Search Results
7/3/2025, 6:05:26 PM
>>714382769
>citing Halo as a positive example, when Halo 2's development was infamously a total mess and crashlanded to the finish line
lmao
This has been a problem with Western studios since the dawn of time: they don't have a solid theoretical foundation to build games on. If you listen to the development story of the average Western game, it often amounts to "we spent the first 2/3rds dicking around with prototypes and then had to get our shit together near the very end". This happens because the average Western gamedev has a cultural memory that stretches 5-10 years maximum into the past. Development budgets and timelines are bloated because they're reinventing the wheel and learning what makes game fun on the fly. The lack of theoretical understanding leads to a lack of confidence, which then leads to an obsession with prototyping and "finding the fun", which then leads to massively overshooting your deadlines. You don't see this kind of shit in Japanese studios (outside the bigger ones, at least) because they have a solid idea of what makes games fun and decide what kind of game they want to make ahead of time instead of mid-development.
This has been the case since the 90s, it's just that Western studios could get away with not really understanding game design by coasting on novelty and innovation, which was easy back when 3D graphics were new and peripherals yet to be standardized. If you actually look at the Western games in all those Best Games of All Times lists, how many of them are there because they were solid or refined instead of doing something new and innovative? How many Western classics genuinely hold up today without fanpatches to fix all the bugs and mods to unmeme the balance? Coasting on novelty doesn't work anymore now that hardware has become standardized and there haven't been any new peripherals since VR, exposing Western gamedevs as frauds who don't know how to refine, but can only mash gimmicks together until they get something fun.
>citing Halo as a positive example, when Halo 2's development was infamously a total mess and crashlanded to the finish line
lmao
This has been a problem with Western studios since the dawn of time: they don't have a solid theoretical foundation to build games on. If you listen to the development story of the average Western game, it often amounts to "we spent the first 2/3rds dicking around with prototypes and then had to get our shit together near the very end". This happens because the average Western gamedev has a cultural memory that stretches 5-10 years maximum into the past. Development budgets and timelines are bloated because they're reinventing the wheel and learning what makes game fun on the fly. The lack of theoretical understanding leads to a lack of confidence, which then leads to an obsession with prototyping and "finding the fun", which then leads to massively overshooting your deadlines. You don't see this kind of shit in Japanese studios (outside the bigger ones, at least) because they have a solid idea of what makes games fun and decide what kind of game they want to make ahead of time instead of mid-development.
This has been the case since the 90s, it's just that Western studios could get away with not really understanding game design by coasting on novelty and innovation, which was easy back when 3D graphics were new and peripherals yet to be standardized. If you actually look at the Western games in all those Best Games of All Times lists, how many of them are there because they were solid or refined instead of doing something new and innovative? How many Western classics genuinely hold up today without fanpatches to fix all the bugs and mods to unmeme the balance? Coasting on novelty doesn't work anymore now that hardware has become standardized and there haven't been any new peripherals since VR, exposing Western gamedevs as frauds who don't know how to refine, but can only mash gimmicks together until they get something fun.
Page 1