- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Video Game Industry Stalls, Stocks Plunge. What’s Going On?
Posted on 3/13/19 at 2:28 pm to BulldogXero
Posted on 3/13/19 at 2:28 pm to BulldogXero
quote:
The industry isn't to hell in a handbasket yet, but we should be very wary of the direction the industry is headed in as it spells trouble for down the road. Look at how many studios have closed since even the PS3/360 days.
didn't most of them just get bought out by Activision/EA? i think the trend will continue to be smaller studios making great games then getting gobbled up and then the cycle repeats. These large publishers do everything they can to maximize profits rather than the gamer's experience. The way the market is set up, there will always be room for new indy studios to show up and make a huge splash. even if EA and Activision shut down completely, that will just open up room for other studios to make/spend more money.
the consumers drive the gaming industry, not these large publishers. gamers will always find games to spend their money on
This post was edited on 3/13/19 at 2:29 pm
0
Posted on 3/13/19 at 2:31 pm to BulldogXero
Just the nature of business in general.
Then you have developers like Epic, CDPR, FromSoftware, Santa Monica Studio, Guerrilla Games who are exploding over recent years. Hell even Capcom is making a comeback.
Then you have developers like Epic, CDPR, FromSoftware, Santa Monica Studio, Guerrilla Games who are exploding over recent years. Hell even Capcom is making a comeback.
Posted on 3/13/19 at 2:50 pm to Scruffy
The big companies are just expecting too much from their games and setting themselves up for failure. They expect every new shooter to be the next big thing that people play for months (if not years) and pour hundreds of dollars into.
Many people are burnt out on that model and the type of customer that appeals to is already invested in other games.
If you've poured thousands of hours and hundreds of dollars into one live service game already, you're not exactly itching to start over from scratch in a brand new one. At least I wouldn't be.
It's like when Hearthstone got popular, you saw this huge rash of card games explode on the market, but it was impossible for them to all be big simultaneously, because most people are going to pick ONE card game to play, it's just too expensive and time consuming to play more than one seriously.
They need to scale back on making these never ending games that are just tedious slogs designed to rope people deeper and deeper in.
Many people are burnt out on that model and the type of customer that appeals to is already invested in other games.
If you've poured thousands of hours and hundreds of dollars into one live service game already, you're not exactly itching to start over from scratch in a brand new one. At least I wouldn't be.
It's like when Hearthstone got popular, you saw this huge rash of card games explode on the market, but it was impossible for them to all be big simultaneously, because most people are going to pick ONE card game to play, it's just too expensive and time consuming to play more than one seriously.
They need to scale back on making these never ending games that are just tedious slogs designed to rope people deeper and deeper in.
Posted on 3/13/19 at 2:57 pm to MisslePig
I'm guessing the industry is like most. Up years and down years.
All depends on big releases. Some big titles got released last year. Good games take years to create. May start seeing more of a pattern such as this.
All depends on big releases. Some big titles got released last year. Good games take years to create. May start seeing more of a pattern such as this.
Posted on 3/13/19 at 2:57 pm to BulldogXero
quote:And they immediately made up for it by introducing THE standard bearer for DLC
Remember when everyone got at Bethesda for Oblivion's horse armor DLC?
Shivering Isles
Posted on 3/13/19 at 7:16 pm to MisslePig
As gamers we need not look into this too much. Keep supporting developers that deserve our support as consumers and continue to shun the moneygrab practices of EA and their ilk. Just look at Blizzard. They're trying to put fires out across multiple titles. The big boys thought they were untouchable and that we'd buy anything. As long as there are guys like CDPR and Nintendo out there, gaming will be fine.
Posted on 3/13/19 at 7:35 pm to MisslePig
quote:
What’s Going On?
A number of big game developers can't manage to actually create a complete game. They tend to release janky games with HUGE flaws and then have to rely on patching them to make them work. Or they basically plan to use the game to constantly make money through micro-transactions/loot crates/cosmetic items.
If I want to play an unfinished game, I'll go browse the early access games on Steam.
I can't fathom buying a major studio release and getting the same experience for 2X-5X the price.
Also, they are continually banking on their franchises and scared to try new things. So they continually rehash things (and usually badly until it's patched - see my earlier point).
This post was edited on 3/13/19 at 7:36 pm
Posted on 3/13/19 at 10:37 pm to PEPE
I hate microtransactions as well, but shouldn't companies raise the prices of console and pc games? It's been $60 doe for easily 10 years.
I don't want to pay more but would a minor bump in game cost help steer these companies from adapting this micro shite? Or is it here to stay?
I don't want to pay more but would a minor bump in game cost help steer these companies from adapting this micro shite? Or is it here to stay?
Posted on 3/13/19 at 10:54 pm to bbrownso
The autopsy on Mass Effect Andromeda pretty much laid out that EA has no interest in traditional games anymore.
They see MMO as the perfect business model and try to shoehorn all their games into it, whether they fit it or not. They’re going all in on this and not realizing, or caring, that it’s going to massively bite them in the arse sooner or later.
They see MMO as the perfect business model and try to shoehorn all their games into it, whether they fit it or not. They’re going all in on this and not realizing, or caring, that it’s going to massively bite them in the arse sooner or later.
Posted on 3/13/19 at 11:01 pm to Tayday
I don’t mind expansions to a game, such as the various mission packs for Fallout, X-Com, etc, as that kind of thing dates back 20+ years to the days of Wing Commander, Ultima VII, etc.
The intentional crippling of games so that you can pay to speed up the unlocking of features? That pisses me off.
Star Wars Battlefield 2 is a good example of that kind of crap. Making you grind for something like 200 hours to unlock Vader was just plain insane.
The intentional crippling of games so that you can pay to speed up the unlocking of features? That pisses me off.
Star Wars Battlefield 2 is a good example of that kind of crap. Making you grind for something like 200 hours to unlock Vader was just plain insane.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 6:20 am to MisslePig
EA Sportd sucks
Posted on 3/15/19 at 2:42 pm to MisslePig
Why do you think D&D is thriving? People are tired of many things surrounding video games nowadays. Especially team based multiplayer games.
- Microtransactions/loot boxes
- Poor content that is overpriced
- Toxic communities
D&D you can choose who you play with and make up your own story. I haven't played anything besides maybe 50 hours of Civ 6 in 2 years.
- Microtransactions/loot boxes
- Poor content that is overpriced
- Toxic communities
D&D you can choose who you play with and make up your own story. I haven't played anything besides maybe 50 hours of Civ 6 in 2 years.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 4:46 pm to Tayday
quote:
I hate microtransactions as well, but shouldn't companies raise the prices of console and pc games? It's been $60 doe for easily 10 years.
I don't want to pay more but would a minor bump in game cost help steer these companies from adapting this micro shite? Or is it here to stay?
Games are cheaper now, adjusted for inflation, than at almost any point that consumer video games existed. The microtransaction and subscription models make up the difference, and then some. Nintendo games used to be $50+... in 1988 (When Super Mario Bros. 3 was released). Adjusted for inflation, that game would cost about $105 today.
Atari cartridges were about $20 in 1980. That's close to $60 today. After the glut of shite games at that price point (sound familiar?) caused an industry collapse because people got tired of spending money on poorly made crap that publishers were pushing out just to make a quick buck, Nintendo came in with higher price points, but better technology, higher quality of game, and strict licensing to prevent third parties from producing crap games, justifying the higher price. The higher costs to the consumer ultimately saved the industry as Nintendo set the bar for both price point and expected quality of game.
I wouldn't be at all shocked if AAA publishers are driving the industry toward another cliff, after which we see prices correct upward as the industry recovers, but get better games in the deal.
After all, how many rehashed Black Duty Modern Ops releases do we see for every masterpiece like RDR2, Horizon Zero Dawn, Witcher 3, BOTW, etc.?
This post was edited on 3/15/19 at 5:04 pm
Posted on 3/15/19 at 5:41 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
And, BTW, at Anthem.
Sad what's happened to Bioware
Posted on 3/15/19 at 7:18 pm to Porcine Human
quote:I started another playthrough of Dragon Age: Origins last week. This can't be stated enough. BioWare used to be great.
Sad what's happened to Bioware
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:44 am to MisslePig
My interest has really fallen off in recent years. I only like non sword fighting RPG's, so my window is small.Games like Mass Effect & Fallout going tits up have pretty much killed my gaming.
Waiting and hoping The Outer Worlds & Cyberpunk deliver.
Waiting and hoping The Outer Worlds & Cyberpunk deliver.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 9:50 am to Tayday
quote:
It's been $60 doe for easily 10 years.
I wouldn't buy them at any higher. If I did, I would either commit harder to that one game or I would be disappointed and be reluctant to buy another to try.
If I was committed to the game even more, I'd need expansion packs to keep me interested and then there lies the initial problem.
My favorite model right now is the free game with micro transactions that don't effect gameplay. I hate loot boxes as that is gambling but like paying a little more knowing what I'm going to get.
However, this wouldn't really work for RPG games.
This post was edited on 3/16/19 at 9:53 am
Posted on 3/16/19 at 10:46 am to Hu_Flung_Pu
This is part of the problem with video game development being centered around microtransactions, most genres and games they don't fit.
EA abandoned single player games because those don't sell microtransactions. Their idiotic statement the public isn't interested in them anymore is pure hogwash. Zelda BotW, God of War, RDR2, all blockbuster hits and some of the biggest selling games of the past few years. Even smaller titles like the recent RE2 remake were big hits.
Their singular obsession with microtransactions has led them to build nothing but live service shooters cuz that's the only thing they've successfully figured out how to shove them into.
As for the pricing discussuon, we've reached a point where video game development costs and cycles vary so much there does need to be a price overhaul.
Games should probably range from $10-$100 depending on how long, expensive, and complex they were to develop. I would have paid $100 for God of War, although I'm not sure others would have.
It's difficult because the ~$50 price point has been such a notable fixture in gaming for over 30 years. But it will inevitably have to change at some point.
EA abandoned single player games because those don't sell microtransactions. Their idiotic statement the public isn't interested in them anymore is pure hogwash. Zelda BotW, God of War, RDR2, all blockbuster hits and some of the biggest selling games of the past few years. Even smaller titles like the recent RE2 remake were big hits.
Their singular obsession with microtransactions has led them to build nothing but live service shooters cuz that's the only thing they've successfully figured out how to shove them into.
As for the pricing discussuon, we've reached a point where video game development costs and cycles vary so much there does need to be a price overhaul.
Games should probably range from $10-$100 depending on how long, expensive, and complex they were to develop. I would have paid $100 for God of War, although I'm not sure others would have.
It's difficult because the ~$50 price point has been such a notable fixture in gaming for over 30 years. But it will inevitably have to change at some point.
This post was edited on 3/16/19 at 12:13 pm
Posted on 3/16/19 at 11:41 am to PEPE
But how do you as a consumer know how much the game is worth in development?
What's to say the publisher said "this game cost $100 because we had so much research and development with countless hours of brainstorming?" They will justify the higher cost no matter what.
I think the two types of games need to be at different prices. Single player games need to start off with a more complete game and charge more and any expansions need to be cheaper. Say $70 base and $15 expansion. Multiplayer needs to start off lower with about free - $30 and have a microtransaction based cosmetic only item.
What's to say the publisher said "this game cost $100 because we had so much research and development with countless hours of brainstorming?" They will justify the higher cost no matter what.
I think the two types of games need to be at different prices. Single player games need to start off with a more complete game and charge more and any expansions need to be cheaper. Say $70 base and $15 expansion. Multiplayer needs to start off lower with about free - $30 and have a microtransaction based cosmetic only item.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 5:53 pm to PEPE
quote:I paid $20 for Witcher 3. Doesn't seem right at all.
Games should probably range from $10-$100 depending on how long, expensive, and complex they were to develop. I would have paid $100 for God of War, although I'm not sure others would have.
Page 2 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News