Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Humble Indie Bundle V Generates Five Million USD

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by uid313 View Post
    I could just as easily pirate that shit if I wanted it.
    Piracy of proprietary software is just as reprehensible as GPL violation.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by directhex View Post
      Piracy of proprietary software is just as reprehensible as GPL violation.
      No its completely cool. You see only by pirating software will people turn to the glory of free RMS software. I mean it worked for pc gamers who pirated games! Now we have no DRM and developers now only speak well of it. /sarcasm

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by directhex View Post
        Do you even have a clue what a real amateurish game means?

        Hint: award-winning lower-budget games are not amateurish. Badly made games of *any* budget are amateurish.

        And Psychonauts had a budget of $13 million in 2005 dollars, which is quite comfortably into AAA territory, certainly for Majesco who originally funded it.
        I said amateurish and average, not just amateurish. So stop using selective quotation.
        If you still don't get it - I'll tell you again but in other words - yes AAA is a subjective term just like beauty since there's no hardcoded properties defining it. I played the first several bundles and all games where either downright amateurish or average games. The games that the bundle ships now are better but to me they don't compare to Modern Warfare 3 class of games, hence they're, as I said, "average" and amateurish, not AAA

        And don't give me 2005 or so games for obvious reasons. What was 7 years ago AAA, now is obviously not AAA any longer since the standards for AAA rise as time goes by.
        Last edited by mark45; 06-15-2012, 09:18 AM.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by mark45 View Post
          they don't compare to Modern Warfare 3 class of games, hence they're "average" not AAA.
          So you rate a game's quality on budget.

          tl;dr: you're a moron

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by directhex View Post
            So you rate a game's quality on budget.

            tl;dr: you're a moron
            Where did I say budget? So who's the moron here? It's a nice try giving me 2005 game figures and then calling names.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by mark45 View Post
              Where did I say budget? So who's the moron here?
              That's what AAA is.

              A budget issue.

              Publishers decide how much money to spend on a game's development and marketing, and the ones that get the lion's share are "AAA" titles.

              It's not a measure of whether a game is any good or not, only the budget spent by the publisher.

              Take a recent example - Homefront was an AAA title for THQ. They spent millions on it. Millions. It rated 70% from Metacritic, because it wasn't very good.

              The film version of the term is "Blockbuster" - it doesn't mean it's good, it means it's expensive. Take the Transformers movies as an example - they're shit, but they're expensive. They're "blockbusters" - and in game terms, they're AAA.

              Let's quote a developer who gets to play with AAA budgets in excess of $20m, Alex Hutchinson from Ubisoft Montreal:

              "We think about [this push] as kind of cancerous growth," .... "I think that will leave the AAA blockbusters as nothing more than the last of the dinosaurs."... "In my mind, video games need to have the goal of educating people, entertaining people, or at least being artistic," ... "If you're not pushing any of these things...then I think we're in for a rough patch."
              You're obsessed with using a term you don't understand as a badge of quality, when it's not - and the success of indie games thanks to download platforms like XBLA, Steam and PSN, goes to show the total irrelevance of AAA as a concept to modern gamers.

              Grand Theft Auto 4 isn't 1,000 times better than World of Goo, despite having 1,000 times more money spent on it.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by directhex View Post
                That's what AAA is.
                bla bla bla

                Quality rings a bell? Hello? I didn't play Left 4 Dead because it had a big budget, but because it's sophisticated and cool, that's what AAA games mean. I haven't seen such games on Humble Bundle.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by mark45 View Post
                  Quality rings a bell? Hello? I didn't play Left 4 Dead because it had a big budget, but because it's sophisticated and cool, that's what AAA games mean. I haven't seen such games on Humble Bundle.
                  Then state what you mean by AAA title. As far as I read your posting, it is like @directhex interpreted. And I agree with @directhex. The quality of games doesn't always depend on how much money you put to produce that game.
                  Last edited by t.s.; 06-15-2012, 11:10 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by t.s. View Post
                    Then state what you mean by AAA title. As far as I read your posting, it is like @directhex interpreted. And I agree with @directhex. The quality of one games doesn't always depend on how much money you put to produce that game.
                    AAA doesn't mean anything if you judge it solely by the budget. And when I say AAA I mean quality since I don't give a rat's ass how much they spent creating a game. That's why I played Call of Duty and stuff alike - because it's sophisticated and cool. There's nothing like this in the Bundle and since they have big budgets lately they can probably try to create and/or ship such a title. I'm sure you can create a good title with under a million $. There are good free engines like doom3 and whatnot, so you don't really have to create a game from scratch.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by mark45 View Post
                      Quality rings a bell?
                      Quality has nothing to do with an AAA budget. There is an assumption that there is a link between "money spent" and "quality of final product", but it's not a causal relationship.

                      Daikatana had an AAA budget.

                      Hello? I didn't play Left 4 Dead because it had a big budget, but because it's sophisticated and cool, that's what AAA games mean.
                      It really isn't.

                      Try reading an industry rag like MCV. It has adverts in it, not for end customers, but for retailers - i.e. "buy this game from your distributor, you'll sell loads of it". Every "AAA" game comes with a tagline for the marketing budget, since that's what defines an AAA game.

                      Left 4 dead had a marketing budget of 10 million dollars. L4D2 was $25m for marketing. Not a penny of that went onto the game, that's money for adverts. That's what makes a game AAA.

                      I haven't seen such games on Humble Bundle.
                      1) Psychonauts is an AAA title (from 2005) - however, unlike other HIB games, it was originally funded by a big-name publisher who spent millions on it.

                      2) A vaguely modern AAA game costs tens of millions of dollars to develop and the same again to market. The best selling HIB ever raised 5 million, which is split first between charity/developer/tip split, then again between developers. If you assume that 100% of HIB revenue went to the 8 game developers, then each got $600,000. That's a decent chunk of change for an indie, but it's a rounding error for something like GTA4 with its $100m budget.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X