Maybe instead of playing with money, the money people should come up with ideas. I can’t think of a time where more budget meant more fun.
the money people should come up with ideas
I’m sure « Financial Market Simulator 3000 » could be fun but … meh… :)
People don’t want to pay for Disneyfied corpo slop that the HR department and advertisers signed off on. A public company lacks the soul to imbue into a creative project.
When you try to make literally everyone your target demographic then nobody will be your target demographic
Lol this reads like a “wOkE GaMEs ArE KiLLiNg thE InDuStrY” level reddit/xitter comment.
Not that odd. Seems like a decade and change ago it became common knowledge that market-tested, sanitized content wasn’t really resonating with “core gamers”, but we don’t even call the demographic that anymore. Not really sure how we got here
Well, gamers includes anyone sliding their finger on a phone screen now playing Farmville and stuff…and that is a looooooot of people. So that moves the needle on the average gamer a lot towards that end. And I think there is limited overlap between the people that use it as a time suck and the people that sit down and turn on their console/pc to play a game as a hobby.
So if the MBAs looked at statistics too much… you also get a warped idea.
It seems that stuff that gets people most excited are the inspired games made by creative people because they had a vision for their game…
Farmville players do not buy AAA games. We need to get this idea that mobile games and other forms of video games are connected out of our collective heads.
Oof looks like the gamergate community has popped over here. RIP.
I’m sure seeing minorities represented is the problem, not stale ass copy-pasted games that nickle and dime everyone. /s
I saw your reply and regret to inform you the other folks are right, I’m no gamergater and the context isn’t even right. Woke is a descriptor that causes me to buy a game. “Core” referred to gamers that were willing to grind, basically; it was a useful demographic for describing players and I don’t really know what has replaced it.
Are you SERIOUSLY this stupid and triggered? They’ve said NOTHING about “woke” anything, and your dumb ass goes off like this is gamer gate? Fuck you. Fuck you, you illiterate moron.
This is about how Epic, the corporarion Tim Sweeny leads, a corpo that’s a big player in the games industry, is FAILING to identify that it is quality, not budget that determines if a game sells.
… and then you come in here saying GamerGate shit. Fuck off, you inflammatory dumbass. Seems like you need to get past Reddit culture, troll.
Someone needs to go for a walk
Yes, the guy I replied to. They need to walk to their nearest college and learn how, “reading between the lines” is NOT about applying any and all conspiracy thinking to a subject…
First person used terms that are normal dogwhistles for gamergate groups, second person agreed with that interpretation after I pointed out it was suspicious.
And I’m the illiterate one and triggered and a troll? Mirror much? Did you even read your comment lol?
Well then. Why not make them not shitty?
It’s the players’ fault for not buying our game.
Two reasons:
-
The money is mostly spent on visual production, graphics, and big name actors to voice characters, which doesn’t automatically make a game good.
-
Season passes, MTX and other bullshit being shoved down our throats in big budget games is getting even worse.
I will always choose a smaller project of passion over a lackluster, watered-down AAA game with an overinflated budget.
I wish I could get it through to my dumbass friend. She says that a game must have good graphics or else she won’t play it.
Stardew valley? Nope. It’s too blocky. Undertale? Nope. Might as well be an NES game.
My god, the games she’s missing out on…
Your friend is entitled to her own opinion and I somewhat get her. Good graphics are really nice and can add greatly to a game.
While I understand your feelings (I have such a friend myself), if graphics are most important to them, they are perfectly entitled to that opinion! I always interject, that my friend is missing out on great gameplay experiences but it is on them what they like and value most.
Yeah honestly AA games deliver the experience AAA games gave 15 years ago, and that’s what I want way more than whatever AAA is today.
When I open a steam page for a game that looks interesting to me, and I find out it has 3 versions at wildly different prices and 10+ other DLC, I just pass and move on. I’m not doing external research to find out what is the difference between the complete and ultra complete and definitive deluxe director’s cut editions and whether it’s worth it, or whether I “need” such and such DLC to get the full experience. I’m instantly and thoroughly turned off by it, and I’m just not bothering. Fuck that whole mess.
It’s like the corporate world has made gaming into a twisted version of THEIR game. How do we grind money out of these idiots?
Well, I think that they will probably work it out in the end by going bust. Every CEO - in the end - blames the consumer, not the product nor the service.
For real! I have the biggest issue on that with the PlayStation store. The main list of titles only shows the most expensive version and you have to dig deeper to find the regular, lowest priced option. I swear, when I first got my PS5 and was interested in getting NHL23 I damn near had a heart attack seeing it priced over $100. Ended up just going to GameStop and picking up a used physical copy for $10.
Ultimately it is about the money and effort being put into the wrong parts of the game, which coincidentally is the part that is easiest to show off to investors and C levels.
-
That’s because they suck ass
Modern Ubisoft are the prime example of this. They churn out loads of games every year and they’re just the same old formulaic crap that you’ve seen before. How can you have so much money and so many studios but you can’t get decent voice actors or writers? How can your AAA games still have clunky mechanics and absolutely no original ideas?
Oh look, it’s another shitty enemy outpost, let’s scout it with my drone/bird/binoculars and mark all the enemies so I can see them through walls. Maybe I’ll not use stealth on the next one because it’s a waste of time as the game is piss easy anyway and I’ll be able to kill all of the enemies in a straight fight. And the reward is the same either way. Now I’ve found [collectible item] 37 of 200, I wonder where the rest of them are in this massive vapid open world?
I always wondered if I’d like to write for video games (I write sketch, character, musical comedy) but honestly there’s probably very little fun in it, as you’re writing 95% one-sided conversations that are variations on “go to place, bring hack item”
The best written games are all indies now. Text and story heavy games are pretty common, with varying amounts of “game” to carry the story. Check out Citizen Sleeper, Disco Elysium, or Book of Hours.
Open world just somehow means placing the exact same mid gameplay events far apart so you have to spend a minute walking from one to the next.
I lived the collectibles in Anacronox, they were little golden taco trophies and their lore was that they used to be highly sought after until it came out that TACO stood for Totally Arbitrary Collectible Object and it tanked the market.
You meet a guy that held on till the bitter end but finally had to sell off his collection because he needed the money, so you give him any you find for trinkets and stuff to help him rebuild his collection.
I played this as a kid, now I feel old. Was a great game but the ending made a sequel necessary, which as far as I know never happened.
A reminder, AAA, means nothing. It is a self-appointed term for marketing. Because it means nothing customers apply whatever they think it means. Just like AAAA is also pointless, and stupid.
It’s the ubisoft lookout tower sinulator, you will like it while you mindlessly run around the map to fulfill idiotic chore tasks that trigger your ocd
Ok. Interesting take. Let’s look at Alan Wake 2. High Budget and pretty good. One of the best games I played in recent years I would say.
And why did it sell poorly, I hear you ask? Well, maybe it had something to do with the fact that you published it on your Epic Store only, being fully aware that the overwhelming majority of PC players are on Steam (and very lazy when it comes to switching away from it). Also you didn’t produce physical copies for consoles. Download only for an environment known for being fiercely pro physical copy.
But we all know it’s not about these things. It’s about calming down investors. That’s why you use buzzwords like “metaverse” and shit. I am actually impressed you didn’t ramble about AI.
Man, I’d love to play Alan Wake 2. Big Remedy fan; Control was my game of the year for two years. Be nice if they’d release it on a platform I’d buy it on.
Oh and 90% of the market could not run the thing.
“We didn’t listen to what people actually want and now less people are buying! It’s not our decision-making, it’s ‘generational change.’”
I mean, if studios are doing it more and more and have been doing it across a whole generation, it probably is generational change. Games take 5+ years dev time to make so high budgets are a given. If uch a game fails, it is more likely to tank a studio now. I think hes just making an observation. Nothing too shocking about that.
What Im observing though is more and more indies filling the void with smaller and cheaper games due to easy access to digital distribution. Not exactly a new take as its been hapening for over 15 years now. Interestingly, Epic seems to not take the same stance as Steam does in this space. Where steam gives pretty much any shovelware the same chances, Epic wants to be super picky about these low budget titles. Where is Epic’s Balatro?
If Tim is so focused on publishing/distributing these overblown budgeted games, Epic will miss out on the secondary gaming market where actual fun games truly live. Imo, the generational change is actually indie titles becoming the norm and AAA taking a step back.
What Im observing though is more and more indies filling the void with smaller and cheaper games due to easy access to digital distribution. Not exactly a new take as its been hapening for over 15 years now. Interestingly, Epic seems to not take the same stance as Steam does in this space. Where steam gives pretty much any shovelware the same chances, Epic wants to be super picky about these low budget titles. Where is Epic’s Balatro?
This reminds me a lot of the days of the original PlayStation (PS). Nintendo was the large, dominant company. But, they were also really, really picky with the games they let on their platform (still are). Along comes Sony with a better physical format and a willingness to let just about anything on their system. And there were a lot of terrible titles on the PS; but, there were also some real gems from smaller devs and lots more choice for people to find what they wanted to play. That openness and plethora of options drew people to the system. Sure, Nintendo is still around and still a juggernaut, but they gave up a lot of market space to Sony.
Sweeney and many of the big studios seem dead set on trying to replicate lightning. They keep churning out Fortnight clones, live service games and lootbox infested grind fests. None of this is because they want to make a game for players, it’s all a bald-faced money grab. And it comes across so clearly in their games. Yes, big budget games cost a lot of money and I don’t begrudge studios trying to make money. I’m more than happy to throw money at devs who make a great game (I just pledged ~$250 at the Valheim Board Game project, based mostly on the fact that I fucking love Valheim). I’ve also bought into way too many Early Access games, because they looked like they had the bones of good games. But, the big budget games seem to get lost trying to pump every last dollar out of your wallet and just quickly become a turn off.
I remember one particular instance in Dragon Age, where an NPC had a “Quest Available” marker floating above his head. When you talked to him, you quickly discovered that you could buy his quest and the game was happy to kick you over to the EA store so that you could buy his quest right there. Fuck that noise. I’m not against DLC, but that sort of “in your face” advertising pisses me right off. Hell, I’m one of those weirdos who likes the Far Cry series. I put tons of hours into Far Cry 5 (seriously, the wing suit was just good fun). Far Cry 6 was ok and I did finish it, though the micro-transaction spam grated on me hard. After that experience, I’m not sure I want a Far Cry 7.
And I think that points to the elephant in the room. Big publishers, like EA are so focused on making profits, they have lost sight of making a good game. Give me a solid, complete experience. Give me good controls, enough story to hold the action together and just a general sense of fun. Once that is in place, then maybe throw hats for sale on top of that. But, when lootboxes and micro-transactions are core to the gameplay and the game is balanced to force you in the direction of buying that crap, fuck your game. If the core gameplay is designed to suck so much that I want to buy cheats to bypass that core gameplay, I’ll save myself a bunch of money and just skip the game entirely. There are way too many options available out there, which don’t suck, for me to waste my time and money shoveling your shit.
Nintendo consoles and handhelds have almost always had a shit load of shovelware. What the fuck do you mean they are really, really picky with the games on their platform? The GBA, Wii, and Switch alone have enough to disprove this
While indie studios have popped up and filled some of that void.
I liked it when they were Epic Megagames and made fun games about green rabbits, savage jungle women, and giant fighting robots
So his big revelation is that Fortnite is really popular with kids.
I’m gonna take a wild guess that the games with high budgets that aren’t “selling”, are just not selling “enough” to cover the “costs” of the executives. I guess it wasn’t much of a guess:
and they’re not selling nearly as well as expected," Sweeney said. "Whereas other games are going incredibly strong
Do they think that these other games “going incredibly strong” are making the money they hope to make? They’re probably making much less but managing it much better. The savings are almost infinite when you don’t approve every executive bonus pay package.
It’s because video games turned into investment vehicles where companies want to make at least 50% return on their investment instead of create a fun and engaging peice of entertainment.
Video games are an art form, there’s no art i’ financial vehicules
Those studios have been pouring huge amounts of money on graphics under the assumption (i.e. idiocy) that better graphics = more sales. Tim Sweeney is shifting it towards yet another assumption/idiocy: that more forced socialisation = more sales.
And they still don’t get the picture. People won’t buy your games if they’re boring, if they’re too expensive, or if they think that you’re an arsehole. Roughly in this order. That’s it.
Try having an original thought.
Make something NEW
Fuck you Tim Sweeney. Fuck the fortnite model and fuck you for delisting and shutting down the Unreal franchise.
Just curious as to what you think the Unreal franchise could provide the modern gaming landscape that we aren’t getting now. It always struck me as pretty bland.
The Unreal franchise can provide the Unreal franchise. There was no real reason for epic to delist the games from all the store fronts and shutdown the master servers other then wanted to control their brand. It was costing them pennies to keep that stuff up and to even shudown the single player games.
As far as “the modern gaming landscape” goes, it can suck it. I’m not interested in playing modern multiplayer shooters. I’m tried a few and they come across as walking simulators and fidget spinner simulators.
Oh you meant like…the old games. I thought you were like dying for the Unreal story to continue or something.
