| | #1 (permalink) |
| News Hound Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Floating among Data streams, waiting for the right moment
Posts: 44,023
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | An anonymous reader writes "That Wal-Mart smiley face is looking pretty evil now that Allen Varney has explained how much influence they have on virtually every modern game: 'Publisher sales reps inform Wal-Mart buyers of games in development; the games' subjects, titles, artwork and packaging are vetted and sometimes vetoed by Wal-Mart. If Wal-Mart tells a top-end publisher it won't carry a certain game, the publisher kills that game. In short, every triple-A game sold at retail in North America is managed start to finish, top to bottom, with the publisher's gaze fixed squarely on Wal-Mart, and no other.'" Link To Original Article |
| | |
| Sponsored Links |
| | #2 (permalink) |
| Advocatus Diaboli Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Home of the world's greatest race...
Posts: 6,663
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | With no disrepsect to Mr. Varner in his blog, I have a very hard time believing that the video game industry has basically given up veto power over game design to Wal-Mart. True, Wally World was the driving force in getting the game boxes redesigned, but there were many other retailers on that band wagon, too. The boxes were just obscenely too large to be practical in a profit generating business. Larger packaging means more shelf space, more shipping costs, and generally just overall waste. I see Wally World as being an influence, but not as the controlling force. Rob
__________________ ![]() |
| | |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |