10 Game Company Decisions That BACKFIRED BADLY

Companies are not players, and as such, they sometimes make

decisions

that don't make any sense if you are a player. Hello friends, it's Falcon and today in the

game

10

company

decisions

that turned out to be counterproductive are classified. Number 10 of the Silent Hills playable trailer. By the way, exactly where I'm going with this, so pt was amazing, it was just a phenomenal example of a short interesting

game

on its own and it was a teaser for something much bigger that probably would have been amazing and I still mourn the loss . Konami's attempt to erase him from history was probably one of the worst things they've ever done.

It was counterproductive both from a PR perspective and basically from a market perspective from a PR perspective it obviously made a group of people very angry, I don't know. I even need to go into a lot of detail about the fact that I'm still angry from a market perspective that it created demand for a game they were never going to release and effectively crushed demand for anything they were planning to release, leaving something of a black cloud over So when you consider that Metal Gear surviving is kind of shit, also to the detriment of not being Silent Hills, which Konami had and which had a clear demand in the market, it was just an idiotic move and in no way worked for them . 9 crisis 2 for a bit of backstory, crysis 1 was basically a no holds barred PC blast, it had a reputation for pushing graphics cards to their limits and for a long time was still considered a benchmark, it was very open ended. there were many options and it was considered a game where the possibilities were infinite, now they weren't infinite, not necessarily, but by the standards of that time, it was a wild game.

Crysis 2 is not paired enough to work on game consoles. in addition to PC, and when your brand is a video card foundry and you basically make a super linear console game and release it for PC as well and you only support Directx 9, which at the time was an obsolete technology, it's a big investment of the kind of the underlying ethos that influenced the game and even the CEO of crytek said yeah that

backfired

on number eight watchdogs downgraded yeah you remember the watchdogs gameplay demo which was beautiful. The demo was shown at e3 2012 and even by today's standards it's still a really nice demo at least in my opinion and when the game came out it barely looked like it stylistically, maybe it looked similar but the lighting and effects didn't really match up.

They looked nothing like that demo and part of that could be attributed to the fact that Ubisoft Montreal didn't want to show the game in 2012. It was at a stage where they were still pushing the limits and knew they were going to have to even things out again. , but at least ubisoft said they learned their lesson. Your CEO, Yves Gilmout, I'm sure I'm pronouncing that wrong and I apologize. We said at e3 2015 that we said okay, let's make sure the games are playable and run on the target machines instead of just tech demos and crazy ideas that hopefully someone can catch up with. sometime on target machines, like the watchdogs 2012 demo, now ubisoft shows games at a level that they think will be playable and so it's not a big jump and so it's not a big pair towards back, I mean, it was a big explosion that they dealt with too, people.

I was angry about the first Watch Dogs game. I was personally quite angry if I remember correctly from number seven that said there would be interaction with other players in No Man's Sky. I mean, obviously a lot of things have changed since the release of No Man's Sky and there are actually multiplayer options. Now, but I remember Sean Murray on talk shows saying to the question: will you be able to interact with other people? Yes, although it's extremely unlikely that you'll ever see another person, which sounds like the worst detour I'll make if I'm totally sure.

Honestly, that's such a dumb answer, it's still annoying to this day even though I think they've made up for it in every way. Thinking back on it, it's like, wow, how did you not expect people to get really angry? this game, I'm happy that they learned from it and spent time turning No Man's Heaven into what it is today, which is a much better game that addresses some of the things people were angry about, but let's be clear , it was pretty obvious that they hadn't included a multiplayer mechanic in the game when he was saying things like this, it just wasn't true that xbox one number six always had the drm essentially destroying the idea of ​​used games now i'm not going to say That this decision reflects the state of gaming today, frankly the physical games market isn't what it was when this happened, but I still feel a little like you're trying to do this to us, weren't you with the Xbox?

One? Microsoft announced that you always would. You had to have it connected to the Internet, it would have a DRM check and if you didn't have a game you couldn't play it on your system, that is, if someone else activated a copy of a game on another system and you put it on your system, despite which was a physical copy of the game you weren't going to play it meaning the games used were pretty much done yeah people went crazy over this one and rightfully so so I mean at this point we were still looking games. like a physical object that you bought in the store and that you own, but over time that relationship changes, so we don't really own games, we have licenses to play, which is strange, honestly, this

backfired

like a nightmare for Microsoft and this was not like that.

It wasn't implemented on Xbox, but as we move towards a digital download economy, we're getting closer to this, so maybe we'll make some noise in the way we did it for Xbox One because it was a spectacular counterproductive effect that changed the course of things, at least temporarily. we've got another one of that on us folks number five, outsourcing the Arkham Knight PC port. Now there is one fact, one simple thing that can be said that makes it all make sense regarding the PC version of Batman Arkham Knight, which was terrible, it was a bug riddled disaster. which, frankly, had no business being released to the public, was ported by a team of 12 people who normally handle ports of PC games for mobile and consoles, so, conversely, they were also in charge of porting Arkham Origins, but Arkham Origins was a very broken game upon release on any platform, so any issues really weren't its fault, but basically very few resources were devoted to the PC port of Arkham Knight and I don't really blame this developer, they most likely fought hard for the contract. the game making a lower offer and saying they could do it with It's really the publisher's fault for not wanting to allocate resources to PC development.

There are several interviews with anonymous people who do quality testing and they say that they are also in the quality testing phase, which had nothing to do with the developer, it was an internal Warner brothers said that there were almost no dedicated people or resources to the PC version, they basically thought it was good enough no matter what, because there weren't going to be that many people playing on PC anyway, which turned out not to be true and it was a huge debacle, it blew up in their faces and Rocksteady ended up having to do all the repair work.

This is basically what happens when you outsource the PC port of a game to a

company

that isn't familiar with the code. and you don't give them a lot of resources to work on it number four three words paid steam mods like that's basically all you need to know about this one, they decided to make it so that mods were a paid thing traditionally mods are a community They don't have anything to to do with markets or profits or anything like that, and while I like the idea of ​​a modder getting paid for their work, I don't like the idea of ​​it being basically something imposed by the overall platform on this. case where mods are something you pay for and that changes the dynamic from hobbies and enjoyment to work and licenses mods are just part of the pleasure of playing and part of the community and this is not really a good , this more or less turned modding into a What you could do as a market action would be to create mods specifically to exchange for money, which influences the type of mods that are created, whether people like it or not.

I don't like that personally and I wasn't alone, yeah this is one of the things I can remember, the most violently angry response to anything random, like not content oriented, like when you tear down pt, people understand why that it makes people angry, but if you say yes, I think they made mods something you pay for. A lot of people would have no idea what you meant, but what it ultimately did was change an artistic endeavor, a hobby, a fun thing that people do for fun, into something you had to pay for and also something you expected money for. , me too.

Just think it totally changed the dynamic and I think everyone knew I was going to do that so thankfully that went away although Bethesda come on guys number three talking about mods remember when they banned Grand Theft Auto mods yeah Rockstar issued a cease and desist. for a modding tool called open iv which by the way basically used a lot of single player mods, it was a huge controversy to the point where 77,000 people signed an online petition and Grand Theft Auto 5 was negatively criticized by people . I'm just saying, come on, basically, people buy this game from you, you make tons of money, and we just want to do the things we want to do with it, which we've done with every Grand Theft Auto game, and then they did it again. that they published a statement that I'm not going to bother reading because they act like they really didn't do anything wrong and that's not true, but at least they understood that we have to get back to it so that people are happy. the game they're supposed to do anything with, including mod, because let's face it, Grand Theft Auto mods have been a big reason why the entire series has been well received and, frankly, that should always be in the Grand Theft single-player experience on PC. car number two diablo immortal i don't even know if i need to say anything else, that's how many things i need to say for you to get this point, but for full understanding, diablo immortal is basically Blizzcon's big diablo announcement from November 2018 and it was basically an advertisement for a Diablo game that was heavily scaled down for its mobile release.

A lot of people were anticipating a Diablo announcement where they would actually get a new Diablo game that they wanted to play, but no. basically it was just hey so we made a cheap devil for mobile yeah yeah everyone's excited why do you hate us so much? It's because it's been a while since a mainline Diablo game, so if you had announced this and a mainline Diablo game. I don't think everyone would have been that angry and who knows, it might even be okay. I'm not ruling out the idea that it could be an interesting take on the game, but all the silence hasn't really helped its case, let's just say and finally, Star Wars Battlefront 2's number one loot boxes and microtransactions, now you know what which actually works well as a business strategy to get to the parts of the game you want to like playing as Darth Vader or any number of other things require 40 hours of play and are not a fun game, more of a really laborious grinding game and you basically get money to open loot boxes in case you can get Darth Vader, which again took an average of 40 hours.

Did I mention it took 40 hours? well it took 40 hours unless you pay money for virtual currency to open more loot boxes so essentially there is gambling in it it's a slot machine you can get your Darth Vader and plus they basically turn work into a job you're paid for by the ability to not pay them money because i have some sheriff of nottingham stuff back in my day games used to be about having a nice experience now its real literal job where the coin you're giving is basically a token coin that says I don't have to pay them real money, it's just that that dynamic is so messed up and it's not going away, it's just that Battlefront was probably the most egregious example of this we've seen.

Again it's a much better game now, but the damage was really. done back then, wasn't it? I guess I don't really play a battlefront, it's a tainted experience for me even though the game itself is pretty good, so don't do that and as a quick bonus point. Because you never forget all the promises made for the original fable and these were strange things like growthfrom real-time trees to more practical things like the prison being a more continuous mechanic in the game. I mean, there is such a long list that I couldn't detail it. here, but a lot of promises were made that weren't in the game and I think Peter Molyneux probably really regrets a lot of that, but let's be fair to him and say that he actually accomplished some incredible things and his games still fell flat.

That's basically it, his reputation is over. Promising sucks because those games are good. What are some failures of big game companies? Remember? Leave us a comment, tell us what you think and if you like this video, hit like if you're not subscribed, now it's cool. It's time to do it, we upload new videos every day of the week and the best way to see them first is of course to subscribe, so click subscribe and don't forget to click the notification bell as always, thank you very much for seeing this. video I'm falcon, you can follow me on twitter at falcon the hero and we'll see you next time here in the game rankings.