Sorry for the wall of text. It's just an introduction.
I already introduced myself in the old forums, but alas, it died. This is for people that might want to have an idea of who exactly I am. And what are my *sinister* goals.
I want to bring entertainment to people. I want to give them something to talk about for a while. I want to cause reflection; laughter; astonishment.
It is not for nothing I posted suggestions on the forums back then. It was a nice "training" for things to possibly come, getting experience on the field itself.
I want to start a major entertainment company (well, not major at first). For years I have watched animations, movies, TV shows. Experienced video games of all genres, of different countries. And of course, have seen the customers'/viewers' reactions to them, both good and bad; studied the failures and successes. But for now, I mostly focus on video games, as this is my forte.
Even now, I am closely watching the reactions of people toward the Switch. Making sure I do not fall behind. With proper knowledge, I can get far in this industry.
First of all, I think I should speak about how I plan to manage my "possible" business, and what are the possible company's values. Best thing to do for now.
DRM, Day-1 DLC, unfinished, and even barely playable messes. It currently "plagues" the industry with some of the top dogs (of course, on the indie side, it's far from being fine either). All of these things are a shame for the industry.
DRM is what makes even a simple game be treated like an online game. If the company has server issues (or even close in the worst scenario), even if you might want to play it, you won't be able to. Obviously not the end of the world, but if you buy a simple 1-player (or local multiplayer) game, you shouldn't need to depend on servers and internet to play it.
Day-1 DLC is all about you buying it first and getting more content for that reason, and if you don't (or can't) get it Day-1, "screw you". Well, not all Day-1 DLCs are exclusive (you'll have to pay extra for it), but some of them are. And if it gives an advantage to players in a multiplayer game, that is downright stupid. I can take that companies might want to give skins (alternate look), but downright giving an advantage to those who buy first is total disrespect for the second wave of customers. It really gives a "You should have bought it when it came out!" vibe.
Unfinished games are awful. There is not that much thankfully, but it still happens. Back then, mostly unknown companies were resorting to such things. Larry Bundy Jr has a nice video on it, but it can be a little vulgar, it was called "Purposely broken games by *BEEP*ish developers. However, recently, Konami did this with Metal Gear Solid V The Phantom Pain.
They made people pay a flabbergasting $60 for an unfinished product. How do people know this? The fact how the story stops progressing abrutly, and that they found data, for more things, that never were finished. Another case is Activision with the lastest Tony Hawk game, where they ONLY put the tutorial on the disc and the rest needs to be downloaded. It was masked as a "patch" but the size was ridiculous to believe such a thing.
Unplayable messes are the worst. Ubisoft and Warner Bros are guilty of this, for example. Assassin's Creed Unity had major issues when it launched, and Batman Arhkam Knight could barely be played on PC. They obviously knew about such issues, as it could not be possible to NOT be aware of things of this level. Walking and then suddenly falling through the floor, missing faces, freezes, intense lag, crashes even. Of course, they are putting almost no effort because "things can be fixed later". Even Bethesda seems to be more competent in this regard (and it is a company that is known to have A LOT of glitches in their games).
With this in mind, would you support companies with such practices (or at least buy their newest titles)? What about a company that would be against all of this? For entertainment to be fully effective, "freedom" and "quality" should be put into the product, not "restrictions" and "laziness".
JRPG, WRPG, Platformer, Fighting, Beat Em Up, Rhythm, Shooter, FPS, Adventure, Puzzle, Arcade, Simulation, and even mixed genres, I have experienced them. Mature, light hearted, horror, childish, family friendly, vulgar, mystery. I have these scenarios under my belt, ready to be expanded upon.
I am not that innovative, in that I wouldn't be the one to create VR, AR, motion controls, or double screens. However, I am confident I can do something with these things.
Giving customers experiences that are unusual, memorable, or just leaves them scratching their heads, is my goal. On the go with handhelds or mobile devices, or at home on consoles or PCs. I want to bring them something they will remember for the good reasons. Not something that is to avoid at any cost.
I am not going to release anything anytime soon, however, seeing the feedback of people is what molded my current view for the video game industry. And seeing some more wouldn't hurt at all.
If I can do well and grow enough. I will also put my efforts into TV shows and animations. I have seen a drop in quality for children shows, where I live, at least. Their vocabulary is rather simple compared to before, and the acting seems like they are downright mocking children shows themselves. I couldn't see adults watching shows like these with their child. The voices are also either high pitched or feel "forced".
Perhaps this also happens elsewhere too, I would need more help, if you could help me, I'd be thankful (post children shows you know). Only the children shows area is lacking in my opinion. Well, where I live at least. I want to bring things that children will enjoy and grow up with. Something that they'll be able to remember and laugh at when they get older.
Also, when I say children, I am speaking about toddlers. It feels like shows for kids aged 8+ only recently (2013) dropped in quality. Unlike toddler shows that were already on the decline for a while (I'd say 2007). Speaking of it. Both children shows with real persons, and cartoons are suffering from this. Not all shows are bad, but I see a lot of bad. Too much to my liking, at least.
Animations. Just like video games, I would like to offer beauty, unusual things, funny things. Mature series; suitable for all ages; drama; action. After seeing the success of RWBY, I told myself "Why not me as well?". It takes a team of course. A big, devoted team, and just like video games and TV shows, requires team work.
Obviously, anybody will normally think "You are beyond ridiculously ambitious", however, let me tell you this: I am also realistic. I won't blame anybody for a lack of success. Not even myself. Because what I plan to create are things of quality (so far, people like what I post, or agree with what I say, usually), but even products of quality can sometimes not be successful. Timing is important. It is a basic of the business. But even with timing, other factors play a role between success or failure.
My reasoning: If even questionable products (and I've seen some...) can find its audience, why not mine?
It is with optimism I move forward, bold, but careful, always trying to get the lastest information to have the edge.
Knowing this, would you support a company like this? With someone such as me, at its helm? I do plan to be the boss of whatever I'll create. Sure, there will be partners, but getting bought might end up destroying what I am trying to build.
What I want, is to have a lasting impact on people, a good one. THAT is true entertainment!
Comments
Sorry, this thread will mostly be walls of text. But this industry requires walls of text! It is full of giants ready to sue in case a name is "too similar" to their liking (No Man's Sky vs Sky, The Banner Saga vs Candy Crush Saga, Scrolls vs The Elder Scrolls for example). People fearing indies that might fail on their promises (and FAR TOO MANY actually fail miserably...); funding campaigns that were at that of succeeding.
If I have to release games, they will be on Steam at first. And surely I won't have much trouble considering the amount of fishy games that can go on there (of course, when too low on quality, they get removed) easily.
Free of charge too. You wonder what is the catch? They will mostly be equal in quality to simple NES games (so don't expect Undertale quality for free). You could say it is some kind of advertisement. And priced games will be even better than what I plan to release for free, obviously.
Some series that used to be "complex" became linear, easy, even. Not a problem, but those that used to love harder games (that weren't THAT hard to begin with) barely have a thing to play with. However, trying to please a crowd that loves hard games will prevent one to appeal to those that love easier titles. Difficulty. How to balance it?
An approach similar to The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time of course. Nintendo had so much success with it that they decided to create Master Quest, a "harder" version of the game. I will take inspiration from how they managed to make their game more difficult, without ditching the crowd that doesn't love difficulty. Most games that have difficulty settings only make you weaker and enemies stronger. But the game remains the same, doesn't it? If you know it already, what will prevent you from finishing it easily? Changing, the rules a little wouldn't hurt. And this is what Nintendo did with The Legend of Zelda MQ.
My take on difficulty is simple. The higher the difficulty is, the more the game will change (if possible). Enemies won't become harder because they have more HP, but because they behave differently. Traps that weren't there before will appear earlier in the game, and even exclusive traps for higher difficulties will be there later, near the end. Surprising the players. Random patterns, patterns that require reflexes.
I want to stimulate the brain of the players at many levels, for any individual. See Luminosity? What they use for "brain training" are video games, basically. I want traditional video games to "evolve" and be seen as something far superior than what they currently are. Something that is inspiring. Something that can make someone better at things too.
Memory, adaptability, reflexes. "M.A.R." principle as I call it.
Well, shall I show you some examples? After all, what is the difference between me and another person? What could I offer that wasn't already made? Am I truly going to create products of quality? Obviously, I seem to have a loud mouth, be a bragging fool. But if some of you were there when I was suggesting things to make MapleStory better, many were positive about them (and ironically, a mannequin feature was introduced in MapleStory 2). I hope you remember that if you were there!
I will take inspiration from other indies, but without plagiarising (plagiarism is THEFT, remember that kiddos!). The Behemoth (Alien Hominid, Castle Crashers), Zun (Touhou), The Game Bakers (Furi), Yacht Club Games (Shovel Knight) and many more. Let us say, I will make "similar" games, but not to the point it will feel like the same game but with different graphics.
I will also take advantage of the fact many genres are no longer being made currently, and fill the void this has made. Run 'n Gun (Contra, Metal Slug), Run 'n Gun/Beat Em Up (Gunstar Heroes, The Adventure of Batman & Robin Genesis ver), Shooter/Puzzle (Sub-Terrania), and usually many games that were there during the late 80s and earlier 90s.
To show more examples of good indie games, both fan made and original titles. This is the quality I aim for, minimum.
Megaman Unlimited
Megaman X Corruption (WIP)
Touhouvania 1 & 2
Evoland 1 & 2
Some indies CANNOT take criticism, but not I. If someone wants to say my products are garbage and doesn't give a reason for it, I'll deal with it. If I can get an answer out of them, good, but if I cannot. Too bad. One case involved an indie studio that sent a copyright infringement notice to a YouTuber. The YouTuber in question was "bashing" their game. But if the game had barely responsive controls (including camera), glitches, and sluggish gameplay, why not let them say it? Others also leave the industry because they find it "too harsh". As long as I can get a decent amount of customers, I don't care.
I am not against streamers either (unlike Nintendo...). I understand that not everyone likes people to use their products (without asking) and earn money. But I think it is an honor for people to take THEIR time, day after day, and stream my products. And it is likely that they will buy sequels or new IPs if I allow them to stream and earn money. Sure, they will buy from other developers, but they will also buy from me again, especially if my products are big hits on their channels.
When I was suggesting, it was heavily based on the complaints and points of fellow forumers. So I obviously will listen to customers. And better yet, maybe I won't have to listen to customers since I will already give them what they want before they ask. Who knows? Wouldn't that be fantastic? Putting yourself into the shoes of a customer is a basic rule. No matter how big I might get, never forgetting the basics is a must. Remain humble too. The giants of today always started small (Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Apple, for example). Any professional shouldn't forget that.
I will show more indie games (good and bad *WINK*) tomorrow. Stick around to see them. Good day.
I said it before, I'll say it again. BE. IN. THE. CUSTOMER'S. SHOES! Only then one will be able to succeed. No, low blows, no questionable tactics. Just pure quality and customer satisfaction!
Here are the other games I deem of high quality. People might not agree on their prices, but they are very good none the less.
Hyper Light Drifter
Bot Vice
Crashlands
A Lenda do Herói
Dust: An Elysian Tail
Freedom Planet
Cloudbuilt
SUPERHOT
And surprise surprise for this one. It's getting a revival.
Wild West Reloaded
Medium quality (place for improvements). Well, good titles have place for improvement as well. However, titles of "medium" quality feel like they lack polish and that they really shouldn't have been released yet. Leave things to be desired, even. They are not bad, but not good either.
ZHEROS
Mitsurugi Kamui Hikae
Megaman Revolution
This doesn't sound like Megaman, the stage layout is questionable, and the music is far too off. It's not because it doesn't sound like Megaman it's not good, it just sounds like someone plays off. That, and sometimes the music just sounds "empty".
Here is a good example. One music, that most who know about this game, deem awful.
And here is a remixed version.
Another:Original/Remix
Yes, you heard that right. The original couldn't be saved.
I don't have too many bad titles to show (thank goodness).
Akane the Kunoichi
Attacking Zegeta
Let's now speak about DLCs (expansions). Fallout 4 & The Witcher 3 that gave meaningful Season Passes for example. Well, Bethesda received some backlash because they made people pay for what felt like should have been in the game already (the settlement DLCs).
I think these things in general should include more than costumes or a few hours of play time for the price some have. I'll take the one from Dragon Ball Xenoverse for example. I know it costs a lot to develop video games with such graphics (and licensing rights are expensive too). But why push the luck?
It costs $30 for a few characters, teachers (characters that teach you new moves), new moves (that can be "farmed"), new stages, new quests, a few costumes and that's it. True, there are voices that must be recorded, characters that must be created with move sets, costumes, and quests. But let's not act like it cost 40 millions to add so few content into a game. Unless they really have to pay a leg for licensing rights again to add the few characters into the game.
While on the other hand, The Witcher 3's Season Pass costs $25. It gave two expansions that gave at least 10 hours of gameplay, EACH. Sure, different tactics for different markets. One is a RPG, while the other is a fighting game. But the fighting game in question isn't full of carefully balanced characters (it follows the story of the manga/anime, and weak characters will GET stomped, so it doesn't require that much work into "balancing").
And wait to see just how much the DLC packs for Dead or Alive 5 cost (over $100 of "sexy" outfits *COUGH!* not joking at all). But it's true the Season Pass for Batman AK disappointed many as well...
It is not for nothing some developers are more praised than others, after all.
In regard to this, I will do my best to follow CD Projekt Red's examples. Do a great game for as much as it can be sold based on established standards, do the same for expansions, and voila.
Being like Yacht Club Games is a viable business decision too. They are planning another expansion Never mind. King Knight and Body Swap mode are also coming for free. They were stretch goals.
They also took advantage of the platforms they released their game on.
On PS4, they had Kratos be a secret boss, and on the XB1, they had the Battletoads. Each of these had different rewards after finishing the boss fights. So it is worth to buy the game again and again if you want to experience everything it has to offer. And it makes it worthwhile to do so.
I will do so as well if possible. But I still think that adding content for a priced game for free is still a good idea. And not just some little things like costumes either... *wink*
How have they managed to raise the bar in the video game industry? By offering more, for the same price. However, there are limits. One cannot spend 60 millions creating something and then sell it for $2. That would be "business suicide" (OBVIOUSLY Sherlock!).
Speaking of price, T2 (parent company of R*) is keeping the price of their games "high" for a long time, but for what they offer in terms of content, it is worth it (as far as I know).
Have you seen Batman Arkham Knight's price? It dropped barely a year after release. As for Ubisoft and Assassin's Creed Unity, they kept it high because they HAD to offer DLC for free for the spectacular failure of a release they had. It was an apology for their pure incompetence. This is what happens when you cut "corners" when you're not supposed to. They rushed it out the door, and it hurt their wallet in the end.
I will insist that if something I offer has a high price, it is because it is worth it (especially if I keep it high!).
Single-player experiences, multi-player, local or over the internet. I will do my best to bring this with the highest of quality. On as much platforms possible. The Vita was ditched, the Wii U was ditched; most North American and European developers cannot develop properly for handhelds (true story). I'll have an advantage there. I will slowly build a reputation and develop on "unpopular" devices and popular devices too. This will make me noticeable easily.
But even if you are interested in what I say, what good is it when I give no name for you to look to in the future? Here's a hint: It'll be a Canadian studio, bilingual (English & French), and the logo and name will have at least one thing in common with the first generation of Pokémon games (in North America) for the GameBoy. What could this be, I wonder?
Perhaps you will know when you will see. I will keep posting to keep the fire of hype alive. Who knows what will come out of it?
Oh yeah. I hope I am not posting indie video game links for nothing. I hope you enjoy them, even if the wall of text is a nuisance!
NOTE:So far, I sound better than Hello Games, right? I've heard their lastest release was a monumental disaster. I better not end up like them, that's for sure...
In terms of gameplay, it was exactly how I expected it to be (I didn't buy it because I thought it very expensive for what it could possibly offer). But it seems some features are missing. And that's where it fails even more. It's true they never said the features would be included at launch, but it's ridiculous to expect people to NOT expect marketed features to NOT be available at launch.
The price: $60. For 3.4GB of content. I tell you this, what do you think, what do you expect from this? A video game for $60 with 3.4GB of content, with missing features. And no promise of added content via patches. From an indie studio that mainly developed mobile games such as Joe Danger (which is an endless runner if I am correct).
The game is fine in itself. But the price asked for this, being treated, marketed, and priced as an AAA title is ridiculous. Some ports from the PS3/360 cost less. There are even remastered collections being released (Batman Return to Arkham, Bioshock collection, Borderlands Handsome Edition) for the same price!
AAA title is a term to describe blockbuster titles such as the most recent AC, BF, CoD, Batman, FC, GTA, and even Crysis (back in the days at least, however, it still holds up to today in terms of graphics) just to name a few.
Just to give you an idea, even Nintendo games are no longer considered AAA titles. Big yes, but they are nothing compared to AAA titles. Whether AAA titles are good or not is another matter though.
NOTE:AAA titles either have the best graphics around, are really big, are packed with content, or all at the same time (well, if the game is big, the graphics HAVE to be less impressive because it would ask for too much power).
But there is no way an indie studio can create video games near Nintendo's level (especially the "big" titles on home consoles), let alone AAA titles. Yet, No Man's Sky was priced like it was.
To return to my first point. I think people who said this sort of thing might have damaged the indie scene might be right. More and more indies fail to deliver despite saying things (talking a little like me, actually...). Look at Candy Crush, would you pay $60 for it? Or another Match-3 game with randomized stages? Because this is what No Man's Sky amounts to (in some way). 7% man-made, 93% computer generated.
Even Keiji Inafune, a renowned figure in gaming, failed to deliver. Imagine when people think of indies and what they are usually capable of.
People keep repeating "But look at Shovel Knight!", however, this line is getting old, while the failures keeps on piling up (there were many shady early accesses on Steam, which led Valve to reinforce some rules regarding these things).
As for me, I aim to NOT do like them. I want to advertise accurately, I want people to know what to expect. I won't speak outside my own competences.
I have bold ideas (that are noted), but I won't start working on them unless I have a team of at least 50. And not just rookie programmers, either they have to have been working in the studio for at least 4 years (to make sure they are well prepared), or they are already experienced (and have to say on what they previously worked).
The most ambitious of ideas I have comes in the form of 3D games. I don't neccessarily want to create blockbusters with graphics as realistic as Uncharted 4, Star Wars Battle Front, Batman, or Assassin's Creed. But at least decent looking games like Warframe should do the trick.
I am confident in my capabilities to deliver good games at a good price. So far, I have noticed that despite not being in the industry, or remotely having anything to do with programming, I am as competent as some of the veterans in the industry (in terms of planning, ideas, noticing lack of polish).
This is the studio that created Warframe, and it is quite popular. And it appears the studio is Canadian. They too, are Canadian.
It's not for nothing many gaming companies have studios in Canada (Montreal is where I am too). They're pretty good in this domain as well. And I hope to be a part of it, and more if possible.
Many good games are considered "failures", not because they are bad, but because they didn't sell "enough". Whether people just didn't notice them, or because bigger hits released at the same time. The "timing" I was mentioning in earlier posts, that's what I was talking about. Never release things when CoD, BF, GTA, or other big hits are "around the corner", because people will save money for these titles instead. They are well established and have the so-called "brand power". That's a basic, obviously. But it seems some forget it (we'll see if I do the same).
Many of these games sold better digitally. This is what I meant by "not successful at first".
I won't do like John Romero and his $44 million budget failure... Literally a failure in all the senses of the term. I don't know how he managed to make something so horrible with so much money (Daikatana).
It's true AAA titles are $60, and if you want a complete experience, you'll have to get the season pass. Which customers hope will be worth it.
After all, paying $20 (most of them are pretty weird...) for costumes is a little disappointing. Or short stories. Or Day-1 content that was supposed to be in the game.
I have a few ideas about true and worth while Day-1 content. Things that should be "thanking" the customer for buying it Day-1. Something exclusive to them and that is good enough. Make it a costume, but let them choose how it'll look like, for example. Most Day-1 DLCs are just "early accesses". That's not how you thank people for buying your game early. Offering something just to offer something is weird. Now, Earlier I said it was a "screw you" to those that didn't get it. But that sort of Day-1 is not ready yet. Allowing people to choose how a costume will look like is a worthy way of doing Day-1 DLC as some sort of "Thank You". Let the community choose what they want. Surely not everyone will agree with this, but it is still better than the current form of Day-1 DLC.
I know it costs a lot (if you thought Daikatana or Shenmue were expensive...) to create these big titles, but I think that they waste some money some way or another. Especially by making questionable decisions. People become wary of buying their titles because they use questionable tactics. It leads to slow sales, even if in the end it sells well. This might hurt the wallet a lot.
NOT every developer is like that, or else we'd see way more complaints. In fact, I hope SE will make a good product out of FF XV, and if they do more DLC, I hope they are of quality as well.
Anyway. I hope I managed to get some credibility and show I had good examples in mind. Sure. I can show bad examples and say "I won't do like them!" obviously, I am not protected from failure. But I managed to show I still had a good idea of how to run things (I hope).
But what are walls of text for without a thank you?
20xx
20XX - "What if Mighty No. 9 was Good?" Anime Fan Something John Romero by Zaric Zhakaron is a nice video too. But I won't link it here because "VULGAR". Well, once by the uploader, and one image. The promotional image of Daikatana actually. You'll see just how bad it was and how it was a shot in the foot for the company. And all for only $44m!
And a few more Touhou.
Touhou: Scarlet Curiosity & Touhou Genso Rondo: Bullet Ballet.
If you are a Touhou fan and didn't know these games existed then... now you know.
Good day, and I hope you enjoyed the games I posted so far!
Edit
About this part
"Many good games are considered "failures", not because they are bad, but because they didn't sell "enough". Whether people just didn't notice them, or because bigger hits released at the same time. The "timing" I was mentioning in earlier posts, that's what I was talking about. Never release things when CoD, BF, GTA, or other big hits are "around the corner", because people will save money for these titles instead. They are well established and have the so-called "brand power". That's a basic, obviously. But it seems some forget it (we'll see if I do the same)."
I didn't want to say that those that released games at the same time big sellers were released as well forgot about this rule. But some obviously do forget the basics sometimes (or want to take high risks). Anyway, it's true releasing stuff is hard work. And some times, luck decides to leave our side.
Eeeesh. This part made me sound way too braggy... Glad I "corrected" it before sleeping. Good.
It was so awful they had to pull it from Steam and even offer refunds because of the miserable quality. Oh yeah, and retail PC versions were DoA too.
Pretty much them that spread Day-1 DLC content left & right as well.
Steam, Wal-mart, PS Store, Xbox Store, GameStop. Wow, just let people that buy on Day-1 have all the costumes at least instead of spreading story DLCs and costumes. Why spread content so much...?
I didn't want people to think it was Rocksteady being incompetent or something. So... stay wary of Warner Bros, especially on PC.
And funny thing is, Japanese developers don't use these tactics. They also tend to not release buggy games.
Sure, their games are "simple" compared to many non-Japanese games, but you can bet that they could release them glitchy if they decided to rush them on the market.
Walking, and then falling through the floor is a basic glitch that should never be in a shipped game, yet it happens a lot with non-Japanese developers.
In 20+ years of video game development, the WORST Nintendo glitch I've heard about was from Zelda Skyward Sword. If you did a few dungeons in a specific order, it would block progress. To fix this (since they can't patch their games on Wii), they released a special save file for those that were affected by this.
Hard to believe the bigger companies can't match nintendo's quality. They try to save money, but they lose reputation and sales because of their incompetence. Logic please?
Good, now let's get on topic.
Many retro games were "recently" "cloned". They are so similar in gameplay that it's nearly impossible for someone that liked for example, Earthbound, to dislike Citizens of the Earth. They both have whacky dialogues and both have the same gameplay.
Some of you may not know it, but game genres can be patented to some extent. This is what happened with King, Candy Crush Saga's developer, for example.
Candy Crush Saga is SO popular, that even videos featuring the original (CandySwipe) are recognised as Candy Crush Saga by YouTube Games.
Candy Crush Saga Controversy
King's open letter.
This. Is. Full. Of. Lies. They wanted to stomp the less rich. They wanted to steal others' works and take them as their own. This is proof.
Games "cloned" by King.
Doing research? What are they doing? At this rate, I know way more video games than them, and I am not even in the industry (even if I am planning to enter it at some point). Either they are far from competent with their half-baked researches, or they are greedy liars drunk with power (which is more likely).
Now that King is owned by Activision, and ever since, I haven't heard any low blows. So it was the previous head that was doing bad things in general. So I assume it is safe to play games by King again, since money will go in Activision's hands, and they own Blizzard, and Blizzard hasn't done too much bad things so far (they kinda screwed people that bought the original Diablo 3 on consoles when Reaper of Souls released). But who knows when they will start. I hope they'll never do low blows.
Think about it. How would you react if you created something, go somewhere to present it, they "refuse" it, and they then copied it and made a lot of money on top of that. This happened to someone with Cinar in the animation industry.
I am talking about things like this to warn you. Be wary of what you buy, no matter the industry. Try to learn what companies do. Because they might try to screw the less known. And in the end, would you like to encourage disgusting companies? A well informed consumer can make a great difference on the market.
Business entities in the video game and animation industries tend to be less competent when it comes to hide their idiotic, and sometimes, downright disgusting actions (stealing work and PREVENTING someone to rightfully earn money by doing so, IS disgusting!).
I, on the other hand, won't stomp on anyone (even if I get big, "possibly"). Look at Capcom, Sony, or even Koei (now TecmoKoei/KoeiTecmo). Sony "copied" Capcom's Devil May Cry (God of War is very similar with the mechanics), which in turn was copied by EA with Dante's Inferno. And then came Konami with Castlevania Lords of Shadow 1 & 2. All of these games are very similar. And Platinum Game's Bayonetta was created by some that were in Devil May Cry's team. So no real problem there either.
Many things are "copied" in many industries. This is what we call "inspiration". It's not because it is similar it is the same thing. And these companies understood this. Sure, there are things that are almost copy-paste (or literally copy-paste), and in this case we can take action, but if things also have their own identities, why not let them be?
Nintendo didn't have any problems with Citizens of the Earth either (it released on 3DS).
Well. I hope you enjoyed this wall of text and learned new things!
Ghost 1.0
Guacamelee
Ori and the Blind Forest
Outland
Axiom Verge
Apotheon
Project Black Sun
Maldita Castilla
Super Cyborg
If Contra always gave you nausea, skip the video. The bosses are just as ugly as the SNES ones, if not more.
Curse of Issyos
The Soul of Dracula (Fan made Castlevania)
Street Fighter x Mega Man
Some of these games have blood in them. Even Kirby Dreamland 3 (SNES) had blood in it. So... uh... I think it should be fine? Anyway, none of them are worst than Castlevania games on GBA or DS. And these are rated T. As far as I remember, mods always said we could post PG13 (maximum) things. So... that's fine, huh?
What AKradian said was "more or less" accurate. Many are doing things in a bad way in the industry. Not every company, but too much none the less.
Half-baked released products that needs to be "fixed" later (Ubisoft, Warner Bros, Activision)*. Thieves that dare to say they never stole (King between 2011-2015). Questionable quality even if it doesn't have glitches (No Man's Sky). Over priced products (most Season Passes, and certain games, like No Man's Sky).
*:As I've said, Bethesda's games are expected to have glitches in them, considering the nature of their games where every variable could alter something (you do something to one NPC, and all other NPCs might get a different opinion of you based on your actions, for example. and depending on that, you get different reactions and possibilities. it's HUGE. Middle-Earth: SoM has a somewhat similar system).
Once companies get big, they think they can impose their rules on people when they are not actually needed (Google forcing people to use G+ for example).
Also, here's a little story about why MGS V TPP doesn't have the "ending" it should.
----------------------------------------------------- TL;DR DONE.
And I guess it's time for me to say why I seem to be boasting and hyping myself beyond delusion by saying I am almost as good, if not as good, as veterans.
The thing is, I've watched videos such as "Tips for getting in the industry" and "Tips by professionals" (one featured a key person that worked on the MOBA SMITE). And what I've heard were things I already came to the conclusion of, on my own, long before even trying to search these types of videos.
I was disappoint. Not because they were bad, or because they explained things in a weird way, but because I barely learned anything. The only thing I've learned is that Match-3 games are considered girl games by many in the industry. Whether forumers believe me or not is obviously up to them though.
...
No wait... Match-3 games are considered girl games (what are "girl" games anyway...? putting gender on certain things is useless, what's next, a kiwi is a fruit for girls...? SMH)!? Where were they when Columns was still a thing (or Pokémon Puzzle League)!?
I might be better than some veterans*. Why? Because I specialized in understanding many video game genres instead of sticking to one. Now, you might be thinking "A jack of all trades can't be that good..." However, remember all you've read up to now, can you point out a flaw (except the one on Day-1 dlc)? Especially the part about M.A.R.
*:No offense to John Romero or Keiji Inafune, but they failed big time... So, erm. *COUGH* Let's exclude these veterans please.
Many action games require adaptability at first (since it's the first time you might see a specific trap), but once you know the game, it's all about memory. You no longer need to "adapt", you only need to "remember" how to deal with things.
Of course, action games require reflexes, but I was mostly speaking about "easy" platformers for example (like non-extra stages in Mario games, the extra stages are quite challenging...). Actually, there's also Dark Souls that requires more memory than reflexes. Because, if you are too quick, you might get punished hard by hard hitting enemies. Those who played it might understand of what I am talking about more easily though. This game is ALL about memory.
If action games are "intense", they will also require sharp reflexes (such as Furi, no matter how good your memory is, if you do not have the required reflexes, you will lose a lot).
Turn-based Strategy and RPG games require adaptability, as situations found in them are not "set in stone" compared to action games. You could play the same mission (or fight the same boss) over and over and find multiple strategies to complete it depending on what happened.
Real-time-strategy and FPS games require adaptability and reflexes, as you do not have the time to "slack". And for old-school and Arena FPS (such as Duke Nukem, Serious Sam, Doom, Quake, and Unreal Tournament) require reflexes more than anything else (you have to remember the map, true, but reflexes are a MUST to win in these).
If some of you thought this was in-depth, you'd be horrified to see my personal notes (crazy scientist style that can fill more than 400 pages, full of examples of all sorts and links too. no, I won't be putting those on the net, far too precious!).
Well, this was rather short, I'll be posting something longer tomorrow, obviously!
If it fails, I doubt "gamers" would give them a third chance on the home consoles side (many said they were disappointed with the Wii even if they bought it), and I doubt they'd be able to take TWO failures in a row anyway (the Wii U being the first, and the Switch MIGHT not sell fast enough). Look at Sega, most of their devices were commercial failures after the Genesis.
And if it is a success, I don't know what they'd try to do next anyway (actually, we NEVER know what they'll try next).
But here's the thing. This device will "kill" the handheld market. Unless Sony tries to go against Nintendo in this (judging the "success" of the Vita, I doubt it). But I doubt it. Nintendo made a handheld that is supposedly as powerful as a Wii U, and the Wii U was equal to a PS3/360. Nintendo won't need to make handhelds before a while. Not only this, but handhelds were always "two generations" behind most of the time.
GB=NES (was there during the N64)
GBA=SNES (was there during the GC)
DS=64 (was there during the Wii)
3DS=GC (was there during the Wii U)
N3DS=Wii (somewhat, since Xenoblade Chronicles is exclusive to the N3DS). And the Wii was more or less superior to the Xbox (which was the strongest console during its own generation)
Now here comes the Switch. Nintendo closed the gap immensely. ONE generation behind for a handheld (that can also be used as a home console) is huge. That's one of the main reasons developers avoided handhelds previously (especially non-Japanese developers). Hardware was pretty "old". It is an excellent device long term wise. Even if Sony releases the PS4 Pro, it's just an upgrade for those who want more power. As for the Xbox Scorpio, we don't know yet (it could be a new console entirely). But it doesn't change a thing since neither of them are handhelds.
Reasons developers ditched the Wii U was how it could "barely" support UE3 (from what I've heard), lack of internal storage (8GB in normal consoles and 32GB in deluxe consoles) compared to the competition (500GB to 1TB for PS4, and 500GB to 1 or 2TB for XB1). The Wii U couldn't read Blu-Rays either, which can be quite big in storage capacity. It didn't help at all.
The Switch might support UE4, which is huge in trying to get developers, professionals or not (a console that only supports Unity or weaker is not recommended... Ouya anyone?). Even smartphones and tablets can support UE4, it would have been a blunder by Nintendo had they not collaborated with Epic Games to bring UE4.
What's better is that developers will probably port their PS3/360 games on the Switch too. GTA V, Mass Effect trilogy, Assassin's Creed for example. All on a very powerful handheld. Sure, customers might be tired of the same games being re-re-released, but that's just the beginning. Many games require a lot of power only because of graphics, not because they require a lot of processing power due to complex systems (like the Nemesis system for example, that wasn't in the PS3/360 version of Middle-Earth: SoM).
Look at the Wii, it had support from developers because of the huge potential user base. Which was actually quite bad (seriously, they barely put any effort in most of the ports...).
However, here's the catch. For developers to develop for a system, there must be a potential of high sales (for the device they release their software on). For there to be high sales potential, there must be software (or "hype"). It's quite the nasty circle, isn't it?
Developers won't necessarily release games if the sales are too "slow" to their liking (if the Switch sells 300k in 6 months, it is a monumental disaster, for example), and people won't buy it because of that. But either way, this should be Nintendo's last console. They won't need to release something again unless it is as powerful as the PS4/XB1.
Or if they do, it should be "current" in terms of power compared to the competition. Many people buy consoles for ALL games, which means 1st party (console creator) and 3rd paties (developers such as EA or Square Enix for example). And the Wii disappointed many (many sales came from those who used it as a tool to cure some disabillities). Which is why many Wii U owners got the Wii U after a PS4 or XB1. They expected Nintendo to offer a weaker hardware again, which would force developers to release "low quality" titles, which is NOT wanted (seriously, look at games on Wii/PS3/360, it's ugly).
They will earn money like Valve. Sit there, and get money due to licensing rights. Indies will have a powerful handheld to release things on for a long time, and so will big studios.
What about mobile gaming? It's a joke. There is barely any quality to it, because it is "free" and uncontrolled. All you have to do is pay a fee to Apple or Google, and you'll be able to upload things of ununtterable quality (pretty much like Valve with Steam). Who wants to play Super Dragon Warrior Hyper Fighter Z with stolen arts from Gundam and One Piece (no joke, the amount of low quality things I've seen is SO awful, it gave me a headache*)?
*:Many games in this world gave me a headache, but it was because of the camera (Sonic 3D Blast), or because they were too flashy for me at first (Mushihimesama). But TWO games gave me a headache because they were SO horrible, I could BARELY play them. Avatar: The Last Airbender (PC ver), and an abomination that was somewhat similar to Elite Beat Agens/Osu (forgot the name since I no longer have it, unlike Avatar... ugh...). It was on DS.
The Switch might also have VR capabilities in the future. Nothing is sure for now.
But for a handheld to have this much potential is quite incredible. Even Nexon could take advantage of that. They released MapleStory games on DS and 3DS in South Korea and Japan. I wonder when they'll release them in Europe and North America?
The Switch won't succeed without your support, remember that! And chances are, many will release games for it, and the more it sells, even more will want to develop for it.
The only thing we can hope for is that it has a storage capacity of at least 50GB.
I was supposed to talk about myself again, but being so self-centered is so uncanadian.