Playing from another perspective
The comment of Daniel Salinas in the previous post made me ask me: Really do we want to play the same title of one or two years ago but with light progress? Do we do it because there are no alternatives?. Examples? Guitar Hero, Call of Duty, Rock Band, Need for Speed and the list continues and continues.
It bothers me in the particular thing that every year they deliver to us patched games, with new stages or campaigns and that they manage at price of an original title ($ 70 USD). Why? of course because many of you dear readership grew in an ambience similar to mine, where the map packs were free, the expansions were costing the half that the basic game and the patches were a forced service of the developer to the user and that now it looks like everything opposite.
Call of Duty? The same engine, different place but multiplayer and identical experience system. Rock Band 2? new setlist. Guitar Hero WorldTour? Pffff I already played Rock Band and the restrictions of the MIDI in 360 at least invite me to buy it. Need for Speed? this exemption turned into the hazmereir that once was Ridge Racer. The sports games are mere updates to the staff and small modifications to the technology of the previous year.
If the development times were bigger than two years, the studies would work under an iterativo scheme and Electronic Arts or Activision will stop existing (or they were bought by Google-Valve) the final user would spend less and would play more.
Is asking great?
This space belongs to GameDevelopmentMagazine.com, you will find comments √°, boring videos and tips of c√≥ to be a games dise√Ī and not to die in the attempt.