I wonder what Malstrom would have to say about this video.
I LOVE ICELAND!

I wonder what Malstrom would have to say about this video.
I LOVE ICELAND!

| disolitude said: If you can't make a good game without spending 60 million dollars, hope you go out of business. |
I think that is the point the video is making about the videogame industry. The industry has to find other ways to entertain that people will buy, and the costs won't go through the roof. What causes games to get that expensive, is designing games to be like movies, hiring voice actors, using leading edge graphics specs and going for gold plating on everything. The industry fools itself into think that Halo, Call of Duty, etc... are where the money are, so they then feel they need to throw even more money at such products. People can only buy and support so much out there. They need to innovate at much lower costs, and hope to capture the attention of people. If they fail to do this, they will go under. The cost of this may result in people who are captivated by stories and movie-like experiences in their games and demanding it, to end up leaving. BUT, what we do get is games being more games than interactive fiction.
In short, you don't have a lot of AAA stuff, as far as costs go, but you do have alternatives that are less expensive.
Through time like these, only the stronger survive. Companies like Blizzard, Nintendo, Atlus and others will remain largely unscathed. It's time to seperate the chaff from the wheat.
My themeforest portfolio:
Pachter says publishers got problems because people are playing games like MW2 several hours in multiplayer. But Nintendo has always shown that this doesn't have to be a problem: People have put ridiculous amounts of time into multiplayer powerhouses like Mario Kart, Smash Bros and now Wii series games, as well as lots of single player games. What that did was create a very loyal fan base.
joeorc said:
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.
Currently playing: Gran Turismo 5
Just finished: Infamous 2
What good have Peter Molyneaux, Trip Hawkins, Cliffy B and Michael Pachter ever done for the gaming industry?

| Jaos said: Pachter says publishers got problems because people are playing games like MW2 several hours in multiplayer. But Nintendo has always shown that this doesn't have to be a problem: People have put ridiculous amounts of time into multiplayer powerhouses like Mario Kart, Smash Bros and now Wii series games, as well as lots of single player games. What that did was create a very loyal fan base. |
Indeed.
In that entire video, pachter tried to justify milking gamers. He was painfully obvious.
I LOVE ICELAND!

joeorc said:
but that's the point is it not? ..what determines the status of a game to be AAA? is is the investment or the outcome of how many peope play your game? you can put a large investment into a game and yet the game could no way near be considered a AAA game but by those few who do play it it is..! how many would have to play the game in order to make it a AAA game. sales and investment are fine, but when you have games like Farmville sporting way more number of gamer's playing the game How is that not an indication of the Game being AAA? |
what you fail to realise is that AAA was and still is an industry term for a high budget main focus title. Later somehow it became used by gamers to say the game has a meta score above a arbitrary number usually 90.
@TheVoxelman on twitter
| dobby985 said: What good have Peter Molyneaux, Trip Hawkins, Cliffy B and Michael Pachter ever done for the gaming industry? |
Not sure about Pachter but maybe some awesome games for us to enjoy?