Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

The upcoming* video game crashFollow

#1 Mar 11 2013 at 5:15 PM Rating: Good
Sage
***
2,211 posts
*possibly



So I think I have mentioned it a few times in various posts, and I've noticed the general trend in gaming. Constant DLC, unfinished games* etc.

I found this video on the forums of the Jimquizition, as I watch a plethora of online videos and do reading, most of it concerning gaming or the industry in general(What can I say I love my hobbies). I watch TB, MikeB, Lore, TWIMMO, Jimquizition, also watch the TGS podcast, and Gametrailers (Reviews,Invisible Walls, Annoyed Gamer, Pach-Attack) I like listening and reading opinions/posts (overall im a lurker) and I love debates as long as they are real debates and not mudslinging contests.

But that aside I felt this video was very well thought out and while it does have some opinion of the creator, I felt like he did a good job of giving the facts and explaining the situation while not sensationalizing it (Ala my thread subject).

The game industy to many people is "to big to fall" but as his video shows a slow decline is still falling, it comes down to which straw will break the camels back? I mean we have Capcoms on-disk DLC, we have Activisions map pack price gouging, EA's Microtransactions and DLC, Square Enixs general lack of innovation/innovating in the wrong areas.

To go a bit deeper, I bought CoD4:MW1 back on PC when it came out, The map packs were free you were able to have servers catering to niche (Gungame) and dedicated maps, while having your normal game servers. Then with MW2 they raised the map prices for really no other reason to get a few more dollars, dedicated servers are all but gone.

And Overall you have this feeling, like was stated in the video, of more and more games feeling rushed, banking on fanbases and uninformed sales, some have technical issues, and some have terrible DRM.

Part of this issue I attribute to developers not knowing how to finance their own games.You see many companies say they need Pre-orders and DLC to offset "The large cost of games". Well stop making high budget only games! If you have a feeling a game might only do decently, dont put tons of money into it, so If it is a huge seller you make a good profit, and if it does decent or low sales you lose less money.

I don't understand why every game now days has to have a 10 million dollar budget, how many indie games with almost no budget go on to make tons of money? Yes they don't always have HD graphics and hype but in the end the game stands on its gameplay and fun. A good example is Journey, it was a Downloadable title, value priced new, had decent graphics and probably not a huge budget, but using what they had they made a extremely fun and profitable game.

A couple other examples Katamari Damacy, Silent Hill 1. These games had both technical and money limitations yet are classic. Instead of looking at the limitations as a barrier they chose to figure out ways to make the games fun while still working within the confines.

IDK, these are some of my opinions and thoughts on the matter and as such are not always correct or right, and also are ever changing and evolving. But I would like to see your thoughts on this matter, I know many of you articulate your posts better then me and are a tad less scatterbrained.

ib4: You're not joph your opinions/contributions don't matter.Smiley: tongue





Edited, Mar 11th 2013 8:16pm by BeanX
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#2 Mar 11 2013 at 9:58 PM Rating: Decent
@#%^ing DRK
*****
13,137 posts
It's a business. I keep seeing people crying bloody murder and threatening to boycott games and people keep purchasing the stuff. I think that the doomsayers and general negativity you are hearing are a very vocal minority. Will the game industry be the exact same in five years as it is today? Most likely not. Will it still exist? Well, Ouya, Steambox, PS4, and Xbox are on the horizon. Sony seems to be renewing their push with Vita (they ******* well better be), 3DS is dominating, WiiU...Well, WiiU is WiiUing. Mobile is also providing plenty of bank. The future looks bright to me. I'm looking big picture though, not year-over-year sales figures. That's outside of my pay grade.
#3 Mar 11 2013 at 10:14 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,211 posts
Paskil wrote:
3DS is dominating


It is? Honestly since I've bought my 3ds(traded up to an XL, original cramped my hands) I've regretted it. I have like 5 games, and haven't seen anything coming up that looks interesting. (Tales of the Abyss 3d, the new Fire Emblem, OoT, and Kingdom Hearts 3D) I've rented one game from Gamefly, Mario Land 3D. Otherwise the system has been a bust for me.

I don't know I havent looked up any stats or anything, but it just seems to be a lack of content for it, less so then the Vita mind you. But the Vita while having limited content has Persona 4 Golden which got 9.5~ 10 at many reviewers, That game alone makes me want the system. But overall I cant name one 3DS game coming out this year, other than Pokemon.

____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#4 Mar 11 2013 at 10:21 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
15,098 posts
Why not pick up the Shin Megami Tensei games for the 3DS?

Devil Survivor Overclocked (remake of devil survivor from the DS)
Devil Summoner Soul Hacker (Coming out in April)

Etrian Odyssey IV People liked the previous ones. You'd probably like the game play style.


Edited, Mar 12th 2013 12:22am by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#5 Mar 12 2013 at 12:30 AM Rating: Decent
@#%^ing DRK
*****
13,137 posts
Vita is quickly becoming an indie darling and both Vita and PS4 have been getting kudos for their ease of developing as of late. I don't own a 3DS, but I will probably be getting an XL at some point this year, probably at black friday. My backlog of games right now is so ******* ridiculous, I could go to next Thanksgiving (2014) and still have unplayed games if I skipped buying any new. Please don't confuse that though, I don't give a **** about 3D. I care about the core games. As of right now, I have no plans or urge to buy a WiiU. PS4 will likely be day one and I need to pick up a 360 at some point as there are quite a few titles since I ditched mine a few years ago (Dust: An Elysian Tail and Shadow Complex for starters).

Here's the most recent list of upcoming Vita Indies:

Hotline Miami
Bit.Trip Runner 2
Binding of Issac
Frozen Synapse
Dragon Fantasy
Lone Survivor
Velocity HD
Machinarium
Rainbow Moon
Starlight Inception
A Virus named Tom
Vektropolis
Divekick
Guacamelee!
Luftrausers
Snapshot
Oddworld: Abe's Oddysee New N' Tasty!
Oddworld: Munch's Oddysee HD
Kick Beat
Thomas was alone
#6 Mar 12 2013 at 7:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Quote:
I don't understand why every game now days has to have a 10 million dollar budget, how many indie games with almost no budget go on to make tons of money?

As a percentage of how many indie games are made? Probably very, very few.

Even the ones that have done well, say Binding Of Issac, have probably distributed a very healthy percentage of their copies either at a price of $2.50 or less or else as part of indie bundles (BoI has been in two Humble Bundles). Whatever revenue it's made, I don't think it's enough to keep a large publisher going, especially if only one in X many indie titles makes even that much.

I find the indie thing sort of interesting in that people keep hyping it up as the best thing to happen since pre-sliced bread but then wail that gaming will be dead if EA includes Day One DLC in their titles. Why don't they all just go play those awesome indie games instead? Truth is, people want AAA quality games with $10mil worth of graphics and development; they just want them made their way and not in the way the publisher thinks will bring in the most cash.

Quote:
Well stop making high budget only games! If you have a feeling a game might only do decently, dont put tons of money into it, so If it is a huge seller you make a good profit, and if it does decent or low sales you lose less money.

I think there's something of a trap here. You can make a retro-looking indie game and it can have a certain kitsch appeal. You can make a cutting edge game that pushes your GTX 690 into a cold sweat. What you DON'T want is a game that looks like it was developed in 2007. If you're going to develop a modern era game, I think you're required to some extent to go all in. Yeah, you'll find people who'll overlook it's outdated-but-not-retro appearance but it'll likely remain a niche title.

I don't direct this at the OP, really. More a reaction to reading the daily diatribes on the Steam forums where bemoaning the death of gaming is something of a state religion.

Edited, Mar 12th 2013 8:32am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#7 Mar 12 2013 at 7:44 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,470 posts
This is a hobby that major businesses have turned into a cash cow. To them it isn't about making a good game, it's about making the next million and milking the consumer any way they can. I understand the rising costs to make games, but that doesn't justify a lot of the practices that have sprung up. Day one DLC is one thing that really bothers me. There's no reason that content ready for launch at the launch of the game should not be included with the game. And the "We had people sitting around" excuse is ridiculous. If you have people sitting around, you over staffed your project. If you want to break your expansions into smaller DLC and sell them for a reasonable price, fine. But stripping everything extra out of a game and drip-feeding it to consumers at ridiculous prices is going to kill the industry. What will keep it from crashing is the army of indie devs willing to fill the gaps.
#8 Mar 12 2013 at 7:56 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
What counts as "crashing the industry"? It was one thing in the 1980's where a small number of people were putting games on cartridges and sending them to stores (and I guess this holds true to a good extent for consoles) but, for PCs anyway, distribution is such that anyone can create a game and get it out there. I won't pretend it's exactly "that easy", but it's not as though you'd ever go to the PC Games Store and find cobwebby shelves and have to go home unhappy and empty-handed.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#9 Mar 12 2013 at 8:35 AM Rating: Good
******
44,314 posts
BeanX wrote:
If you have a feeling a game might only do decently, dont put tons of money into it,
No one really goes into a game saying "We're going to make back the money we put into it!" More often it's about when they get near release time that it starts becoming apparent that the game they've been hyping for the past four years isn't going to do decently. Then there's expenses in developing new technologies, extensions, licensing, etc etc. Look at what happened to Aliens Colonial Marines.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#10 Mar 12 2013 at 9:04 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I think there's something of a trap here. You can make a retro-looking indie game and it can have a certain kitsch appeal. You can make a cutting edge game that pushes your GTX 690 into a cold sweat. What you DON'T want is a game that looks like it was developed in 2007. If you're going to develop a modern era game, I think you're required to some extent to go all in. Yeah, you'll find people who'll overlook it's outdated-but-not-retro appearance but it'll likely remain a niche title.


I think that's a bit of a false dilemma. People expect AAA games to look good, but I'm not sure that this means publishers need to bet the farm on every one of them.

If there's an issue, it's probably this: Dead Space 3 purportedly needed to sell 5 million copies in order to be profitable, or at least, deemed a worthy effort by EA. That's a real dissonance - Dead Space isn't that sort of game, and no amount of gerrymandering was going to turn it into that. EA and Activision have gone on record that they're only really interested in annualizable, gangbuster-sales franchises. That's probably not surprising when the harvest from one WoW or Call of Duty can mean a whole decade's worth of profits, but it may also be a high-risk proposition. It hasn't really bit the big publishers that hard, but we've certainly lost a good number of developers in the past few years to this.

And speaking of Call of Duty, it's been shlupping out the same engine for years, but people keep coming. Just sayin'.


All that said, I don't really think such things are indicative of a coming crash. I do think, however, that they color the development of the games too much. I see games like Dragon Age, Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect, et al approaching a nexus of market-driven same-ness, and it bums me out.



Edited, Mar 12th 2013 11:05am by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#11 Mar 12 2013 at 9:09 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Eske Esquire wrote:
I think that's a bit of a false dilemma. People expect AAA games to look good, but I'm not sure that this means publishers need to bet the farm on every one of them.

Sure, but there's a difference between mortgaging the building and saying "Eh, let's not spend a lot on this game." Modern AAA titles require investment. If your game looks cheap, it's going to get dinged heavily for it.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#12 Mar 12 2013 at 9:10 AM Rating: Good
The reason there are 10 million dollar games is this over whelming prevalence in the industry that if the a game doesn't meet a certain graphical fidelity it's automatic ****. It is a perception prevailed by gamers and reviewers alike. Saying **** like "Good for a wii game" or condemning other games for graphics all reach the developer ears.

In a developer mind if a game isn't at a certain graphics it won't sell. Which is why we see amazingly bland but crisp and detailed areas in major titles.

Anyways, I don't think there is going to be a game crash as bad as in the 80s. However the industry is going through a transition, big business practices are being brought in and they aren't being applied the best way. When they do a ****** move like they did with Simcity, you need to let them know by not buying their game. Simply put like jim said(if you watch his shows) we need to stop buying games on launch day. So we can determine if the game deserves our money.
____________________________
If cookies were milk and milk was cookies. Would Oreo's still be america's favorite brand of milk?
#13 Mar 12 2013 at 9:16 AM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
I think that's a bit of a false dilemma. People expect AAA games to look good, but I'm not sure that this means publishers need to bet the farm on every one of them.

Sure, but there's a difference between mortgaging the building and saying "Eh, let's not spend a lot on this game." Modern AAA titles require investment. If your game looks cheap, it's going to get dinged heavily for it.


Agreed.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#14 Mar 12 2013 at 11:23 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
9,356 posts
Quote:
Part of this issue I attribute to developers not knowing how to finance their own games.You see many companies say they need Pre-orders and DLC to offset "The large cost of games". Well stop making high budget only games! If you have a feeling a game might only do decently, dont put tons of money into it, so If it is a huge seller you make a good profit, and if it does decent or low sales you lose less money.

I don't understand why every game now days has to have a 10 million dollar budget, how many indie games with almost no budget go on to make tons of money? Yes they don't always have HD graphics and hype but in the end the game stands on its gameplay and fun. A good example is Journey, it was a Downloadable title, value priced new, had decent graphics and probably not a huge budget, but using what they had they made a extremely fun and profitable game.


See, this is why I love the 3DS, because it isn't all about having the "best" graphics (btw, I also don't have any use for 3D) - just good games with solid gameplay. The backwards compatibility is awesome too. Games like the new Etrian Odyssey really showcase how this is a system that is about fun games first. As for not enough games on it, I've actually reached the point where there are games I'd like to play/buy but I don't have the time for them, so I'm holding off in favour of buying them digitally when I'm done/bored with what I have.

The new Etrian Odyssey for example, I do want, but I am still so addicted to fire emblem it seems pointless to buy it right now. Before the digital distribution was available I would have bought it anyway out of worry it would be hard to find a copy but now I feel less rushed about it.

And while the Eshop could use a lot more titles, and REALLY OUGHT TO HAVE ALL AMBASSADOR GAMES FOR SALE, there are a lot of fun games I missed before that I've picked up and spent time on. Wario land, the gameboy super mario lands, etc. I've spent a good amount of time on them and loved them to bits.

Vita is all about the SUPER GRAPHICS but it's way overpriced and there isn't much of anything to play on it. I loved my PSP, and I would have gotten a Vita when the screen broke on it, but the fact that I'd have to rebuy all the games I owned on disc as digital games (and overpay for memory to boot) was a dealbreaker. I bought a new PSP instead. About the same time that my PSP screen broke my gf accidentally broke my DS, and I bought the 3DS to replace it, cause I could play all my old games on it, and the price difference between the DS and the 3DS was so small that it was a no-brainer.

And while the Vita has access to the PS1 classics, I've already got access to them on my PSP so, unlike the 3DS eshop, that's not a selling point in the slightest. Also, it should be noted that the playstation shop makes me INSANE every time I've ever used it (reinstall their stupid program, update my system, 3 hours later, maybe I can buy something) that I've made the decision not to use it anymore because it is too much of a hassle, even though there are some games I still wouldn't mind having.

On the topic of DLC, I don't see it as a big hairy deal when it is done right. Like I've bought all the DLC for fire emblem because I love the game to bits. If I don't like a game, I don't buy the DLC. It's not that big a deal. As long as the game isn't broken without it. But it isn't as if FE doesn't already have gobs and gobs of content, so I don't see an issue with selling some optional scenarios.



Edited, Mar 12th 2013 10:27am by Olorinus
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#15 Mar 12 2013 at 11:39 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
Avatar
****
4,325 posts
I miss the glory days of Duke Nukem 3D, Warcraft 2, Doom, Quake, etc. You didn't have to spend a fortune to buy DLC because the game engines were simple enough that anybody with the desire to learn could figure them out. I can't count how many hours I played these games mainly because of user generated content (my own included). Was also some amazing user generated content for several of these games. Remember the Aliens addon for Doom?

I also despise single player games that require internet connections to "prove" you own the game. Sims 3 is probably the worst I have for this. One night I couldn't even play the game because EA's server was lagging/offline. When I can't play a MMO because internet is down first thing I turn to is a single player game and now more often then enough can't even play them!.
____________________________
Hi
#16 Mar 12 2013 at 1:40 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
Jophiel wrote:
What counts as "crashing the industry"? It was one thing in the 1980's where a small number of people were putting games on cartridges and sending them to stores (and I guess this holds true to a good extent for consoles) but, for PCs anyway, distribution is such that anyone can create a game and get it out there. I won't pretend it's exactly "that easy", but it's not as though you'd ever go to the PC Games Store and find cobwebby shelves and have to go home unhappy and empty-handed.


Well I ment "crashing the industry" as the crash of AAA games, Indie and smaller games will still be made because most are acts of love and less only for money. I wonder how many of you watched that video I placed up there. The Atari crash came from many publishers just putting out shovel ware, it wasn't instant but rather one day people just said, " Hey enough is enough Im done buying games that are glitchy , incomplete, useless, or just copy pasta.

Honestly Im in 2 camps I like triple A 'shiny' games but if they dont have the gameplay to back them, I move on quick. I never said there's anything wrong with some games having super hi fidelity. But look at the recent trend, people are pumping money into lower fidelity games, Walking Dead was GOTY many places, Journey was GOTY some places to.

Both games were good but neither was pushing the line graphics wise. Companies like EA and Activision on the other hand keep churning out the same thing, as was mentioned, they put tons of money into games that most people know are 'niche' then just kill it when it it doesnt meet expectations. If you watched the video, the guy explains how after the crash almost no one is able to get back to where they were, partly because no one has expendable money atm and due to other reasons.

EA in general is terrible for getting a semi decent profitable developer and closing them down after their game because "They didn't make enough". Any business is that fine line between cost and marketability. As someone said in this thread, for a game like Dead Space to hit 50 million sold is asking a lot, EA seems that all gamers play the same drivel that comes out no matter the genre(Not saying DS3 is bad, but its not a game Ive ever had interest in).

As for the preordering, they already have your money, and thanks to no laws protecting consumers in the US, once that sale is done and that package opened your stuck with what could be a 60 dollar coaster. I mean I understand supporting companies that make the games you want, I preorder JRPGs from smaller companies to promote them bringing more over. but even then most of the time I've seen the japanese game reviews so Im still betting on a product I've seen or know is to my tastes, working.

But like I said earlier I dont mean a all out crash were there's no games, but A crash of the current model, games still existed after the Atari crash, just not as many until Nintendo.
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#17 Mar 12 2013 at 2:01 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
I wonder how many of you watched that video I placed up there.

I haven't really been online except at work the last few days so I have not.

One thing I've noticed (again, again, not directed at you) is that a lot of people ***** EA out for "ruining" the studios they purchase but no one ever seems to cast any blame on the studios which cashed out to EA. It's not as though EA took over Bioware by stealing the deed to their property in a daring midnight raid or something. Rather, it was a ~$860mil deal and the founders apparently cashed out and left gaming all together. It doesn't sound as though they were looking to develop the next breath-taking chapter of Mass Effect or Dragon Age with or without EA.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#18 Mar 12 2013 at 2:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
12,008 posts
Not much of a comment about the impending doom of the gaming industry, but when the slide with the "golden age of SNES games" came up, I was in complete agreement that Earthbound, FF3, Chrono Trigger, etc were all some of my favorite games ever.
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#19 Mar 12 2013 at 3:09 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
On a slightly related topic microtransactions are coming to Call of Duty. At first glance they are claiming it will be just cosmetic items but excuse me if I have my doubts that it will stay that way.
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#20 Mar 12 2013 at 3:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
2,470 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
Earthbound, FF3, Chrono Trigger, etc were all some of the greatest games ever created.


Fixed
#21 Mar 12 2013 at 3:42 PM Rating: Good
@#%^
*****
15,817 posts
Criminy wrote:
On a slightly related topic microtransactions are coming to Call of Duty. At first glance they are claiming it will be just cosmetic items but excuse me if I have my doubts that it will stay that way.


OMG HATS!!!
____________________________
"I have lost my way
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all **** for a basement"

#22 Mar 12 2013 at 3:51 PM Rating: Decent
Terrorfiend
*****
12,905 posts
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
I wonder how many of you watched that video I placed up there.


I didn't read all your post, let alone the 30 minute video. :P
#23 Mar 12 2013 at 3:58 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
Raolan wrote:
LockeColeMA wrote:
Earthbound, FF3, Chrono Trigger, etc were all some of the greatest games ever created.


Fixed

QFT

Quote:
On a slightly related topic microtransactions are coming to Call of Duty. At first glance they are claiming it will be just cosmetic items but excuse me if I have my doubts that it will stay that way.


Yep, remember how I said Activision made map packs 15 instead of 10, like the norm was pre MW2. As for "Cosmetic only" in MW3 i dont know what they would sell "power" wise. I mean From what Ive played Ive been using the 2nd SMG, and never died saying "Oh its because his gun is more powerful etc" Note I do play on Hardcore most times. If they sell a gun that can see/shoot through walls for cash, Well they deserve the backlash from that. Overall Im sick and tired of them selling me sh*t in a game I already paid for (even if i did buy it for 50% off).

Honestly though Blackops 2 has been out for almost a year, I guess I can understand it now rather then day one DLC. DLC is ment to keep a player playing your game and not moving on, putting it day 1 IMHO is just double dipping, your not trying to get the person to play your game longer your trying to charge them more for the game period.

Least 'cosmetic' items dont tear apart your user base as much as map packs. I mean instead of having all your players in one big pool with map packs (paid ones) your splitting your players up into different pools, limiting the players they can play with, which is fine when you have tons of players but like MMOs when one server dries up, suddenly you have part of the playerbase that no longer can get much enjoyment out of the game and are way more inclined to just leave rather then deal with it.

Least thats my issue with WoW and their server transfers, I transferred to an Oceanic server when I was working a late 2nd Shift job, since I could come home and the server would be busy. I made 10 toons got them all to max (85). Now that Im on more of a 1st/normal 2nd shift schedule, when I play the server is dead, I cant do barely any group content. But I cant afford to transfer all my toons to a normal time US server because it would cost 250 bucks, yes I could transfer 1 toon or maybe 2 but then my income(in game) dries up, because my lesser toons have all my feeding crafts. And as for leveling another toon, Im completely burnt out on that notion. 12 times is way more then enough times.



Edited, Mar 12th 2013 5:03pm by BeanX
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#24 Mar 12 2013 at 4:02 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
KTurner wrote:
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
I wonder how many of you watched that video I placed up there.


I didn't read all your post, let alone the 30 minute video. :P


BeanX wrote:
ib4: You're not joph your opinions/contributions don't matter.Smiley: tongue



____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#25 Mar 12 2013 at 4:08 PM Rating: Good
Terrorfiend
*****
12,905 posts
If it makes you feel better I wouldnt have read it if Joph posted it either.
#26 Mar 12 2013 at 4:24 PM Rating: Good
I did watch it the other day, it seemed very similar to one that "Francis" did on the SimCity release and consumerism.

I agree that our best defense is to keep our money, don't buy games on pre-order (this may be tough), and demand better games that are worth the price we actually pay. It may be a golden dream but, if we stop buying crappy games, maybe they will improve them to get us to buy them?
____________________________
Things I sometimes play...

"What do you want to be when you grow up?"
"I want to be a unicorn!"
"Awww, why's that?"........
"So I can stab people with my face."
#27 Mar 12 2013 at 4:48 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
Dyadem, pet mage of Jabober wrote:
I did watch it the other day, it seemed very similar to one that "Francis" did on the SimCity release and consumerism.

I agree that our best defense is to keep our money, don't buy games on pre-order (this may be tough), and demand better games that are worth the price we actually pay. It may be a golden dream but, if we stop buying crappy games, maybe they will improve them to get us to buy them?


Yeah I rarely pre-order, Like I said usually only console JRpgs, because most of the times they are already out in Japan, and already have a few Engrish reviews/ English speaking people that speak/read Japanese reviews. But Jrpgs are a niche market and many don't get translated over because of that, preordering shows the company that do bring over games, hey we're interested.

Otherwise I very very rarely preorder, I know im taking a risk. Last game I preordered was DmC, only because **** I got it for 35 bucks, because of pre reviews I felt it was a game I liked and competent, and DMC4 PC ran awesomely and much better then PS version. Again I knew I was taking a small risk but it was calculated. Everything else, no thanks, I'll wait to see if your product is good before I buy it. I watch many review youtubes/sites to make sure I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is.

____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#28 Mar 12 2013 at 4:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Dyadem, pet mage of Jabober wrote:
I agree that our best defense is to keep our money, don't buy games on pre-order (this may be tough), and demand better games that are worth the price we actually pay.

Maybe that's why these things roll off my back. I never pay more than 50% MSRP for a game anyway and usually closer to 20-25%.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#29 Mar 12 2013 at 5:00 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
5,684 posts
Eh, I don't think the gaming market will crash, though it certainly could, but I'm betting it'll be avoided. EA is a different subject. EA just ruins things and has generally been a pretty sleazy company the last 5 or so years.

It's certainly true that the video points out a lot of failures (mostly by EA) over the last few years, but there have also been a great deal of good games. Most things Bethesda, Far Cry, Tomb Raider, Borderlands... The video just seemed like someone ranting after trying to play SimCity for a few hours and wanted to rail against EA without being completely obvious.


As much as I hate DLC, it's not always a bad thing- companies and players just have to start figuring out some general guidelines. The content DLC aren't always extensive enough to justify the overhead of a new game/sequel and they can be significant enough that they don't make it into the game due to deadlines. I'm always reminded of the Developer Jam for Skyrim... everything there was created as experiments, but then half of it ended up in DLC or updates simply because it was so cool. Clearly cutting content from a game as launch DLC is a horrible idea though (looking at you Mass Effect 3). For other than content DLC, I really liked the ExtraCreditz on micro transactions and is definitely worth watching. I'd make more points about micros, but it'd just be parroting the link... and for the record, I support the $70 monocle (unless it was an example of selling power, though I thought it was just aesthetic). If people want to waste their money, go right ahead- just makes it easy to identify the rich/morons.

I could not care less if used game sales suddenly stopped as I'm more concerned that a new console might require an internet connection, but it would be a horrible idea to do either. The video mentions bringing a game to friend's house- even if we ignore that a huge majority of multiplayer is done online already, some alternatives are: bring your HDD, bring your gaming system (PC gamers have been doing this since forever!), have your friend come over instead, and probably more. Yea, sure not as easy as bringing a disk- but if you're bringing a disk, your friend has the system, so he has all the cables and hookups, so bringing your HDD/system really isn't too difficult.



Oh, and maybe Sony will mention it at E3, but hiding facts about allowing/forbidding used games is just a bad idea. The sooner we have all the information, the better because then it gives the fan base time to contemplate and time for Sony to (re)think any strategies. There's nothing that will cause more problems then a surprise, that's for certain.

Also, it's been a few days since I watched the video, so not sure if it was mentioned or not- but Madden, FIFA, and other such games should move to a subscription model though I don't know how it would work (benefits vs. free content). Personally, I'm surprised EA hasn't already because I bet they would make money overall than simply releasing a "new" game every year. This is what made FFXI the most successful Final Fantasy of all time and the playerbase in tiny compared to Madden. Of course, knowing EA, they'd offer subscription, then make a new game after a year anyway... I guess if I were EA, I'd promise to only make a new game every 3-4 years. Offer subscription option to allow for online and key updates every month... then when they release their new Madden after 3-4 years, price it at $60 and allow for 50% off with a copy of the old game which would remove a used physical copy from the system or... since everything is moving digital, 50% off for those that obtained a moderately difficult challenge (play 100 hours, win 10 games or something), but nothing that wouldn't be unlocked for a typical dedicated player over a period of 4 years with a subscription account (this shows "dedication" to EA). Could offer weekend tournaments or "in depth" events during the regular football season to make subscription option more appealing. Ok, that was longer than I expected, but I'm keeping it regardless of how pointless my ramblings became... I think I'll make it small though


Also also, I'm really sick of preorder-to-win models!
____________________________
Signature starts here.
#30 Mar 12 2013 at 5:03 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,211 posts
ITT: Joph is cheap, KT doesn't care, and SNES was awesome.
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#31 Mar 12 2013 at 9:25 PM Rating: Good
Iron Chef Olorinus wrote:

On the topic of DLC, I don't see it as a big hairy deal when it is done right. Like I've bought all the DLC for fire emblem because I love the game to bits. If I don't like a game, I don't buy the DLC. It's not that big a deal. As long as the game isn't broken without it. But it isn't as if FE doesn't already have gobs and gobs of content, so I don't see an issue with selling some optional scenarios.


The problem isn't exactly with DLC itself. DLC can be a very good thing. Offering additional areas, outfits and other content. It's when you get day one DLC that feels like a cash grab such as DMC having 3 alternate outfits out right away as DLC instead of being available from the game. Sebastian from Dragon age as DLC left a bad taste in my mouth too. That doesn't mean the month after release DLC for DMC doesn't have me excited and doesn't feel cash grabby in my opinion or the two DLC to follow on dragon age.


Nintendo did DLC right for fire emblem in fact I would call it a text book example of how to do DLC right. For those not in the know, fire emblem DLC features characters you can get from previous titles with custom avatars(And sometimes custom classes) along with a challenge stage where you have to fight characters from previous games with not so custom avatars. You get your character from a previous game through beating these maps. Depending on the DLC you even get other benefits like stat +2 to all characters and extra cash. AS an incentive to buy on the game early for the first month it was out one of those DLC maps and characters were free. The DLC feature storyline completely separate from the main story was really just a fan service to people who been playing the series a long time.

It's when games hold unlockables that use to be standard in game as DLC or even some really really **** moves by developers/companies when they have DLC that's already on disc that you have to pay to unlock after buying the game. This has happen before and it's a kick in the balls. This what makes people upset.
____________________________
If cookies were milk and milk was cookies. Would Oreo's still be america's favorite brand of milk?
#32 Mar 12 2013 at 9:59 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,519 posts
I think extra content as implemented in The Sims works out well. You have a core game that is fully playable in its own right. You can make your own stuff, download and install stuff others have made, or just pay cash to Maxis and have it imported directly into the game without any effort. You can buy furniture packs and clothing packs based around themes that do not add any functionality to the game but just give you extra things to play with. "Stuff packs" are traditionally $10 or so. Full expansions that add extra functionality to the game are three or four times that much.

But nothing stops me from firing up Sims III, making a family, and playing them til I'm bored. And I don't have to spend any extra money.

Pay to win or pay to cheat bothers me. Pay to get shiny non functional armor or a cute but useless pet? Sure, why not.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#33 Mar 13 2013 at 8:57 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
****
4,325 posts
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
What counts as "crashing the industry"? It was one thing in the 1980's where a small number of people were putting games on cartridges and sending them to stores (and I guess this holds true to a good extent for consoles) but, for PCs anyway, distribution is such that anyone can create a game and get it out there. I won't pretend it's exactly "that easy", but it's not as though you'd ever go to the PC Games Store and find cobwebby shelves and have to go home unhappy and empty-handed.


Well I ment "crashing the industry" as the crash of AAA games, Indie and smaller games will still be made because most are acts of love and less only for money. I wonder how many of you watched that video I placed up there. The Atari crash came from many publishers just putting out shovel ware, it wasn't instant but rather one day people just said, " Hey enough is enough Im done buying games that are glitchy , incomplete, useless, or just copy pasta.

Honestly Im in 2 camps I like triple A 'shiny' games but if they dont have the gameplay to back them, I move on quick. I never said there's anything wrong with some games having super hi fidelity. But look at the recent trend, people are pumping money into lower fidelity games, Walking Dead was GOTY many places, Journey was GOTY some places to.

Both games were good but neither was pushing the line graphics wise. Companies like EA and Activision on the other hand keep churning out the same thing, as was mentioned, they put tons of money into games that most people know are 'niche' then just kill it when it it doesnt meet expectations. If you watched the video, the guy explains how after the crash almost no one is able to get back to where they were, partly because no one has expendable money atm and due to other reasons.

EA in general is terrible for getting a semi decent profitable developer and closing them down after their game because "They didn't make enough". Any business is that fine line between cost and marketability. As someone said in this thread, for a game like Dead Space to hit 50 million sold is asking a lot, EA seems that all gamers play the same drivel that comes out no matter the genre(Not saying DS3 is bad, but its not a game Ive ever had interest in).

As for the preordering, they already have your money, and thanks to no laws protecting consumers in the US, once that sale is done and that package opened your stuck with what could be a 60 dollar coaster. I mean I understand supporting companies that make the games you want, I preorder JRPGs from smaller companies to promote them bringing more over. but even then most of the time I've seen the japanese game reviews so Im still betting on a product I've seen or know is to my tastes, working.

But like I said earlier I dont mean a all out crash were there's no games, but A crash of the current model, games still existed after the Atari crash, just not as many until Nintendo.


BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
What counts as "crashing the industry"? It was one thing in the 1980's where a small number of people were putting games on cartridges and sending them to stores (and I guess this holds true to a good extent for consoles) but, for PCs anyway, distribution is such that anyone can create a game and get it out there. I won't pretend it's exactly "that easy", but it's not as though you'd ever go to the PC Games Store and find cobwebby shelves and have to go home unhappy and empty-handed.


Well I ment "crashing the industry" as the crash of AAA games, Indie and smaller games will still be made because most are acts of love and less only for money. I wonder how many of you watched that video I placed up there. The Atari crash came from many publishers just putting out shovel ware, it wasn't instant but rather one day people just said, " Hey enough is enough Im done buying games that are glitchy , incomplete, useless, or just copy pasta.

Honestly Im in 2 camps I like triple A 'shiny' games but if they dont have the gameplay to back them, I move on quick. I never said there's anything wrong with some games having super hi fidelity. But look at the recent trend, people are pumping money into lower fidelity games, Walking Dead was GOTY many places, Journey was GOTY some places to.

Both games were good but neither was pushing the line graphics wise. Companies like EA and Activision on the other hand keep churning out the same thing, as was mentioned, they put tons of money into games that most people know are 'niche' then just kill it when it it doesnt meet expectations. If you watched the video, the guy explains how after the crash almost no one is able to get back to where they were, partly because no one has expendable money atm and due to other reasons.

EA in general is terrible for getting a semi decent profitable developer and closing them down after their game because "They didn't make enough". Any business is that fine line between cost and marketability. As someone said in this thread, for a game like Dead Space to hit 50 million sold is asking a lot, EA seems that all gamers play the same drivel that comes out no matter the genre(Not saying DS3 is bad, but its not a game Ive ever had interest in).

As for the preordering, they already have your money, and thanks to no laws protecting consumers in the US, once that sale is done and that package opened your stuck with what could be a 60 dollar coaster. I mean I understand supporting companies that make the games you want, I preorder JRPGs from smaller companies to promote them bringing more over. but even then most of the time I've seen the japanese game reviews so Im still betting on a product I've seen or know is to my tastes, working.

But like I said earlier I dont mean a all out crash were there's no games, but A crash of the current model, games still existed after the Atari crash, just not as many until Nintendo.


I always felt alot of this was mainly Atari. I remember the main 3 Atari Systems the 2600, 5200, and the 7800. The 5200 was pretty much a flop. One thing Atari just couldn't figure out is people were done with Pac-mac, Defender, Centipede, etc. Sure Pacman on the 7800 had better graphics but it was still a game that everyone had played to death. IF you look at a majority of the games on every updated Atari system they just kept re-releasing the same games that people had played to death in the arcades and on their Atari 2600 to death allready.

Then Nintendo comes along with the NES and starts to offer games that take hours (sometimes days) to complete rather than games that you just try for a higher score on.

I have to say a majority of my game purchases from the past couple of years have probably been indie games. There hasn't been anything on console recently that has interested me in the least.
____________________________
Hi
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 59 All times are in CST
Allegory, Kavekkk, Shojindo, Anonymous Guests (56)