Completelu Average
Newcomer
Do you want to be hit in the head with a rock?
How do you know unless I do it to you first?
This is the basis of your argument.
UBIsoft in potential financial trouble
- Thread starter Silent_Buddha
- Start date
Do you want to be hit in the head with a rock?
How do you know unless I do it to you first?
This is the basis of your argument.
Completelu Average
Newcomer
Let me reverse this:
Any claim that the audience doesn't know what they want is being made by a person who is admitting that you don't know what you want, and I could throw any old idea at you, no matter how controversial and insulting it may be, and you're totally open and accepting of it, because you don't know what you want.
So racial prejudice, bigotry, hate against groups for their gender, sexual orientation, every "bad" thing you can think of, you may really enjoy a game that makes you do all of it, because you don't have any idea what you want. Right? You're willing to wave that hatred flag and embrace any bigotry in a game, because you have no idea what you want. And so is everyone else, because they have no idea what they want. Right?
If you disagree then you're admitting that you're wrong on your own point. People do have a really good idea of what they like and don't like. What they find acceptable and what they find insulting. And many people would reject a game like that without playing it, because they find everything about the concept insulting. THEY KNOW WHAT THEY WANT.
The problem with this who "people don't know what they want" claim is you assume that whatever you're offering, they have ZERO prior experience with. Because if I have prior experience, I know what I want.
So name me any aspect of a video game that no gamer has ever had any form of prior life experience with. Because if I have any life experience that I can use to assess what you're offering, then I DO know what I want, and I'm basing what I want off ideas and beliefs that I already have. It's your job as an entertainer to find out what that is and give me what I want. Understand?
Any claim that the audience doesn't know what they want is being made by a person who is admitting that you don't know what you want, and I could throw any old idea at you, no matter how controversial and insulting it may be, and you're totally open and accepting of it, because you don't know what you want.
So racial prejudice, bigotry, hate against groups for their gender, sexual orientation, every "bad" thing you can think of, you may really enjoy a game that makes you do all of it, because you don't have any idea what you want. Right? You're willing to wave that hatred flag and embrace any bigotry in a game, because you have no idea what you want. And so is everyone else, because they have no idea what they want. Right?
If you disagree then you're admitting that you're wrong on your own point. People do have a really good idea of what they like and don't like. What they find acceptable and what they find insulting. And many people would reject a game like that without playing it, because they find everything about the concept insulting. THEY KNOW WHAT THEY WANT.
The problem with this who "people don't know what they want" claim is you assume that whatever you're offering, they have ZERO prior experience with. Because if I have prior experience, I know what I want.
So name me any aspect of a video game that no gamer has ever had any form of prior life experience with. Because if I have any life experience that I can use to assess what you're offering, then I DO know what I want, and I'm basing what I want off ideas and beliefs that I already have. It's your job as an entertainer to find out what that is and give me what I want. Understand?
ZebMacahan
Regular
A saw a couple of videos of some female gameproducer, I dont remember her name but she has been in a the buisness a long time, having worked on the original gears of wars games among others. She also talked about knowing your audience and giving them what they want. Also, water is wet. I agree with you that this is self explanatory.
I can see the point about how people might not always know what the want. I for instance didnt get very hooked on the trailers for the god of war reboot, AC originins or horizon, but it turned out I loved those games. Maybe a better way of putting it would be:
Don´t give your audience what they dont want.
Yes. People might not know what they want, but they certainly know when they see it. Also most people know what they don't want. It's actually a simple idea.
Last edited:
This is idiotic reasoning and you know it. Come on, you can do better.
No, I just used a fairly obvious generalisation and you miss completely the key point that these industries don't know what consumers want and consumers largely don't know what they want until they see it. Did anyone ask for Vampire Survivors or Balatro? No, and they wouldn't.
Your extreme example only proves that there are clear boundaries to what people will accept, making for some obvious games to avoid, but that argument didn't need expressing because no-one was saying that. You were effectively saying publishers should know what to make for their audience and what to avoid, but you don't know necessarily what your audience will or will not take to. Of particular relevance is the 'inflation' of movie ratings. Over the years, the amount of sex, drugs and graphics violence in the 12 and 15 age brackets has increased. What's tolerable now as a 15 wouldn't have been so in the 70s and even less so in the 20s. I doubt GTA3 would have been particularly welcomed in the early 80s if possible and dropped in among the Hungry Horace and Marios Bros games of the time.
Art pushes boundaries, people acclimate, and they become more accepting of views that wouldn't have been acceptable years earlier. Through these, some artists attempt to affect change by pushing those boundaries, and historically it can be seen those boundaries have shifted without needing to getting into a moral debate about whether for good or ill.
So as a publisher, you can't ever be sure which way the wind is going to blow. Do you get in front and try a trend early before it's proven? Or sit back and wait and see, and risk losing the early move advantage?
In short, you oversimplify. It's not as simple as a two-step decision tree to make profitable games. You have no idea if your 'live service' game is going to be rejected or become a cash cow, but avoiding 'ramming live service' games down your consumers throat which be the dumbest business decision you make if your rivals find success with a LS title.
That will lead to the most boring and uninteresting media ever. Great media can expand your mind and show you something you didn't know you wanted or even was interested in. I didn't know I would be interested in Attack on Titan before I actually experienced it and felt the amazingness of it. If people would have asked me what I wanted I would say "season 3 of Silver Spoon" instead, but I got something I didn't know I responded to instead. Which is much more interesting.
That's a "what don't you want" challenge, not a "what do you want". Plus everyone has experience of physical impact and be informed of the stories of people affected such that they know.
If your supposition were true, no-one would ever buy a game they ended up not liking because apparently everyone knows what they like. And no-one would ever be surprised by enjoying a game they thought they'd dislike. And no-one would ever try something and not like it at first, only for it to grow on them.
