By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - 5 Reasons the Video Game Industry is about to Crash...

 

Is a crash likely to happen?

Yes, within a year 20 5.92%
 
Yes, within 2-4 years 54 15.98%
 
Yes, by next Generation 38 11.24%
 
Maybe a wipe-out this gen, but no crash 36 10.65%
 
No, not any time soon 90 26.63%
 
No, the Industry is healthier than ever 100 29.59%
 
Total:338
Salnax said:
vivster said:

Just to ask, what would a video game crash entail? I can't imagine people would just stop playing videogames. And if they are playing they are willing to pay for new experiences. I don't think it is possible in this day and age for any (major) entertainment product to "crash". The market is just too huge for that.


A crash would entail a major decline in the revenue of the video game industry as a whole within a short period of time. 1983's crash reduced the size of the American market by over 90% within about two years. A modern crash would not necessarily be so severe, but it is implied that a large, at least double-digit percentage of the entire video gaming industry would be removed from the equation.

People didn't just stop playing video games in 1983. 1983 was a perfect storm. The previous (2nd) console generation was ending; the Atari 2600 was out in 1977 and the Magnavox Odyssey in 1978, so they were each already getting old. The big new console meant to start the 3rd gen of consoles, the Atari 5200, had a poor opening, lacked backwards compatibility and original games, and had a crappy controller. Not to mention it cost a whopping $270, $70 more than the Atari 2600 did at launch. The only other viable contenders on the console market the SG-1000 and the Famicom, were just released in Japan, meaning that they really couldn't be localized very quickly, especially in the days where both companies were small. Throw in some high profile failures (The ET game lost Atari $100 million in an era where the entire industry was only $3 billion in the USA), the lack of reliable gaming media to distinguish between good games and shovelware, and competition from other devices, and people just stopped buying games.

They kept on playing the games they already had. They just stopped buying new titles.

 

Could that happen today? I doubt it, but there are some parallels. The 8th gen consoles have generally had decent launches, but have lacked killer apps to set them apart from older systems as well as backwards compatibility, so they might not be adopted by the mass market quickly. The old consoles are definately declining, especially the former titan that was the Wii. Possible contenders, like the Android consoles, are too small to penetrate a market where you must be this high to ride. The gaming press has been losing credibility as of late, as fewer people trust reviewers. And mobile devices offer another way to waste time for a cheaper price. All that's missing now is a huge failure, and we have similar conditions to 30 years ago.

 

If a crash happened today, it almost certainly would not be as big. Instead of taking out 90% of the American console market in two years, it might take out 50%. That said, maybe the crash is already happening. In 2010, about 19 million consoles were sold in the USA. In 2013, it was 17 million. In 2012, it was 14 million, even with the release of the Wii U. That's a roughly 25% drop in two years. So far in 2013, even after Black Friday, only about 8 or 8.5 million consoles have been sold in 2013. Even if a million are sold a week for the rest of the year, that's down from 2012, despite the new Wii U and the "amazing" PS4 and Xbone launches.

 

By that explanation a crash in the last generation would've been much more likely.

There are a number of things that will prevent a crash:

- the biggest market of games and gamers in history

-a heap of highly anticipated games on all platforms, not only in the coming months but years

- myriad of games in all price categories and numerous funding possibilities

-the (informed) core gamers are a small percentage of the market, so most mishaps of the industry wouldn't even be noticed by the majority of gamers and thus wouldn't prevent them to to continue to consume

For a crash to happen all those things would have to be reversed



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Around the Network

Branching, partitioned market, few home consoles, established developer structure from the 7th gen, more multiplatform effort lowering costs a great deal = imminent gaming industry crash is highly unlikely, if not impossible.
This has been circulating ever since the move to VGA and SVGA graphics back in the day, it was cheaper to shoot cutscenes in real life video rather than rendering them and games sales were a lot lower, making it hard to offset losses (if any) and the industry was doomed.



Also, some of the points the guy makes are kinda... dumb

Make sensational title, generate traffic. Story of online news sites.

People that don't know gaming are in charge? Miyamoto wanted to go into manga, and has said he barely plays video games, and he's credited as the father of modern gaming.

Budgets have gone insane? Very good point. But, that won't lead to a crash. Just polarizing the market, more AAA games and more indie games, and I don't see this as a big deal. Way he's saying it, everything is a rehash and there's no innovation, which is not true. The Last of Us is a brilliant example. It's a AAA title, big company in Naughty Dog, but it's an excellent and refreshing game.

He's also saying that games requiring huge budgets makes game developers are a failed game away from bankruptcy. I view that as a positive. In 1983, shit games flooded the market since they were cheap and sold for a high price. Now, it's the opposite, developers need to buckle the fuck down and make sure their game is damn good.

Paid off reviewers? Yep, happens all the time. But gamers are still gonna be aware of what games will be good. They're not drones that just listen to IGN or GameSpot unquestioningly.

Flying blind? This is just dumb. Consoles come out every few years? Try almost every decade nowadays, The PS4 and Xbox One are much simpler to design more and almost identical graphically, it definitely won't take years to maximize it like this guy is saying. It did take a while for the PS3, but that was the fucking Cell, this is just an AMD GPU.

Industry is exploitative? Boo-hoo, all of them are.

Basically, all I'm seeing is problems video game industry has, a lot of which are minor. Industry has always had problems though, ever since the NES.



Serious_frusting said:
I think Nintendo fans think the game industry will die if a Nintendo console is not king of the hill.

Please just stop, its getting annoying. The internet, mobiles and tablets will make sure gaming wont die. Not to mention the devils named PlayStation and Xbox


I'm a Nintendo fan and I have no idea what you speak of. How did this turn into Nintendo fan bashing? 

Also, I haven't considered Nintendo King of the hill since snes days. 



LOL.

Microsoft and Sony have their best launches in history. Well maybe theres a Nintendo crash coming. But Microsoft and Sony are flying high.



Around the Network
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
I read this exact same article last year and the year before.
Funny how these two new consoles are the best selling ever, and how a major player in these systems (indies) pretty much contradicts the entire article.
(Not to mention steambox is coming out as well, which is almost entirely indie games)
Malstrom was wrong about this 3 years ago, and his not so clever copypasta is just as wrong.


I mean... not really.  Fastest selling... but due to larger supply.

The actual consumer size of the consoles can't really be gauged until it hits the point where neither is out of stock.

So it makes it's sales in relation to this topic a bit irrelevent at the moment.

I mean put it this way... do you think both consoles will outsell the PS2?  I sure don't.

 

Had the PS2 and Wii had similar stock... don't you think they would of sold as well?  I Do.

You have a point, time will tell.

However, one point I'd like to make is that the video game industry is bigger than ever. We just only talk about consoles as if they're everything. Video games are thriving on mobile.


Oh yeah, and PC.  Just most console gamers don't look past it.

PC games were around during the last crash though too.

To quite a significant degree actually.

That's why activision is still around.

 

I do think as children get computer literate sooner and sooner and PC ownership increases.  Consoles will make less and less sense logically.

Whether or not that ever comes to bare in the markets though who can say.



The 1983 crash only killed off consoles in North America. Arcades slowed a bit, but computer games were unaffected. (In fact, the latter may have picked up steam from the console crash. At least according to my experience.)

Keeping that in mind, I'd like smartphone gaming to crash while leaving other platforms intact. I'm not say it will happen, just that I'd like it to happen. The sheer number of crap games for iOS and Android bring back memories of the later Atari 2600 years. Stuff like that deserves no less than death.



I see this generation being shorter, and a contraction of the console industry, but no crash. The videogame market is as turbulent as it was thirty years ago, but it's also far more strongly entrenched. A weak Nintendo, and no sign from Microsoft or Sony that they understand how to expand their audience not just beyond their PS3/360 base, but into the wider audience that swelled last generation's numbers, as well as a weak portable console sector, will mean console contraction as more mainstream tablet and smartphone gaming goes from strength to strength across a wider variety of markets.

Does this mean doom for consoles? No--it just means that the console industry will change in order to grow again in the future.



The big "AAA blockbuster title" trend is not sustainable. That is the only part of the gaming industry that is going to "crash", but as far as I'm concerned, that's a good thing. Then maybe developers can quit trying to make playable Hollywood films, and go back to making VIDEO GAMES.



I need to read the article, but some quick thoughts on similar sentiment that's been kicked around prior to the XB1/PS4 launches.

There have been issues with a lot of crapware being released in the 7th gen, particularly for the Wii, when unscrupulous publishers attempted to cash in on its popularity. That was a serious problem with the Atari 2600 shortly before the bubble burst.

But that was back in 1983 when video games were an extremely small niche market relative to today. Today, games are as prevalent a form of entertainment as TV or movies. Most people grow up playing them.

Since the mobile space has become a legitimate ground for game development and monetization, a lot of these "games are too expensive to allow risks to be taken" arguments simply don't hold water. This is to say nothing of lower priced indy titles that show up on PC, PSN, XBL, Nintendo eShop, etc.

About the only thing I could arguably see being pulled back are the "blockbuster" titles that cost 8 figures to produce. That would hardly drop the floor out of the gaming industry. And even this is a pretty sketchy argument. It will boil down to basic entertainment business practices to determine how much can be spent on a big budget title based upon projected sales (which means sequels of successful games are favored).

As things currently stand, demand for such titles has not been dropping, so it is premature to say the sky is falling.