ARE GAME DEVELOPERS BEING LAZY OR ARE THEY JUST AINT THAT GOOD?
Options
PILL_COSBY
Members Posts: 6,374 ✭✭✭✭✭
in IllGaming
I had a brief convo on here about this a while ago with a poster. We were talking about how some of these games that have came out had all kinds of content packed into them while most don't. Games like batman arkham city is a good example of this(a few others too). With the recent release of G.T.A 5 You can't help but wonder why can't all open worlds game be this G.O.A.T and this deep. Most of these games have these big ass beautiful detailed worlds but don't even use half of it. They just leave you wondering what could have been. Games like the ones I just named(and some others I didn't mention) clearly show what these systems are capable of. But for some reason most don't utilize the full power of these systems.
So the question is, are most of them just lazy or they just aint that good at developing games for these systems?
So the question is, are most of them just lazy or they just aint that good at developing games for these systems?
Comments
-
I have been wondering this since GTA 3.
-
It has to do with money I believe...the companies become corporatized and only give projects with high projected return on investment special attention to detail and depth
-
Yeah its definitely a budget thing Rockstar spent $230 million on GTA 5 .Smaller developers wish they had a budget like that.
-
Money.....not every game has a 200 million dollar budget
-
Yup Money.. and trends is what it comes down too
-
So y'all saying people like rockstar and rocksteady(makers of batman games) have more money than the big dogs that been in the game forever? So g.t.a and the batman games are the only games to have a big budget.......? the other g.t.a games had less money behind them and they still produced games that are far superior to most.
If this is the case then what's wrong with activisions games? Specifically the call of duty series. I think activision has waaaay more money and resources than both rockstar and rocksteady combined. There are many more but I'm just speaking on this company for example. They pump out soooo many ? games and games that have so much room for growth. I don't think I have to even speak on the call of duty series lol. You can't help to be left wondering "why couldn't they{fill in something simple to add here}". How is modern warfare still the best/most complete game out of all the C.O.D games released after it? I mean they have the power, more money, and more resources to work with now so what's the problem? Developers like midway aka nether realm studios, rockstar and rock steady are small compared to the big dogs. So money can't be the issue here because those three been dropping gems far superior to the O.G's.
Every now and then the big dogs do drop gems showing us what their capable of. Most games with all the money behind them are the ones that seem to not use the systems full power(or even close to it). Shots out to the developers of bioshock. -
Activision is a publisher. Treyarch and Infinity Ward are COD devs
-
Time and money. Most developers dont have the luxery of being able to spend 5 years spending money to make 1 game. Some of these smaller and less succesful companies cant risk going that long without making a real profit and/or being out of the public eye in fear of becoming irrelevent. Rockstar realesed 5 games in the past 5 years midnight club, red dead redemption, gta 4, la noire and now gta 5. They are keeping the money flowing.
-
Activision is a publisher. Treyarch and Infinity Ward are COD devs
-
-
7_rolls_royces wrote: »
I've been wondering the same thing, but I'm having too much fun to question it. -
If you spend more money you reduce profits.
-
Deadlines and budget. I guess now a days games can be patched after release so they release anything they can make money on even if its not polished.
-
There is a reason rockstar has such a large budget.