19th August - Game Publishers

Today's Topic - 19th August 2018

Submitted by @The Communist Wookie

Which video game publisher do you trust the most?

(Give an explanation, don't just post the name of the publisher)(edited)
PH4SE (Ryan)Last Sunday at 8:02 PM
For Example:

Personally I trust Valve Co. as a video game publisher; not that they make games anymore but, from what they have made I have been thoroughly impressed. My 'humble' origins with gaming start all the way back with Left for Dead (when I bought it as a disk - 'haha') and I was really impressed. That was over 5 years now, and i have been looking up to them ever since, aside from some issues with censoring and hating the number 3 of course. Half life, half life 2, the left for dead series. Portal. So on and so forth have revolutionised the industry time and time again. And the same to my love for gaming. And for that reason I don't see how I could be disappointed by one of their games. (Again, if they ever choose to create another one - hopefully if I work there I could spark some imagination ;p).
SuperuserLast Sunday at 8:04 PM
I have loyalty to Paradox Interactive mostly, who make grand strategy games. They have a strong brand identity and I even listen to their podcast, which is on the business of video games. I also run the unofficial community server here on Discord, which is 10,000+ strong. Paradox Dev Studio, their main studio, is a bit incestuous as I understand it (for lack of a better word) but this is better for the consumer as it means you are getting about the same experience from all their games. Also, their developers have publishing roles. I must say though their DLC policy is only great if you go all-in early on - if you miss out a few DLC you'll be really far behind and the large upfront investment to get back into a game can be prohibitive. I'm out of date by a few years on EU4 and CK2 and I'm waiting for some kind of ultimate edition, to be honest; in the meantime, I content myself with multiplayer (where you get all the DLC the game host owns).

Another I place faith in is Bandai Namco, which have over time become a publisher making (usually Japanese, which I like) games for a slightly older demographic and a bit more of an edgy aesthetic than its closest comparison, Capcom.  Over time, Bandai Namco's output has become a bit more consistent in style, tone and quality.

Beyond those two I generally look at individual studios rather than publishers.(edited)
CorvusLast Sunday at 8:08 PM
I trust CD project Red the most. They provided 16 free DLC for The Witcher 3 which some other developers probably wouldve put a price tag on and the DLC that one had to buy were fantastic and definitly their money worth. Also they dont announce a release date for their games before theyre sure that they can meet that date, something which other developers did not do which resulted in rushed games. The quality of their games is also fantastic and they dont include shady stuff like loot boxes or microtransactions in their games even though they probably could.

I also trust Paradox Interactive a lot for similar reasons as stated by Superuser
👍
1
TalhofferLast Sunday at 9:35 PM
Tough one. I do like Devolver Digital and Adult Swim Games a great deal. While I don't like some of their products, they always seem willing to experiment and support games and developers with creative ideas behind them. They also have some remarkable marketing. Other noteworthy publishers are Paradox and especially the above mentioned CD Project. Both have some slight tarnishes to their reputation (Paradox' dlc pricing and CDPs alleged problematic work hours), but they still do a lot of good for the industry, like catering to a specific market  ignored by the big guys or distributing older games and making them more accessible on modern systems.
I think the connective tissue between all of my favourite publishers is that they like to take risks and are run by people who love games. I don't think that this does put them beyond criticism, but at least it's good to know that some publishers still give a shit about more than their shareholders.(edited)
SilenLast Sunday at 9:44 PM
I trust Re-Logic, because I love Terraria. Yes, their next game ended up being cancelled after 2 years-ish of teasers and what not, but they stayed true to their community, always giving information even if things didn't go well. Terraria got so many updates, all of them were completely free, the game constantly goes 50% off from the first year when it was released, the devs helped the modding community by working with them to introduce a global mod launcher that wouldn't crash the game anymore. Maybe it's not fair, because they have basically only one game under their belt (aside from stuff like pixel piracy), but it's the love that they put into that single game and the care which they show through their actions and posts that makes me trust them the most. I honestly think, developers could learn a thing or two from this publisher/video game maker.(edited)
ErnesTronLast Sunday at 9:50 PM
In general, I dont regard any company with trust, but, CDPR products seem fine (the alleged problematic work hours I haven't heard before). But that's part of the problem I'm having with the question, are we judging a dev for their products, business model or employee-treatment ethics? the answer can vary wildly depending on the metric used. An example: EA may have a very low score regarding their buisness model and game quality has been on the decline, but I dont hear much complains coming from their employees, suggesting they have a proper, if not OK working environment (on this point i may be wrong because I dont read THAT much specialized press). My point being, I'd be much more inclined to scoring  pubs/devs on theese 3 metrics rather than choose one favorite (wich I dont have).(edited)
Wu-Tang EthosLast Sunday at 9:58 PM
Short answer: I don't trust big game publishers.

Long answer: Because none of them have ever managed to keep their nose clean of absolute horseshit for longer than like, a day. Konami is Konami, Nintendo abuses law as they see fit because they're a bunch of babies I guess, Sony and Microsoft are both trying to sell me on a more expensive product and therefore their bias is inherently visible, Valve refuses to curate their own damned storefront so literal problematic trash ends up on it constantly on top of them deciding that games publishing itself just isn't worth it anymore, Bethesda wants you to pay extortionate rates for mods, CD Projekt has a high turnover rate because they treat their employees as disposable, Paradox allows it's forums to be... ugh, EA isn't even subtle about trying to suck the cash out of your wallet, RiotGames can't balance worth shit, Battlestate refuses to engage in international law because who even knows anymore, Activision-Blizzard is Activision-Blizzard, and even Bandai Namco has been known to release buggy, unfinished or outright offensively incomplete games at full retail prices.
The closest I get to trusting a game studio is trusting the people making it. I can trust iD software, being made up largely of industry veterans and having a fairly good recent track record with their only real recent downsides being the 'what do you mean it's not intentional' politicizing of their games and the fact that they're published by Bethesda, the people who want you to pay 8 dollars for a new pair of clothing in a video game that the mod creator will never actually see anyway because the mod workshop is a good idea implemented so amazingly poorly that it's not even funny. I can trust Harada, having actually met the dude and talked to him about Tekken for quite a while and I know him enough to trust the whole of Tekken Project with the same gist being true of Kojima Productions and Whoever has the unfortunate circumstance of being subjected to the madness that is Yoko Taro for more than ten seconds will inevitably make a good game and their employees aren't abused too terribly in comparison to the others listed with the exception being Kojima Production being abused by Konami to absolute hell but Konami can suck a dick.

@ErnesTron EA Games is quite literally the best games publisher to work for, assuming you work somewhere in the publishing studio and not one of the devs.
(Answer was too long needed two posts.)
ErnesTronLast Sunday at 10:27 PM
I mean, yeah, kind of the point I was trying to make. You cannot have trust on a company, you may have confidence in it, but trust? I can barely trust people, measure a company by numbers, not feelings.
Leonardo Da SidciLast Sunday at 11:35 PM
I'm going to side with @Wu-Tang Ethos on this one. Whilst many people have personal affiliations or trust in some company or another, I don't think that's an inherently good thing. A company, regardless of their industry has a singular purpose and that's to generate money for its owners. If it has employees, they're paid for their work (however good or bad) but at the end it'd designed to make money for whomever sits at the top. Which, not bad, but the decisions are driven by that.

In the example of CDPR, their manifesto is having faith in the gaming community, which makes for good PR and generates a loyal fan base, however at the inside of the spectrum, the people making the games on the ground are underpaid and overworked in comparison to their US counterparts. However, you can trust that a company will do whatever it takes to get your money.
August 20, 2018
NephLast Monday at 2:05 AM
As a gamer, I trust two game publishers: Rockstar Games and CD Projekt Red.

I have been playing Rockstar Games' titles ever since I was a kid. Grand Theft Auto series, Bully, Max Payne, Read Dead Redemption and even L.A. Noire — I consider all of them really great titles. Just look at GTA: Online, even after years, they are consistently creating new content for players to enjoy, it’s always fun to play with friends. My PlayStations 2 days wouldn’t have been the same without GTA: San Andreas and Bully.

CD Projekt Red has really impressed me with the Witcher series. They have made two of the biggest DLCs I have ever seen in a single-player game — 'Hearts of Stone' and 'Blood or Wine'.

'Family Matters' is by far my most favourite quest in the game because there is just no ''good'' or ''satisfactory'' ending to it, no matter how you choose to play it. It's a matter of deciding the lesser evil, that's another thing I love about the game: the consequences the player is left with after a major decision. Just today, I finished 'The Wild Hunt' for the second time. The story is so rich, the world is not only vast, but there's so much to learn and understand about it.

Trust is earned and these two publishers have earnt mine again and again. Then again, it can be easily lost for some. There’s one thing these two developers give the players in common: you can perceive the research, time and effort they have put in their craft while playing.(edited)
SteffertyLast Monday at 7:55 AM
Over the time I grew suspicious of all of them. Some production teams bathe in my trust but those a few and consequences have taken their path.
Games like GTA5 or No Man's Sky, heck even Final Fantasy 14 or Elder Scrolls Online betrayed me with updates, changes, things they don't handle like in the beginning anymore.

I don't like big changes. And I don't like stagnation. The line between them is a small one and one single publisher did earn my trust without trying: Deadalic.
Their games are simple, yet deep. I can choose a game of them with closed eyes and later say I have enjoyed it.
They also keep stuff organized and a few updates roll out.

Rockstar betrayed me. I liked GTA5 but the inflation ingame and the pure thought on moneygrinding did the rest to kill that fun for me. That is the reason we boycott the Dead red redemtion 2.
SilenLast Monday at 8:30 AM
I don't quite agree with the notion that trusting companies is a bad thing. Trusting them easily to the point of pre-ordering games is absolutely horrible, but if the argument for why you shouldn't trust companies is the fact that they try to make money, then what about the place you get your hair cut, the grocery store you go to, your favourite snack producer, the music artist you always listen to. Are they not the same, having to put money before anything else? Obviously enough, a video-game company needs to make money to pay the employees, pay out dividents for stock owners and to cover other expenses, but that's the same for any company out there and I'm sure you've seen at least a few examples of companies which managed to balance cost vs customer satisfaction nicely. Living in a constant paranoia thinking that noone's to be trusted is not for me, especially when it's about video games, because the worst that'll happen will be a few bucks going to a bad game. Not to mention, I have friends I ''trust'' and even they make mistakes that upset me and betray that trust, but does that mean I should immediately throw the history between us out the window? That being said, I don't just give out my trust willy-nilly, it's important to think about the motives behind companies' actions. Why is this dlc so expensive? Why did they implement this change? Does this change generate monetary value or is it simply PR? Is it for the sake of a healthier community and a better game or is it simply a cash grab? As long as you're able to understand why something exists you can decide whether or not you should ''trust'' a company and I applaud the decision not to ''trust'' companies easily, but saying it in a way that makes all of them seem evil because they want to make money seems unfair.(edited)
Wu-Tang EthosLast Monday at 1:23 PM
You shouldn't trust a big corporation. Of any kind. Ever. When a businesses sole excuse for existing is to make money off of you and they therefore stand to manipulate you into buying their product, never trust them.
Hell don't even trust Rockstar, they sold their souls of for one of the most manipulative online experiences in gaming that I would say rivals if not outright surpasses the greed of call of duty. No one is saying their evil. Just not to trust them. They stand much to gain and literally nothing to lose if they lie to me about their product to get me to buy it. As for the other examples, barbers provide what is ultimately a primitive service but one that is ultimately neseccary. Due to the nature of barbers, there's often dozens within walking distance and people will always go to one they prefer, for pricing or how nice they are to you or because they cut your hair right. Barbers often have such a small and niche clientele that they wouldn't be able to get away with subpar service, they'd go under.
And grocery stores are heavily regulated by, in America, The FDA. Don't trust stop and shop but feel free to trust a non-profit state run office to ensure that stop and shop doesn't rip you off by selling you shit.
SilenLast Monday at 3:14 PM
The problem with big companies is the fact that they have the ability to make use out of a relatively young gaming industry as they see fit, because the consumers make idiotic decisions, such as pre-ordering. Whoever thinks that giving a company income for a product before it's released is a great idea can go ask Atari from 1982-1983 how their pacman adventure went when they ordered millions of copies and they paid the money up front for a game that wasn't even started yet, while giving the developer of that pacman port no time to actually make the game. I think it's less about that the companies themselves are not to be trusted, but rather that they will obviously use and abuse any naive customers if they can, because in an ever-growing audience of video game industry, if you can make 500 million dollars with a shitty game, there's no reason not to do so. I'd do the same alone if I had the ability to do so at the moment, because who the hell doesn't like millions for no reason? That's why small (indie usually) devs make what seem to be masterful games, right? They have a niche audience to appeal to just like the barbers and that's why they are easier to trust, because to them, reputation means everything. Does that mean that big companies should never be trusted? For now, perhaps so, because people still throw money at their sketchy business practices without a second thought, although in this case I trust the customers less than the big companies themselves, because of how stupid they are. Rather than outright ''not trusting'' big companies, I'd say customers should strive to tighten the market and make the big companies appeal to the niche, in other words, work hard to earn the ''trust'' needed to sustain themselves, rather than simply cashing in on a yearly game franchise.
NephLast Monday at 5:15 PM
@Silen  Let's not be anecdotal from the Atari incident.

You have to look from the business owner's perspective. Pre-orders help the business maintain a good cash-flow. You need to pay salaries, expenses and be prepared for uncertain costs or liablities, because ot that, income from pre-orders is necessary. A company will always face lawsuit if they don't deliver the product.

For consumers, it's never an ''idiotic'' or ''naive''decision. What feels shitty to you may have value to others. I have friends who would pre-order the newest FIFA game as soon as the option is available because they love football, doesn't matter much to them whether the game is good or terrible. Value judgements will always differ.(edited)
SilenLast Monday at 5:35 PM
@Neph I value good games and if we're talking about trusting publishers, quality maintenance should be at least one of the main criteria to judge if a publisher should be trusted or not. Now tell me, what is the point of maintaining as much quality if you have these kind of people that pre-order games out of their love for football instead of their love for a good game? You're getting revenue for a game that's neither finished or sold, so what incentive do you have to keep up your reputation, if people pre-order without actually paying any attention to that? In my opinion that is extremely stupid and if someone thinks different, I'm fine with that, but in my opinion that's not a healthy mindset which helps the industry grow. The only thing it encourages is more shady practices, because trust and reputation seemingly don't matter when you're making that money for free.(edited)
NephLast Monday at 6:32 PM
@Silen That's really not how a business works. You should think more long-term instead of what will happen in the short-run.

If you don't maintain the quality you will lose from your current customer base and potential customers, it will lead to eventual failure. A business will want to produce consistent cash flows over its lifespan rather than aiming for one-time-pre-order scam. Ruining quality will just give competitors an edge, trust me, it's really competive out there. That should be the incentive: staying a cash-cow.

In reality, only a few people pre-order, the majority waits for reviews. As I said, pre-order revenue helps to maintain a good cash-flow, it's only good enough for survival.(edited)
SilenLast Monday at 6:58 PM
Then how come EA is still fully functional after what seems to be nothing but a road of dissapointments? Why is Activision getting all this revenue to make even more marketing campaigns when their Call of Duty games are going down in numbers and they close their Guitar Hero franchise? Because blindly following pre-order hype train is still mainstream, it's not ''a few people'' it's a few hundred thousand people who still get sucked into whatever sweet promises those publishers give out. That's the reason people still yell ''don't trust these companies, they didnt hold onto the promise''. People wouldn't care as hard if they didn't drop 60 dollars before the product is even there. Just look at No Man's Sky, expectations larger than the observable universe from a no-name game developer and everyone pre-orders it because of the hype. The game's launch is a complete disaster and everyone cries for refunds on a product that's not refundable due to pre-ordering. It's still a major problem especially in the case of big companies' games, because as you said, some people ''value'' things differently, even if it means giving money for potentially a disaster that's not worth playing.
NephLast Monday at 7:52 PM
@Silen Not all EA games are horrendous as people describe. I had fun playing some of their titles, like — Crysis, Mass Effect, FIFA, and recently, A Way Out and Unravaled. Back in 2012, I played a lot of Battlefield 3, I enjoyed my time. Yes, they have their share of disappointments (Battlefield Hardline). Then again, who knows, maybe Anthem might turn out to be great. I forgot to mention Mirror's Edge(2008) and Dante's Inferno, they are decent titles too. See? Not all games are bad.

I wouldn't comment on Activision as I haven't played any of their games recently. The last game I played was Modern Warfare 3. However, some of my friends did like Destiny. I really don't know much about Activision's current situation.

I have to agree with you on No Man's Sky's developers. Recently, they released a patch to make the game look better. They are a small game developer, and like I said before, people will now think before ever purchasing or pre-ordering a game by  Hello Games.(edited)
SilenLast Monday at 8:00 PM
Yup, that's why I mentioned it as a bad thing, because by pre-ordering customers take a bigger gamble than they need to and the money from the pre-orders usually just goes into more marketing or the boss' pockets. Yeah, not all games are bad, but why give the money before you see any decent information about the product? It's like buying a car upon seeing its rims or the headlights but having no clue as to whether or not it's actually comfortable, how much fuel it takes or if it's even drive-able. I doubt any company relies on money from a product that's not even finished to allow them to continue their work. Since this could be a topic on its own I'll probably drop it for the time being, but that was pretty much the point I wanted to get across, since that's where a part of the hate for big companies comes from. In the end, I suppose trusting big brands at the current state is simply not worth it, although that doesn't mean buyers should stop looking into why they're not trustworthy to be more aware of the system and how people get manipulated. Hating just to hate is not helpful either after all.