Games industry, what went wrong and how to fix it.

Interesting article with developers opinions. Kind of cool that EA had such a bad year, and the industry slumped at least 11% over 2004.

Maybe we will get some new games :) Instead of the same old franchises year in, year out.Having said that, most people seem to want the same old really, since the most anticipated games are usualy sequels not new franchises. Oh well...


http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1944&Itemid=2

Maybe this will teach them we want a new game, not 2 expansion packs (pretty much all EA PC games do this).

Nin.
Ten.
Do.

(Canya tell I like 'em?)



Only- I didn't feel comfortable shouting at my handheld, so I hope better things come! :D

Thanks for the link!

This bit from the front page "pivotal fourth quarter of 2005. The months of November and December traditionally account for approximately 50% or more of annual videogame revenue, so it’s a big deal when weak October game sales continues into the final two months of the year."

... is really vital. 50%!!! in two months, wow. What I really want to know is if this applies to downloadable Indie games too or not? I'd expect more games are bought near Christmas as people treat themselves (don't know how big the "buy downloadable games for other people" market is although I see the portals are trying it out).

Well I'm hoping to release an Easter Bonus game an it'll be interesting to see if it does better or worse than XMas Bonus. I only have two portals to measure it by though, and I plan to get it to all the portals earlier this time as some can be a bit slow, this may invalidate any comparision to Xmas Bonus anyway. Also, hopefully the game demo will be better yeilding a higher Conversion Rate; but will there be more or less downloads, who knows, we'll see.

P.S. oh yeah, thanks for the link.

Besides the 360 which I picked up on launch day with PGR3 and PDZ ... I didn't buy or recieve a single console game for the holidays. I did however get inundated with PC games ;)

"how to fix it" dont worry about that, its capitalism, they stop earning they'll fix it

Cattle want cud. Cattle get cud...and sometimes they get new cud with added flavour... before lamenting the days of the good old cud...like music.

@Cygnus

now.
wash.
your.
mouth.
out.

LOL! ;O)

It was just a crap year. It will take more than one crap year to get them to fix the problem. And with the 'next gen' coming out we will see them wait even longer. They will sit and hope that the next gen will get people buying games again when it is likely going to be the opposite.

I wonder where Gamefly and the like fits in. I know a lot of people that didn't get games this year, but got full year subs to gamefly and netflix and such...

Gamefly has been on the lips of every gamer I know as of late... and I think the industry should take a hint.

People don't want to be spending this much on games...


Graphics are a novelty, they wear off and soon the poor quality of the gameplay starts to show and people stop playing. There hasn't been a truely addictive game outside the puzzle genre in over half a decade.

1998 was the year... the last year for great games. Zelda OOT, Half life, starcraft...

We want good gameplay...

The industry shouldn't stop making the games that make them the money. The sports games, the long winded franchises... But they should be taking the money they make with those and sink some of it into arty type games. games that bring new things to the party...

Like in the movie industry... you have tons and tons of crap, then 3 or 4 times a year there is something truely wonderful that comes out and takes nothing in the box office.


We don't have that...

Ok.. I'm gonna read the article now...


EDIT

I find it interesting how little the company execs mentioned the division of gamers core v casual. While the lower down the corporate ladder and out into the anaylists you see more focus on that.... but still no one really hit the mark.. I think

There are a lot more casual gamers than core gamers. But the numbers will even out as more and more people become core gamers or jump to that funny little mid range between the 2.

I buy games the whole year round. I don't buy anymore around the holidays.

As the numbers grow, we should see a smaller and smaller spike at the holidays as more and more people get heavily into games...

Thats just my 2 cents anyway

I think there are a lot of great games ... I just think that we've reached a point of diminishing returns really. The last time games really had a big change was a long time ago ... it's not that games aren't good, I think they're better than ever ... but as a whole their just isn't anything very mind blowing.

I usualy find 5-6 great games a year that I really love. But there are 100's of so so games that were a complete waste. Or really disappointing.

Last year I barely played anything but Xbox games. This year it's mostly been PC games. Allthough I think the upgrade from a GF3 to GF6 was a big factor in that.

Eurogamers game of the year was Psychonauts. I don't like 3D platformers at all normaly, but I'm curious to see what that game is like.

It looked pretty cool, but most 3D platformers look cool, I just don't enjoy playing them.

PC gaming was really good this year for me.

World of Warcraft
Battlefield 2
Civilization IV
The Movies
Quake 4
Call of Duty 2

I don't normally play WOW, Civ, or The Movies type of games either ... so that was very nice for me. I got a lot of new experience from those titles even though they aren't wholly original. Well, I suppose The Movies is quite different but it's mostly just like The Sims so far as I haven't messed with the movie making abilities.

I think there there's nothing wrong. The whole games culture is an evolutionary exception anyway. We've been telling stories for thousands of years. Then we had movies for hundered years and now games for about 20 years.

Even the average game release is so great. every trashbin or crate mesh in a game is hard work and I hate to see the kids running trough all this without any respect. It's got to be better and better. Even Graphics that look like a masterpiece painted by a great Artist, rendered 60 times every second, is already boring for some people. Like when you have too much sex.

The games industry has one problem: it's big. Like Hollywood it became a home for a small group of giants. If you don't have millions, you won't make millions from a game. Millions? Billions you need! For the same reason you see a lot of crap movies with the same topics all the time.

But even already now there's an indy scene of games and multimedia designers, true artists, not only artworkers, who see their duty not in making millions, but to express their ideas, opinions and feelings, as a mirror of our time and culture.

And People with the ability to think by their own usually like it much more than commercial AAA releases, because the roots of upcoming trends and inventions are often part of it.

Even today I still prefere to play old titles with a good story from new titles with supershiny graphics. It's good to know what's going on on the super-shiny-graphics front, but I really don't need to buy it. Most of it reminds me a lo of Movies without a story but with a lot of special fx. A waste of time to watch it. If they only had a short film version on the DVD, containing the FX only :)

I don't buy games anymore... The primary reason is cost. I have a full time job but I can't see spending 1/3 a days salary on a game. Not one that will be played and finished in 2 months of snippet gaming.

And that is the second reason. No time. I work 5 days a week from 0800 to 1900... I get home tired and would rather cuddle my wife then kill alien scum and save a pixel princess with electronic BAPs!!!

Then I have no interest in whats out... I played FATE for a while but it was really just Diablo with a new corner added but nothing worthwhile inside. Free Version. I did not like that it uninstalled itself when trail period was up.

I write puzzle games... have two of them I just need to polish and attempt to sell... Someday... Maybe this summer.

But isn't that a self-fulfiling prophecy? The reason people usually wait for sequels is that they know they aren't getting burnt (except in the case of PoP:WW). Usually more of the same is a good thing, especially if the first game doesn't have much replayability.

The best purchases I made this year was Civilization IV - the ultimate game of Civilization, one Sid Meier will be hard pressed to beat.

I think top-10 sales lists like this one say alot. An old game like Locomotion at position 5? Why? It costs a fiver.

Part of the problem is that we tend to super advance all the non-game aspects of games. Graphics, Story, Music, Cutscenes, and off that. When gameplay itself has seen little advancement...

Its not to say that gameplay can't be advanced, it is just easier to advance everything else. It is hard work to great a new kind of gameplay... hard work for everyone, and hard work on the heads of people who sell just fine without working that hard.

It isn't the animators and the artists that will have to work harder. It is the programmers. But not as much so as the lead designers. Who have to do a lot more work than just designing a new type of gameplay.

Even those of us here in the indie world have trouble.

I haven't seen too much in the way of gameplay advancement from the people around here. I see lots of people making lots of clones, and lots of games that do something new with those non-game aspects of games... But I see very little new gameplay models. and No new genres.

It has been said that games can't be an artform... that it is just those non-game aspects of games that can be art... but that gameplay can't be an artform... That it can't bring emotions to the players all by itself...

They are right. AS long as we don't advance GAMEplay we can't ever have artgames... we will have games with great visuals, games that make us cry with their cutscenes or storylines... but we won't ever see a game whose gameplay alone can bring out emotion... but thats not how it has to be...

I got Diablo and Diablo 2 for £5 each this year, that was good value for sure!

There haven't been any truely new genres in at least 10 years. However saying that Half-Life 2 (for example) isn't a vast improvement over Platoon is a pretty far stretch, just because they're the same genres.

No they aren't. I know at least one immotion (anger) that some games bring, particularly if they suck and I pay 70 bucks for it. Also many games are quite frustrating - that's another emotion.

There are lots of games that provoke thought and emotion - usually however that's not a good idea, because Jack Thompson (and the morons like him who think video games should be a passive pass time, like Movies and Books) would be all over it in a minute.

Isn't match-3 a new genre or are you just calling that "puzzle"?

Dancing games are new withing 10 years and so are Eyetoy games.

I had a Breakdanceing game for my C64. Dated 1984, which is at least 20 years ago.

The Eyetoy is an interface device, not a game. You have any specific games in mind?

Great link, thanks Evak.

Am I wrong or most of them are explaining the problem because of
-marketing
-release quarter through the year
-big hits last year (Halo2,GTA-SA) and not this one
-not enough stock or too expensive new consoles
-social economical problems
- ...

but there is almost no words about "creativity" or "innovation" ...

Paolo.

@FlameDuck

I'm not so sure that anger and frustration due to poor game design is really something artful...

Also... Books and Movies are viable artforms. Plenty of movies have made me cry... and I know readers who swear that books are even better.

What it comes down to is how the gameplay can tell a story... And I think so far that Half-Life 2 has gotten closest... but still the emotion is coming from cutscenes that don't change based on how the player plays...

Right now most of the effort is pushed into fighting AI... but a game like Black and White or BW2 and it's creature have potential... I want to feel bad about beating my creature senseless..

But the best example I have... which still uses premade cutscenes to help it along... is a section from Vampire the Masquerade BLoodlines... where you have to kill this poor guy who was telling a screenwriter about the Masquerade... He is so pitiful.. and was sort of nice to you up to that point.. I felt really bad about killing him.. and was reluctant to..

It tore me up inside to do it... It is that kind of feeling that elevates gameplay to an artform... and since it was MY choice to pull the trigger... and MY hesitation.. and it was really MY choice to even take the job in the first place.. I'm going to say thats close.... but still the inspiration for the emotion came from a cutscene, or groups of them...

But maybe we can call that part of games now? After all... Narative and story telling are parts of books and movies and tv.. and they don't get called non-art for using them... Sure... there are aspects of movies you can do elsewhere that give emotion... but are they any different than a painting?

Still.. Games are supposed to be about making your playtime unique... Otherwise there is no concept of talent..

And if everyone has the same story verbatum... thats not really what games should ultimately be about I think...

Who knows.

Yes. But not all Books and Movies are art. Most are in fact garbage, even ones that make you cry. I don't think art is defined by whether it illicits an emotional response.

Salvador Dali is not 'art' to everyone.

A good choice. I was generally affraid in the "Haunted house" segment. Even playing it today, I still get goosebumps even though I know what happens and that you can't possibly manage to die there. In fact if it wheren't for all the bugs it would be the ultimate RPG.

And incidently, you don't have to actually kill him, you can scare him off instead. You murderer!

haha FD: Breakdancing game look uh interesting. Has anyone ever made a plate spinning game or a game where you dance by moving your body or kung fu where as you move your (entire not just fingers) body you actually kick/punch them. They eye toy games were fairly unique in this respect due to the "radical" interface technology.

I agree about the haunted house... but what was scary wasn't the gameplay... so I didn't go with it.

She tells you to kill him... so I killed him... If I scared him off I would have been breaking the rules... I wanted to bang her more than I cared about the guy... If I had only known ahead of time...

That was a great game... Too bad about the glitches.. I got stuck in an air vent towards the end and never finished it.. (made it through the whole building without saving and didn't want to do it again) But I know what all the endings were... funny crap some of it.

I was a bit upset at how useless guns became later in the game.. I had to cheat to be able to beat some of the bosses because I was a gun slinger most of the game and sunk all my points into it. By cheat I mean give myself xp to spend on melee attacks...

If It wasn't for that and the glitches...

It is deff the way RPGs or at least action RPGs need to go. well... With a GTA style freeroaming world and maybe with a 3rd viewing angle... a Diablo view... That would sate nearly all action RPG fan's tastes... and get rid of the TERRIBLE loads...

It was the loading that bothered me the most... on my dad's super fast PC the loads weren't tooooo long... 2-5 min... but thats still too long when you might be spending less time playing the game till the next load... from building to building..

I hope that Oblivion is everything Bloodlines got right, plus free roaming worlds... even with all the glitches from Morrowind... I can take either method of object movement... the direct placement of a morrowind or the less accurate but more realistic bloodlines (or half-life 2 really...)

I thought the original masquarade game was at least 80% better than bloodlines.

Bloodlines just seemed like a very average 3rd person game that left me bored within 20 minutes. Too much wandering through corridors and doors that don't open. Limited interaction. It all felt very generic to me.

Real shame as after the first one I had my hopes up. Maybe thats the problem.

> Games industry, what went wrong and how to fix it.

Stop creating crappy games would be a start.

What really, really gets me annoyed is when people say 'profits were down 10% on last year' i.e. they made 300 million profit but because they made £330 last year they are sad...

As I see it there is only so much money in the world economy, it rarely changes and so its just the share you eeek out of punters which varies.

You cannot - I REPEAT - CANNOT expect to continually make more money every year ad infinitum... the world cannot sustain that kind of growth - somewhere else someone fails more..

I think that EA probably had a bad year becaue they are stretched out over all platforms in many countries over the world and really - when they were smaller - it was easier to control spending, production costs, development periods etc... Now they are so huge they just need to take firmer control at grss routes level and make sure they develop more games like SSX 3 - and Bunrout and their other top sporting ranges.

Enay says it in one sentence really!

IPete2.

I don't think they do it intentionally.

I only bought Resident Evil 4 this year and I still play that a lot too.

> I don't think they do it intentionally.

There's only so many driving, fps and sports that you can do before even the people who love playing them will get bored. Besides, now that games are taking years to make, there's not that many games to even buy.

if you look back over the last 20 years, there were always a ton of terrible games and a few Jems. We just forget all the bad and give the gems a place of honour in our memories.

I remember tons of totaly rubbish atari, vic20, C64, BBC, specky and Amiga games. back in the 80's and 90's

Even some of the ones I thought were good, seem totaly rubbish today.

I honestly don't think much has changed at all, except that games are mainsteam and get a lot more media attention and hype than they did back then, and people expect a lot more.

Computer Games are more than Games, they are a new Artform, a new Medium. If you want to play a game, how about chess or a dice game. More and more Computer "games" will replace noninteractive Movies, just like Movies replaced Storybooks. We call them Computer Games, but they are more, they often are Reality Replacements, Simulations, parallel worlds, hiding places. Not only Computer Games evolve in our hands, also mankind will evolve in touch with computer games. Our need for storytellers will turn into the wish of creating parallel universes. Once we felt with the main actor of the story, soon we will BE the main actor, in photorealistic real-feeling virtual realities. The borderline between real and virtual will disappear more and more.

So PC Games design is not only about games, but it's pioneer work in the cultural evolution of mankind.

Let's face facts, MOST games are rubbish to mediocre. Only a few games (10-20?) on each platform are actually worth spending money on each year. Things like REsident Evil 4, C.O.D. 2, God of War etc

Yeah. But they didn't cost 50 bucks a piece. Most of the rubbish games cost a fiver.

There are few rubbish games that aren't worth the price of a movie ticket.

heh, depends where you watch movies, in London Leceister square, last time I went it was £12! which is $20. Mind you, makes you check the reviews first!