Quality wars: We've lost.

[Croaker42]

I think the only way to improve this, is for the 'enthusiest' gamers to stick to their convictions. As far as doing what they say they are going to (Talking about the half ass boycotts here.) Also stop buying games on advertising and hype. Do some research. I can't see any good reason to buy a game on release day without consulting reviewers you trust, gameplay vids and demos.

We live in a time where we, as the consumer, have a combined power that is almost incaluable. (Its got to be over 9000). As a culture with one mindset we could make or break these devs that try and pull crap. But the problem is, we as a group refuse to move in the same direction.

 

[SantoUno]

I was listening to a Podcast today (the Gamehounds podcast) and they made the point that, sadly, all enthusiast/hardcore gamers don't matter anymore (and they are enthusiast gamers themselves, they were sad too).

Basically, it boils down to this; as gaming becomes more and more mainsteam, the percentage of the gamer market that is enthusiast drops, because the majority of the new people don't want or simply don't become enthusiast gamers. As such, we are in the minority. Basically, if you are someone who cares enough about gaming to read or post on this forum, if you care enough to read articles and reviews, to research your game buying decisions, or listen to Gaming podcasts, you are a minority (yes, including me).

This is why gaming innovation and invention has slowed down alot lately, and why shovelware is generally more profitable than quality games (Modern Warfare 2 and Halo are expections to this rule - they aren't shovelware, and have enthusiast gamer fans).

Lets compare this to the restaurant market; McDonalds, Burger King, KFC, etc, etc, all these fast food 'restaurants' make money like they are a mint. But their food is of low quality. So, why are they the top of the restaurant market?

* Advertising: They advertise virtually anywhere there are people. I can easily imagine poverty stricken Africans who've not seen food in 2 weeks being able to draw the M symbol for McDonalds.

* Ease of 'use': You don't have to book in advance to eat at McDonalds, Burger King doesn't have a dress code, and KFC doesn't require a knife and fork. These companies have made it so ANYONE can eat there; even men without hands could probably manage it (especially if they have a fork strapped to their wrists).

* A lack of caring from the majority of the target market: Most people who eat at fast food places aren't people who savour the flavours of food in general, typically aren't familar with a wide range of foods, and even if they were, would probably not care enough to go look for them.

Now, if we look again at the Gaming market, and highlight EA vs Activison. EA were the biggest bastards in the industry not long ago; they've improved somewhat, and ok they still are bastards, but are better than they were: they invest in new IPs, they try new things, and are getting better. But as a result of this, EA is taking a hammering finanically. Ok, the recession is a major factor, but the fact remains - when they were at their worst, they were making a fortune, now they aren't the worst, they are making huge loses.

Activison, on the other hand, are the current biggest bastards in the industry. They are hitching up prices, making an infinite number of sequels to Guitar Hero, and generally pumping out the same stuff over and over, jacking up the price every so often.

And yet, Activison are generally doing far, far better than EA. The problem is EA have tried to move more towards catering for us, the enthusaist market, whereas Activison have ignored us and pushed what they can get away with with the general market, and Modern Warfare 2 alone was an giant success for them.

In essence, what I'm basically saying is "Now is the time when the McDonalds, KFC, etc, of the gaming market are going to rise and take over. If we want good games, we'll have to goto the remaining small business restaurants (aka the indies), or order Chinese food (wait, what?)"

Your post was very interesting, good job on using fast food as a metaphor, and I lol'd at the last line.

But to be honest I really doubt our "minority" has lost. Yes they are lots of mainstream casual shovelware games, but there will always be those quality gems of each generation of gaming, we just need to support them and give feedback that we love them and want more.

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

[edit: nm]

 

[Canadamus Prime]

And I just want to say I fucking called it.

 

[KnowYourOnion]

I really don't think were heading for an eternity of shit games, good games will still be made, think about it a bigger potential market means that companies stand a better chance of people buying their new original games consequently making a larger profit.

 

[Woodsey]

*cough*The Wii*cough*

You're right, anyway. I couldn't believe that poll where people said reviews were the least influential factor in what game they buy (or close to the bottom at least).

 

[mattman106]

Game creation is a business. And as such, it's sole purpose is to generate profit. Consumer gaming zombies are generating the most, therefore they are the main objective in sales, game design, advertisement and future policies. How cares how much a game sucks, as long as it makes money , right?

I still Say Games are an art not a buisness.

I would say things can be about art AND profit. For example when Damien Hurst and the other YBAs began churning out alot of modernist rubbish (my opinion) other artist lambasted them for a lack of artisitic integrity. Those doing the lambasting could have chosen to churn out rubbish as well but didn't because they knew that you could make art and money at the same time.

I believe games are/ can be an artform and as such one can as a games producer choose to only make good games and take a stand against the decreasing quality of games.

 

[DeadlyYellow]

I think we're in a nadir at the moment, but what will happen is the same thing as film. The indie devs will start making great, serious games because they will now have the advanced mediums to do it (unreal engine 3 released free, for example) and they will fill the gap in the market, and then they'll become mainstream... and start making shit. And the whole thing will just go again. So basically, just cherish the next round of goodness, and it is coming.

Spoiler: A pessimistic outlook on Indie development. TLDR: There's little money to be had as an indie studio, so your only real motivation is the love of the medium.

I would debate the point sir. Making a game on UE3 is a pain in the ass, and high quality asset creation does take a long while. Animation will be done pose by pose, since I doubt many Indie studios will be able to afford using MoCap equipment. Now reading this paragraph, I'm sure you can point out the obvious flaw here. That's right, graphics don't make the game. Cutting a few corners can still make a great looking game, and quite a bit of graphical appeal can be emulated without much hassle.

However, the biggest problem here is money. Money is key here, and is largely how the Big Boys of the industry are ruining it. While the creators may share a love of the medium, without being a source of income it really takes second place. Unless you're working from your parents basement, you'll still need to buy basic commodities. While the technology may be free, I doubt licensing is. Without it, you can kiss commercial distribution goodbye.

So we overcome these hurdles. Get a license, get a game made, launch a topnotch demo, and offer the full game for a modest sum with intent to use money made by the game to fund future projects. But there are a few problems. Being an indie dev, you are largely overshadowed by the Big Boys. Then there is the next big groaner. Piracy. Yes it seems that the fight against DRM has spilled onto your territory and a free version of the game has surfaced everywhere. But hey, as long people play the game it's okay right? Just slap a donation page up and let people pay what they want if they want. Any studio is likely to develop a cult following. So you'll continually lose money, likely until you can no longer spend your leisure time contributing to the effort. Either that or one of the Big Boys picks you up, and funds a sequel. But that too is questionable. They may just seek a license to use the game idea and name, without the actual genius behind it. Or you may go along working on it a bit only to have the project cut, you fired, and your creative license lost to legal issues.

 

[300lb. Samoan]

What sucks is that games that could have been great are given much less attention because what scarce resources are available have to be spent on developing mainstream cash-ins. For instance:

Borderlands, as most of us know, is a hell of a lot of fun to play. But imagine what it could have been in a bull market, with time and resources spent ironing out all of the little lacking details like the fidgety interface, the lack of facial animations, or fine tuning the console graphics. I'm really looking forward to a Borderlands 2 sometime in the future, hopefully at a time when Gearbox will be able to devote a surplus of attention to making it a really excellent experience. Hell, they might even include a story this time around!

 

[imp_spittle]

-snip-

I disagree. Comparing making films to making games is like comparing a cockroach's movement speed to that of an elephant.

When you make a game you have to have animators, the game engine, a publisher, (at least some kind of) a writer, much time and quite a lot of money. Movies, on the other hand, can be shot in less than a week (Phone Booth was shot in 10 days), don't have to look better all the time to receive better ratings nor care about the newest technological advancements and can be made with a minimal budget (cough cough Blair Witch cough Project).

I think you missed what he was getting at. It's not a comparison of the process involved, it's a comparison on different consumers.

There are movies made for discerning audiences, who want plot, characterization, etc.
There are movies made for the summer blockbuster audience, who just wants to see shit blow up.

There are books written for discerning audiences, who want plot, characterization, etc.
There are books written for the crowd that wants shitty, overdone, and unrealistic romance.

There are games made for discerning audiences, who want plot, characterization, etc.
There are games made for your impatient twat who just wants to blow shit up.

What he's trying to say is that good games will still be around because there will always be someone that demands plot, characterization, etc. vs. generic shoot 'em ups.

 

[Jandau]

It is indeed true that major publishers (and therefore developers) don't really care all that much about the gaming enthusiasts. And yes, innovation has slowed as far as they are concerned. However, I've found that looking at smaller development studios might be the answer. I'm not talking about the tiny "indie" games that are a step up from Flash games. I'm talking about smaller developer studios that make full feature games. These games often try new things, modify existing concepts and generally innovate.

The downside here is the lower production values. Let's face it, we're (for the most part) spoiled rotten. We whine endlessly about the smallest bugs and imperfections. Graphics are vastly too important, and heavens forbid there's a typo somewhere in the game's text. However, if you can get past the rough edges there's a whole market of games to be found that try new things.

 

[targren]

Lets compare this to the restaurant market; McDonalds, Burger King, KFC, etc, etc, all these fast food 'restaurants' make money like they are a mint. But their food is of low quality. So, why are they the top of the restaurant market?

* Advertising: They advertise virtually anywhere there are people. I can easily imagine poverty stricken Africans who've not seen food in 2 weeks being able to draw the M symbol for McDonalds.

* Ease of 'use': You don't have to book in advance to eat at McDonalds, Burger King doesn't have a dress code, and KFC doesn't require a knife and fork. These companies have made it so ANYONE can eat there; even men without hands could probably manage it (especially if they have a fork strapped to their wrists).

* A lack of caring from the majority of the target market: Most people who eat at fast food places aren't people who savour the flavours of food in general, typically aren't familar with a wide range of foods, and even if they were, would probably not care enough to go look for them.

You forgot the biggest reason fast food stomps the restaurant market, and that reason makes the restaurant market a very bad analogy to the gaming market.

* Price: A good steak at a good steakhouse will set you back $40-50. For that price, you can have about 300 hamburgers, 12 pounds of fries, 16 gallons of sugar water, and a hot apple pie.

Since most games for any given system come out at the same price point, this doesn't really apply to the gaming market.

 

[Halo Fanboy]

I would like to point out that "shovelware" doesn't apply to every game you don't like. By definition a high budget game is NOT shovelware. Besides, I can't think of one succesful game that a majority of "enthusiast" gamers have a low opinion of, even MW2. Even if you do feel like gaming only produces pure crap, go ahead and whine about about how Left 4 Dead 2 or Halo3 ODST or MW2 left you feeling ripped off, but you have no reason to whine about other people enjoying them.

 

[BaldursBananaSoap]

There will always be Hardcore games being made. And if people aren't making them, I will.

Oh yeah, stop playing on a consoles too. That helps.