Staff Discussion: The Standard for a ‘Good Game’

[size=9]Is The Standard For A “Good Game” Getting Lower?[/size]

————-

Donkeythong

[size=8]No!

The standards are still there for good games to live up to. That’s why people still compare games to Mario64 and Goldeneye etc, its just with the current platforms, developers are pushed to produce big graphical eye candy games. And the developers that do go all out in producing good games don’t get the sales they deserve as the market is saturated with games and so less games sell lots of units, as there is a bigger choice of games to choose from.

There are a lot of developers/publishers still setting high standards but your E-A’s etc of the world don’t need to follow them as the name of the titles alone still sell the Game, movie tie-ins, sports franchises etc.

A lot of companies will always produce very high standard games, Namco, Capcom, Nintendo, Sega et all as they have pride in what they do and a reputation for producing these games.[/size]

————-

ibu2003

[size=8]Well it seems to be less about standards nowadays doesn’t it? It’s more about is there a market for it? Will it sell? Does it have a brand name to push it or the endorsement of a celebrity?

These seem to be the thing companies want to get in a game and if the don’t want to conform to any of these points they have to shock the audience into buying they’re game…. RockStar have used this to they’re advantage in there games of recent…. but then again they make mostly quality titles for a “mature” market.

EA they push the same Fifa game forward next year…. they preach about all the elements they add to there games to create a better “immersion into the footballing experience” but they always fall back on there promises and let everyone down.

Anyway I’m straying away from the point a bit there. Companies always have a standard for the games they strive to release but essentially they are often forced to release as close to the announced release date as possible not the date when the game is properly complete… but actually at a time where the market will buy into they’re latest gaming opus. A good example here is Luxoflux with there True Crime: Streets Of LA game while a jack of all trades a master of none…

Or maybe they failed in this because of a few factors:

The release date dictated to them was to capitalize on the Christmas rush.

They tried to implement too many styles to the game, RPG>Action>Fighting and Driving… and they did not manage to fully utilize these many genre’s and create a specialist area that the game excelled in.

It was just too ambitious but works as a stepping stone to a more solid and worthy game to rival Grand Theft Auto.

Anyway back to the point… there are still standards in which is a good game and a bad game, but games companies look at this in a different light… while Nintendo famous for looking for innovation and perfection from its games has had to tone down development times it still holds these values close to heart. Whereas companies like EA look to release there games at certain marketable periods i.e. Christmas, Spring, Sporting Events and Movie Releases for example this is aimed to be the time where they can get the strongest market share.

They are both looking out to making money its just some companies value the happiness they’re customers get from there products than other companies do…. and that is the standard for games good or bad.[/size]

————-

pelican

[size=8]With the market diversifying so much now how can anyone draw a line of quality over the whole, industry? People expect very different things in their games these days, Fifa fans just want updated rosters and graphics, survival horror fans are asking for realism and racing fanatics want perfect handling. Back in the days of the master system games were, due to their simplicity, far easier to judge. In today’s industry games seem to evoke starkly contrasting opinions, causing discussions and often flame-wars, much in the same way art and films are treated. So if our industry really is growing up, then of course it means better games all round, we should just remember that a games’ quality is now far more a secular opinion than unquestionable fact.[/size]

————-

Surrealist

[size=8]I don’t think standards are getting lower at all.

I have to say I agree with Donkeythong on the comparing. Everyone seems to compare FPS’s to Goldeneye etc. and I also agree with Pelican in that it is very hard to draw a line on standards for all genres. But I do think that each genre has a standard to live up to (FPS’s to Goldeneye for example). If someone said to me, “Oh this game is so much better than any other game ever!” then I would probably hit them round the head with a wet fish or something of that nature. It’s impossible to say that a single game IS the best game ever because there are so many opinions about games. Personally, I like football games but I don’t go around saying that PES is better than TimeSplitters 2. I could say that, in my opinion, it was better than FIFA for whatever reason and obviously that means that FIFA, for me, doesn’t live up to the standards of PES.

This leads me neatly to my next point. Everyone’s standards will be different. Some people like FIFA more than PES (cretins lol) and therefore, PES doesn’t live up to their standards. So basically, gaming standards aren’t getting lower or higher.

Here endeth the lesson.[/size]

————-

Raditz

[size=8] I don’t think the standard of a good game is getting lower, its jus tougher for developers to make a good game these days. They are under-pressure to make a game full of flashy graphics and no substance as this is what will sell the game to casual gamers. Violence also attributes to this, I recommended Beyond Good and Evil to my friend the other day and he said it didn’t look very good because there “wasn’t enough killing” its ridiculous to miss out on the (possibly) best game of the year, he buys tripe like Lord of the Rings ROTK because it has mass slaying of people. EA are really the biggest offender, they release yearly updates of basically the same game, even though the situation with EA is improving, with FIFA 2004 and Tiger Woods 2004 being very good and certain improvements over there 2003 versions.[/size]

————-

Do you agree or disagree with our staff members? Click the link below to visit our forum and air your own opinion!