Should Developers Listen to their Fans?

[Lili Rochefort]

in just one word: absolutly!
developers are making these games for fans.... so they must listen to us!

 

[V]

Put it this way: in business, if you want more business... better business... you give people what they want. Finding out what they want is important, and that's why so many companies spend so much time and money on market research and surveys. Give people what they want as opposed to what they don't want, find out what they'd like and what they don't like, and apply it to your business, and you will more than likely sell more.

But from an artistic perspective, you should not simply serve up what the mainstream demands, as it dampens creativity, suppressing new directions of expression and exploration.

Gaming companies - being a hybrid of both business and artistic production - need to take both into account. So to an extent they should be aware and receptive to what fans want, while at the same time, maintaining their creativity.

 

[Dark Drakan]

Put it this way: in business, if you want more business... better business... you give people what they want. Finding out what they want is important, and that's why so many companies spend so much time and money on market research and surveys. Give people what they want as opposed to what they don't want, find out what they'd like and what they don't like, and apply it to your business, and you will more than likely sell more.

But from an artistic perspective, you should not simply serve up what the mainstream demands, as it dampens creativity, suppressing new directions of expression and exploration.

Gaming companies - being a hybrid of both business and artistic production - need to take both into account. So to an extent they should be aware and receptive to what fans want, while at the same time, maintaining their creativity.

One of the best comments in this thread and i fully agree.

 

[V]

Thanks. I meant to add some more on in an edit but I'll add it here.

I was going to say also, that developers' survival is paramount - i.e. their business which allows them to continue creating, and so they really do need to keep their ear to the ground with what people want to play.

It's no good coming up with the most innovative and creative game imagined, if nobody wants to play it (sadly). I may be wrong but studios like Clover Studio were shut down after the games they were making simply weren't selling, and I can't say they were bad games - some, like Viewtiful Joe and Okami were just 'different' - perhaps badly marketed or something, but they weren't picked up on enough.

At the same time I think game series like Call of Duty - immensely popular and currently owned by someone who thinks of nothing but money - will burn themselves out if they fail to keep players' interest by becoming nothing but a stream of samey 'safe bet' sequels.

I think we need a balance of both to ensure creativity survives, along with a healthy fanbase.

 

[Dark Drakan]

At the same time I think game series like Call of Duty - immensely popular and currently owned by someone who thinks of nothing but money - will burn themselves out if they fail to keep players' interest by becoming nothing but a stream of samey 'safe bet' sequels.

I think we need a balance of both to ensure creativity survives, along with a healthy fanbase.

Such a shame when this happens and its starting to happen more and more. Activison are the worst for this these days, they see a game thats doing well and has a great community so they pounce on it and milk it for as much as they can. Infinity Ward were fantastic developers when they created the original 2 then Activison wanted them to make a new game every year (which they refused). So being the money making leeches Activison are they slowly pushed Infinity Ward out until now they dont even work on the Call Of Duty series.

Guitar Hero was also a novelty idea to begin with (though not one that interested me) but then Activison have milked it so much that people are getting sick of seeing it everywhere. There was no reason for a new retail release with every band they wanted in it, all they needed to do was put DLC packs up with the tracks in it for a fraction of the price.

EA used to do this sort of things years ago when they closed down Westwood Studios (Command & Conquer creators) they let them create the game and took the profits then closed them down once it was completed. EA realised that they were becoming hated for their bad practice and now they pump millions into games studios and have actually turned things around.

 

[Devil Bane]

My input now,huh?

Well...DEPENDS!You are making a new game?Why should you,just do the damn game.

Is is a sequel on long running franchise?Listening to the fans once or twice and giving them what they wnat won't hrut at all.It might be far more profitable and better for bussiness.

Is it a sequel to a game?One or two opinions are welcome for sure but keep them there.Add them as fun or something if possible but don't go further.The project is still very young.

Is it a sequel to very young yet insanely famous gaming franchise[Say...DMC,Sengoku BASARA etc]?GIVE THEM WHAT THEY WANT,GOD DAMMIT!Just do it.I don't mean to do it immidiatelly,but granting the fans' wish will be excellent for bussiness and everyone will be happy.Granted the wish is possible and understandable.Just look at Koei and Hokuto Musou.The fans didn't even say it[Koei just looked at a fan site and immidiatelly went and developed the game] and see how it turned out.

Is it a purely fanservice/anime game or a sequel to a long franchise?ABSOLUETLLY LISTEN TO THE FANS.Don't even think of not doing it,because it will terribly hurt you in doing this bussiness...unless you are the only developer to do the certain kind of games[ex Bleach heat The Soul Series].Should you choose a different path,like cc2 did with the Unltimate Ninja Strom games,do it for certain as you may,almsot certainly end up with excactly what the fans wanted,even if they didn't say it vocally.

Whew...that's me.

 

[A.$h!nati]

They should take only the good ideas from their fans cuz if they just do what the fans want they will screw the game up

 

[V]

Such a shame when this happens and its starting to happen more and more. Activison are the worst for this these days, they see a game thats doing well and has a great community so they pounce on it and milk it for as much as they can. Infinity Ward were fantastic developers when they created the original 2 then Activison wanted them to make a new game every year (which they refused). So being the money making leeches Activison are they slowly pushed Infinity Ward out until now they dont even work on the Call Of Duty series.

Guitar Hero was also a novelty idea to begin with (though not one that interested me) but then Activison have milked it so much that people are getting sick of seeing it everywhere. There was no reason for a new retail release with every band they wanted in it, all they needed to do was put DLC packs up with the tracks in it for a fraction of the price.

EA used to do this sort of things years ago when they closed down Westwood Studios (Command & Conquer creators) they let them create the game and took the profits then closed them down once it was completed. EA realised that they were becoming hated for their bad practice and now they pump millions into games studios and have actually turned things around.

Agreed. EA seem to have realised their mistake, but Kotick hasn't.

I do think game developers and their business partners/owners need to understand that the gaming industry is a little different from the movie industry, or TV, in the sense that the audience - the gamers - interact with the product more than they do with movies or TV shows and they expect more from games than the average film or show... after all, a film ticket is roughly £6, a TV show is either free or paid for from TV license in the UK, but a game usually costs nearer £40 and you expect an immersive, enjoyable experience. It's hard to be immersed and entertained when, as you say, a game company doesn't want to take any risks and wants to stick with what sells safely, Guitar Hero a prime example. I can only imagine their staff are bored to death churning out edition after edition of the same thing, and the gamers will follow suit when the novelty wears off.

I can understand companies' concerns in that it can take 1-3 years to develop and debug a game, so they are expensive to produce, and the trend atm is toward more and more complex graphics and sprites and realistic movements, all of which takes a hefty budget. Although the price of new consoles and new games has remained steady since I bought my first console in 1998. There'll probably be a tailing off of the amount of detail they can put into the games and the length of those games - it already seems that games are much shorter and easier than they once were - or else gamers will be facing longer waits and higher prices for games. Perhaps the gaming industry is reaching a peak at which the costs of game creation are finding it increasingly difficult to match demand for games, and the amount of realism and detail we'll get in games will have to be capped somehow.

 

[Dark Drakan]

Agreed. EA seem to have realised their mistake, but Kotick hasn't.

Bobby Kotick is a greedy, self absorbed, greedy leech of a man. He would rather charge gamers by the minute to play games and sell them parts of the game bit by bit than care about a product he has a hand in. He sets extortionate prices for DLC which arent worth the prices, wants to charge gamers extra fees to play his games online, prevent 2nd hand game sales and raise the price of games in general. He is everything thats wrong with the industry personified into one vile body.

 

[V]

Aye, I think he needs to realise that not every game is (or can become) World of Warcraft. He thinks like a corporate top predator, but games aren't essential items that everybody needs and has to buy - they're entertainment, that needs to entertain. It seems to me that he simply wants to churn out as many games as possible with having put in the absolute least amount of effort. Very good business strategy for some things - but in the games world, I suspect not so good if there's still competition out there.

To be honest, I fear the days of games as we used to know them may be numbered... by that I mean solid, single-player games that provide a decent length of playing time and replay value. I think many developers already have followed this online lead to the point where when you buy a game you feel like you're only playing 'half a game' - since as much effort has gone into some multiplayer mode as went into providing the original game... or, the annoying trend of games having extra downloadable content that answers 'important plot questions'. What's next, buy half a game, then have to buy the ending plot twist as well? Ugh.