Thanks Christian223. There's lots of viewpoints and most of them have merit.
I agree with your point too about making money. As I've begun to see in the business world, although some companies create products `for the love of it`, they more often than not will focus on what is profitable and seemingly in demand than what is actually a good product, especially if it is a bigger business. They are not really that interested in making a product that does anything other than get the money to come in. They could then just as easily substitute computer games for any other product and sell that. In the end it's all the same stuff when you look at it from that viewpoint. If you are in business and you really need to stay afloat with the right choices then unfortunately most of the time you have to find a demand and supply it, in terms of what the audience seems to want or what they will buy into, rather than what you would `like` to be able to do or what would be a great expression of your best efforts and ideas. Some of the best most fun games probably never see the light of day. Again it's an ego thing, the less meaningful the product is and the less important it is the happier the ego will be because it removes all real value and replaces it with ego values. These big-money companies are churning out crap based on getting the most sales which doesn't have much at all to do with innovation or anything else.
Look at FlameDuck's comment - it's more fun to play at being a plumber jumping on people's heads, than to give him a big gun and have him blow them to pieces with realistic blood splattering all over.
I think these problems begin in part when the people developing the product stop sticking to their guns and start adapting to the public. Instead of setting a new standard they become a mirror of what is already out there. It's totally shallow and absent of all meaning. It's easy, it takes no awareness and adds nothing to the mix. Business is all targetted at seeing what the audience seems to want and feeding it, rather than blowing minds with radical and possibly unpopular yet superior concepts. They go for the popularity vote and the majority of people buy into it. It's not just that companies make the bad games, there are also significant numbers of people who have the same mindset that buy into them. These companies couldn't be successful if the people would stand up and say no. But then, if they were saying no they'd also be saying yes to their own expression and creativity, which would make them less interested in being a passive recipient of what the bigwigs throw at them.
I agree with your point too about making money. As I've begun to see in the business world, although some companies create products `for the love of it`, they more often than not will focus on what is profitable and seemingly in demand than what is actually a good product, especially if it is a bigger business. They are not really that interested in making a product that does anything other than get the money to come in. They could then just as easily substitute computer games for any other product and sell that. In the end it's all the same stuff when you look at it from that viewpoint. If you are in business and you really need to stay afloat with the right choices then unfortunately most of the time you have to find a demand and supply it, in terms of what the audience seems to want or what they will buy into, rather than what you would `like` to be able to do or what would be a great expression of your best efforts and ideas. Some of the best most fun games probably never see the light of day. Again it's an ego thing, the less meaningful the product is and the less important it is the happier the ego will be because it removes all real value and replaces it with ego values. These big-money companies are churning out crap based on getting the most sales which doesn't have much at all to do with innovation or anything else.
Look at FlameDuck's comment - it's more fun to play at being a plumber jumping on people's heads, than to give him a big gun and have him blow them to pieces with realistic blood splattering all over.
I think these problems begin in part when the people developing the product stop sticking to their guns and start adapting to the public. Instead of setting a new standard they become a mirror of what is already out there. It's totally shallow and absent of all meaning. It's easy, it takes no awareness and adds nothing to the mix. Business is all targetted at seeing what the audience seems to want and feeding it, rather than blowing minds with radical and possibly unpopular yet superior concepts. They go for the popularity vote and the majority of people buy into it. It's not just that companies make the bad games, there are also significant numbers of people who have the same mindset that buy into them. These companies couldn't be successful if the people would stand up and say no. But then, if they were saying no they'd also be saying yes to their own expression and creativity, which would make them less interested in being a passive recipient of what the bigwigs throw at them.