Poll: What's really hurting the Game industry?

[TheLastTatlFan]

I'd say what's hurting the industry is corporations/individuals at the production levels who care not for games as games, but as money-making tools. And the only way to get them to stop is for we, the consumers, to hurt it more, by voting with our dollars by not giving them over to mainstream games, until it's such an unprofitable market as to leave only the game makers who love games more than money.

So yeah, we're kind of in a lose/lose situation with the industry at the moment. Eye em aitch oh.

 

[GonzoGamer]

I would say that it is a combination of the entries listed, plus the Unpleasable Fanbase and a proviso on the Piracy option which states "It's not the piracy that is the problem, but how game industries respond to it.".

Yea, I have to say. As someone who pirated long ago (I was living off minimum wage in NYC so give me a break) I can guarantee that many of those pirating, would not be buying those games if piracy was not an option. I'm not saying it's right or that I'm proud (it's not and I'm not) but they aren't losing revenue through piracy.
As for the used sales, even though I buy my games new now, I resent them trying to squeeze more blood out of used purchasers rather than stealing the share of the market from the monopolizing retail chain that's really causing the problem. If this online pass and day 1 dlc crap was going on when I was buying used, I can guarantee I wouldn't be buying new now...I probably wouldn't have even bothered picking up a console.

It's like with politicians: they're really good at saying how incompetent the other side is and how much it's ruining the country but when it comes down to it, they're going to ruin our lives before they ruin the lives of their opponents.

So overall, I think that most of the game companies are doing fine, all things considered. The companies that make good games are making profits and the ones that don't are going out of business.

 

[veloper]

It's us.
Vote with your wallet.

 

[UnknownGunslinger]

As bad as it sounds, I will typically either wait for a sale, or buy a used game when I do buy because it is cheaper, so I can afford more.

But why does it have to sound bad!
I'm in a similar boat, living off student loans I'm not exactly flushed with cash to spend on games so when I do buy, I look for deals and used games as well.
But only the Game Industry insist on making you feel like a monster for not paying the full price on the release date for your game of choice!
Nobody cares about my used surround system, or my second generation car but when it's about Pre-Owned Games you're equated as to a pirate
I really hate that practice, it shouldn't sound bad because it inst, it's a common practice everywhere else.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Other:


Trying to cater to too many different irrelavant consumer bases all at the same time. Gaming companies shouldn't want to be the next movies or books, gaming should be itself, if people like it then great, if they don't then they can have another hobby. The hunt to get a piece of the other kid's pie is hurting our medium.

I don't exactly agree, since when is diversity a bad thing?
I don't think that games that cater to new consumer bases such as Farmvile, Bejeweled, Wii Sports or whatever is new right now is exactly hurting Skyrim, the new Batman or World of Warcraft!
The diversifying and proliferation of games is down the line a good thing I reckon, or at least not hurting mainstream gaming.

Oh but it is, the whole plague that is trophies and achievements, the whole inter-connected nature, everything needing to have online in some form, these are all unnecessary things.


But beyond even that aspect, you can be diverse without sacrificing complexity and depth. There has always been simple and easy to play videogames, they were the ones made for kids aged between 3-7. I don't think packaging that in a box more appealing to a 40-yo housewife is a good step forward for our medium and definitely not the proper aim for the industry, despite the financial incentives it creates.

Why are achievements so bad? Outside of that Batman, Skyrim have no online. And how is Farmville effecting Batman they're done by different developers?

Doing things in a game should be INHERENTLY rewarding. It's a cop-out having the console call you awesome, you should feel awesome by the awesome thing you actually did. It leads to games being made without anything special in them, relying on trophies to make the player feel good.


It's not affecting Batman directly, it's affecting the potential Batmans of the future.

 

[StrixMaxima]

I think what's hurting the gaming industry the most is its tendency to think it is a special kind of service/product provider, which couldn't be farther from the truth.

The gaming industry needs to grow up, accept that the gaming market is very mercurial and demanding, and reinventing their cost/profit schematics, because it is clearly not working anymore.

I fully believe it is possible to make the process of developing and publishing games cheaper and more efficient. Big companies are too set in their ways, and are using their bulk to make customers behave and play the way they want to (which is something absurd, no matter how you look at it).

If games become cheaper and less formulaic, I am sure there will be a very positive response from customers. So, adapt, improve, then profit. Not the other way around.

Believe, we want to pay good money for good games.

 

[Shadu]

As bad as it sounds, I will typically either wait for a sale, or buy a used game when I do buy because it is cheaper, so I can afford more.

But why does it have to sound bad!
I'm in a similar boat, living off student loans I'm not exactly flushed with cash to spend on games so when I do buy, I look for deals and used games as well.
But only the Game Industry insist on making you feel like a monster for not paying the full price on the release date for your game of choice!
Nobody cares about my used surround system, or my second generation car but when it's about Pre-Owned Games you're equated as to a pirate
I really hate that practice, it shouldn't sound bad because it inst, it's a common practice everywhere else.

I know, right? All these developers telling me buying a used game is bad, and all I can think is "then why don't you somehow insist you get some of the profits? Because, I'll tell you, you're not getting my money any other way."

I'm a college kid. I don't have loans to pay off just yet, or bills yet, but it's coming (in May... ) but I'm working for beans and need to save some for that time coming up and buy my groceries and any incidentals. I don't have anything to spare unless I just decide to eat ramen for two weeks instead of something else.

 

[UnknownGunslinger]

Other:


Trying to cater to too many different irrelavant consumer bases all at the same time. Gaming companies shouldn't want to be the next movies or books, gaming should be itself, if people like it then great, if they don't then they can have another hobby. The hunt to get a piece of the other kid's pie is hurting our medium.

I don't exactly agree, since when is diversity a bad thing?
I don't think that games that cater to new consumer bases such as Farmvile, Bejeweled, Wii Sports or whatever is new right now is exactly hurting Skyrim, the new Batman or World of Warcraft!
The diversifying and proliferation of games is down the line a good thing I reckon, or at least not hurting mainstream gaming.

Oh but it is, the whole plague that is trophies and achievements, the whole inter-connected nature, everything needing to have online in some form, these are all unnecessary things.


But beyond even that aspect, you can be diverse without sacrificing complexity and depth. There has always been simple and easy to play videogames, they were the ones made for kids aged between 3-7. I don't think packaging that in a box more appealing to a 40-yo housewife is a good step forward for our medium and definitely not the proper aim for the industry, despite the financial incentives it creates.

Well that's a good point, the whole social trend in games and always on internet that is coming our way is potentially pretty bad.
If it becomes the norm it will divulge resources away from the more essential things concerning actual gaming to those less necessary mechanics
At least where the smaller studios are concerned.
As to achievements I don't think they're hurting gaming, I find them silly when not executed properly and people who brag about their X-Box/PS3 achievements boring as hell, but not exactly damaging.
More like the natural progression of the old Arcade leader boards

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Other:


Trying to cater to too many different irrelavant consumer bases all at the same time. Gaming companies shouldn't want to be the next movies or books, gaming should be itself, if people like it then great, if they don't then they can have another hobby. The hunt to get a piece of the other kid's pie is hurting our medium.

I don't exactly agree, since when is diversity a bad thing?
I don't think that games that cater to new consumer bases such as Farmvile, Bejeweled, Wii Sports or whatever is new right now is exactly hurting Skyrim, the new Batman or World of Warcraft!
The diversifying and proliferation of games is down the line a good thing I reckon, or at least not hurting mainstream gaming.

Oh but it is, the whole plague that is trophies and achievements, the whole inter-connected nature, everything needing to have online in some form, these are all unnecessary things.


But beyond even that aspect, you can be diverse without sacrificing complexity and depth. There has always been simple and easy to play videogames, they were the ones made for kids aged between 3-7. I don't think packaging that in a box more appealing to a 40-yo housewife is a good step forward for our medium and definitely not the proper aim for the industry, despite the financial incentives it creates.

Well that's a good point, the whole social trend in games and always on internet that is coming our way is potentially pretty bad.
If it becomes the norm it will divulge resources away from the more essential things concerning actual gaming to those less necessary mechanics
At least where the smaller studios are concerned.
As to achievements I don't think they're hurting gaming, I find them silly when not executed properly and people who brag about their X-Box/PS3 achievements boring as hell, but not exactly damaging.
More like the natural progression of the old Arcade leader boards

Read my above post as to why achievements are a plague.

 

[Michael Hirst]

Other: STAGNATION

The increasing budgets required to make a AAA title are literally choking the creativity of devs who until recent years could provide very interesting titles and have some room to explore new ideas.

Nowadays it's almost impossible for a dev team to spend a decent length of time writing their games story or design interesting characters, either that or there's some new law that states gritty voiced bald space marines with stubble and no personality are the only option open to devs.

Gameplay is also becoming stagnant with shooters/action leaking into other genres and destroying them, how many sneaking titles of late are now cover based shooters that HAPPEN to let you sneak past enemies but then force you into mass shootouts.

Graphical standards, it seems people demand a bloody lot from graphics now and yeah they can make a game look better and thus improve the experience but when games keep bombarding me with a grey/brown colour pallete they seem less appealing and very generic, I'll let some games off the hook becuase it fits their style but other times it seems like the lazy way out of actually designing something.

Difficulty vs Longevity. This is a tough one to strike a balance on because we now live in an age with a lot of people who immediately give up when a game gets hard so devs don't want to alienate people but Christ after spening £40 on a new game I want it to last longer than 4 hours. I know not every game can be long but in that case make it challenging and compelling.

I'll leave it at that because I could whine all day about why games are all becoming samey.

All in all the money is my second choice on the poll, this year I've bought one game at its brand new price and that was Deus Ex: Human Revolution on PC £27.99 Every other game I see, especially on consoles it NOT worth buying at £40 not when I can wait 2 months and get it for £25. Meanwhile on Steam I get bombarded with cheap deals on games and these are what keep me going. Also play.com sell some games at a good price, a few months ago I got Portal 2 and Shogun 2 for £13 each and I was bloody pleased with both.

I've also been touching into more indie territory as of late, gmaes like Braid and Super Meat Boy which cost £1.75 and £3.00 respectively (Steam sales baby) have been great gaming experiences which are imaginitive and FUN.

Final note: The last Console game I bought brand new just after launch was Red Dead Redemption, this was in part to winning some money on the lottery and thus not feeling bad about spending £40.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

You know what I think is really hurting the industry?? People wasting time pointing fingers at each other trying to figure out whose to blame for hurting the industry instead of coming up with solutions on how to fix it!

[sub]Yes, I'm fully aware of what I just did there, I'm trying to make a point here.[/sub]

 

[darth.pixie]

I'm going to go with the developer's wish to cater to damn everyone and their grandma. It's an RPG! No, now it's a shooter! Nope, changed it to stealth. Now, it's micromanagement and strategy! Oh look, hack and slash!

If books or movies tried this, the critics would be up the wall. Stick to the damn genre and stop chopping up bits and pieces of the game.

And for the quality of most of said games, they are really over-priced.

 

[Darius Brogan]

I'll vote 'Other' simply because it's not something 'we' or 'they' are doing that's harming the gaming industry, it's a co-operative effort.

The Gaming industry is waning because fewer developers are putting the same effort into making great games like they used to, in terms of story, character development, inter-play, ect... and are instead focusing on graphics and gore (at least in most new games).

The modern-gaming crowd is enthralled by this new-found ability to count the inches of intestine flowing from that minotaurs insides, but have taken to pirating instead of purchasing, in the belief that it's somehow more cool.

The older gaming crowd has noticed the steady decline in video-game quality and has primarily stopped purchasing new-gen games. Some out of principle, others out of genuine distaste for new games.

While I will admit that there are game developers out there that have retained some of the original zeal in terms of quality video-game production, and there are new-gen gamers who prefer older, higher quality games, as well as old-gen gamers who like the newer, lower quality games that are the norm these days; the prevailing fact is that the decline of the gaming industry is being cause by slowly shifting priorities in development, coupled with an old-style of thinking clashing with a new-style.

If game developers quit putting so much effort into smooth graphics and the immediate 'blam-effect', and more new-gen gamers learned to appreciate the subtleties required in a truly High-Quality game, the industry wouldn't suffer as much.

 

[UnknownGunslinger]

People who play games. Yep thats right thats exactly who is hurting the industry. The ones that do nothing at all but complain to developers about a feature and then when it gets changed they complain they it was changed. People who complain for the sake of complaining or hate on something to be cool are the real plague of the industry.

I don't think that's the gamers fault, people always want stupid things!
It's the fault of the developers if they choose to listen to everything their fan base fancies, instead of you know, doing what they're paid to do in the first place - make their games!
Blaming the consumer is kinda silly.
The consumer will always disagree about something, nobody will be perfectly satisfied, it's up to the developers to not fall into the trap of trying to please everyone!

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

People who play games. Yep thats right thats exactly who is hurting the industry. The ones that do nothing at all but complain to developers about a feature and then when it gets changed they complain they it was changed. People who complain for the sake of complaining or hate on something to be cool are the real plague of the industry.

Doing things in a game should be INHERENTLY rewarding. It's a cop-out having the console call you awesome, you should feel awesome by the awesome thing you actually did. It leads to games being made without anything special in them, relying on trophies to make the player feel good.


It's not affecting Batman directly, it's affecting the potential Batmans of the future.

Actually no at best they add depth and replayability to games without taking anything out and at worst they add nothing while taking nothing away. Games can and still do have special things in them. Its just that now they often have trophies/achievments that help people discover those things. I am still not seeing what is wrong with giving the player an extra clap on the back for doing something cool or whatever.

Tell me how it is effecting the potential of Batmans of the future?

They don't add anything, you could do the things that trophies ask of you even were they not in the game! That's the point, they make pointless things into pseudo-important tasks to add fake value, depth and content to the game. Metagame and superior depth should stem from a deep understanding of the mechanics, not from a freaking tag that tells you to do this very obtuse and pointless hard task.


It's affecting them by making things inherently different to them seem as the correct way for the industry to go. It's hurting them in the same way the serious gamers are hurt by Wii not being perceived as a hardcore gaming platform in the USA by Nintendo.

 

[RollForInitiative]

For the people saying "DRM," I should point out that all this really means is that the issue is "piracy" after all.

Why?

Simply because we wouldn't be using DRM if piracy stopped being an issue. Funny how that works. Why did you think it was there in the first place?

 

[Darius Brogan]

And blast this 'auto-return' feature of my browser... I just reported MYSELF because I was in the middle of voting and it returned to where I was before the page re-loaded...

I hope I don't get a warning for that... I've got a clean record so far...