How come video games live up to the hype?
 

The most anticipated games of the year almost always live up to the hype of being great games (Gears of War, Bioshock, pretty much all Zelda games). I wonder why this happens so frequently in the video game industry but not in the film business? Those Hollywood blockbusters almost never live up to the hype. Anyone care to comment why video games deliver as promised?

And yes I know some games do not live up to the hype (Heavenly Sword, Lair) but I think that's far and few between.

Well Zelda is hyped because it IS Zelda, and has a great track record. So does it do well because it's hyped or was it hyped in the first place because it's a quality product? Chicken or the egg question.

Alot of people (not me) would tell you Bioshock was overrated. Also remember Black and White. I loved it, but some people were hating it.

So hyped isn't always good.

I haven't heard many people say Bioshock was overrated :shrug:

Anyway, I agree with GatorDeb. A lot of games are hyped because they're good games based on previews and first looks from the media and content released to the public. Not to mention games that were crafted by well known developers. I'd say other games are hyped based on the concept (like Spore currently, Black and , Fable). I'd say those are the ones that tend to fail.

And i don't really see how Heavenly Sword didn't live up to the hype.

Many times the hype is generated by the gaming journalists themselves, because in during the games development they see the progression of games, and have a general idea of the direction a game is going. Not that they are always right, many games have fallen flat that looked good early on, but I would imagine after previewing games for so many years, you get a good feeling on what games will be good.

Some games build a lot of hype due to the marketing. If companies are spending a lot on the marketing, they are probably spending a lot on development too, which certainly helps a games chances of being good. It doesn't gaurantee it, but it certainly doesn't hurt. I think budget in games means a lot more than it does in movies for reviews. Production values definitely inflate a games score even with with standard gameplay and bad story. A movie with amazing special effects but a bad story will usually get slaughtered by the critics.

I think the gaming press is less discerning than the movie press. Game critics really let games get away with the same cliched plots and characters, same game mechanics, etc. I think movie critics are generally much harsher. Part of it is because games are still growing a lot as a medium, in terms of graphics, new types of games etc. Movies don't have the same focus on the advancement of "movie technology."

I think this holiday definitely saw some inflated scores, hype definitely added a point or two to some games that were certainly good games, but not near perfect as the scores indicated. I don't think it was anything shady, I just think the game journalists can get caught up in the buzz just as much as the consumers, even more so because they have an interest in seeing the medium succeed.

Black & White and Fable were hyped up mostly because of all the things Peter Molyneux kept promising about the games. A LOT of the features that were supposed to be in the games were cut out of the final product. Molyneux has a tendency to promise a mountain and deliver a molehill. It is interesting that in the previews he has shown of Fable 2, many of the things he has shown off were supposed to have been in the original Fable.

Does anyone remember Blasto? It was a game developed by Sony for the original Playstation. Sony hyped the shit out of that game. They said Blasto was to become their official mascot (like Mario for Nintendo and Sonic for Sega). The game came out, and it was complete garbage. The game didn't sell, and the planned sequel was canceled. Blasto was quickly forgotten.

It's not. It seems that 1-2 people here and there that just can't get into it throw that word around lightly instead of just claiming it just wasn't for them.

Still GOTY for me. Even over Halo. Now we have to see if it withstands Mario.

I think the game was certainly "for me", I enjoyed it immensely, but I still think the game was overrated. Don't get me wrong I still think it was a great game, I just wouldn't have scored it as high.

Sorry to quote my own post, but I was listening to the Gamers with Jobs podcast today (an older episode) and found there was a term for this. It's called confirmation bias.