4 ms·
Well, in general this is true of entertainment - the best usually has that "little extra special bit of love" injected into it, and when something is a pet proj
by csydas 10y ago
Well, in general this is true of entertainment - the best usually has that "little extra special bit of love" injected into it, and when something is a pet project, it shows, even if the end result isn't good. This happens a lot with movies, and it's probably why the comparisons between games and movies are so common; for larger productions in both mediums, no matter what you do you have to treat it like a somewhat industrial process due to the sheer number of people required for each production. A smaller team can of course have a more personal touch, but this usually means longer release times and more limited resources.
A lot of the time it just really depends on the motivation behind the director. Keep in mind that some of Nintendo's most successful games were from simple observations on the parts of their creator, like Miyamoto watching ants while he was gardening and coming up with the basic concept for Pikmin. Most yearly release games will suffer just because they are yearly release games. Same with yearly release movies.
- wj 10y agoI was wondering if someone was going to make the comparison to movies as movies are almost entirely crewed by contractors. The difference might be that the contractors in the film and TV industry are all union.
- germinalphrase 10y agoAs a former member of the Cinematographer's Guild (Local 600) I can assure you that the unionization is both culturally strong and plays an important role in workplace safety. Movie sets are dangerous places: explosions, heavy equipment, high powered lights and electrical cords all around... There was a distinct jump in professionalism (and acknowledgement of safety) when I started working union shoots vs non-union. I'm sympathetic to the game developers, but unionization has been pretty strong eroded outside of traditionally hazardous occupations.