Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6941181" data-attributes="member: 37579">The catch is, licenced games are *always* terrible. Think back on all licensed games you've played or review: ones based on TV shows, comic books, movies, or roleplaying games. Think hard? They're all awful. "But Jester," you say, "I remember <game X>. And <game X> was decent. Or even good."True. But for every example of a good (or just not godawful) game there are a dozen terrible ones. Good games are typically flukes. They're non-representative. And the bad games can sometimes be among the worst video games of the year… if not ever. See, the thing is, video games are made by one of two types of studio: ones owned by a larger company that can pay for the development, and ones owned independently owned. Independent studios typically have to rely on investors (and now Kickstarter) to make their game, and if they're hoping to break into the big league, they need to attract attention. Which means their game either needs to be really special, or their game needs to have a familiar name.Just like movies: either you wow everyone, or its a sequel/remake/reboot. Licensed games are almost always done by independent studios. Because ones owned by larger companies don't need the name recognition the name brings. They have advertising and marketing budgets. (Plus, they want the ability to make their own IP that can be licensed for books, toys, movies, etc.)The studio goes to the rights holder and asks for permission to use the rights in a video game, paying to do so. They're hoping the investment in the IP will be offset by greater sales and attention. WotC doesn't make D&D games. They also have little say in who makes their games. They can only choose between the companies making a pitch. I no one great proposes a new D&D game, then WotC has the choice between the least bad of the studios or no game. (There's also the option of making the game themself, either by hiring people or creating their own design studio. But given the success race of first time video game studios, it makes more sense to did a big hole in the woods, fill it with five million dollars, and set the pile on fire.)Did all the support on SCL stop? Well, yeah, the company that made the game went under and everyone who was paid to make the game lost their jobs. Utter failure? Yup. What did WotC learn from this? Well… likely as much as Blizzard learned from the failure of the Warcraft movie or DC comics learned from the response to Arkham Knight. I.e. almost nothing since they weren't the ones making the game. I *hope* they learned that people want a game that follows the D&D rules. And that just because someone has a loose tie to DragonAge doesn't mean the game will be a hit.</blockquote>

Verification