit the 70K mark? I doubt Deus Ex will break 150K (if lucky) in US sales. </QUOTE> Okay, George, I have to ask. I've been following the Top 20 thing at Evil Avatar for the past several weeks, and Deus Ex has been consistently there (either #12 or #18, I don't remember which). Are you telling me that a game that stays in the Top 20 for a month is only selling 40K? If so, that's pretty mad--the game industry, not you :) I... AM BAYTOR!!!!<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
RahvinTaka wrote orginally:<quote>The <b>majority of humanity</b> is lazy. They don't want to learn en route to <b>entertainement</b>. They prefer to sit back with <b>mindless gameplay</b>.</quote> of which I quoted in context:<quote>The majority of humanity is lazy.</quote> to which he responded:<quote>And where did I ever suggest that humanity was only made up of gamers .. seems like a week assertion to me ...</quote> Hmmm.....you said it, not me...:P Kevin wrote:<quote>I think your opinion on this matter is skewed because you interact with the hardcore gamers subset.</quote> Possibly, because I do recall how everyone wretched at the idea of deerhunter getting its own *planet* site....:-) Forensic wrote:<quote>...the simplicity theory only gains more evidence in its favor.</quote> I guess it's inevitable that games will continue to be dumbed down to meet the demands of a lazy humanity. Thank god for people like Jeff K....:P |
|
Duke Hunting... that's a rather odd concept. I see the economical motivation there, but really... I would think you wouldn't want to completely milk the character dry before the real game is even released. By previous posts it seems that 3DR is not imposing a strict limit on the games' release cycle, so that isn't an issue. As to why Deus Ex isn't selling... it's hard to say. I personally <i>love</i> this game, unlike Diablo2 (which has thus far been a rather uninspired clickfest with an occasional snippet of nice CG animation.) People have said that the complexity scares people off... I tend to think it's something else. The established RPG genre manages quite well, despite the relative complexity of games like Baldur's Gate; so it is obvious that you can't blame the games' failures entirely on their level of complexity. All of those games mentioned (Thief, System Shock, Deus Ex) fail to fall into any successful genre; and as such they have no automatic fan base. The hardcore FPS junkies won't buy them because they lack direct "skill" based competition, and the hardcore RPG players won't go for the first-person perspective and lack of pointy ears. I think that while these games may "fail" to <i>some</i> extent due to their complexity, their poor sales can also be traced back to what we tend to praise them so heavily for: their originality. Jeremy |
|
I'm not sure why Thief keeps getting lumped in with System Shock. Everything I read indicates that it sold quite decently, hence a sequel and now Ion Storn Austin beginning work on a third game. Thief can also be plopped into a category, albeit one that it largely created itself -- first person sneaker. It's much easier to summarize what it is than, say, Deus Ex or System Shock. As to the Duke hunting game, 3D Realms has been mliking Duke since Day 1. This ain't exactly a shocker. :) And I really don't think all of the console games, add-on packs and whatnot will hurt Duke Nukem Forever. When that one comes out, people will see it for what it is, the direct sequel to Duke Nukem 3D. |
|
<quote>Releasing at Xmas is stupid. You heard it here first and you will learn and see over time that it's silly beyond marketing belief. </quote> Yeah, but you have a huge franchise and are a reputable developer. If you have a new franchise from an unknown entity, wouldn't you stand a better chance of benefitting from increased foot traffic? If there's not other title driving people to the story in July, how are people going to buy your game? Would Deus Ex have done better at Christmas? Would KISS Psycho Circus? Who knows? (By the way, I agree Deus Ex, like other Looking Glass games, is overly complex for newbies, but what about Rainbow Six and Rogue Spear? Big sellers, big complexity.) <quote>Duke 3D was unknown and went out in May. Starcraft March. Diablo 2, June. Shall I continue? </quote> What games NOT from Blizzard did well releasing in the summer? What games that aren't from a major franchise (like The Sims)? If Vampire didn't do great (it is a license), what does that say about its timing? Might it have done better at Christmas? Might it STILL be selling at Christmas? OK, I'll name one off-season game that wasn't a franchise name or widely anticipated: RollerCoaster Tycoon. But they did TV ads. If you go back, Blizzard launched WarCraft II at Christmas of 95 (and WarCraft was also a Christmas title a year or so earlier), and its success established them as a top developer. Its success also allowed Diablo to miss Christmas (by a few weeks). Because of those two enormous successes, StarCraft could release anytime, as could Diablo II. It's easy to be puzzled about companies following Christmas release schedules when you're a top-dog, but I suspect Blizzard is the exception, rather than the rule. And perhaps 3D Realms is as well. For others, Christmas may be their only chance to get casual gamers to even LOOK at their game... Oh, and Shakespeare in Love grossed over $100 million domestically (probably three times that internationally), and probably cost about $30-$60 million to make. Jurassic Park grosses about $300 million domestically (about $500 worldwide) but its costs were probably over $200 million (with marketing). With greater risks come the potential for greater rewards, but I doubt Miramax (and their bosses at Disney) were upset with the revenue and profits generated by Shakespeare in Love. And therein lies a problem with the blockbuster mentality. If all you're doing is swinging for the fences, you're going to fail. Spectacularly. But a couple of walks and a single will produce the same run... (ooh, sports metaphor, sorry to our friends overseas for whom baseball isn't a religion). Of course you could argue "Duke Hunting" games are the walks and singles, in terms of producing steady revenue for a company... and those singles, put together, could turn into a "big inning" or blockbuster. You never know. |
| C O M M E N T S |
|
Home »
Topic: The Dancing Bears Of Hypocrisy
|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»| |
| P O S T A C O M M E N T |
|
|
| C R A P T A G S | ||||||||
|
|
| There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details] |
Powered by blah 0.9.1-dev •
PlanetCrap is © 1997-2035 Hendrik "Morn" Mans
|