Top
230°

Should Developers Listen to their Fans?

Should developers bow to the wishes of their ever-demanding fans, or might there be a value to sticking to their original vision?

Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
ABizzel13291d ago

Yes and No.

At times it helps. Not to mention they're the ones who buy your product.

But when they complain about things like character design, No. I understand Dante's an iconic character, but just roll with and see first. If it doesn't work change it in the next game.

dangert123291d ago

noooo don't listen to fans devlope a game no one wants and watch it fail :P

jjacinto233291d ago

look at the maker of Infamous......... we hate the new character and they respond quickly

RememberThe3573291d ago (Edited 3291d ago )

Fans are the consumers. If they really don't like something about what is in this case a reboot to a beloved franchise, then there is something wrong. I don't remember this much hate toward the new Castlevania even though it completely different from the rest. Redesigning Dante is fine bu trying to sell him as the exact opposite as we've grown to know him is not going to work amounts the series biggest fans. I have this feeling that the people defending this new "Dante" are not even DMC fans and just really couldn't care either way. I probably wont pick this game up (I might rent it) because the main character is so lame.

I hope I'm wrong though and this is almost a creation story about how Dante became Dante. However I don't see how Emo Dante can transform into smooth Dante over the course of a single game.

@jjacinto23(above): Thats because they knew people weren't pissed for nothing. Even though our responses were overblown, there were legitimate character design issues with the old-new Cole. The cool thing about Sucker Punch is that they weren't so arrogant to think they knew what the consumer wanted more than the consumer.

lastdual3291d ago (Edited 3291d ago )

between listening to the fans and letting the fans dictate how a game will be.

It's always smart to listen to your fans, especially when it comes to making a sequel and listening to problems fans had with the previous game (for example, I would hope Mercury Steam will listen to the feedback and improve the camera and invisible walls for their next Castlevania).

That said, if a developer has a vision that involves doing something different, they should stay true to that vision and not change it for the fans, as most all fansbases tend to be very resistant to change. Sometimes you have to shake things up to revitalize a franchise. It may or may not work, but always playing it safe will lead any IP to a slow death. Sometimes you need to take risks.

ChineseDemocracy3291d ago

Bungie, Insomniac, Naughty Dog, and Suckerpunch have all listened to their fans and look how their games have turned out!! Absolutely terribl--- terrific.

PshycoNinja3291d ago

comes to reboots than ya they should listen to fans of that series.

However, sequals and new IP's fans shouldnt really have a say in the developers creativity. They ( the devs) have a vision and they need to be expressed the way they want, after all they are the ones making the world and experiance. In some cases the fans can give input to sequals but ultimatly it really is up to do what they want to do from there.

ABizzel13291d ago

The main thing to remember is that this is a reboot. It's not the same DMC that you're use to, and I wouldn't be surprised if the gameplay was similar, but different as well.

Give the game a try, and if it's not up to par then you can count on the next game going back to the original.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3291d ago
IronmanRR3291d ago

Just fuck NT and their new Dante.

Christopher3291d ago (Edited 3291d ago )

Yes and No. Completely depends on what is being asked. There's no absolute answer here.

Player A makes a reasonable request that might enhance the game while Player B makes a request that would cause imbalances. Developers need to ascertain how the request would affect the balance and goals of the game first and then the benefits, if any, of the request.

If you choose to just ignore your user base, it doesn't mean you can't make a great game. It's very rare that developers don't utilize usability and feedback tests with their games to get general feedback from a wide range of users, including hardcore and casual gamers.

visualb3291d ago

no if its a couple of fans / something trivial and stupid / a basic design decision

in the case of DmC:

Universal reaction
Messing with cannon and art style = very fan oriented sensitive imo

DevastationEve3291d ago (Edited 3291d ago )

If you want to innovate then you need to break misconceptions and sometimes that takes having to stick to your guns despite what the fans want. You can't please everyone, so at least go for the product as you would envision it.

And besides...the fans only want what they want because it was something new to them in the first place. It's hard to go back to "first"...you can't keep making the first of anything, unless you're like Square who makes a new FF every time. Franchises exist BECAUSE of their continuity. Which unfortunantely can damn them to stagnation.

gtamike3291d ago

San Andreas 2

Listen Rockstar!!! :)

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3291d ago
ZombieAssassin3291d ago

The good ones do Bungie, Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Polyphony Digital. That doesn't mean they will do everything their fans want but the do listen.

solar3291d ago

can i have examples of those developers listening to their fans? im curious. show me examples. :)

Chuk_Chuk3291d ago

insomniac returning the weapon wheel for R3
PD with weather and damage system in GT5

vickers5003291d ago (Edited 3291d ago )

I know I'll get a ton of disagrees for this one, but

Treyarch for balancing out their next Call of Duty and listening to what fans want and don't want.

No commando, no stopping power, more recoil in the guns (based on what people who have played it have said), no easy quickscoping, no martrydom, no juggernaut, no deathstreaks, no kills that count toward killstreak kills, killstreaks such as the chopper gunner are much harder to use, no infinite sprint, the inclusion of the Zombie mode, no danger close, a theatre mode for recording matches and catching and banning boosters and glitchers, tactical insertion doesn't work in free for all (and some other mode I forgot), no shotguns as a secondary weapon (which is now primary thank you treyarch), gun game which was requested by the community, deeper gun/emblem/title customization, golden camos return, a true barebones mode straight at launch, bots, no resupply of noob tubes from grenade launchers (and I assume, but I'm not 100% sure) and equipment such as claymores and launcher ammo, and a few other changes I can't think of at the moment that Treyarch implemented because the community requested it.

Godmars2903291d ago

They've never done anything that majorly pissed fans off then ignored complaints and concerns.

Square has done nothing but even back in the days they were Squaresoft, meanwhile you've got someone like NIS and Atlus throwing in soundtracks, bonus material and multilingual voice and subtitle options without ever being asked.

lastdual3291d ago

"That doesn't mean they will do everything their fans want but they do listen."

And that's key. Many of Bungie's fans wanted Reach to basically play exactly like a prettier version of Halo 3, and Bungie did the right thing by often saying "NO" to their fans.

They listened, and changed things where it made sense, but didn't sacrifice their vision just to placate every whim of the fanbase. That's how a smart developer should operate.

Godmars2903291d ago

When they make drastic changes like in DMC, a character that's around 5 years who's being turned over to a relatively new and unproven dev, yes.

inFamous, they probably should have stuck to their guns. Especially if they make more changes for i3.

THE MAX SPEED 213291d ago

Yes they should because we're the ones buying them. If you dont put what we wont then we wont Buy your product anymore.

Blaster_Master3291d ago

The only time devs should listen to their fans is when it could hurt their sales if they dont. For instance, 90% of everyone that played KZ2 didn't like the weightiness. I know alot of you dont like the idea of them messing with it, but its really the main reason why the game didn't sell the way it could have.

xDaRkModEx3291d ago

Yup, i hate the fact that it takes 3 seconds to look behind me. By that time I'm already dead.

visualb3291d ago

i've stumbled across a website where every "gamer" just b!tches about good games

amazing =P

lolzers3291d ago (Edited 3291d ago )

Yeah, Kzz2 was a bit crap in that respect. Along with the storyline.

@solar

I think Crysis had far more interesting gameplay, you had more choice for a start. The fun factor was only limited by your imagination.

solar3291d ago (Edited 3291d ago )

KZ2 only had graphics on it's side. much like Crysis.

@lolzers

i agree about crysis. but i cant compare the two because the ps3 fanboys will call me an xbot (even though i dont own a 360 only a Ps3). im trying to stay on the DL. shhhhhhh!

asyouburn3291d ago

no one bitched about stupid shit like this. no one said to the Karnov dev's "hey!your jumps are too floaty! make it more like mario's jumps!" they just played the damn game until they got good at it. kids these days play a game for five seconds and are like, "its too weighty, slow, etc, we hate it". i guess i just come from a time when the devs handed you a game, and you had fun with what was contained within. now everyone wants to put their two cents in and basically make every game into call of duty

lolzers3291d ago (Edited 3291d ago )

No, Karnov was shit imo. It was a crap game, I had far more fun with Strider.

@asyouburn

I never could get into it, fair play for beating it, it was a bitch.

asyouburn3291d ago (Edited 3291d ago )

strider was infintely more fun, but i still stomped the piss out of karnov. i wasnt gonna let it beat me!
EDIT yeah it was really hard, though not mega man 2 hard