market failure? I guess you never heard of a computer company called valve?
Do you suggest government should make computer games instead? Cain’t wait for that…lol
You need wait no longer!
Seriously, it’s shit. It’s such shit. If you go insane from how shit it is and shoot your drill instructor, the game actually PUTS YOU IN A CAGE. Jesus. I thought that was what the objective was.
Grand Theft Auto: The Standard Oil Threat
Bankers May Cry
Final Fantasy: Freedom
Communal Fortress 2
Elder Scrolls and Species: the Fight against Extinction
Super Cash Bros
Wrong in your points. America’s army has a solid user score on more popular gaming sites, a lot better than most of the private corporate games developed in the last few years. It is a statement in what it does. It aims at a result, and the enjoyment of the gameplay is consistent with what it tries to do. So, it is a success.
“Wrong in your points. America’s army has a solid user score on more popular gaming sites, a lot better than most of the private corporate games developed in the last few years. It is a statement in what it does. It aims at a result, and the enjoyment of the gameplay is consistent with what it tries to do. So, it is a success.”
It only exists because it uses the game engine from privately made games.
It’s easier to make a great game when you don’t have to earn the budget you use to make it.
Tell me, Xarthaz - do the ends always justify the means to you?
Interesting premise:
My only main problem with this is that you are calling games you remember successful. It’s games you remember. You cannot say that quality games are less present now than they were then. It’s simply untrue. The games that exist outside the mean are more easily recalled along with the feelings you had about them. You are seeing what’s called, regression the mean. The better your experience with something, the more easily this regression will be noted. There is also not less quality games out there. There is, in the worst case scenario, the same number of quality games produced every year. But, video games are the largest entertainment industry in the history of the world. That means there is a lot more attempts at making money it in, and with that increased number of options, many are poor. So, it seems worse than it really is.
At what point does it seem like a good idea for the government to fund the arts, or in this case, artistic video games? Government is so inefficient, that they dump a lot of money on the arts already, despite it being the largest privately funded pursuit.
Surely you have to be joking. The Government is supposed to gauge creativity? You do realize that most bureaucrats and elected representatives are there because they are otherwise unemployable, right? What creative energies would these committees tap into? An IQ of 90 would be considered genius to most of them.
It is not for you, and certainly not for the State to judge what the quality of a product should be, what it should cost, or how much we should invest in its development. Each of us make that decision when we buy something, an infinitely more efficient process than some committee, centrally planning everything. If you really want the quality of products to improve, I suggest you find a way to convince mass numbers of people to raise their standards in a way that does not involve me subsidizing one more thing I do not use.
I really hope that this was some kind of satire, but I’m not laughing.
DEMON’S SOULS/DARK SOULS
Are you seriously saying that there are no good computer games out there ? I can give tons of new games that are great artistically and stimulate the mind as well. During the Victorian times most people did not read the great classics of the time, they most likely read the penny horribles, but that did not require the government to make laws to produce great books. Great works will always be produced and need no government to do it.
The Elder Scrolls VI: New Hampshire
This is some kind of troll thread. Government can’t write the driving manual well, let alone dictate what is and is not good for a game.
Here is a good example of the market in action. Take the game, Call of Duty: Black Ops (codblops for short). It is the most successful videogame of all time, by a large margin. It has moved over 20 million units worldwide. So, by that measure, it is the most successful game ever made. By the margin of exposure, more people have played that than have ever played a lot of other games. And by the financial metric, it is the most successful game one could make. Some people will take this game and it will be their best game ever. Others argue that the sales are so large because they worked to appeal to the most common denominator, and have not made an exceptionally good product. Some would say they have even produced a poorly made title that does not deserve the praise it gets.
My point is: The only metric any government would have to go by would be the money it made. In the fashion of government, they would then demand all games be made like this because it’s the most profitable and they will get the biggest share of this (you didn’t think of this, but they will surely have their hands in everyone’s pocket on this, they always do). Only, that would be the end of the video game industry. All games becoming that would mean it’s end. Government is not innovative, that is why they just keep throwing money at the same failing programs, ad nauseum, and nothing ever gets better with those programs.