Topic: Developers mentioned in games = Sign of pride?

[Plugabugz]

I have 6 games. Super Monkey Ball 1 and 2. Animal Crossing. Rogue Leader. 007 Nightfire. Crash Bandicoot: TWOC.
I've borrowed Metroid Prime.

In both Monkey Ball games, AV are mentioned in opening credits. EA has the same with Nightfire.  Metroid Prime is mentioned TWICE in the opening credits. Animal Crossing has simpleNintendo .  As does Crash Bandicoot.

More and more these days, we see developers mentioning themselves in their games. I have absolutely no problem when the games in question DESERVE to have their name mentioned (Super Monkey Ball 1/2, Metroid Prime, Nightfire, AC). They are clearly proud of their work they have created. AV even went on to design a level based entirely around the letters AV and SEGA (Monkey Ball 1).

I do have a problem with those developers though - Travellers Tales, who made Crash - Who mention their names, yet the games are plain poor. It's clear fact that games do not port from PS2 well. Crash Bandicoot was very, VERY bad.
New engine = Graphics no different to PS1. Camera is appalling. Buttons can be quite unresponsive. When in levels that combine both, you get irritated enough to snap the CD! The game is extremely linear and did not wow me like Metroid, AC, both SMB's and Nightfire.

What I'm trying to say is, developers should only put their names in when they very well know the game is good, because it has been developed and polished to perfection.

[PIAC]

every game i have ever played (if i remember correctly) the dev mentiones their name, not doing so would be a bit silly, would be like going to buy some coke and them just having a bottle labled 'cola', name recognition is important, reguardless of the games' quality.

also listen to the interveiw between Billy and Seamus Blackly, should give you some insight into why some games turn out badly.

[Nintendo]

Listen? Where? Link?

[Grey Ninja]

It's like submitting a report, and leaving your name off of it.  It's been standard since the NES days to put a simple line at the start that says who made the game.

[PIAC]

in the special section of PGC i think, its a pretty big file (its 40 minutes long)

[Plugabugz]

I know where your coming from. It's totally understandable actually.

Developers which actually deserve to have their name in blazing lights - twice before you start the game (Retro wink wink ), looks to me as if they are truly caring, and very proud of their accomplishment. I'm sure everyone will agree there!
Most developers do just put their logo on the back of the case, which is fine for me.
It's those developers though, that make AWFUL games, still put huge logo's in the game itself.
I wouldn't want to be told, that (arguably!) the worst game ever - Crash Bandicoot - Is made by travellers tales?

All my games do have their developers names' on the back of the cases. But, it's kinda bad publicity for it, if the game turns out bad. That said, that is rarely the case on GCN.
One thing the gamecube does have over the other two is that we largely take on quality titles. Those that aren't, words spread quickly.

Bad publicity isn't helpful when you're trying to sell games.

[oohhboy]

I don't mind the Logos, but when you can't skip them when i takes 30 - 60 seconds to roll through them, it is unacceptable.

[NoVisAnima]

You have to expect the logos, because just like films they first say who created them. It's only really annoying when they are overly long. In EVERY game you play they will put who made the game.

[GameCuberZ]

I can't remember a game I have played that didn't have it's developer name come up on screen at the start.

[Uncle Rich AiAi]

For Sega games, they used to only come up with "Sega", but now we are seeing the developer popping after.  How come?

[yellowfellow]

the fact is poor ports/games come about by a) less experienced programmers and b) the line between a product's quality and its readiness to be marketted and sold (the deadline)

sure, all developers feel mostly unsatified with their work, usually because there is always something that can be done; the work is never finished.  a texture can be cleaned up, a minor clipping issue can be addressed, an added feature can be implemented.  
it doesn't mean however that programmers feel no relief when a project is considered complete and they can relax from all the hard work and endless nights of coding and debugging and more debugging.  and this hard work is what they want noticed, with thteir company logo.
just because you think a game sucks, doesn't mean that these people don't deserve recognition.

and lets be resonable here, no company logo if the game isn't polished?  this kind of nintendo consumer mentality is the very reason why nintendo has less 3rd party support and will never be publically considered #1.

i personally, am all for the credits at the beginning, however, a skip function MUST be a possibility.  

[Grey Ninja]

Quote
Originally posted by: yellowfellow
and lets be resonable here, no company logo if the game isn't polished?  this kind of nintendo consumer mentality is the very reason why nintendo has less 3rd party support and will never be publically considered #1.

No need to generalize here.  I told him basically that he was on crack, but in nicer words.  And besides, suggesting that a logo be left off a game has ABSOLUTELY NO RELATION to Nintendo's 3rd party support.  I mean seriously, where do you crackpots come up with this stuff?

And regarding the logos in general, haven't any of you considered that the logo might be concealing loading times?

[lakitu42]

The way I see it, if a company puts their name in huge letters at the beginning of a crappy game, they just made sure everyone knows that they made a crappy game. So let 'em, I say.  

[Ninja X]

Quote
Originally posted by: AiAi
For Sega games, they used to only come up with "Sega", but now we are seeing the developer popping after.  How come?

Most projects at Sega take at least a year to complete.  These developers who worked on these projects want some credit for them.  

[Termin8Anakin]

thie thread is stupid.
of course developers put their name in the game.
crap of otherwise.

[PIAC]

would be like microsoft not having its name in its products, or car makers not having their names on the back of their cars, or even god not putting his name in the bible

[yellowfellow]

Quote
this kind of nintendo consumer mentality is the very reason why nintendo has less 3rd party support and will never be publically considered #1.

this purpose of this line doesn't imply that the mentality of no logos affects 3rd party support, it's the mentality of generalizing most 3rd party games as crap just becasue they aren't as polished as nintendo's products that affects it.  this can be a reason why a 3rd party game has a better chance of selling on a PS2 or XBox.

 

[PIAC]

but they are mostly crap, good 3rd party games sell well, but your point is valid as shovelware doesn't sell on gamecube but does on ps2 and hence is more attractive to developers

[Grey Ninja]

Quote
Originally posted by: yellowfellow

Quote
this kind of nintendo consumer mentality is the very reason why nintendo has less 3rd party support and will never be publically considered #1.

this purpose of this line doesn't imply that the mentality of no logos affects 3rd party support, it's the mentality of generalizing most 3rd party games as crap just becasue they aren't as polished as nintendo's products that affects it.  this can be a reason why a 3rd party game has a better chance of selling on a PS2 or XBox.

Name a GOOD 3rd party game that did really crappy on GameCube.

[yellowfellow]

comparison-wise, i'm sure a game like Splinter Cell probably sold less on GC than on the other two platforms.  Not crappy, but still less...

the point i was trying to get across is that shovelware does have a better chance of succeeding on PS2 and XBox because a) most of it's userbase hasn't spent all their money on nintendo's fine products and b) 3rd party games just pale in comparison to nintendo games.  partially we've been spoiled, but also our attention is really on nintendo franchises so 3rd party games have a better chance of standing out on other consoles.  
frankly, i'm happy with our support and i look forward to all the games we are getting (lord knows i can';t afford all of them).
maybe i generalized, but to think a 3rd party game is crap and thus the developers should be ashamed to put their logo on the game, and negating the fact that countless hours of hard work was most certainly put into the game because nintendo makes it look easy, is silly.

[Grey Ninja]

Quote
Originally posted by: yellowfellow
comparison-wise, i'm sure a game like Splinter Cell probably sold less on GC than on the other two platforms.  Not crappy, but still less...

Splinter Cell came out on GameCube 6 months after the Xbox and PC versions.  That's going to seriously hurt sales of a game, regardless of the system it appears on.  Most people would have already bought it on Xbox or PC by that point.

As for me, I never bought it because I am flat broke, not because I don't think the game is any good.  The game isn't spectacular (just not as fun as MGS), but it's certainly worth the money to buy.