Battlezone Forums

Why is it that nearly every single game in Pandemic's portfolio turned out to be either a minor success or a dud? Their first two games, BZ2 and DR2, didn't do so well either. Their last game, The Saboteur, didn't even help them go out in style.

The industry doesn't like good games. I mean hell, look at CoD.

CoD is not a good game, I concur. However, just because we think they're good games doesn't obligate everyone to agree with us.

I would appreciate GSH's input on this. He probably knows the most.

I can tell you what GSH will probably say. The games were not very good. They were buggy as heck and every game was made using a different engine. Development teams were broken-up after every project and no sort of normalcy or reuse was ever established.

I like "The Sabatuer". Reminds me of "No one lives Forever". Good stuff.

forgottengames wrote:CoD is not a good game, I concur. However, just because we think they're good games doesn't obligate everyone to agree with us.

Doesn't make everyone else any less wrong.

SW:Battlefront 1/2 were pretty good games for what they were.

Well, what could Pandemic have done to prevent or delay its fate?

forgottengames wrote:Well, what could Pandemic have done to prevent or delay its fate?

Build a space helicopter.

So you're telling me that Pandemic was hell in a handbasket. It was a runt among game companies.

forgottengames wrote:So you're telling me that Pandemic was hell in a handbasket. It was a runt among game companies.

What I'm telling you is that you need to build a space helicopter.

In that case you need to build an anti-pedophilia machine.

Pandemic was done for the moment EA bought it.

Now that I've seen (and experienced) the production modus operandi of BZ1.5, I'm curious if that was learned and/or the culture of the original group that evolved into Pandemic?