Quote:
the people that are actually making the games nowhere near number the amount of people WHO WOULD LIKE TO make games.


Yeah. When I was younger, I had at times thought it might be good to make games, but would it really? Face it: Chances are, if you're an American making games, you're not Miyamoto making whatever game you want, taking three years to fine tune it. Chances are, your main priority when designing a game is just making something that can be released and sold as a game.

I'm reminded a bit of Ebert's comments when The Color Purple was shut out of the oscars:

Quote:
People kill themselves out here - literally work and worry and negotiate themselves to death - trying to turn worthless little pieces of crap into movies. Because you cannot be stupid and get far in Hollywood, the people who make bad movies are usually smart enough to know they are bad. Hollywood is such a competitive town that you need to be smart, gifted and luck to claw yourself up to the point where you can make bad movies. There is a lot of self-hatred involved.

...

Hollywood ... understands very well why a man might spend a year making a movie that a 13-year-old would disdain as trash. But if a man blessed with great success tries to do something really wonderful, there is a tendency to slap him down. It is just too much of an affront to all the compromises and little ethical deaths that happen every day all over town.



Personally, I think working on games without having enough power in the process to ensure any sort of quality (from a gameplay, not technical, perspective) would be soul-crushing.



I LOOOOOOVE Flying Omelette!!
Crawl and 1000