THE BORE
General => Video Game Bored => Topic started by: ToxicAdam on February 17, 2009, 11:15:06 AM
-
http://www.slate.com/id/2210732/
So, I am reading this article that asks "What is killing the gaming industry" and they list all the problems that next gen devs are having with costs and development times for new games. Yadda yadda, you know it all.
I was walking through the gaming section the other day and was just floored by all the titles I have not played, nor will get a chance to ever play. Since about 2004 it seems that the overall number of games being released has doubled. I don't ever remember it being this way, most games I hadn't played yet was because I didn't want to play them.
I saw a tv spot on G4 where they claimed 1700 games were released in 2008. I can't find anything to back that statement up, but I wouldn't doubt it when you factor in all the PC/XBL/PSN/handheld/cellphone games that come out that anyone barely notices.
There are only so many "gaming hours" that a person can feasibly participate in. It seems like the market is flooded and companies are failing because of this.
-
I think they bring up a relevant point. One thing I don't understand is why middleware solutions, purported to be a cost saver in development budgets, aren't really really saving anyone money.
I definitely think that both MS and Nintendo, along with the economic crisis, are going to extend this generation, along the lines of Sony's strategy. I hope this is case. I don't want buy any new consoles before 2012.
-
I don't want to buy a new console before 2015
-
I don't want to buy a new console again. I'm hoping that portable hardware gets so good by the time the next 'gen' arrives that I can just have something the size of a PSP that I can play on the go, or come home and plug into my TV.
-
Yes, yes, and yes.
The market is flooded with titles. Every week 30 games come out or something across all platforms. Do they really think there is enough consumer wallet to finance all those?
All you have to do is look at gaming forums and see even the hardcore gamers who buy tons of games don't have enough time to play them all because there are so many and thus end up passing on some titles. If that's what the hardcore buyers are doing, what about the casual buyers who buy 1 game a month, 1 game every 3 months, 1 game a year, etc?
Especially with rising development costs it would be better if there was like 4-5 new games a month TOTAL. That way people who want to buy new games during that month would split their money between those titles and bring more revenue.
-
there can't be only 4-5 titles a month because you have EA, Activision, Ubisoft, etc. all competition for attention with, most times, very similar looking games.
-
Especially in this recession. Anyone else decreasing their games bought this year? I'm just going to buy the more big hits and a couple of portable games.
I mean really, aside from maybe 2 titles, as far as this year's console releases go, the Capcom games are the only ones I'm going to get.
What else do you even need aside from Dead Rising 2, Resident Evil 5, Bionic Commando, and Street Fighter 4? Nothing! Those games could potentially last a man all year in this recession.
-
Same for me
Halo Wars, KZ2, Infamous, maybe Prototype, Halo ODST. DQ5. Good enough.
-
I'm not cutting down too much on video games, definitely cutting down on blu-ray movies I get though.
actually, Prototype and Halo Wars are two games that I'm not thinking about passing on. The Halo Wars demo was enjoyable, but I have a copy of Company of Heroes I got free with my graphics card, if I was gonna jump back into the RTS genre, I'd rather go with that. The new videos of Prototype made it seem like it can get old fast, so hopefully there is a demo.
I really do wish that games were spaced out a bit more. March has so many games coming out within a week that it's ridiculous.
-
Well, there's always been TOO MANY games. But finally we now have too many GOOD games, whereas before it was just a load of shovelware and other crap with the occasional good title thrown in. Of course pretty much every title on the industry leading console is nigh unplayable, but that just makes the glut of good games even more amazing.
-
I don't really think the amount of good games has increased all that much. It's a bit higher than what we have seen in previous generations, but I recall similar situations last generation. I suppose the biggest difference this time around is the length of the good games. Everyone is so concerned about lengthy games these days and many developers work to extend (artificially or otherwise) their games.
-
I'd like the next generation to start as early as possible. Gotta have ma Zelda in HD.
-
I can't relate to gamers these days. I don't know if I've ever been the type to buy three or four games in every "wave," but now I can't even seem to find three or four games a year worth actually buying. It's some blend of not being terribly rich, having other shit to do and generally not being dazzled by games released these days. By the end of this year, I will probably own KZ2, Halo ODST, Infamous and any possible IW COD game. Very safe line-up, but it's about the only stuff that really interests me, at least to the tune of setting aside time and money for it.
That said, I'm totally ready for the next generation, assuming it's a one-HD console generation. Sony or Microsoft or some collaboration, I don't care, just give me one good system with some good games and I'm set. Right now would be the best.
-
I'd like the next generation to start as early as possible. Gotta have ma Zelda in HD.
Don't get ahead of yourself. You know how Nintendo likes to move in baby steps, they're probably looking to capture the Himu demographic next.
-
I don't really think the amount of good games has increased all that much. It's a bit higher than what we have seen in previous generations, but I recall similar situations last generation. I suppose the biggest difference this time around is the length of the good games. Everyone is so concerned about lengthy games these days and many developers work to extend (artificially or otherwise) their games.
So now HD games are too long.
-
I'd like the next generation to start as early as possible. Gotta have ma Zelda in HD.
Don't get ahead of yourself. You know how Nintendo likes to move in baby steps, they're probably looking to capture the Himu demographic next.
Fuck you :lol
-
half the problem is that no one can crack the DS or Wii markets like Nintendo can, so instead of trying to put out one good Wii or DS title, you get companies throwing out anything and seeing if it sticks. But that's only half the problem, the other half is that the major publishers feel the need have their hand in every genre every year even if it means making a shitty game (sup Need for Speed).
I'd like to think that we'll be seeing the end of yearly updates for non sports titles. Was anyone really clamouring for a new Call of Duty a year after Modern Warfare?
-
I'd like the next generation to start as early as possible. Gotta have ma Zelda in HD.
Don't get ahead of yourself. You know how Nintendo likes to move in baby steps, they're probably looking to capture the Himu demographic next.
Fuck you :lol
Come on, you know how big the s-video market is in comparison to hd.
-
I'd like the next generation to start as early as possible. Gotta have ma Zelda in HD.
:lol
-
MLB 09 comes out in two weeks, then you can say the future of gaming has arrived
-
Yes
The downside to this is that given the flow of cheap, good games, I find it very hard for me to justify purchases greater than $20. That means waiting a few months for some games but they will always drop down in price.
-
I don't want to buy a new console before 2015
I agree.
People are still having fun with Wii graphics. I'd expect people to still have fun with PS360 graphics by then.
And it's too expensive to start a new gen. Especially for developers. This will be the longest generation of gaming. Mark my words.
-
I'd like the next generation to start as early as possible. Gotta have ma Zelda in HD.
Don't get ahead of yourself. You know how Nintendo likes to move in baby steps, they're probably looking to capture the Himu demographic next.
Fuck you :lol
Come on, you know how big the s-video market is in comparison to hd.
Tis true, but I'm getting an hdtv soon
-
Yes
The downside to this is that given the flow of cheap, good games, I find it very hard for me to justify purchases greater than $20. That means waiting a few months for some games but they will always drop down in price.
I found that by waiting years to jump into the current gen meant that I had a nice, fat backlog of quality games to get on the cheap. I also don't want the next gen to start until 2012 at the earliest.
-
By the end of this year, I will probably own KZ2, Halo ODST, Infamous and any possible IW COD game. Very safe line-up, but it's about the only stuff that really interests me, at least to the tune of setting aside time and money for it.
I'll probably buy two 2009 games, both of which would be Halo. I'm not interested in anything else I've heard of, nor do I care to find out much about what I have not heard of.
There are three 2008 games left that I want to buy, though.
-
Yes!
There are too many games that I want but can't afford to buy.
-
Maybe if you have a novelty fetish. I think its a waste of money to buy CoD, FarCry2, Gears, Left4Dead, Resistance 2, Killzone 2, Resident Evil 5 etc. all within a time span less than six months. It's terribly redundant. I understand there are differences in the mechanics, but its pointless that so many publishers are trying to make the next big gun action game. The niche is saturated. To use a personal example, I don't see myself picking up Sin and Punishment 2 this year, because I already have alot of games where you point at the screen and shoot shit.
The only problem with there being so many games now is that budgets are getting out of control. I think the article in question mentions a break even point at 2 million copies sold at full retail price. Expectations for me-too games at $60 is 2 million+? Really? Idiotic. Budgets need to be deflated so these games can sell in the 30-40 range. Surely you can make an aesthetical pleaser with some interesting gimmicks on a smaller budget. It won't look like Gears but at least the company won't go bankrupt.
-
Maybe if you have a novelty fetish. I think its a waste of money to buy CoD, FarCry2, Gears, Left4Dead, Resistance 2, Killzone 2, Resident Evil 5 etc. all within a time span less than six months. It's terribly redundant. I understand there are differences in the mechanics, but its pointless that so many publishers are trying to make the next big gun action game. The niche is saturated. To use a personal example, I don't see myself picking up Sin and Punishment 2 this year, because I already have alot of games where you point at the screen and shoot shit.
The only problem with there being so many games now is that budgets are getting out of control. I think the article in question mentions a break even point at 2 million copies sold at full retail price. Expectations for me-too games at $60 is 2 million+? Really? Idiotic. Budgets need to be deflated so these games can sell in the 30-40 range. Surely you can make an aesthetical pleaser with some interesting gimmicks on a smaller budget. It won't look like Gears but at least the company won't go bankrupt.
Spoken like a true n-thing.
-
i had a handful of $60 regrets this past fall/winter
-
Maybe if you have a novelty fetish. I think its a waste of money to buy CoD, FarCry2, Gears, Left4Dead, Resistance 2, Killzone 2, Resident Evil 5 etc. all within a time span less than six months. It's terribly redundant. I understand there are differences in the mechanics, but its pointless that so many publishers are trying to make the next big gun action game. The niche is saturated. To use a personal example, I don't see myself picking up Sin and Punishment 2 this year, because I already have alot of games where you point at the screen and shoot shit.
The only problem with there being so many games now is that budgets are getting out of control. I think the article in question mentions a break even point at 2 million copies sold at full retail price. Expectations for me-too games at $60 is 2 million+? Really? Idiotic. Budgets need to be deflated so these games can sell in the 30-40 range. Surely you can make an aesthetical pleaser with some interesting gimmicks on a smaller budget. It won't look like Gears but at least the company won't go bankrupt.
Spoken like a true n-thing.
Eh, things are going to change for all the games you put on a pedestal. Very soon, just look at the financial reports.
-
smh @ this neogaf shiz
pshaw "backlogs" and "feasable gaming hours"
i dont get paid by the hour nor do i get commission, therefor dont treat videogames like a job