next »

[gunmaggot]

Sorta agree with Melly, but they've always been up and down.  Genesis era: Great, PS1 era: eh, PS2 era: great, Current: eh.

[Melly]

That's a badass box art though.

[mewse]

Publishers don't actively participate in a game's production, nor do they need to even know what a good game is.

Evidence?

I've personally worked with three big-name publishers (including some mentioned in this thread), and my own experience has been that they are always very much involved in a game's production, and their reps are every bit as passionate about games as are those on the development staff.

[Shawny]

Sorta agree with Melly, but they've always been up and down.  Genesis era: Great, PS1 era: eh, PS2 era: great, Current: eh.

ps1 era = n64 era

they released bangai-o, sin and punishment and mischief makers on n64 ]:

[Melly]

Publishers don't actively participate in a game's production, nor do they need to even know what a good game is.

Evidence?

I've personally worked with three big-name publishers (including some mentioned in this thread), and my own experience has been that they are always very much involved in a game's production, and their reps are every bit as passionate about games as are those on the development staff.

Well, I did say I could be wrong, since I hadn't worked in that enviroment. But thanks for clearing that up a bit.

I do however still believe that there isn't a requirement of the publisher to be passionate about games in order to publish them, and that, I feel, can hurt the medium. Wouldn't there also be the pressure of investors for the publisher to prioritize the most profitable games instead of the most imaginative or somehow meaningful?

[Jolli]

i don't see them as huge corporations, i see them as individuals making games.
more talented than anyone who dares criticize them at least.

Wouldn't there also be the pressure of investors for the publisher to prioritize the most profitable games instead of the most imaginative or somehow meaningful?

they still want to make money, it's part of their job. and just because a game is profitable doesn't mean it's not "imaginative" or "meaningful"
(and vice versa)

[gunmaggot]

Sorta agree with Melly, but they've always been up and down.  Genesis era: Great, PS1 era: eh, PS2 era: great, Current: eh.

ps1 era = n64 era

they released bangai-o, sin and punishment and mischief makers on n64 ]:

I was just using a generic term to describe the time frame.  Their stuff was actually pretty evenly spread across Saturn, PS1 and N64 (I think their best stuff in the 'PS2 era' was on GBA).  None of it is really their best work.  In my opinion.

[Derek]

I know that as an indie development site, we tend to harp on the big name companies for being what they are (money-sucking cash grabbers, no real game soul anymore, etc. etc.) and there is a huge reluctance to kind of acknowledge the merit of certain AAA title producing companies.

I agree with eva, you can be trying to make money and also be imaginative and make meaningful games.  "Big companies" make some of the most polished and fun games.  And they're still led by and filled with extremely creative and enthusiastic developers.  No hate from me toward big companies, in general.

That said, certain types of games that I love would not get made (or would stop getting made) if we didn't have indie game developers.  I can't imagine a world without Barkley: Shut Up and Jam, Gaiden, can you?!  I also just love the openness and friendliness of the community (most of it).

Speaking of Barkley, you know one area where indie developers dominate the hell out of mainstream game companies, hands down?  Humor.  The only times I've ever laughed until I cried playing a game was when I played indie games.  Barkley, Hard Time, Sexy Hiking, Enviro-Bear, etc.

You really need that kind of raw energy to tickle my funny bone well.  I love B-games!

[Gimym TILBERT]

Sorta agree with Melly, but they've always been up and down.  Genesis era: Great, PS1 era: eh, PS2 era: great, Current: eh.

ps1 era = n64 era

they released bangai-o, sin and punishment and mischief makers on n64 ]:

I was just using a generic term to describe the time frame.  Their stuff was actually pretty evenly spread across Saturn, PS1 and N64 (I think their best stuff in the 'PS2 era' was on GBA).  None of it is really their best work.  In my opinion.

Radiant silvergun : P


Regarding nintendo, it's the only big company that nurture more than  niche title (and often turn out to be hidden gold mine). They listen no one, and yet they can delight you with unexpected surprise. They are not fanboy, they are progressive.

[Aquin]

It's tough to follow stuff by name.  A developer studio has people coming and going all the time.

That's why Konami (non-castlevania) platformers were great and then Treasure was formed out of that.  And then Treasure was totally bad-ass until they decided to split again.  Q and Lovedelic came out of Sega, which explains where all the talent went, etc.

You gotta follow *people*, not brand names.  One reason I love indie.  I trust Derek Yu the person and not "Derek Yu Ltd." which would be some brand with who knows what person driving it forward.  This is how I know Spelunky HD will be totally awesome.

[Hangedman]

One reason I love indie.  I trust Derek Yu the person and not "Derek Yu Ltd." which would be some brand with who knows what person driving it forward.

*cough*Mossmouth LLC*cough*

[Shawny]

You gotta follow *people*, not brand names.  One reason I love indie.  I trust Derek Yu the person and not "Derek Yu Ltd." which would be some brand with who knows what person driving it forward.

... I hope Derek's company isn't actually called Derek Yu Ltd. :V

Also, I agree. I tend to follow the works of specific people. Daisuke Ishiwatari is probably one of my favourite professional game designers, known for his work on Guilty Gear. That man is a GENIUS. Akihiro Hino, the man behind Professor Layton, and most of the games developed by Level-5 is pretty god damn amazing too. <33

[Aquin]

Hangedman, that's kinda my point.  I could follow Mossmouth.  But it could become successful and then Derek could have a bunch of employees and then who knows right?  But I don't care about the company name.  I only care about the person.  If he were to suddenly leave Mossmouth to someone else (for reasons totally beyond my imagination), I would drop it and not look back...well unless there was another person there I liked.

I'm just saying, it's all in the peoples.  

[Hangedman]

Hangedman, that's kinda my point.  I could follow Mossmouth.  But it could become successful and then Derek could have a bunch of employees and then who knows right?  But I don't care about the company name.  I only care about the person.  If he were to suddenly leave Mossmouth to someone else (for reasons totally beyond my imagination), I would drop it and not look back...well unless there was another person there I liked.

I'm just saying, it's all in the peoples.  

Oh, I know, just a joke. I completely agree.

[Paul Eres]

my favorite "mainstream" or middle-sized game developers are

- koei: even though they've given up their great early strategy games for the dynasty / samurai / orochi warriors series, they still do a great job at introducing people to important historical figures and interweaving history in their games, making it exciting

- atlus: although their rpgs are all very similar after you've played a dozen of them, and don't change around their mechanics very much, the stories in their games are bar none and almost without exception the best in the industry, nothing else even comes close. the difference in sophistication between, say, final fantasy 13 and persona 3 is pretty big (not that i dislike ff13, its visuals were gorgeous, but its story was kind of just typical, with the odd good moment).

- mistwalker: ex-final fantasy team again teamed up to make rpgs, outside of square. they don't actually make the games themselves, but outsource a lot of the work, but they cared enough about games to quit square to make a company of their own, so that they could make games the way they wanted to make them.

- lionhead: i wasn't particularly astounded by fable2 but i think they're one of the few mainstream game companies trying new things; fable3 sounds interesting and they have a long history (and bullfrog before them) of innovative games; they're a good example of a western mainstream developer that doesn't just make nothing but fps's or third person shooters.

there are also a few mid-sized near-indie game companies in foreign countries that i like, like icepick (russian developer).