8 ms·

The Rise of Costs, the Fall of Gaming

47 points by pclark 14y ago

jonny_eh 14y ago
I'm surprised they didn't mention the new Android powered game consoles. Wii U game should be easier to port to these newer, cheaper, simpler devices.
- stickydink 14y ago
  The problem with that (for this first generation; OUYA, GameStick et al.) is that the hardware isn't comparable to the WiiU. When they're released in the next few months, and even right now, most high end phones out-spec them. The article points out that the WiiU would be comparable to an iPad 4, which is well behind what any of the announced Android consoles are aiming for. They're generally going for the 'we can use last years hardware and sell it cheap' angle, rather than a AAA console experience. Perhaps when/if this first round of consoles prove the concept, a second generation high-powered Android consoles will appear.
ekianjo 14y ago
ANother rant on "big budgets are killing the industry!". We see this coming every 4-5 years and this never ceases to make me laugh. There's never been as many games sold as now. And of course there will be winners and losers, as always.
- NoPiece 14y ago
  I agree with you, and am sure if you could make large list of small developers that closed during any given period of time. But there are downsides to the current trends. When big companies have to take bigger financial risks they are less likely to take creative risks. So while we are seeing really beautiful well crafted games, many are cookie cutter sequels and copies. The industry is large enough that there is innovation (and a vibrant indie scene), but I wish there was more interesting AAA stuff.
  - ekianjo 14y ago
    Well the AAA stuff does things right too. Look at Far Cry 3. It's hardly a indie game, and most people who played it loved it and found it refreshing. Look at Witcher 2. Hardly a small game either, and they managed to pull off one of the best RPGs in recent history, with non-linear paths in the story. Indie or AAA, there's crap everywhere anyway. There's a lot more people buying crap than ever, too, and that is exactly why crap endures : it's profitable. This would not have happened in the same way in the 80s/ early 90s when gamers were more of an "elite", educated and curious bunch of people, rather than the average Joe nowadays who buys Video Games just because they can.
    - NoPiece 14y ago
      I liked Far Cry 3, but it is the perfect example of what I was talking about. Far Cry 2 took a lot of risks (and failed in some ways). Far Cry 3 is polished as hell, but basically dumbed down so that anyone can pick it up and play. Objects you should pick up glow and even beep when you look at them. There is a mini map with arrows telling you where to go. There are pop ups constantly telling you what to do. And it is the third game in a franchise. I liked it, but found it very safe. The Witcher 2 was developed in Poland for ~8million. Great quality from a relatively small company and team. Compare that to Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 (I know it is old, but wanted to find citable numbers). $50 million dollar dev budget, and $200 million dollar launch budget according to the LA Times (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/18/business/fi-ct-duty18 http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/18/business/fi-ct-duty1...). I'm sure the spent lot more on the development the most recent Call of Duty - Black Ops 2.
      - ekianjo 14y ago
        There are not many games that spend as much as Call of Duty. There is probably NONE, in fact, so it can hardly be used as a benchmark for the whole industry. And the numbers for the expensive productions are never really given so I doubt what the real numbers actually are. It's far from being as transparent as Hollywood. Most AAA games spend about 10-20 millions for multi-platform titles, that much we know, and it has not increased significantly over the past few years. THe Witcher2 's cost of 8 millions is not small by any standard. It was a PC-only game when it came out, and spending as much for a PC-only title is fairly expensive, on the contrary. ANd they spend some more when they made the Xbox version, too - besides, take in account that 8 million in Easter Europe probably means double the budget if it were made in the US or Western Europe. It's not apple-to-apple.
rvasa 14y ago
Attention and time are also being split across a range of devices (esp. tablets, smartphones) -- this may also be having an impact.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
svachalek 14y ago
I think economics will prevent the industry from going out of business by spending too much, but the more visible effect of the high budgets is similar to what we see from Hollywood -- total fear of risk resulting in tepid sequels, remakes, and lowest-common-denominator titles. If the market gets disgusted enough to stop buying Call of Duty 29 (Reskinned) we could have another 1983 on our hands, but I don't quite see that coming, yet.
marcofloriano 14y ago
This guy could not be more right on his prediction. Game of the Year (GOT) 2012 was not a blockbuster like Max Payne 3, Far Cry 3 or Assassins Creed 3. Damn it was an indie game, Journey. As i can see, not a surprise for everyone.
pinaceae 14y ago
interesting definition of gaming and its platforms. as if console-makers are the only players in town. let's see here: http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Screen-Shot-2013-01-16-at-1-16-2.11.50-PM.png http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Screen-Shot... xbox360, ps3, wii ... all child's play. a niche industry. the true gaming platforms are android and ios, with ios users more likely to spend money on apps/games. serious game "journalists" dismiss casual gaming as beneath them. halo, skyrim, yes, but angry birds? cut the rope? no. interestingly the industry ignores journalists and goes to where the users are. hence the release of titles like baldur's gate for iOS - taking an old, known game and porting it back. no big budget needed. a lot of turn based games are perfectly suited for touch, from Jagged Alliance, XCOM, Panzer General to all the adventures to RPGs (where are all the Ultima games on iOS? Final Fantasy and Chrono Trigger already are available). and then you have indie gaming, Minecraft, Torchlight, FTL, Hotline Miami, etc etc etc. Big budget shit games are dying. Max Payne 3? yes, good riddance.
- corporalagumbo 14y ago
  If you grew up playing console and PC games then yes, iOS games are a joke. If you loves games, touch-based UIs just don't cut it.
- potatolicious 14y ago
  > "all child's play. a niche industry. the true gaming platforms are android and ios, with ios users more likely to spend money on apps/games" I question this wisdom, and will continue to do so until the day an iOS title breaks Halo 4's first-weekend sales record. Or hell, lifetime sales record. The core gaming industry moves far fewer units than iOS/Android games (in which case "units" is more ephemeral of a concept), but succeeds in extracting $60-90 at a time, as opposed to $0.99. We had our love affair with "casual gaming is the future" when the Wii came out - that didn't pan out then either. Attach rates were abysmal, and people soon bored of the platform after one or two titles. It failed to find a long-term place in the living room, that's for sure. This isn't about some supposed superiority of core gaming vs. casual gaming, it's simply skepticism because every time someone has said that casual will eat core for lunch, it has failed to occur. Sales for iOS/Android games are terrible on a per-title basis, and even including only the top titles don't come close to console sales numbers. The only real corner of that industry making eyebrow-raising amounts of money are microtransaction-based, treadmilly, slot-machine type games, and I have my doubts as to whether or not it's a sustainable trend. > "a lot of turn based games are perfectly suited for touch, from Jagged Alliance, XCOM, Panzer General to all the adventures to RPGs (where are all the Ultima games on iOS? Final Fantasy and Chrono Trigger already are available)." "Re-releasing old games on mobile" is a profitable segment, but it won't last, mostly because we will very quickly run out of games people actually give a shit about. And once you start contemplating development new adventure games, RPGs, and strategy games, the economics of this falls over. Even without the notion of modernizing graphics and gameplay, developing something like Chrono Trigger would hardly be worth it when the market bears $0.99 a copy, or less. More likely, we'll see Chrono Trigger, where enemies are overpowered and you pay microtransaction credits to revive your party members when they die. This is, after all, the only way mobile devs have found that generates any substantial revenue. What a marvelous progression of this industry. The future of the indie gaming scene lies with the PC, and potentially surprise core-gaming-targeted platforms like the Ouya. These are the only platforms where users are prepared to spend any real amount of money on gaming. Revenue extraction on mobile platforms inevitably involves fairly unscrupulous (and simply not fun) mechanisms.
msg 14y ago
Holy moly that was tl. I did r, but I regretted it. The big problem with this article is cherrypicking examples. Even though it contains a list of 120 game companies (yes, tl) that folded between 2006 and 2012, it doesn't set them in context. How many companies are there of which these are a subset? How does this failure rate compare with historical norms? How big are these companies really? Other lists of large budgets, large layoffs, large numbers of units required to break even make similar non-points. The larger point is that game art is expensive. Will Wright was making the same point with Spore, I would say. The art was so expensive he outsourced it to the cheapest laborers he could find, players. It turned out the tools were better than the game itself; nevertheless I think you have to feel he was on to something. There is not going to be an asset apocalypse in a world with a Minecraft mod API (Real Soon Now), the Steam Workshops, and procedural generation. Unless you mean the kind of disaster that kills off dinosaurs. Is AAA gaming unsustainable? Of course it depends on what you mean by AAA. But I think the big studios have an eye on their wallet at all times. They make big games because at the end of the day they are profitable on the average. There is just a wide variance. If a smaller studio has all its money on black on its AAA title, you might wish them luck, but not be completely surprised when their success is raked away. The AAA titles that succeed do so through solid gameplay. That is unlikely to change no matter how shiny they become.
- thisone 14y ago
  >Even though it contains a list of 120 game companies (yes, tl) that folded between 2006 and 2012, it doesn't set them in context Indeed. I went looking for Flagship and found it. Flagship went under because Hellgate London was a MMORPG title, with AAA MMORPG costs that, unfortunately failed in it's mission as a game. It, unfortunately, wasn't very good. Failure meant not enough purchases and not enough subscriptions, therefore not enough money coming in.
Tiktaalik 14y ago
Charts that show a decline in console retail sales don't really reflect the health of the gaming industry. One thing that must be kept in mind is that there has been a shift toward online sales, both on the PC, which is currently enjoying a renaissance, and on the console, and these are not reflected. Furthermore the console industry is cyclical, and sales are expected to decrease in this fashion prior to the launch of new hardware (Wii U just arrived, more coming in 2013).
brianchu 14y ago
I think consoles are a dying segment. Casual won't eat console, though. Mobile will eat console, because of 1) greater audience and 2) a shift of console-quality games from mobile to console. We're talking about a platform that more than 50% of all US teens own (and growing), a platform that is carried around nearly everywhere by most users, a platform that is expanding globally. Because of that audience, we're looking at ROIs that can outpace console games. Halo 4's dev and marketing costs are estimated to be well over $100MM. Its first weekend gross was $220MM. Halo 3's first weekend sales were roughly $170MM and Halo 3 ended up selling roughly $600MM total (10 million copies sold [1]). So based on that let's be generous and extrapolate Halo 4's total sales as $800MM. Keep in mind that I'm not even taking into account 1) eventual discounting on each unit and 2) retail markups and packaging costs. Angry Birds (first version) cost $135k to develop. It grossed 7.35MM (after Apple's "retail" cut) [3]. Angry Birds has a ROI of 54x. Halo 4 has a ROI of 8x (and I'm being liberal). It's also a mistake to think that smartphones are purely for casual games. Console-quality games are already moving to the iOS/Android platforms. So-called mid-core games are very profitable on mobile. There is a trend of games charging greater and greater amounts of money, as the Final Fantasy ports do. The market most certainly does not enforce a $0.99 price point. Games with higher production values routinely push past that price point. Bear in mind that the iPhone 5 is considerably more powerful than the Xbox, and is roughly 1/4th as powerful as the Xbox 360 on one metric (texture rendering). Given 1) exponential growth in mobile processing/graphics power, 2) the increasing delay between console launches which allows for catching up (8 years between the Xbox 360 and Xbox next-gen, assuming a 2013 release date), and 3) diminishing marginal returns in graphical quality when hardware quality is increased past a certain point, in 2-3 years smartphones will be capable of Xbox 360 games, and a few years after that will have caught up with next-gen consoles. This gap is narrowing even faster with tablets. The article mentions how the Wii U is comparable to an iPad 4. There are tons of startups out there building game controllers to overcome/augment the limitations of touch UIs. Mobile games are already being wirelessly hooked up to televisions/monitors. Big budget console games won't die. Not completely. There will always be a market for the absolute bleeding edge. But I think it's clear that mobile gaming will eat up huge segments of the console market. One "type" of console that I see as a potential commercial hit would be immersive AR platforms, like the Oculus Rift. But there's no reason that mobile can't eat that too after several years. Looking even farther into the future, I think there is great potential for other advancements in mobile such as actual physical buttons that are programmatically generated over the touchscreen [4]. [1] http://www.vgchartz.com/article/4787/halo-3-sells-10-million-copies-worldwide/ http://www.vgchartz.com/article/4787/halo-3-sells-10-million... [2] http://www.mobilewebgo.com/how-did-angry-birds-become-blockbuster-rovio-video-interview-and-transcript http://www.mobilewebgo.com/how-did-angry-birds-become-blockb... [3] http://www.symbian-freak.com/news/010/12/angry_birds_hits_42_million_free_and_paid_downloads.htm http://www.symbian-freak.com/news/010/12/angry_birds_hits_42... [4] http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/13/this-is-the-future/ http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/13/this-is-the-future/
jdietrich 14y ago
Exactly the same thing is happening in the movie industry. The critic Mark Kermode has written at length about the phenomenon of the "motion picture event" - a movie so expensive that it is newsworthy regardless of creative merit. People will go and watch lousy-but-expensive films, just to see what all the fuss is about. The canonical example is the 2001 film "Pearl Harbour", which was an absolute stinker but made a profit of $60m on a $140m budget. We're currently in the era of the mega-blockbuster - vastly expensive superhero and fantasy films that are a relatively safe bet financially, because they very effectively capture the casual market that might only see one or two movies a year. Even adjusting for inflation, nearly all of the most expensive films of all time were shot in the last decade. At the other end of the spectrum, it's possible to make a genre movie for a niche audience on a tiny budget, knowing that even without a theatrical release you can promote it virally and turn a good profit on DVD sales. You can spend $150m on Call of Warfighter XVII, knowing that it'll sell a gazillion copies in every superstore in the developed world. You can also spend a tiny fraction of that on Garbage Truck Simulator, in the knowledge that 100% of your potential customers will be able to find it on Steam with no real promotional spend necessary.
- robmcm 14y ago
  I think the industry will just find a way, things like steam will cover marketing, 3rd party developed engines and frameworks will cover development costs, and auto generated environments will aid with increased environment size. If it doesn't produce good games, then the market will dictate what it want's by not buying games...
- lifeisstillgood 14y ago
  Hence the retail truism - there is no room in the middle. Luxury goods will always have a market. Cheap as chips will sell as long as there is stock on shelves. Reasonably priced good quality stuff - you will lose your shirt.
- WhaleBiologist 14y ago
  http://warhorsestudios.cz/index.php?page=blog&entry=blog_007 http://warhorsestudios.cz/index.php?page=blog&entry=blog... is a very good blog post, outlining how poisonous executive management of large video game companies is, and how there are inordinate numbers of useless/inefficient positions in games development. I remember reading a blog post by the guy who did the fire for Far Cry 2. He spent a year on it. He didn't even do any of the graphics. He spent an entire year just playing around with fire spreading algorithms. An entire man year, spent on making the effect of one weapon look cool. Absolute madness. On your mention of Garbage Truck Simulator, Euro Truck Simulator 2 came out not too long ago. All you do is drive a truck, that's it. It's selling pretty well, and has a development team of about 10 guys. Why don't people in the big games companies realize all they need to do to be successful is make small, focused, FUN games, that have development teams of 10 or so. The rise of the indie game genre pretty much proves that it is financially viable.
nazgulnarsil 14y ago
Why is this surprising? In the movie industry each blockbuster finances 2-10 flops IIRC.
venomsnake 14y ago
The game industry is in trouble (well except for PC, digital distribution, indies which we assume don't exist) And with Trine 1 & 2, Mark of the ninja, Bastion and Borderlands 1 and 2 and Dishonored we have very successful and profitable example of studios and projects that break with the graphic whoring and bet on an art style. And majority of the failures listed were mediocre games anyway. We haven't had the psychonauts, torment and Shadow of the colossus of this generation yet. Top critical acclaim and no sales. Budgets are insane and spend on stuff that don't add much value. Total voice over of games is one of the things I can do without.
LatvjuAvs 14y ago
Star Citizen, Wastelands 2, Double Fine Adventure, many others. It just looks like finally I can participate in making game I would like to play. I am tired of playing some half-assed interactive movies that costs half a billion to make. Niche will survive, and it just recently started to rise again, thanks to niche people themselves funding games. There is no void and there will not be, in death, something will born again, and sometimes it is built upon recognizing failures of previous generations. Call it evolution, as dire it might look, it is a progress.
- zokier 14y ago
  > Star Citizen, Wastelands 2, Double Fine Adventure, many others. how many of those has actually shipped? ...yeah.
  - LatvjuAvs 14y ago
    You know, when reading product description and watching some mock-up video gives me more excitement than playing 8 hour epic AAA title, the industry for sure is on wrong path :D

47 points by pclark 14y ago

I'm surprised they didn't mention the new Android powered game consoles. Wii U game should be easier to port to these newer, cheaper, simpler devices.

stickydink 14y ago
The problem with that (for this first generation; OUYA, GameStick et al.) is that the hardware isn't comparable to the WiiU. When they're released in the next few months, and even right now, most high end phones out-spec them. The article points out that the WiiU would be comparable to an iPad 4, which is well behind what any of the announced Android consoles are aiming for. They're generally going for the 'we can use last years hardware and sell it cheap' angle, rather than a AAA console experience. Perhaps when/if this first round of consoles prove the concept, a second generation high-powered Android consoles will appear.

ekianjo 14y ago

ANother rant on "big budgets are killing the industry!". We see this coming every 4-5 years and this never ceases to make me laugh. There's never been as many games sold as now. And of course there will be winners and losers, as always.

NoPiece 14y ago
I agree with you, and am sure if you could make large list of small developers that closed during any given period of time. But there are downsides to the current trends. When big companies have to take bigger financial risks they are less likely to take creative risks. So while we are seeing really beautiful well crafted games, many are cookie cutter sequels and copies. The industry is large enough that there is innovation (and a vibrant indie scene), but I wish there was more interesting AAA stuff.
- ekianjo 14y ago
  Well the AAA stuff does things right too. Look at Far Cry 3. It's hardly a indie game, and most people who played it loved it and found it refreshing. Look at Witcher 2. Hardly a small game either, and they managed to pull off one of the best RPGs in recent history, with non-linear paths in the story. Indie or AAA, there's crap everywhere anyway. There's a lot more people buying crap than ever, too, and that is exactly why crap endures : it's profitable. This would not have happened in the same way in the 80s/ early 90s when gamers were more of an "elite", educated and curious bunch of people, rather than the average Joe nowadays who buys Video Games just because they can.
  - NoPiece 14y ago
    I liked Far Cry 3, but it is the perfect example of what I was talking about. Far Cry 2 took a lot of risks (and failed in some ways). Far Cry 3 is polished as hell, but basically dumbed down so that anyone can pick it up and play. Objects you should pick up glow and even beep when you look at them. There is a mini map with arrows telling you where to go. There are pop ups constantly telling you what to do. And it is the third game in a franchise. I liked it, but found it very safe. The Witcher 2 was developed in Poland for ~8million. Great quality from a relatively small company and team. Compare that to Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 (I know it is old, but wanted to find citable numbers). $50 million dollar dev budget, and $200 million dollar launch budget according to the LA Times (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/18/business/fi-ct-duty18 http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/18/business/fi-ct-duty1...). I'm sure the spent lot more on the development the most recent Call of Duty - Black Ops 2.
    - ekianjo 14y ago
      There are not many games that spend as much as Call of Duty. There is probably NONE, in fact, so it can hardly be used as a benchmark for the whole industry. And the numbers for the expensive productions are never really given so I doubt what the real numbers actually are. It's far from being as transparent as Hollywood. Most AAA games spend about 10-20 millions for multi-platform titles, that much we know, and it has not increased significantly over the past few years. THe Witcher2 's cost of 8 millions is not small by any standard. It was a PC-only game when it came out, and spending as much for a PC-only title is fairly expensive, on the contrary. ANd they spend some more when they made the Xbox version, too - besides, take in account that 8 million in Easter Europe probably means double the budget if it were made in the US or Western Europe. It's not apple-to-apple.

rvasa 14y ago

Attention and time are also being split across a range of devices (esp. tablets, smartphones) -- this may also be having an impact.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

svachalek 14y ago

I think economics will prevent the industry from going out of business by spending too much, but the more visible effect of the high budgets is similar to what we see from Hollywood -- total fear of risk resulting in tepid sequels, remakes, and lowest-common-denominator titles. If the market gets disgusted enough to stop buying Call of Duty 29 (Reskinned) we could have another 1983 on our hands, but I don't quite see that coming, yet.

marcofloriano 14y ago

This guy could not be more right on his prediction. Game of the Year (GOT) 2012 was not a blockbuster like Max Payne 3, Far Cry 3 or Assassins Creed 3. Damn it was an indie game, Journey. As i can see, not a surprise for everyone.

pinaceae 14y ago

interesting definition of gaming and its platforms. as if console-makers are the only players in town. let's see here: http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Screen-Shot-2013-01-16-at-1-16-2.11.50-PM.png http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Screen-Shot... xbox360, ps3, wii ... all child's play. a niche industry. the true gaming platforms are android and ios, with ios users more likely to spend money on apps/games. serious game "journalists" dismiss casual gaming as beneath them. halo, skyrim, yes, but angry birds? cut the rope? no. interestingly the industry ignores journalists and goes to where the users are. hence the release of titles like baldur's gate for iOS - taking an old, known game and porting it back. no big budget needed. a lot of turn based games are perfectly suited for touch, from Jagged Alliance, XCOM, Panzer General to all the adventures to RPGs (where are all the Ultima games on iOS? Final Fantasy and Chrono Trigger already are available). and then you have indie gaming, Minecraft, Torchlight, FTL, Hotline Miami, etc etc etc. Big budget shit games are dying. Max Payne 3? yes, good riddance.

corporalagumbo 14y ago
If you grew up playing console and PC games then yes, iOS games are a joke. If you loves games, touch-based UIs just don't cut it.
potatolicious 14y ago
> "all child's play. a niche industry. the true gaming platforms are android and ios, with ios users more likely to spend money on apps/games" I question this wisdom, and will continue to do so until the day an iOS title breaks Halo 4's first-weekend sales record. Or hell, lifetime sales record. The core gaming industry moves far fewer units than iOS/Android games (in which case "units" is more ephemeral of a concept), but succeeds in extracting $60-90 at a time, as opposed to $0.99. We had our love affair with "casual gaming is the future" when the Wii came out - that didn't pan out then either. Attach rates were abysmal, and people soon bored of the platform after one or two titles. It failed to find a long-term place in the living room, that's for sure. This isn't about some supposed superiority of core gaming vs. casual gaming, it's simply skepticism because every time someone has said that casual will eat core for lunch, it has failed to occur. Sales for iOS/Android games are terrible on a per-title basis, and even including only the top titles don't come close to console sales numbers. The only real corner of that industry making eyebrow-raising amounts of money are microtransaction-based, treadmilly, slot-machine type games, and I have my doubts as to whether or not it's a sustainable trend. > "a lot of turn based games are perfectly suited for touch, from Jagged Alliance, XCOM, Panzer General to all the adventures to RPGs (where are all the Ultima games on iOS? Final Fantasy and Chrono Trigger already are available)." "Re-releasing old games on mobile" is a profitable segment, but it won't last, mostly because we will very quickly run out of games people actually give a shit about. And once you start contemplating development new adventure games, RPGs, and strategy games, the economics of this falls over. Even without the notion of modernizing graphics and gameplay, developing something like Chrono Trigger would hardly be worth it when the market bears $0.99 a copy, or less. More likely, we'll see Chrono Trigger, where enemies are overpowered and you pay microtransaction credits to revive your party members when they die. This is, after all, the only way mobile devs have found that generates any substantial revenue. What a marvelous progression of this industry. The future of the indie gaming scene lies with the PC, and potentially surprise core-gaming-targeted platforms like the Ouya. These are the only platforms where users are prepared to spend any real amount of money on gaming. Revenue extraction on mobile platforms inevitably involves fairly unscrupulous (and simply not fun) mechanisms.

msg 14y ago

Holy moly that was tl. I did r, but I regretted it. The big problem with this article is cherrypicking examples. Even though it contains a list of 120 game companies (yes, tl) that folded between 2006 and 2012, it doesn't set them in context. How many companies are there of which these are a subset? How does this failure rate compare with historical norms? How big are these companies really? Other lists of large budgets, large layoffs, large numbers of units required to break even make similar non-points. The larger point is that game art is expensive. Will Wright was making the same point with Spore, I would say. The art was so expensive he outsourced it to the cheapest laborers he could find, players. It turned out the tools were better than the game itself; nevertheless I think you have to feel he was on to something. There is not going to be an asset apocalypse in a world with a Minecraft mod API (Real Soon Now), the Steam Workshops, and procedural generation. Unless you mean the kind of disaster that kills off dinosaurs. Is AAA gaming unsustainable? Of course it depends on what you mean by AAA. But I think the big studios have an eye on their wallet at all times. They make big games because at the end of the day they are profitable on the average. There is just a wide variance. If a smaller studio has all its money on black on its AAA title, you might wish them luck, but not be completely surprised when their success is raked away. The AAA titles that succeed do so through solid gameplay. That is unlikely to change no matter how shiny they become.

thisone 14y ago
>Even though it contains a list of 120 game companies (yes, tl) that folded between 2006 and 2012, it doesn't set them in context Indeed. I went looking for Flagship and found it. Flagship went under because Hellgate London was a MMORPG title, with AAA MMORPG costs that, unfortunately failed in it's mission as a game. It, unfortunately, wasn't very good. Failure meant not enough purchases and not enough subscriptions, therefore not enough money coming in.

Tiktaalik 14y ago

Charts that show a decline in console retail sales don't really reflect the health of the gaming industry. One thing that must be kept in mind is that there has been a shift toward online sales, both on the PC, which is currently enjoying a renaissance, and on the console, and these are not reflected. Furthermore the console industry is cyclical, and sales are expected to decrease in this fashion prior to the launch of new hardware (Wii U just arrived, more coming in 2013).

brianchu 14y ago

I think consoles are a dying segment. Casual won't eat console, though. Mobile will eat console, because of 1) greater audience and 2) a shift of console-quality games from mobile to console. We're talking about a platform that more than 50% of all US teens own (and growing), a platform that is carried around nearly everywhere by most users, a platform that is expanding globally. Because of that audience, we're looking at ROIs that can outpace console games. Halo 4's dev and marketing costs are estimated to be well over $100MM. Its first weekend gross was $220MM. Halo 3's first weekend sales were roughly $170MM and Halo 3 ended up selling roughly $600MM total (10 million copies sold [1]). So based on that let's be generous and extrapolate Halo 4's total sales as $800MM. Keep in mind that I'm not even taking into account 1) eventual discounting on each unit and 2) retail markups and packaging costs. Angry Birds (first version) cost $135k to develop. It grossed 7.35MM (after Apple's "retail" cut) [3]. Angry Birds has a ROI of 54x. Halo 4 has a ROI of 8x (and I'm being liberal). It's also a mistake to think that smartphones are purely for casual games. Console-quality games are already moving to the iOS/Android platforms. So-called mid-core games are very profitable on mobile. There is a trend of games charging greater and greater amounts of money, as the Final Fantasy ports do. The market most certainly does not enforce a $0.99 price point. Games with higher production values routinely push past that price point. Bear in mind that the iPhone 5 is considerably more powerful than the Xbox, and is roughly 1/4th as powerful as the Xbox 360 on one metric (texture rendering). Given 1) exponential growth in mobile processing/graphics power, 2) the increasing delay between console launches which allows for catching up (8 years between the Xbox 360 and Xbox next-gen, assuming a 2013 release date), and 3) diminishing marginal returns in graphical quality when hardware quality is increased past a certain point, in 2-3 years smartphones will be capable of Xbox 360 games, and a few years after that will have caught up with next-gen consoles. This gap is narrowing even faster with tablets. The article mentions how the Wii U is comparable to an iPad 4. There are tons of startups out there building game controllers to overcome/augment the limitations of touch UIs. Mobile games are already being wirelessly hooked up to televisions/monitors. Big budget console games won't die. Not completely. There will always be a market for the absolute bleeding edge. But I think it's clear that mobile gaming will eat up huge segments of the console market. One "type" of console that I see as a potential commercial hit would be immersive AR platforms, like the Oculus Rift. But there's no reason that mobile can't eat that too after several years. Looking even farther into the future, I think there is great potential for other advancements in mobile such as actual physical buttons that are programmatically generated over the touchscreen [4]. [1] http://www.vgchartz.com/article/4787/halo-3-sells-10-million-copies-worldwide/ http://www.vgchartz.com/article/4787/halo-3-sells-10-million... [2] http://www.mobilewebgo.com/how-did-angry-birds-become-blockbuster-rovio-video-interview-and-transcript http://www.mobilewebgo.com/how-did-angry-birds-become-blockb... [3] http://www.symbian-freak.com/news/010/12/angry_birds_hits_42_million_free_and_paid_downloads.htm http://www.symbian-freak.com/news/010/12/angry_birds_hits_42... [4] http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/13/this-is-the-future/ http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/13/this-is-the-future/

jdietrich 14y ago

Exactly the same thing is happening in the movie industry. The critic Mark Kermode has written at length about the phenomenon of the "motion picture event" - a movie so expensive that it is newsworthy regardless of creative merit. People will go and watch lousy-but-expensive films, just to see what all the fuss is about. The canonical example is the 2001 film "Pearl Harbour", which was an absolute stinker but made a profit of $60m on a $140m budget. We're currently in the era of the mega-blockbuster - vastly expensive superhero and fantasy films that are a relatively safe bet financially, because they very effectively capture the casual market that might only see one or two movies a year. Even adjusting for inflation, nearly all of the most expensive films of all time were shot in the last decade. At the other end of the spectrum, it's possible to make a genre movie for a niche audience on a tiny budget, knowing that even without a theatrical release you can promote it virally and turn a good profit on DVD sales. You can spend $150m on Call of Warfighter XVII, knowing that it'll sell a gazillion copies in every superstore in the developed world. You can also spend a tiny fraction of that on Garbage Truck Simulator, in the knowledge that 100% of your potential customers will be able to find it on Steam with no real promotional spend necessary.

robmcm 14y ago
I think the industry will just find a way, things like steam will cover marketing, 3rd party developed engines and frameworks will cover development costs, and auto generated environments will aid with increased environment size. If it doesn't produce good games, then the market will dictate what it want's by not buying games...
lifeisstillgood 14y ago
Hence the retail truism - there is no room in the middle. Luxury goods will always have a market. Cheap as chips will sell as long as there is stock on shelves. Reasonably priced good quality stuff - you will lose your shirt.
WhaleBiologist 14y ago
http://warhorsestudios.cz/index.php?page=blog&entry=blog_007 http://warhorsestudios.cz/index.php?page=blog&entry=blog... is a very good blog post, outlining how poisonous executive management of large video game companies is, and how there are inordinate numbers of useless/inefficient positions in games development. I remember reading a blog post by the guy who did the fire for Far Cry 2. He spent a year on it. He didn't even do any of the graphics. He spent an entire year just playing around with fire spreading algorithms. An entire man year, spent on making the effect of one weapon look cool. Absolute madness. On your mention of Garbage Truck Simulator, Euro Truck Simulator 2 came out not too long ago. All you do is drive a truck, that's it. It's selling pretty well, and has a development team of about 10 guys. Why don't people in the big games companies realize all they need to do to be successful is make small, focused, FUN games, that have development teams of 10 or so. The rise of the indie game genre pretty much proves that it is financially viable.

nazgulnarsil 14y ago

Why is this surprising? In the movie industry each blockbuster finances 2-10 flops IIRC.

venomsnake 14y ago

The game industry is in trouble (well except for PC, digital distribution, indies which we assume don't exist) And with Trine 1 & 2, Mark of the ninja, Bastion and Borderlands 1 and 2 and Dishonored we have very successful and profitable example of studios and projects that break with the graphic whoring and bet on an art style. And majority of the failures listed were mediocre games anyway. We haven't had the psychonauts, torment and Shadow of the colossus of this generation yet. Top critical acclaim and no sales. Budgets are insane and spend on stuff that don't add much value. Total voice over of games is one of the things I can do without.

LatvjuAvs 14y ago

Star Citizen, Wastelands 2, Double Fine Adventure, many others. It just looks like finally I can participate in making game I would like to play. I am tired of playing some half-assed interactive movies that costs half a billion to make. Niche will survive, and it just recently started to rise again, thanks to niche people themselves funding games. There is no void and there will not be, in death, something will born again, and sometimes it is built upon recognizing failures of previous generations. Call it evolution, as dire it might look, it is a progress.

zokier 14y ago
> Star Citizen, Wastelands 2, Double Fine Adventure, many others. how many of those has actually shipped? ...yeah.
- LatvjuAvs 14y ago
  You know, when reading product description and watching some mock-up video gives me more excitement than playing 8 hour epic AAA title, the industry for sure is on wrong path :D