Pop Quiz Hot Shot

[Shockeye]

Your game has show-stopping bugs and is almost universally panned by reviewers but you can't admit the game sucked: What do you do?

Dialogue: Shiny Entertainment's David Perry

The Hollywood Reporter: Sometimes the concept for a game sounds great, but then it doesn't deliver. For example, everyone got very excited when you talked up the concept for "Enter The Matrix" and, in fact, it did great in the stores -- which might have had something to do with its tie-in to the movie -- but, as you know, the game got less than critical acclaim from reviewers. In retrospect, what would you have done differently to get a better reception, and why is it so hard to build a game that lives up to expectations?

David Perry: The thing about the video games business is that the reviewers who critique your games are very hardcore gamers with very strong opinions that don't necessarily reflect those of the mass market. When we did "Enter The Matrix," we wanted to sell as many copies as we possibly could and, in fact, we made something like $250 million. In order to do that, we did focus group tests and made many changes in the game in order to make the average gamer happy. You'll find that, with most games today, the people who buy your games give higher marks than the reviewers. And that's something that you have to watch out for in our industry. You can't judge whether your game is successful based on what the professional critics say.

The Hollywood Reporter: The gamers' word of mouth is more important than the critics' reviews?

David Perry: Yes, that's what really matters. If we put all of our attention on making the reviewers happy, we'd create a game that would be for hardcore gamers and would please only a very small percentage of the mass market. That's not why we're in business.

When in doubt, blame the reviewers.

[Furiously]

I shoot the reviewer in the leg.

[Kenrick]

I shoot the reviewer in the leg.

You have summoned:

a Jeff Daniels

[Nebu]

Dialogue: Shiny Entertainment's David Perry
David Perry: Yes, that's what really matters. If we put all of our attention on making the reviewers happy, we'd create a game that would be for hardcore gamers and would please only a very small percentage of the mass market. That's not why we're in business.

In other words, the mass market wants a shiny in a box with proper marketing appeal.  Not a good game. 

I'm not so sure that he's wrong.

[schild]

He's wrong. There's no reason to get into it. He's wrong. It takes a very rare title on very rare IP to sell independently with bad reviews to be worthwhile. Making a game spread by word of mouth is near impossible once children discover the internet. Marketing to smaller children just requires using a Nickelodeon IP or some shit from Cartoon Network.

[Margalis]

Perry is an idiot. A self-aggrandizing one at that, one of the most annoying people in the industry.

[Shockeye]

Perry is an idiot. A self-aggrandizing one at that, one of the most annoying people in the industry.

In other words, the perfect person to interview!

[Nebu]

Sorry Shockeye, I should have written that in green text.

[HaemishM]

Actually, for movies as well, it's almost always the case that professional reviewers give shittier reviews for things than do normal, average consumers. All the reviewers loathe Adam Sandler movies, yet they still make great bank. Of course with movies, you are talking about an industry that has some (little) vocabulary for review as well as some (little) actual professionalism among its reviewers. Games, on the other hand, have little (none) common vocabulary for review and no (not a fucking wit) of actual professionalism amongst its reviewers, so I'm not sure what he's expecting.

[Yegolev]

so I'm not sure what he's expecting.

GIVE ME MONEY FOR THIS SHIT!

[Soln]

Dialogue: Shiny Entertainment's David Perry
in fact, we made something like $250 million.

Or like $2.5M, or like $250,000, or like $25,000?  Hey, it's all you know, like numbers.  But it was like that.  Like.


This means they must have sold, being generous at 50$/box, 5,000,000 boxes.  I think the biased gaming press would've caught on if that many were even close to being sold.  I call shenanigans.

[HaemishM]

It actually sold well off the shelves, before the word of mouth about its bugginess and shallowness really had a chance to take effect.

But since the dev company paid the Wacky Bros. $16 MILLION FUCKING DOLLARS just for the rights to make it, I'm sure it wasn't as profitable as it should have been.