CGI-Quality said:
The makers of those games are two out of a bunch that have been successful (though I didn't get a feel that either of those were trying to emulate Hollywood). I also didn't say EVERY developer shooting for this was successful. But the industry, as a whole, it isn't falling because of these types of games. It just isn't. They don't even make up 30% of the stuff released. Never mind the fact that we just had one of the most successful generations since its inception, and one of those franchises trying to be like movies is to thank. Now as for your articles, they are mainly using wishful thinking and opinion. When done right (Heavy Rain, Uncharted, The Last Of Us, Mass Effect, Metal Gear Solid, Call of Duty, etc....), games aiming to be more like movies do just fine. There's your proof. When they are the sole reason for a collapse, indisputably, then get back to me. With the amount of variety there is, this industry isn't going anywhere anytime soon, neither are these types of games, no matter how much you tell yourself otherwsie or try to listen to articles written by people who mimic your stance. |
Go back and reread the post I did. You are looking at forecasts of free to play to end up canabalizing things also. You saw Nintendo express concerns over the portable arena.
The industry is failing by having dev costs too high and not selling sufficiently. That is why it will sell. You end up having the likes of the Old Republic decide to throw tons of money into doing what it did, giving ALL the NPCs voice actors, and go way over the top, and then be reduced to being free to play. EA's latest round of games didn't turn the corner either, and you had them have their head let go.
The thing is you think being MORE like Hollywood, when you don't have the same business model, is a sane thing to do. I am telling you, as I said before, it is not. And I believe I saw you write in the past that like 8-10 hours of gameplay at $60 a pop, is a steal. You do realize that will get a game in the used games bin, right? And then the games get recycled among players, and studios don't get money from it, and it is akin to piracy for them. Your approach to push for story driven games that then end, and are done, isn't working. Call of Duty ends up doing ok enough, but that is driven by multiplayer. Sony can get away with pushing some, but the likes of Uncharted ended up even having to add multiplayer. But multiplayer didn't even save Spec Ops: The Line. And don't give me that the game sucked, which is why it bombed. No, because it didn't have a sufficient enough hook to get people to buy it, and no amount of quality would save it. People also lamented Enslaved also.
You want me to add Square Enix into the mix also? Well, here you go:
http://gamerant.com/square-enix-tomb-raider-sales-loss/
Apparently Sleeping Dogs, Tomb Raider, and also Hitman didn't make a profit. So much for you and your theory here on how that approach works "swimmingly". And please do go on how all those titles suck, which is why they didn't do it. IF ONLY they were more like movies, they would of done better, right?
