Do we expect too much of games designers?

[Alexander's Horse]

I notice that much of this board is now taken up with people sitting on their tush and whining about various aspects of civ III. Do we expect too much of game designers? Are we the fans from hell? Should we just take what we get and be grateful for it?

[orange]

I voted no...

but I think we can be critical and show respect at the same time. Unfortunately, there was no option for that one, horse

If we didn't tell Firaxis what we want to see, how could they give us what the customer wants?

[yin26]

If we didn't tell Firaxis what we want to see, how could they give us what the customer wants?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I said yes. We definetly expect too much, especially from Firaxis. The expectations were incredibly immense for this game! It seems that Firaxis was thought to be superprogrammers

[dainbramaged13]

Both Imran and Orange are right

we shoudl give them input, but it doesnt need to be as harsh, or as incessant as it is, and all the little nitpicky things most of which are even opinion questions are pointless. Especially since most of them are fixable in the editor

[Kevin Ar18]

A lot of times I'll find myself expecting things out of games that I, me, and myself would do if I were programming it.
But then when I find that when such and such feature that I felt should be in there is not in it, it's more of a disappointment than if I had just left them alone.

Sometimes I get the impression game developers don't consider what will make the game fun. But then I think about my own ideas and how I would only include the features I like in the game. I would want to make a game I most would want if I'm gonna spend years programming it (and if I as the designer, like it, then I can be pretty sure others will too ).

[Simpleton]

I don't think we expect too much. Usually, what we expect is what the game company/designer has been hyping so how can that be too much?
An example of this is CTP2. I remember before it came out. The people from the company were posting here saying how cool the diplomacy was, how hard the game was to beat, etc. Of course, you know what the game really was like. They set the expectations and failed. I think most of the time the designers have only themselves to blame.

[yin26]

I think most of the time the designers have only themselves to blame.

[Chuckles]

I work in hardware, not software, but project work is the same, and I know a few software guys in game companies.

The most important thing is the vision, and the project management. If no one thinks things through properly, stupid stuff gets implemented. If the project managment isn't good, the vision doesn't get implemented properly, or parts of it are left out. You may have the best programmers and artists in the world but the winning products have top notch marketing, specs, and project managers.

There are far to many examples of poor marketing. Either by failing to define a good product, setting expectations too high, or both. These issues are common to the development of any kind of product or service. The unfortunate thing is the inexperienced tech company spends no calories on the marketing, and all the calories on the tech. Ends up being really good but useless.

So I do expect a lot. Why should I accept lower quality out of their company then I expect out of mine?

[yin26]

Wow. Two thumbs up!

[Sean]

Some people here do expect too much. But to be far, most of it is not unreasonable...though including all whims in it would be impossible. All I ask is a game that is efficiently put together...so it doesn't require a super-computer to run at higher levels; not because of the complexity of the game, but because of lazy programming.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Chuckles
The most important thing is the vision, and the project management. If no one thinks things through properly, stupid stuff gets implemented.

This really reminds me of the pointy-haired boss in Dilbert.

Usually stupid ideas come from management and marketing, not engineering.

Originally posted by Chuckles
If the project managment isn't good, the vision doesn't get implemented properly, or parts of it are left out. You may have the best programmers and artists in the world but the winning products have top notch marketing, specs, and project managers.

What do you mean by, "winning product?"

Is that something that makes lots of money, or something that is technically brilliant?

Originally posted by Chuckles
So I do expect a lot. Why should I accept lower quality out of their company then I expect out of mine?

No comment on your part.

[SITS]

If they had said 3 months ago that MP wasn't going to make it this time round then I would know what to expect. But when they hyped it up saying that it was going to be this new wonderful thing and it doesn't happen then I think I can ***** about it especially when they haven't been very upfront about it.

[Chuckles]

Winning product means succesfull in the marketplace which tends to mean making money. There are many examples of brilliant technology but technology is not a product.