Do you hope for an industry crash?

[Entitled]

While there has been plenty of fearmongering about a potential crash of the game industry, especially since the start of the recession, it seems to me that recently many of them are not that... fearsome.

At least quite a few gamers are starting to sound like they are actually waiting for the crash, just as fundamentalists are waiting for the Apocalypse or the Rapture (or otherwise their Judgement Day of choice), as the punishment for the wicked, and the start of a new, better world.

There is some logic behind this, for example big companies going bankrupt could lead to more competent ones taking their place, but that would only be worthit if you would think that actually being deprived of games until a new industry forms would be "worth it", or if you generally dislike the AAA gaming, and think that smaller self-organized teams of indie developers would provide more entertainment than a big industry.

Then again, as much as people like to badmouth the industry, most of us still play plenty of AAA games. So I guess those who talk like this are either the minority, or hypocrites.

So what about you? Are you afraid, or excited about the prospect of big publishers bankrupt, consoles discontinued, and AAA franchises dead, hoping that leads to a more humane, gamer-centric new industry?

 

[scorptatious]

I don't really hope for a crash. And I kinda doubt there is going to be one anytime soon.

That being said, certain companies are using business practices that are definitely going to hurt them if not outright kill them in the long run if they keep it up. *cough* EA *cough*

 

[Maximum Bert]

Why would I want a crash? also the last crash was only in north america other regions were much less affected. I dont think there will be a crash on the scale of 1983 though some companies may go even big ones and there will probably be change but thats always happened.

 

[Luca72]

I suppose I do. Video games are too ingrained into our culture to disappear no matter what happens to the market - it's like how if Hollywood had severe financial troubles, movies would still get made.

I don't hold that AAA games are necessarily bad. In fact, I think average game quality is higher than it's ever been. But while the lows may not be as low anymore, the highs aren't as high either. A lot of the "cinematic" games that are getting pumped out are trying as hard as they can to ape film while being slightly interactive. The result is a game that gets unanimous review scores of 9 or 10, but if it was based on it's narrative alone would probably get 30-40% on rotten tomatoes or something. The word "homogenized" is getting thrown around a lot, but it's appropriate. AAA companies are not evil, but they serve a master other than their own creative drive - investors. EA has to make it's game's a certain way (and I mean it has to - it has to move certain number of units because it literally has a fiduciary responsibility to it's stockholders to perform a certain way).

The reason I wouldn't mind a crash is because we don't need these kind of developers anymore. We literally don't. Game development is becoming more accessible every day. Distributing an independently made game on the console market can be tricky, but it's easy online. Indie games have been such a breath of fresh air to me because of one sole reason - the people who make them actually want to make them. Maybe 5% of AAA games can give me that feeling.

The only AAA game I've bought in the last few years was Starcraft 2, and I was quite happy with that purchase. And I'm not saying that to give myself an art wank. I didn't stop buying AAA games to make a point. I just lost interest in them. Most AAA games feel like shitty movies. I keep track of new ones coming out, because I know there's going to be some kind of game changer (Watch Dogs is looking pretty damn good), but I haven't had a worthwhile experience from a big-name developer in a while.

This is obviously just my opinion, and I'm not saying people who enjoy AAA games are dumb. It's just that from my perspective, a "crash" in the sense you're talking about seems more like a wake-up call than a disaster.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Today: Not really. Mostly because the market is still growing to much in other avenues to support a total crash. Those most at risk are those with the highest costs.

A few years ago I didn't really care if the market crashed, since it wasn't producing much of anything that interested me while making the "game" parts of the experience worse while emphasizing the shiny bits that don't really matter that much.

All the while people repeatedly bleat "Gaming is better than ever!" at me, without really justifying that statement beyond technological achievement..small wonder I wanted to see the market fall back then.

I admit, that was a very petty outlook, but time has proven me wise in expecting the AAA gaming business to consolidate and homogenize...and now it looks very unhealthy indeed.

But time has proven me wrong about independent gaming, which is experiencing a surge in variety and quality; without the drawback of having to sell 5 million+ units to break even.

So now, I'm only looking forward to the fall of certain AAA publishers, as a natural part of a market cycle, mind you, (though the news reports will be pretty damn interesting when it happens).

 

[IllumInaTIma]

If market have to crash in order to AAA publishers to see that not every freakin' game has to sell over 5 million copies to be "successful" then yeah, I hope for industry crash.

 

[Luca72]

I think we may be getting our terms confused here. A "crash" is highly unlikely. In 1983, video game distribution itself was threatened. There is absolutely no parallel to that today because of the internet. If all consoles disappeared, and even if popular online market places like Steam and Origin vanished, game makers would still be able to release their stuff online. And because of the nature of the internet, the hole that would be left from these market places disappearing would quickly be filled.

What we're talking about isn't a crash, but a bubble bursting. AAA games in their current state are a recent development. Blockbuster games exist because there's an audience to pay for them. Because so many people flocked to these games and they made so much money all at once, people began to invest in the companies making them. Companies like EA are now posting huge quarterly losses though. Because of the model they use, their games have to make more and more money each time. So even though this years shooter makes a ridiculous sum of money, if it's less than last years shooter (or more than last years shooter, but still "underperforms") then the company that makes it starts to see a loss in stock value.

I'm sick of this governing the direction games take. I'm sick of every game being about an assassin because that's what sells. I'm sick of every game one year having bows, because that seems to be what's "in" at the moment. And I get the feeling developers are getting fed up too. I don't mean the guy that you hear making the PR statement about why this game is awesome because of "insert arbitrary feature here", I'm talking about the programmers and artists who have to work 12 hour shifts for 6 days a week during the last few months of development because the stockholders had unrealistic expectations for a release date.

In fact, Kickstarter seems more like the future for big-name games than anything else. It doesn't rely on venture capital, it relies on faith-based investments. If you put your money into a Kickstarter game, you have no way of knowing whether it's going to work out for you. And we have yet to see whether a really hyped Kickstarter campaign is going to deliver on its' promises. But if things like Star Citizen, Torment, and Project Eternity turn out as expected, we may have a new method for funding epic games that allows developers to actually express themselves creatively.

If the bubble pops, it won't be any great tragedy. It'll be because it can't sustain the weight of its' won bullshit anymore, and the market found something better.

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

I think the tide of public opinion will hopefully give certain big companies a rude awakening that they need to sort their shit out in order to survive. However, there doesn't need to be an industry-wide crash for this to happen, and I think people who are actively hoping for one don't entirely realise what they're wishing for at best, or are just incredibly selfish and spiteful people at worst.

A true crash means thousands of people losing their jobs, mostly average workers not responsible for the business and marketing decisions that we have come to loathe rather than the big-wigs at the top who are. A true crash means those people not getting other jobs in the industry because companies become afraid to make anything that requires any kind of significant budget or manpower. These people and their families then suffer through no fault of their own; and for the consumers, the things we already don't like about the industry will get a lot worse before they get better. A true crash sees this suffering last for years, not just a few quick months. A true crash is not a good thing for anyone, even if a handful of positive lessons are learned by the end of one. We should absolutely be focusing our attentions on what can be done to avoid a crash, not rubbing our hands with glee at the thought of one.

I don't like a lot of what's going on on the business side of the industry right now, but if I'm faced with a truly binary choice between the way things are now, and a full-on industry meltdown, I'd choose for things to stay the same, DRM, Mirotansactions, sequelitis and all.

 

[Vegosiux]

If it takes a crash for the industry realize that gaming is about the games, not about stirring up the hype and pumping people up for pre-orders and day 1 sales, then yes, I damn well hope for a crash.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Why not?

It did so well when the banks and the housing industry crashed.


...


Oh waaaaaait.

 

[XMark]

Not really hoping for an all-out crash (and it's terribly unlikely), but one big publisher or another (well, EA) needs to go down to serve as a warning to others.

 

[Luca72]

A true crash means thousands of people losing their jobs, mostly average workers not responsible for the business and marketing decisions that we have come to loathe rather than the big-wigs at the top who are. A true crash means those people not getting other jobs in the industry because companies become afraid to make anything that requires any kind of significant budget or manpower. These people and their families then suffer through no fault of their own; and for the consumers, the things we already don't like about the industry will get a lot worse before they get better. A true crash sees this suffering last for years, not just a few quick months. A true crash is not a good thing for anyone, even if a handful of positive lessons are learned by the end of one. We should absolutely be focusing our attentions on what can be done to avoid a crash, not rubbing our hands with glee at the thought of one.

This is already happening though. Even the newsposts on the Escapist don't seem to be able to go a week without some report of a studio closing or being heavily downsized by a major company. Even without a crash there's no way out of the situation we're in - the AAA bubble got too big, and companies who are concerned with the bottom line and nothing else will be forced to take measures to reduce their losses. This means getting rid of "non-essentials" (ie: loyal employees). The companies already overwork their employees and consider them disposable. Unfortunately, when these developers lose their jobs, most of them seem to turn around and try to get back into the industry that shafted them in the first place.

If a bunch of these talented developers got together and started making their own studios, I'm sure they could both make more money for themselves by having a smaller company and getting a fair cut of royalties, and also make better games. The idea that you need to be part of a major company is outdated as physical copy sales become less and less important. These guys have the means and talent to make more money than they're already making, and probably enjoy their jobs a lot more if they wren't hamstrung by their companies.

 

[TrevHead]

Imo it's wishfull thinking to expect that a crash will fix gaming and that only the chaff will be separated from the wheat with companies continuing to make all the games are good. Most likely it'll be the other way around and the most interesting AAAs are the first to get the axe.

Companies really do need to scale back on their spending though.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

no one hopes for a crash...but I can definitely see one happening in the next couple years. AAA budgets just ran out of control, mostly due to the hubris of developers not realizing that all that programming costs money due to requiring PEOPLE to do it. When games can't make their budget back after a million copies have sold, something needs to change. But instead of doing the sensible thing and scaling back budgets except for a few blockbuster games, devs and publishers seem to be going full-retard and just putting MORE money into budgets as though the only problem is that games aren't shiny enough or that it's the limitations of tech. The only companies that were responsible with budgets and tech seem to be Nintendo, Atlus, Arc System Works, and a handful of other Japanese companies who went for refining stuff they mastered and using lateral thinking to extend the lifespan of tech. Though unfortunately the landscape is riddled with idiots who keep relying on brute force in gaming design and things are suffering.

Anyway, if a crash does happen it won't be the size of '83, but it'll definitely rattle some people. Maybe a good scare is needed so designers and programmers can stop being in such a rush to show off.

P.S. Am I the only one noticing that most of the 120+ studios that have folded since the beginning of this gen have been almost entirely Western? (seriously, this list is a bit frightening: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=459131)Kinda weird.

 

[ResonanceSD]

Why not?

It did so well when the banks and the housing industry crashed.

Yeah because that's totally the same thing as "luxury entertainment"

Yeah bring on the crash, it'll cut developers down to size, make them realise they can't just peddle any old tripe, games will have to be good and not bugged/broken to launch properly, it'd be the end of ridiculous practices, and will stir innovation in the industry as more and more crowdfunded/indie titles come online.

 

[Andy Shandy]

Do I want one to happen like some people do? No

Is there a possibility of it happening? Yes.

 

[EstrogenicMuscle]

I would like to see a crash of the "dudebro" first person shooter industry.

I am rather sick of seeing the market dominance of this genre.

I'm serious, this fascination with guns is getting out of hand.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Why not?

It did so well when the banks and the housing industry crashed.

Yeah because that's totally the same thing as "luxury entertainment"

Yeah bring on the crash, it'll cut developers down to size, make them realise they can't just peddle any old tripe, games will have to be good and not bugged/broken to launch properly, it'd be the end of ridiculous practices, and will stir innovation in the industry as more and more crowdfunded/indie titles come online.

A crash is a crash.

I'm not one for wishing ill on others.

If a crash happens, it happens, but I'm not exactly clamouring for thousands to lose their jobs.