Do games non ironically need editors?

[DJOGamer PT]

a) People who have free time but have no money (kids and teenagers)

b) People who have money but have no free time (adults)

Category a) is going to complain if there is no padding. Category b) prefers shorter but more quality games. Sadly, developers soon realized that if you want a unified product to sell to both demographics, it is better to serve category a), because that is the demographic that surfs the internet all day and shills for content and complain when they don't like something and they skew perception of games.

So you consider yourself to be a teenanger.
Interesting...

 

[Nathaniel3W]

But if the games aren't padded out with shit filler content the plebs will complain that the games are not worth their money and refuse to buy them.

(...)
The market shuns games which are too short for the price they are sold at, and as such cutting heavily can be a massive financial risk.

I've heard this argument a lot of times, but I wonder whether there is any data to back it up. I remember that the amount of play time you get for your money was often talked about in gaming mags back in the nineties. Back then games were more expensive than today. Today I don't think this argument is all that compelling. People have been handing over money for super short Call of Duty campaignes for more than a decade now. I don't think that long games sell better than short games in general. The industry is probably too risk averse to try a game without any filler, but I think it could work very well.

Maybe I'll look up the reference if no one believes me. Or maybe not. Anyway, I remember a GDC presentation on stuff that correlates with higher number of copies sold. The strongest correlation was hours played.

 

[Haba]

Games shouldn't need an editor, but almost all long games would greatly benefit of a "directors cut" after the game is complete. Unfortunately many of the glaring problems don't become obvious unless you can play the whole thing through - and often by that point the release date is already knocking on the door.

Often a good game is a product of luck rather than creative vision. Look at Predator, as an example. They had so many setbacks and compromises that it is a small miracle that the movie succeeded.

 

[J1M]

Games being too long isn't an issue, however, it having huge chunks of shit content that drags on is one.
Only argument I can come up with for not editing games, is the cost of producing said content, so it might as well just ship with it. But it hurting your overall experience with the game is enough reason to cut that shit, you'll even get more of them shiny reviewing points, and the reviewer might even bother to finish your game before giving it a 9/10 GOTYAY.
If you're a dev and really want to show off the polished turd you call a level anyway, just leave it in the game files for modders to enable and tinker with.

Just think about it, Ayylmao Isolation without all the padding.
Dark Souls without the walking dragon arse area.
Thief 1 without Thieve's Guild (Maybe I'm just too casual to handle it)
99% of sewer levels in games.
etc.

Yes, they do. Unfortunately, I am the only one qualified to perform the job. Anyone else would eventually fall to what is plaguing the design of modern games: focus groups.

 

[wahrk]

Yes, most games (especially RPGs) would benefit from an editor. If anything just to cut down on overly verbose text and lore dumps. But I’m also tired of games that you have to play for 6-8 hours before it really “gets good”. If that’s the case then how about we just skip the beginning and start the game when it actually gets interesting, thanks.

On top of that, DS doesn't have "bad areas".

I love dark souls but come on now. Lost Izalith exists. If we’re talking DS2 as well there’s Iron Keep and the abomination that is Black Gulch. Dunno why Red Panda doesn’t like Shrine of Amana though, that area is fine.

 

[boot]

due to the way games are made editing doesn't really make sense, parts may be programmed together in such a way that removing a piece might mean reprogramming other parts to work right. You aren't just striking a line out here and there, and I'm pretty sure they already have writing editors for in game text

__

and what kind of title is non ironically? what are you a fag

 

[TemplarGR]

So you consider yourself to be a teenanger.
Interesting...

Exceptions do exist in both categories, but they are exceptions, not the norm. 12 year olds with tons of money due to rich parents exist, for example. As do exist broke adults. Or adults who have no family and have more spare time to spend on games. Most adults do have children so they can't spend as much time. It is not a one-size-fits-all category, but people tend to belong in 1 of the 2 groups i mentioned, those are the 2 main ones and since they are large demographics they influence developer decisions.

 

[vota DC]

Pathway doesn't have an editor, It would be improved with one since Is quite short.
Survival horrors too. Darkwood and Resident evil 2 would be great, I like very much re2 but was disappointed by the fact "this time you will explore an entire city rather than a mansioni" but you are mostly in closed places except intro where you must follow narrow streets.

Even games like telltale walking dead would benefit with an editor for creating different stories or troll mods with dialogue and bodies swapping.

 

[Morpheus Kitami]

Editors in the modification sense, every game should have one. No exceptions.
But to answer the real question, what would the editors do? At the point a traditional editor takes over, everything in a game is already done. Book and movie editors put things into the final state, but in video games that's more a role of an existing programmer or designer. Where would you stick them? In the script-making process? In the map-making process? But by then problems aren't apparent. I think the answer is no, because there's no unmessy way to stick them in.

 

[laclongquan]

On the topic. Game development does have editing process in the pipeline, albeit made by non-professional editors, I think. The writings get editted in-department. Same with the art design in art department. And when things completed and get pushed to Quality Assurance, the testers can provide feedback and get (minor) editing works done.

You make it sound like there's an established process that allows quality assurance, but there isn't, because hello 99% games are shit.

Editting process, in games or literature, only made to control bugs/typos and inconsitentcy. It DOES NOT assure that art is made.

Of course there are editing passes on writing, and of course the art director sends shit back to artists and it goes back and forth.
The problem is that leads are stupid people too.

I used to a book editor. I damn well know there's editing pass on writing, both books and games. We can assure people there's no typo, sentencing bugs etc... We can NOT assure there's art coming from us. That is the job, the role for authors, not editors.
Sure, if there's inconsistency in storyline, in logic process etc we can contribute to authors to fix it. But if authors persist, saying "that's part of its art, you see" then we are stumped.

In game writings, usually the writers do the editing themselves because they dont want to hear opinions from outsiders about their works. Then indepartment colleague and team leader can contribute some more. then QA testers can provide feedback about typos.

It is there that the writers can proclaim what they write/post is art. But that is because they are writers making that claim, not because they are editors making that claim.

 

[cretin]

STALKER was in dev hell until they producer brought in a foreigner to tell the slavshits to stop fucking around and release a commercial FPS instead of masturbating all day to this what if fantasy of the bestest sci fi immersive sim ever. This involved scrapping large amounts of planned content, as well as extensively trimming what was already done. I've played a lot of early STALKER builds as well as mods that attempt to restore and rebuild old stalker content or what it mightve looked like using the design docs, and everything I've played tells me that everything they cut and trimmed in the final product was the right decision. SoC as you know it today, is a relatively tight, very fun and interesting classic FPS experience. What it "could have been" is a bloated mess with an identity crisis and many loose threads, despite what the build-fags like to imagine.

 

[Wunderbar]

Games being too long isn't an issue, however, it having huge chunks of shit content that drags on is one.
Only argument I can come up with for not editing games, is the cost of producing said content, so it might as well just ship with it. But it hurting your overall experience with the game is enough reason to cut that shit, you'll even get more of them shiny reviewing points, and the reviewer might even bother to finish your game before giving it a 9/10 GOTYAY.

it's called scope management.

 

[jac8awol]

Games have editors. Creative leads, directors, project managers etc. Whatever the title is, if the person who is in charge of making the story adhere to a single vision sucks, the game will suck. If he micro-manages all the creativity out of the project it will fail. If he is a walk-over yes man who doesn't rein in his team, the project will fail. It is incredibly hard to walk that line.

Short answer: Obviously games need editors. They have editors. More interesting to talk about how they could be better editors.

 

[Ghulgothas]

Games in particular need more than just editors, they need dedicated Creative Wranglers. People who can anchor down the the grandstanding daydreaming of assorted creatives, idea guys and auteur designers and mold it into a minimum viable product.

Take a look into the practices, projects and controversies Tim Schafer's own Double Fine have gotten themselves into over the past 20 years for a better idea.

 

[laclongquan]

Suicide Squad prove that editors is not the assurance of art and quality in movie. As shown by the scenes get in trailers, and NOT in film.

 

[J1M]

Games in particular need more than just editors, they need dedicated Creative Wranglers. People who can anchor down the the grandstanding daydreaming of assorted creatives, idea guys and auteur designers and mold it into a minimum viable product.

Take a look into the practices, projects and controversies Tim Schafer's own Double Fine have gotten themselves into over the past 20 years for a better idea.

Correct. The real problem is that the people who today (and in your fictional example) end up in such a position are not the people who should be in those positions of power. They are just the people best able to maneuver themselves into a desirable job in the landscape of corporate politics.

 

[J1M]

Suicide Squad prove that editors is not the assurance of art and quality in movie. As shown by the scenes get in trailers, and NOT in film.

Weird example since the trailer was put together by an independent editor and the strong response to it caused them to go back and re-shoot significant parts of the film...

 

[laclongquan]

I actually like the trailers much better than the film itself~