AAA games are doomed.

[joeorc]

spiffiness said:

joeorc said:

spiffiness said:

joeorc said:

spiffiness said:

Interesting. This would seem to indicate that the industry is not at all ready for the next-gen unless the consoles progress laterally rather than iterate on current graphics technology. If they are already losing money creating current hi-def detailed games, an even higher graphics standard isn't going to help.

that's one view but on the same token, what many in that very same video were talking about is the way you as a game company invest into a project and how it will be in the sales market. for instance the market was you could put a game out on a disc and people would buy the game play it an move on, now people are sticking with just one game because it offer's so much choice to continue on line the publisher's are not getting any money.

but let's take a look as a great example of that very situation:

Little Big Planet has over 2 million level's produced by home console user's, the server's are not being charged to play, but on the same token How much content for DLC has been released for LBP, that is paid content?..some would say quite a bit , other's would say not enough..lol

but what it does show that IN THE CASE OF LBP, Now Modnation Racer's, and some more of these type of game's they can make money on their product's.

Yes, that's how some studios can make their money back but this model doesn't fit in with all types of games. The underlying problem is that many games just cost too much to produce. If costs go even higher for the next gen, we will see fewer games (particularly original games) and more studios closing.

I wonder what the ratio is for DLC purchases. I remember seeing an article, I think on IGN, saying the percentage of people buying DLC after the intial purchase is not that high, but I could be wrong.

i do see how this could apply to almost any game , though you would have to micro manage what your DLC content's direction, and focus is going to be and key is price of that DLC to make sure the attraction is there will benefit's that will keep consumer's happy enough to pay for somthing they feel would be worth the added benefit without seeing that it's required,but as an incentive to buy to increase enjoyment of the product.

I think it could fit in with any game , you as a developer have to look at what direction that a DLC content model can be worked.

An if that is feasable.

I don't know, I guess everyone could sell extra costumes, weapons, and levels, but I'm not convinced that DLC can support the game industry. I found the IGN article that states that only 15% of gamers buy DLC. Granted the sample size was small and the 43% who didn't even know about DLC were mostly either on the Wii or PS2. If you take out that percentage it's still only 27% who bought DLC. Of course that also means the sample size of people who know what DLC is, is also much smaller so the margin of error is quite large. I would guesstimate maybe max 35-40%? Would that be enough you think? It would be interesting to see data from a larger sample size of only HD console owners.

Source: http://ps3.ign.com/articles/105/1059588p1.html

while i agree with what you stated an 35-40% would be pretty good, i do think that DLC is one of the main reason's that would make it viable for publisher's to keep making money with out the MMO pricing method, that may be popular with some game's but for the majority of them they have trouble, but with DLC the Idea that it's optional purchase is more of an idea situation to the consumer than a "must have payment to play" Now that is not to say that method cannot work , it can it does very well.

But you do get less of resistance for future purchase  from the cunsumer with DLC than a month by Month payment principle.I think in my Opinion as long as the DLC offered is robust enough and priced reasonbly people will more than likely want the content, and you May..notice i said May have a greater chance of purchase by the consumer.

Pachter is very spot on that publisher's want a piece of that continued purchase pie, but I also Think he is very wrong on the way the companies would or should go about doing it. Some companies could indeed make great sales profit, an do very well in that Principle of Profit dynamic, but I think that very few Game's are able to make that grade of "paying on a month by month basis" purchase principle.

where as if you go with the DLC content method, you may not have the most and largest profit principle every month, but if your game keep's getting played even with out offering DLC if you try to add a Month By Month purchase principle you may infact kill off the very game you were trying to make money on.

with DLC optional purchases the people that continued to play your game keep playing but with the option of future content, may be more than willing to purchase more content for the game than completely up and quit , if you decide to start a month by month purchase principle.