this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2024
46 points (92.6% liked)
PC Gaming
8534 readers
1027 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion.
PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Why is this a red flag?
I’ve noticed that games marketed that way usually turn out pretty poorly. Notable examples off the top of my head are Back 4 Blood, Callisto Protocol and Mighty No 9.
It can also be quite misleading as was the case with Back 4 Blood where there was only around 5 people on the team that were actually involved in L4D. Despite the whole “From the people that made L4D” thing.
There’s also the fact that being part of a team that made a successful game does not necessarily mean you’re going to be successful as part of another team. We also don’t know their level of involvement most of the time so they could be all the MVPs of the past projects. But they could also be people who were nowhere near as involved using their connection for clout and hype.
It’s not. I don’t think it’s particularly useful to market a product with that information, but it’s not a terrible thing that some people used to work elsewhere. And reading any more into it than that is just a form a bias.