PvE Groups; are they just a fad?
- Thread starter Globusdiablo
- Start date
not at all. innovation is based on a concept, and then you check if the concept is better than the already existing ones or if the concept is worse but has the potential to become better with future technology.
but the designs made in many games are mostly never based on new technolgy that may become better. Impelmetions of economy and BG's as we have now are not new, they have just chosen a non technolgy innovative way nor one of the good ones that exist. So without entirely redoing that deisgn the current one is meant to stay inferior.
Nothing in the current game when it comes to many features is "innovative" yet many choices were just bad designs that were done better already. So not even "may be hard to code" is a valid exception because game sof the 90's did that, and the onyl reason to make that coding "hard" is lakcing the skills. Whicht then would mean a studio isn't able to hire someone properly (or willingly).
Last edited:
Well to be fair that's what they thought about voters voting for Brexit. Heh, they're nobodies, just individuals with an opinion.. yet look what happened when they were ignored.. just saying that an opinion holds weight, add that weight to others and very soon it's very heavy.
That gives you experience. You know more about what makes a better game than anyone else... even if it is for a specific genre. Many games conform to the same rules. How the implementation is, is how successful it is. Just because someone decides to write a book, it doesn't mean they know more about literature than you. You could have read thousands of books in over 20 years.. you already know what makes a good book and what makes a bad book. The author just writes the book.
You deserve more credit
I have to disagree with you here. your experience tell you what YOU think makes a game good, or a book. It doesn't give you any more knowledge on what I think is good. Or what a majority of people think is good. I have played many games that I thought were junk, that were good enough for the company to make sequel(s)(Watchdogs and Titanfall are two examples).
I have read many thousands of books for a lot longer then 20 years, but there are still many books that I thought were crap, that have 4.5/5 (average) ratings.
You can disagree but you're being subjective with that and you are objectively wrong. Experience tells us what are good games because we see them being played by players and they get good reviews and people are talking about them. Unless you don't have the ability to remember stuff, then you can tell what makes a good game and what doesn't because we also see the games that are just awful (War Z anyone?). Therefore our experience and ability to remember allows us to get an idea on the gaming industry as a whole.
Also, being a games developer doesn't give you carte blanche info on good game design as is proved time and again but games that completely fail. Just look at ED's implementation of Engineers for the worst possible game design without storage too. Being a game developer does not mean you know how to make a good game.
In fact, how on earth can you know a good game without playing games? Where is this magical knowledge coming from exactly?
Last edited:
Well it seems some people here think developers have some magical ability to know what a good game is based on the exact same knowledge the rest of us are privy too and yet for anyone who isn't a game dev (and also excluding those devs that make god awful games), somehow that same knowledge can't be used to judge what good games are because looking at things like sales and steam charts and reviews and youtube and award ceremonies couldn't possibly give us an inkling on what's going on LOL
Quite a while back, well over a year, I remember Brett saying that the activity levels in Mobius were very high.
Also you have to go with a balance of what is 'trending' and what the userbase wants. It's imperative in more niche games that you listen to the players. The players KNOW what they want to see. The players KNOW what daft ideas are (telepresence?) that go against the very things that make the game attractive. The players KNOW how much they're willing to pay, how much time they're spending on things in game. The players KNOW if something is killing the game with a wrecking ball.
Sure the developers know how to make a game. That's not in question. BUT in lieu of keeping the balance between wright, wrong, acceptable, unacceptable, there's no better source of data than the players.
Restaurateur: We now sell this perfect soup.
Customer: It's way too salty
Restaurateur: No it isn't this is exactly how we want it.
Customer: It's way too salty
Restaurateur: We're the experts, and we say it's perfect.
Next customer: OMG this soup is g salty, yuk, want money back.
Restaurateur: Why is everyone saying it's salty? We followed the business model and ingredient list perfectly
Customer: It's still too salty.
Restaurateur: I'm sorry, it's the way it is.
Customer: OK fine, see ya. Thanks for my refund.
Restaurateur: How come everyone is complaining about the soup?
Another customer: Why don't you just reduce the salt?
Restaurateur: Because this soup is the way we developed it...
Who's wrong? Customer for complaining, or the Restaurateur for simply not listening to many of the customers?
The customer may not know how to make soup, but they know if it's too salty!
Just call it Salty Soup.
You only need to watch Gordon Ramsey's Kithcen Nightmares to know just how relevant that restaurant example is [haha]
They have chef's like that all the time, telling the customers their food is amazing - well, customer as there's only one and the business is about to collapse....
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
I gotta be honest here, DB was hugely niaeve about how open would work.
LOL yeah I saw that in hells kitchen, someone tried to refund a beef wellington or something, said it wasn't nice.. He told the waiter to go back to the customer and tell them to f-k off out if they don't like it !
I laughed so hard. There's that awkward moment... you actually feel sorry for the customer who walks out in disgust. You may keep the laughing fanbois, but you won't get new customers that way!
Yeah that kitchen nightmares.. everyone can see see why the thing is going down the pan, apart from the owners thinking they're the bees knees!
verminstar
Banned
The customer is always right. Its a fairly basic and fundamental rule within a great many jobs where one deals with customers...is that the concept ye mean?
Yeah, I'm getting that impression as well. Community Goals should have been the pinnacle, where CMDRs are working together to achieve some sort of goal.
I think I already made a poll about calling them "Solo Goals - Because that's how they are done" from now on. I miss the polls
Edit
Looks like I didn't start such a thread. That's a shame!
Last edited:
Sort of.. the customer knows what they want.. or what flavor things need to be or if something isn't right, or if they want new things on the menu...
Anyone listening would try to apply as much feedback as possible. Just watch The Apprentice, where a team goes out to do market research, ignore all the findings.. then look puzzled in the board room when they lose to a team that did take feedback in. It might reduce profits, but it reduces profits far less than missing or lost business, which is the fatal mistake many contestants on it fall to!
Anything recent?
That is a shame.I think I already made a poll about calling them "Solo Goals - Because that's how they are done" from now on. I miss the polls
Edit
Looks like I didn't start such a thread. That's a shame!
I hear many players are enjoying the CGs in Private Groups, where I think players behave how Sir Braben expected them to behave.
I'm going to go with, no.