The point of criticism is to show if a game is good or not with biased views. If you like the game and someone is criticising it, No matter how you defend it, you have a low chance of actually changing that critic’s views of the game without starting a longass argument.
The reason you find quick videos acceptable is because that’s how long it takes to make it. I can make a FNaF game in a month if I want to.
Oh yeah? Although Scott is milking his franchise, making a game like FNAF isn’t like putting badly compressed jpeg images onto a backdrop made in ms paint.
1 Like
Alright. To be clear, I didn’t make that picture. It was given to the the person in charge of the project and I was told to put it in. And I did change the title screen.
Doesn’t change the point. Now elaborate, how DO you make a FNaF game in a month?
1 Like
Milk the cow, hard.
HARD
And by the way, this is how FNAF cow is now.
http://media4.picsearch.com/is?JmhT-W7cJL2hF7JF1WKsQotjDoYmBx2z1tTTC9Ze-RA&height=175
sorry if this is a link, i don’t know what happened.
1 Like
clap
clap
clap
beautiful
The YouTubers I watch put actual effort in their videos and edit them very well. They spend a lot of time for 1 video for that medium, which you don’t seem to understand. Making a game in a monh and then keep doing so for the entire year (although here it was 3 - 4 - 4 months, which is still far too much) IS milking. I am not quite sure if you really understand the term.
By that logic critics shouldn’t be criticizing games if they don’t like them. I know there will be people defending the game, but how should that chance my opinion in any way? He can milk all he want, but I don’t have to go with it and stay silent simply because there are fanboys who like the game. Your logic is illogical.
Your statement for YouTube works fine for FNaF games. If he spends four months on a FNaF game, compared to the one month it takes to make a FNaF game, then it shouldn’t be considered milking. I don’t think milking is generally a bad thing in the first place. As long as people are willing to buy it, this is what I think: “Guys! He’s making something based off something people want to see somethings about! He’s not allowed to do that!”
I would love to see you make a FNAF game in a month that is actually up to par with any of the games in the series. With the 4 months he has taken to create the sequel, he has done minimal effort on creating an actual new experience and a game that improves on the previous sequels. That is exactly what milking a game means. Creating a sequel in a short amount of time with no substantial improvement on the last ones. Why do you think you get punished in Game Dev Tycoon if you do that for example? Because people dislike it and see you as a cashgrab. Please learn to make proper arguments and stop changing things around to your will when they clearly aren’t. You’re even worse than tntey.
LineLiar, please don’t call people retarded. Anyway, seeing as you’ve never played the Fnaf games, how can you call them low qualty games. Sure you’ve seen it played on youtube, but watching is very different from actually playing. Also, i’m not a troll, if I was, I think I’d have gotten your goat a while ago. Anyway, I want to have a good argument.
What’s wrong with tntey?
Also, changes are made. For example, FNaF2 introduced death minigames, FNaF3 had a good and bad ending. FNaF4 most likely had a new concept but I didn’t look at any videos yet because I didn’t want spoilers.
For WaveJones(sorry if I made a mistake on your name), make graphics(1 week), program(2 weeks), add sound(1/2 week), polish(1/2 week).
1 Like
You’d program then make graphics
Well personally, I find it easier to program after I have graphics to work with.
I usually make placeholder graphics then good ones.
I guess I just like seeing the final product.
Those aren’t, as @LineLiar put it, “substantial improvements”. A great example for a sequel with “substantial improvements” would be the jump from The Sims to The Sims 2. It added new mechanics, weightings, features, wayyy better graphics, and more! If he had added something like free-roaming, that would’ve been the game-changer. All the ones you listed are minor things, that don’t generally change the way the game works or feels. The only redeeming quality about each game is the somewhat interesting story. That’s about it.
The only thing I would like to get across in this argument would be that I don’t blame Scott Cawthon. He’s giving the fans what they want. That’s who to blame… The fans… Or “fanboys” as you guys would put it. Notice how all the games get 8 - 10/10 on Steam. Put yourself in his shoes, imagine what he’s thinking. He’s released FOUR games in a year’s work, and most people are content with it, for some reason…
Are the games good? No. Mediocre at best. Do I blame Scott? No, I do not. I blame the fans who have for some reason allowed their standards to be lowered enough to keep buying what are practically re-skins.
Seriously? Ugh… Geez…
3 Likes
Well now scottgames is just blank…
so take that as you want.
Why are you guys complaining about Scott getting money? IT’S HIS JOB TO MAKE THESE GAMES!!!
1 Like