I'm pissy cause over the past few months of living on my own, I've come to a serious disagreement with the way of thinking of the modern gaming industry...That disagreement being over how a game/franchise is decided to be a success or a failure.
I personally am not comfortable when the first week/first day/first month sales are used to decide whether a game is good or not. I mean, there are soo many factors that can stop even the most die-hard of fans from supporting their favourite game day 1, like maybe their boss didn't pay them on pay day? Or their store couldn't get it stocked on launch day? Maybe the only copies he could find were used ones? And what about those who are against online shopping for whatever reason?
Like, what if there are 2 games being released at the same time, both of which you love very much, but you only have enough money to get one of them at that time. One might think "Oh, I'll just get this one now, and get the other on my next pay day", but just because who knows how many people decided to make the same decision, that other game you like didn't sell _____ within the first week or whatever, gets scrutinized as a failure as a result, "critics" making up reasons why it didn't sell, the team gets disbanded, bankrupcy, layoffs, blame this, blame that etc. So now when you now do have the money to get that 2nd game, you look at it and wonder if it's worth it now knowing it'll probably end on some cliff-hanger since no more will be produced...
I guess what I think I'm saying is that life for most people is hectic and unpredictable, there are way too many things that can happen to people to hinder them from buying more than one video game a month, if at all. Can't they more focus on how a game sells over the course of a year? or at least a 6 month period? Or something? I dunno
I just don't like how nowadays, video games seem like "The Rich Kid's Club" or something...
I HATE HOW VIDYA GAMES ARE UBER EXPENSIVE THESE DAYS T^T
No - unless you produce more games with a cheaper budget in a shorter time period.
And yes, gaming is an expensive hobby.
Games cost thousands to millions of dollars to make.
Quote from: {Your Lovely Kyo}~ on July 20, 2013, 04:34:10 AM
No - unless you produce more games with a cheaper budget in a shorter time period.
Hmmm, what's the worst case scenario if people were to cut down on development costs?
Poor production value, less assets, shorter games, buggier games.
Quote from: Iris Sapphire on July 20, 2013, 04:54:35 AM
Poor production value, less assets, shorter games, buggier games.
All those things happen even with big budgets...
Quote from: KPOPSTAR on July 17, 2013, 12:47:21 PM
I HATE HOW VIDYA GAMES ARE UBER EXPENSIVE THESE DAYS T^T
Could be worse. Back in 1990 when the Sega Genesis was brought to America, you'd be paying about $60 for just ONE game.
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 20, 2013, 05:42:57 AM
All those things happen even with big budgets...
That would be called missmanagement.
Isn't mismanagement just a thing that happens with business regardless of their budget?
They're still people prone to mistakes...
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 21, 2013, 09:51:02 AM
Isn't mismanagement just a thing that happens with business regardless of their budget?
They're still people prone to mistakes...
....exactly?
Quote from: Iris Sapphire on July 21, 2013, 10:10:22 AM
....exactly?
It's just that, with the way that we're dealing with game sales right now, even the best of games are being seen as failures. There has to be a better way.
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 21, 2013, 11:31:47 AM
It's just that, with the way that we're dealing with game sales right now, even the best of games are being seen as failures. There has to be a better way.
Yeah - by changing how the world's economy works.
Well, how about a more immediate solution? Like, why not take the Wii/Wii U approach and make "inferior" games with lots of replayability, so that all the money they would've spent on expensive fluff can be used on marketing and budgeting the next project?
Of course that would involve changing the way modern gamers think...
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 21, 2013, 01:17:56 PM
Well, how about a more immediate solution? Like, why not take the Wii/Wii U approach and make "inferior" games with lots of replayability, so that all the money they would've spent on expensive fluff can be used on marketing and budgeting the next project?
Of course that would involve changing the way modern gamers think...
Thats what the downloadable $15 category is there for.
What does that do for those who want to own their games?
bad luck.
Or make like New Super Luigi U and make retail versions.
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 21, 2013, 04:08:29 PM
Or make like New Super Luigi U and make retail versions.
20% Console Manufacturer
20% Retailer
20% Distributor
Yeah, no.
Well how about releasing less video games per year?
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 23, 2013, 03:46:01 AM
Well how about releasing less video games per year?
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/11408288/Neuer%20Ordner2/shepard.gif)
Well, with the way things are now, good games and innovation are being swept under a rug in favour of the safe and controversial. So either a better solution is found, or I'll just find a less expensive hobby.
The only way to solve your problem is to stop being a console gamer.
Quote from: Iris Sapphire on July 23, 2013, 11:10:55 AM
The only way to solve your problem is to stop being a console gamer.
Me not being a console gamer isn't gonna suddenly make Darksiders a success.
But it will give you access to a lot more "New" games.
So like, Darkstalkers Ressurection is a "failure".
A $15 downloadable game that was #1 downloaded PSN for months...is a "failure"...
To surprise to absolutely no one.
If you can be the literal "Best" of your competition, but still be a failure to the eyes of your parents, something's got to change.
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 28, 2013, 05:26:33 AM
If you can be the literal "Best" of your competition, but still be a failure to the eyes of your parents, something's got to change.
If it was It wouldnt be a failure.
Well, if being the #1 downloaded PSN and XBLA title, highly rated, and being backed by the FGC, while only selling at $15 is considered a failure these days, then I think something needs to change.
okay, first of all
The sales expectation set for Darkstalkers Ressurection was probably the bar to check if its worth to make a new Darkstalkers.
Obviously it wasnt worth to make new full-fledged Darkstalkers.
And finally Capcom never used to word "failure" - they said "did not perform as well as we would have liked to perform".
That is dissapointment not a failure.
And finally financial failure =/= failure
Games like Mirrors Edge that bombed at the start have proven that If your game is good enough and gains popularity it gets another chance.
Hmph
If you can be on the top of the charts and still not be up to the standard, then I think something's wrong.
But I guess I'm the minority.
Something that a lot of people buy isn't automatically a good game.
I thought we all learned that when Sonic 06 sold over 2,000,000 copies.
Butitwasagoodgame*grumble*
I'm sorry, but no.
Ok, that's your opinion.
What's this I'm hearing about Metro Last Light was made using 10% of the cost of regular overbudgeted AAA games?
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 29, 2013, 06:16:06 AM
Ok, that's your opinion.
What's this I'm hearing about Metro Last Light was made using 10% of the cost of regular overbudgeted AAA games?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=558062 (http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=558062)
AAA games arent overbudgeted. There are just the higher standards.
Quote from: {Your Lovely Kyo}~ on July 29, 2013, 07:31:06 AM
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=558062 (http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=558062)
AAA games arent overbudgeted. There are just the higher standards.
Well, where does all that extra money go?
Cause from what I've played, it feels just as good, if not better than any other AAA 3rd party game I've played.
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 29, 2013, 08:11:34 AM
Well, where does all that extra money go?
That is kinda self-explanatory.
Quote from: {Your Lovely Kyo}~ on July 29, 2013, 08:36:52 AM
That is kinda self-explanatory.
Then I guess it's not going into anything I care about.
Look, if a game doesnt sell well its to 85% the publishers or developers fault.
If you release your brand-new IP Binary Domain the same day as the Blockbuster Mass Effect 3 and expect it to sell...
Its your own damn fault.
If you release your brand-new IP Mirrors Edge the same month as the Blockbusters Gears of War 2, Resistance 2, Call of Duty World at War and Far Cry 2 and expect it to sell...
Its your own damn fault.
If you release a half assed bare bones port of a 2 year old game on a new console and expect it to sell, then someone needs to get fired.
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 29, 2013, 04:24:58 PM
If you release a half assed bare bones port of a 2 year old game on a new console and expect it to sell, then someone needs to get fired.
If you expect to get quality third-party games on a system that no one bought...
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 29, 2013, 06:16:06 AM
Ok, that's your opinion.
What's this I'm hearing about Metro Last Light was made using 10% of the cost of regular overbudgeted AAA games?
The staff of that game had poor conditions and practically chose to slave over that game.
AAA games aren't overbudgeted.. all that budget goes towards the massive teams that make those kinds of game, and the amount of content they create. Creating all those cool set-pieces, creating large areas, hundreds of thousands of different sound effects, voice acting, artists, programmers. It's all about the scale of a game- and while Metro Last Light was a great looking AAA quality game with a great engine, and some really good assets, it was also a fairly narrow, linear game, with a lot of attention to detail but in very tightly packed areas. It also lacked decent voice actors to be fair..
It's easy to put all those variables together and understand why it was so inexpensive. A project driven by passion in a company that suffered far too many difficulties, especially financially. It's a miracle that game even came out.
Quote from: {Your Lovely Kyo}~ on July 29, 2013, 08:48:21 PM
If you expect to get quality third-party games on a system that no one bought...
Halo?
Besides, I wasn't expecting any 3rd party support, especially any good ones, cause that sh*t doesn't come at launch, ever, the best you can hope for is a quality 2nd Party Game.
But how did they expect Mass Effect 3 to sell on the Wii U? I fail to see the logic.
Quote from: Iris Sapphire on July 30, 2013, 01:14:08 AM
The staff of that game had poor conditions and practically chose to slave over that game.
AAA games aren't overbudgeted.. all that budget goes towards the massive teams that make those kinds of game, and the amount of content they create. Creating all those cool set-pieces, creating large areas, hundreds of thousands of different sound effects, voice acting, artists, programmers. It's all about the scale of a game- and while Metro Last Light was a great looking AAA quality game with a great engine, and some really good assets, it was also a fairly narrow, linear game, with a lot of attention to detail but in very tightly packed areas. It also lacked decent voice actors to be fair..
It's easy to put all those variables together and understand why it was so inexpensive. A project driven by passion in a company that suffered far too many difficulties, especially financially. It's a miracle that game even came out.
Soo, they're putting alot of money into things I don't take notice of... fantastic.
Quote from: Hakudamashi on July 30, 2013, 04:08:11 AM
Soo, they're putting alot of money into things I don't take notice of... fantastic.
If you actually did not notice that in the past 5 years.
Wow.
Just, wow.
Yeah, I'm stupid.
Gimme a fun game that plays great, and I don't really pay attention to much. I do appreciate small attentions to detail, like Luigi whistling in Luigi's Mansion.