When did you realize that consumers ruin franchises, not the developers or publishers?

When did you realize that consumers ruin franchises, not the developers or publishers?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=O1Z91YkPatw
youtube.com/watch?v=Q9RjDRLBWio
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Maybe from Portal to Portal 2

it's don't

who is semen demon

Why is she always so sad?

JRPGs were shit before weeks were a thing

Because she's oppressed user, didn't you know? All American women are oppressed. That's a look only the patriarchy can put on a face.
i'm sorry.

but she's british

Pretty much. instead of developers doing their own thing they decide to listen to fans and try to pander.


It is good to listen to the fanbase some times but honestly fanbases are usually shit.

Rose Bryne

It's still the devs and publishers fault if they want to try to pander to shitty consumers.

They don't have to self censor.
They don't have to change the game because of poorly chosen focus groups and playtesters.
They don't have to "Broaden the demographic".

It's still entirely on them if they want to sacrifice quality for the sake of the promise of more purchases in return for less effort.

back when I was 16 and work at a dollar store.
place was awful, we were always under staff, we only ever ran one cash register and it was over all just a bad store and yet we made made bank even with our overprice product. Why you ask? Simple, because no one was willing to go any distance to get there shit, our store was right in the middle of a residential zone and if a person had to pick shitty awful service but saved 5 minutes having to drive somewhere else they take it. They hated it and would get super bitchy but the idea of an extra five minute drive to the nearest store plaza that would have a better selection for better pricing was to much for them.

I quickly understood that while it's edgy to call people sheep, that really is the matter of things when they are willing to come in day in and day out to a shit store that is exploiting them all because they just don't want to take the extra time for better.

>It's their fault for wanting to make profit

It's almost as is developers and publishers are business with the goal of making revenue and profit.

If by consumers you mean normalfags and casuals, then I realized it a long time ago.

Brit women are just as oppressed by the patriarchy as american women. She's suffering user, don't bombard me with your facts or corrections or whatever you have, stop MAN SPLAINING!!!! MAAAAAAN! I dunno why I am doing this, once again, my apologies.

she's thinking about the people that touch themselves to pictures of her

Hey here's a spoiler of life for you:
just about everyone who has any kind of job is in it for the money. They do what is needed for the money, they go to where the money is. They have no reason to change practices if it generates money. Much like how many people work jobs they hate just so they can get cash to live off of publishers will make what ever turns a profit, reputation be damned

no sometimes developers take the initiative and make unnecessary changes to a series that everyone already liked. case in point, Ubisoft.

They were making a profit before. What they want is to own the world.

Her son is a neet that posts on Sup Forums all day

I agree for the most part. Get mad at twitch whores all you want. It's the desperate betas that fund them. Get mad at overwatch all you want, it sold 7 million copies. Cry that WoW ruined MMOs all you want, it was and probably still is king. People spend more on LoL skins than they ever will on actual quality games. People would rather play fucking Skyrim for 6000 hours than play a decent game.

As a company you have to give the people what they want, and people want trash. I'm just grateful that some companies are more focused on their vision than maximizing profit so I still get good games from time to time.

Yeah that's how it's been with fucking everything once we became a hyper-consumerist society. Additionally, isn't that the point of capitalism? To put in as little as possible and to get the greatest return possible?

It's just a fucking job.
You go, you clock in, you get paid twice a month.
If you're lucky they don't boot your ass after the project is finished.

Management only cares about selling the largest amount of copies to the largest amount of users. That's their job.

Everyone else does their job as well, everyone is a cog in machine.

I always find it hilarious that Sup Forums expects people working in game dev to show some sort of composure, artistic integrity and dignity no other profession has ever displayed in the history of humankind.

Reminder that Blizzard and Valve gambling based video game models were created by Diablo 2 userbase.

...

Cost of making games went up.

Fuck Singer and his twink loving faggotry.

If I could double my income by selling out a bit I would do it in a heartbeat.

Explain

most people would
hell most people would hurt others without question for profit.
it's just people are huge hypocrites and get very defensive/bitchy when they are on the receiving end of shit they pull themselves.

People are stupid sheep, (OP). I'm not very surprised.

what's wrong with her wrist?

I wonder if even half the people getting so upset would live up to their own ideals. Say I'm writing a book and the publishing company says they'll publish it if I make a couple characters black or gay or whatever, why the fuck wouldn't I do that.

Diablo 2 was designed around loot drops and procedural maps. Players 'ran' instances and bosses over and over to get epic loot. Furthermore, there was an item that rerolled item stats.

Players started selling gold and items via third party websites. Blizzard started thinking.

I understand all this. I'm not a commie, I understand games and everything else I enjoy are driven by profit,

But what people like you and others in this thread don't understand is that there's making money off a great product, and there's making money by being a cheapass exploitive Jew. Both scenarios the devs get their money but in only one the consumer is also happy.

There's 2 pizza joints next to each other in my town. One makes its money by being the best, the other makes money by using cheap ingredients and by making deals with landlords to sabotage competition.
Both are motivated by money but I'd argue one is much more morally acceptable and deserving of respect.

Businesses/ videogame creators used to have a shred of integrity and honor, the whole "greed is good always no matter what, endless pursuit of profit at the expense of your employees, product, and the consumer is A-Ok" is a recent fucked up American idea I think.

Usually those offended the most by such actions are the first to succumb to them when given the chance.
kinda like the allstate commercial
youtube.com/watch?v=O1Z91YkPatw

That depends. If I was somebody who has to make a living by writing books, I'd probably do it. If I already had a daytime job and only wrote on the side, I'd rather throw the book away for free than give in.

>tfw you are a life long pirate and just go with the flow
Feels good man

That sounds plain stupid. In any multi-player game with randomized drops there will be players that would use real money to get what they want.
If anything, WoW would he more directly responsible since they started the whole auction house thing, and D3 made it worse by accepting IRL monies

>morally acceptable and deserving of respect.
You think they care?
See As long as they make a profit they don't give a shit about you.
People that feed those markets will always dominate the market because it's easier profits without worry of "losing respect"
EA was once seen as a pioneer company that was always out for the people
Activision has always been seen as a profit first monster

One was torn apart for betraying those they once respected
The other is still King because they never played to respect, they played to feeding the vices of addiction driven gamers.

You will always make a better profit being shameless in profit then "caring" for the shitstains that will grow old and die being replaced by a new market eventually.

Well that's like twice as much integrity as I have I guess. If it's something like the example I gave where it's just pandering to demographics and no one gets hurt then I don't see why I wouldn't take the offer.

You guys don't get mad when they toss titties into everything to pander, I don't really see how that's any different.

Nigger, how fucking bad can you be with your hypothetical situations? One is a fucking crime while just pandering to the consumers isn't a crime, are you bloody retarded?

>You guys don't get mad when they toss titties into everything to pander
It annoys me as well desu.

And? Only a company run by retarded monkeys wouldn't try to create something to profit from the situation

She's Australian you megaplebs

Me too honestly, it feels like the consumer equivalent of being talked down to. Having said that though I have no problem doing it to other people so I guess I'm just a prick. I would comfort myself with money and the knowledge that some people love being pandered to.

Its not about being the best or using best high quality products when it comes to gaming. You have to cater to your market and do it using the most efficient method, I would say the majority of gamers are dumb in general. Why waste time making a deep complex game with good mechanics when 95% of the players wont notice it. Just make something simple and cinematic, it will be accessible to more people, take less time/cost to make and because its simpler, it would require less time bugfixing. Also the gaming industry sucks in terms of talent because all the good devs go into more profitable industries.

To sell out successfully, you need to take a long hard look at what the future might entail. The problem with the industry is that people sell out... then practically die within the next few years or so.

Interplay/Black Isle tried to do this without a game plan. They just saw the money and tried to chase it. Everyone relevant knows how that ended up.

Crytek is barely hanging on now, funded only by their military contracts before Amazon almost bought them out.

Gas Powered Games released one of the best RTS games in the industry before shitting out its sequel and it killed them.

For every failed story though, there's a comparable success story like Bethesda, Blizzard, Naughty Dog and CDPR and it all boils down to how they play the corporate game.

>dollar store
>overpriced

My local dollar store is absolutely the cheapest place to get every type of candy they have in stock. The only problem is that they don't have everything.

you mean liberal sjw's ruined media.

Extreme pandering to any demographic results in a shitty product. Look at something like Senran, the gameplay is mediocre if I'm being generous but it sells because tits. That's just as trash as something that panders to the other side.

why is rose byrne so fucking cute bros

This is bullshit. There are many big companies that are also ethical.

fanservice=/=agenda

Pretty much though. They're both a tool to sell a mediocre game to a particular demographic. I don't care what type of crutch the shitty game is using, I just don't want a shitty game.

No actually what I realized is that the videogame consumerbase is the biggest bunch of developer/publisher/corporation apologists in the fucking world.

Have you ever seen so much "But they gotta make money too!" bullshit from anyone else? Because I sure as shit haven't. Nobody else is so willing and grateful to just swallow whatever horseshit companies throw at them, and it frankly infuriates me to see so many assholes be so incapable of controlling themselves.

>. then practically die within the next few years or so.
That's all of industry.
They can't all be winners.
And even the winners if you look at Blizzard for instance all they've done in the last 7-8 years has been mediocre in both sales and what it is.

Understanding why they sell out is not the same as buying the shit they sell. I understand why they would go for the audience of several million instead of selling the the audience of a few hundred thousand. That doesn't mean I'll buy the shitheap of a game that they put out, just that I understand why they did it.

No I'm talking about these unending hordes of spineless cunts where, when the devs/pubs explain how and to what degree they're going to be fucking them in the ass with a product, they maybe huff and puff a little but in the end buy the product anyway and thank them for the privilege of doing so.

The higher ups don't give a shit if some nerds on the internet threw a bitchfit over multiple lost features or a higher pricepoint or more DLC, all they hear is dollars from sales. But none of these fucks understand that in the slightest.

Nigger are designers of Senran Kagura forbidding you to make games without big tits in them? Are you just an useful idiot or have an actual agenda here? Are you really that daft that you cannot see the difference between someone trying to subjugate entire culture and an artistic choice whether it's pandering or not?

You're forgetting that both Sup Forums and /r/games get canvassed daily by shills hired online. It's well documented, there are even public calls for these jobs. Currently most obvious examples are Doom and Overwatch, and Dishonored 2 is an up and coming title. Paradox has invested heavily into shilling and it shows.

They can't subjugate anything, they have no actual power. In the same way titty fans make it clear what they wanted (for example purity fags) the sjw cunts try to force things their way too.

An agenda with no actual power behind it is basically equivalent to establishing a demographic. These developers don't owe the sjws anything and if they pander to them it's for a perceived increase in sales, not out of any actual fear. If the SJWs had some sort of secret police powers then I would agree with you 100% but they're powerless whiners, anything they have they were given by cowards.

It's not bullshit.
If people buy their product it's obviously good.
It's not like someone got tricked.
People buy Assassins creed every year.
They buy Call a doody every year.
They used to buy shit like NFS every year - heck every other EA game as well.
Obviously the industry knows what they're doing to appease the masses.
My tastes are 1% and I can't expect anyone to develop for me specifically. When it happens I'm always happy of course but besides that the only alternative I have is to make my own game.

There comes a day when you realize bitching like a kid about shit that will not change is not productive.

I mean feel free to do it, but don't think you're intelligent for wasting you're time. You're basically a spineless piece of shit bro.

Human nature is dogshit. The world is littered with plebeians who have awful taste. There are far more "gamers" who purchase CoD yearly, play MOBA cancer than there are people who purchase tasteful titles like Dark Souls 3, Witcher 3, and other gems.

This, coupled with the fact that the suits running the game companies are all slaves to their own greed, means we will never reach the potential that video games have.

>keeping up with the lives of people you don't know
Seems like you're the plebs here.

Fuck off

Ah. Yeah those people annoy me too. I know it's cliche but voting with your wallet is the only thing that will ever have an effect.

Souls franchise is the perfect example of an art style being ruined by the fanbase.

Very compelling counter argument.

Except you can't write everything off as "but shills". Shitty games sell well all the time.

Diablo 3 is one of PC's best selling games of all time, Fallout 4 is widely considered great outside of Sup Forums, MW2 sold gangbusters regardless of all the terrible shit it pulled (not even mentioning it singlehandedly rose the price of new PC releases to $60 when previous $50 was the norm).

Except no, just because something sells well doesn't mean its good.

If it sells every year it's good.
Live with it or end yourself.
Both options are valid.

>Apple sells overpriced antiquated tech to people at a premium that is built like utter shit and will break under normal use
>HTC makes top of the line, mid grade, and low end phones that all hold up like tanks and rarely fail from even blatant abuse at a fair and competitive price point

Meanwhile Apple flourishes because people love buying over marketed bullshit based on that marketing, and don't give a shit about getting a good value.

Media and marketing have greatly distorted traditional market values, you can make superior or better value products than your competitors and still go bankrupt or fall in last place just like HTC is. The best phones I've had have both been Samsung or HTC.

If you need more examples look at Sennheiser, Fostex, and Audio Technica vs Beats by Dre. Beats are openly known as base heavy over priced garbage yet they control a vast majority of the market because most consumers are slaves to marketing. Nothing more. Sales has nothing to do with selling a quality product anymore, throwing money at marketing sells a product more than making a good one.

Are you the same kind of person that would argue that Adam Sandler movies are good because they make money?

If so, go fuck yourself with a rake, buddy.

You're delusional

because Heat Legend was her best friend ;__;

Actually people buy Apple products because for a very long time other brands were only selling generic junk.
Can't blame them for doing luxury tech well.

Bose fits your example very well too. Among high-end headphones, Bose typically comes in with very inferior quality. They still have a bigger market share than all the better ones though because they advertise a lot more.

>I don't like reality so everyone else is delusional
The masses decide what is good.
There is no objective good.

>sold too little
gotta casualise to sell more
>sold too much
gotta casualise

>Both scenarios the devs get their money but in only one the consumer is also happy.
Pandering to consumers is making them happy. You might not like it but the majority does.

>luxury tech
That's a good way to describe it. Not in the sense of the specs being luxurious, but the way it looks and feels. Using a Mac is designed to be comfy and easy, like sitting in a Cadilac or something. A custom PC worth the same amount would be far and away better in a technical sense, but that like comparing luxury cars to souped-up drag-racers.

"If it sells every year it's good" is not reality. Argument ad populum is a fallacy, not a valid argument.

And yes, there is some objective good. (You) are completely delusional if you think quality factors more into sales than marketing and brand awareness.

It's a bit of both.

There's no denying that casuals have ruined the industry, but developers could still throw us a few bones. From Software has found success without catering to the lowest common denominator and both Platinum and Atlus are still around.

Having niche appeal isn't the financial death knell the media makes it out to be. If you can't (or don't want to) compete in the big leagues, then being a big fish in a small pond seems like the next best idea to me.

>muh argument ad populum

there's a difference between pandering to consumers by telling them they're happy with the product and making a good quality product that actually makes people happy. If you can't recognize this then you are beyond hopeless.

They don't even do that well anymore. In mobile Apple is outmatched in almost every aspect aside from arguably industrial design.

You basically admitted that they sell well due to brand awareness.

Most people don't need good specs on their fucking phone. Just because you want it doesn't make it an important feature.
Quite honestly I don't care how fast the CPU on my phone is either.

A phone nowadays is like a watch for my grandfather. If it looks good it's already serving 80% of it's function.

>Argument ad populum is a fallacy
And yet Western culture is build upon it.

Quite honestly if we look at a game where the small professional segment decides the direction of development like CS:GO - stagnation or LoL - features pretty much no one can capitalize on, you'd see the public opinion isn't really that bad.

It's always been publishers that ruin franchises. The consumer has no direct influence in the game's design.

Publishers pay developers, regardless of whether the game fails to sell or not those developers get paid for the game they made, and then they take a small cut from royalties. Publishers are the ones who desperately need the game to sell to get a return on their investment. Of course the team wants to make the best game they can or they all get fired.

If a publisher tells the team that they need to change things to cater to what their market research has reported, the devs must adhere to it or get replaced, there are plenty of people ready to replace you in the industry. It's a business after all, if you want niche games that fulfill your specific tastes, then passionate indie developers are your only option. No publisher is willing to take risks on a product that only a few people will purchase.

>If people buy their product it's obviously good.
This is only true when consumers play a game first hand and judge whether it's good or not before buying it. The Division is a perfect example of a game that sold gangbusters yet died in less than a month after everyone realized how shitty it was.
Simcity managed to sell >1 million copies in the first month despite being an objectively broken, unplayable game in that timeframe.

Until refunds are widespread enough, not just on steam, and those refunds deduct from the reported sales, the whole popularity=quality argument doesn't hold.

>It's not like someone got tricked.
So you have no idea how marketing works. Good to know

>>Argument ad populum is a fallacy
>And yet Western culture is build upon it.

Take your (You)s and go

>>Argument ad populum is a fallacy
>And yet Western culture is build upon it.

Are you trying to make it sound like that's a good thing?

>making a good quality product that actually makes people happy
If you're so far up your own ass to think that no one enjoys playing stuff like Call of Duty or Assasins Creed then I don't know what to say. Branding plays a part but for millions of people to play these titles for dozens of hours or even hundreds, it probably does something they enjoy.

If you don't like democracy you're free to go live in a theocracy in Asia. Possibly the last thing you'll be free to do in your life.

You can't say someone has been tricked if they've been buying a franchise for years.
You can get tricked once. But if you keep buying something over, and over, and over again?
You either enjoy what you're buying or you're a masochist - in which case you're still enjoying it.

youtube.com/watch?v=Q9RjDRLBWio

Daily reminder that this is the future consumers chose

The point of the video is retarded since it's not about vanity of facecam people but rather it's about product pushing; they're not playing with their own funds there unlike users they're baiting.

>If you're so far up your own ass
I'm not the one claiming popularity = quality and pretending marketing doesn't exist.

People play COD for thousands of hours, because it's the most marketed FPS in the industry and that's all people know. The vast majority of people who buy shit like Asscreed don't even finish the games if achivements are anything to go by

Your head could not be further up your ass right now.

>conflaiting democracy with consumerism
>being an EA apologist

>You can't say someone has been tricked if they've been buying a franchise for years.
Actually you can. It's called brand awarness. Also most people buying these franchises are not long-time fans. They're called casuals for a reason.

Sorry you don't understand how marketing works.

Wtf would investors put money in a stock if its not going to increase in value?

Its horrible if a stock keeps going down and similarly its bad if a stock stagnates for too long

The Division was a new franchise selling on the Tom Clancy IP despite not playing like a Tom Clancy title.

EA leverged the Simcity franchise to sell the latest game in the franchise to people which was broken and unplayable for weeks. Way to shoot yourself in the foot.

It's a bit of all three to be honest.

Most consumers don't know what they want or what they're talking about. They're usually the loudest of the consumer base, size varies, but they're usually small. So what happens next?

The publisher takes notice and says "we could be making more money if we tried to appeal to this group, we just have to broaden our audience" the developer agrees, not like they have a choice.

So they streamline the game with a sequel or an expansion, making things easier, watering down the mechanics a bit. The hardcore fanbase notice this and leaves. Now the loud mouths that complained get what they want, the people who couldn't play the game before because of difficulty take notice and join in.

Now the people who just joined like the direction the game is going, but it's not catered entirely to their tastes, so they become the whiny bunch to make demands.

The publisher motions to take things down a notch and the developers, cucks that they are, agree.

It's a vicious cycle that only alienate its most loyal fanbase, chasing sales but leaving people unsatisfied.