Gaming's Future Looks Uncertain, Says Epic Boss

[Logan Westbrook]

Gaming's Future Looks Uncertain, Says Epic Boss

Smart phones and social games are making things difficult for traditional videogame makers.

Epic Games president Mike Capps thinks that the future of the traditional videogame industry is more uncertain than it's ever been, thanks to changes wrought by social, casual, and mobile gaming. He said that a lot of the truths that the industry had relied on for years might no longer apply, and it was hard to see what was in store.

Capps said that there was now a question mark over things like the role of retail and physical distribution in five to ten years time, and whether anyone would care about a new console generation. "It used to be, 'well, of course PlayStation 3 will be successful because PS2 was amazingly successful,'" Capps said, "But can you say for sure that you know everyone's going to jump to the next generation? I sure hope so - I'm going to try to make some great tech that will make everyone want to. But it's scary."

Despite Epic's forays into iOS development with Infinity Blade, Capps also worried about the effects that devices like the iPad and iPhone were having on traditional games. In Capps' opinion, "dollar apps" were potentially very harmful to the industry, saying that 99-cent games on smart phones made it much more difficult to convince consumers that a $60 game was value for money.

Capps didn't think that everything was completely bleak, however. He said that while it was an uncertain time in the industry, it was also an exciting one, especially for the company that made the right choices and ended up "winning."

Source: Industry Gamers [http://www.industrygamers.com/news/epic-99-cent-apps-are-killing-us/]


Permalink

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Again?

(I can pad this out if you really want, but all I really needed to put was that one word.)

 

[Scorched_Cascade]

I giggled a little at "Epic Boss"

I don't really buy into the doom and gloom bit the industry keeps harping on about. The consumers that they are talking about were not the ones buying the full price retail games in the first place. Stop questioning the wrong demographic for your product.

 

[Trolldor]

And, as I have said before, even if 'AAA' gaming declines it will never go away.

Several million sales for heavy story-based games with rich, complex and immersive worlds will simply not disappear.
Several million sales for generic shooter X won't simply disappear either.
And the iPad for gaming? When open-platform tablet PCs with far more flexibility and an actual use not already covered by a laptop come out, sure.

 

[DTWolfwood]

when will they get it that they are catering to very different audiences <.<

 

[unacomn]

" more difficult to convince consumers that a $60 game was value for money."

That's easy, just make a 60 dollar game that's actually worth it's price. Not some two bit product you churned out because you thought people would buy it and didn't.

Or, since here games actually cost 60 euros, which is a lot more than 60 dollars, make games cheaper. You can cut costs by firing everyone in marketing and CliffyB.

 

[jhlip]

I giggled a little at "Epic Boss"

I don't really buy into the doom and gloom bit the industry keeps harping on about. The consumers that they are talking about were not the ones buying the full price retail games in the first place. Stop questioning the wrong demographic for your product.

Pretty much this statement right here is what I got to say.

 

[RuralGamer]

Since when was an app as good as a full-sized game... Actually forget I said that; when the companies remember how much content they used to put in games and how it was worth it, then we'll have an answer. Games now are far too short and they skimp on far too much; the exceptions are what stand out for me and games I'm more likely to buy.

 

[Prof. Monkeypox]

Of course being able to buy quality titles for a few dollars will make us question why we pay $60 for generic AAA games. Of course, I already question that. That's why I never buy a game until the price drops below $40.

 

[Jamous]

Direct the good man to Extra Credits! With any luck, he'll be reassured.

Despite Epic's forays into iOS development with Infinity Blade, Capps also worried about the effects that devices like the iPad and iPhone were having on traditional games. In Capps' opinion, "dollar apps" were potentially very harmful to the industry, saying that 99-cent games on smart phones made it much more difficult to convince consumers that a $60 game was value for money.

Also, really? 99-cent games are selling for 99-cent for a reason. Yes this may 'just be my opinion' but there is still a serious gap in the fun that I can have with PC or Console titles and the fun I can have with Social or Mobile games. I tend to enjoy myself a lot more when I'm playing, say, Oblivion, a Total War game, Assassin's Creed or maybe Half-Life. Also, one of the main reason I'm into games is the stories. You don't often get stories with apps or FB games, although a couple you will find are pretty good; see: Echo Bazaar, Assassin's Creed Legacy.

 

[LondonBeer]

So what he means is gaming in the form of overpriced crap games with little quality control and less quality on one trick pony hardware is gone ?

Ohg what a terrible shame.

 

[LondonBeer]

Minecraft.

(Effectively an app game, also Atomic Zombie Smashers, Magicka, Flotilla, Red Nation, Plant Vs Zombies)

 

[Jamash]

I think trying to compare the value for money of these two different markets is foolish.

Technically, a $1 app game only needs to be 1/60 as good as a AAA title to be the same value for money, but are gamers really going to want games that are only 1/60 as good as AAA games, regardless of value for money?

Value for money be dammed, I'm not going to be satisfied playing an app that has only 1.67% of the content or quality of a proper game, just because it's of comparable value.

If a $1 app game got a score of 4/100 on Metacritic, I wouldn't go out an buy it because technically it has twice the value for money than a $60 game... shit games are still shit games whether they cost $1 or $60 dollars, so publishers should focus on releasing good games that people will enjoy regardless of their $60 price tag.

 

[Bobbity]

I think that in order to compete, games are going to have to become bigger, not prettier, and deliver a better quality story and characters. In other words, more bang for our buck. Otherwise, we'll be lacking in incentive to shell out a hundred dollars over a proper game, as opposed to a dollar and a bit for an interesting or engrossing app.

 

[Dora]

Seriously? Seriously?

I don't think you can blame the poor sales of any AAA PS3 title on Angry Birds. While a lot of people play iOS or Android casual games, not all of them play console titles, and it's because they're just not that into gaming beyond something cute and colourful to waste a few minutes on. My mother-in-law never has and probably never will picked up a controller, but she enjoys games like Bookworm. For that matter, while I work for a site the reviews casual PC games, most of the gaming I do for my own personal entertainment winds up taking place on a console, and I've got several titles pre-ordered for the PS3.

As for the complaints about pricing, hell, people are greedy and lazy. They are. We all are. The same people who put out those .99 gaming apps STILL get complaints from people who think it should be free, or want more for their literal dollar. People even moan about paying six dollars or whatever for older SNES console ports. In most cases it isn't because they think it "isn't worth it", it's because everyone wants something for free and they will never, ever be happy for anything more than that.

If your big-budget, big-name title faces lackluster sales, then maybe it's time to take a closer look at what's wrong with it rather than pointing the finger at another platform. If people aren't willing to pay what you want them to, there's probably a bigger underlying issue than "cheaper games are bad". Gaming's future is just fine, as long as people like Capps stop playing the victim and take a good hard look at their own products instead.

 

[Funkysandwich]

It's kind of amazing that even heads of game studios don't see that social games and traditional video games are two different markets that appeal to different people. They may overlap at times but generally there is a difference between someone who plays Bejeweled and someone who plays Bulletstorm. A $1 mobile game is different product to a "$60" (more like $80 - $100 here in Australia, even though our dollar is worth more now) AAA game.

People don't buy $1 games to replace traditional games, they buy them to supplement their gaming. It's not so much about replacing one product with another as it is about increasing your exposure to different elements within the medium.

 

[Meggiepants]

Ooh! Subtle mind games! How pleasant.

"Ya'll better stop bitching about how much you spend on games now, ya hear? Iffin you aren't careful, we'll just up an go away now. How about that?

[sub]By the way, we will still always sell great games worth $60, just in case you were wondering. We also have a few casual games, for those who you know, don't pay for big titles[/sub]"

This shit is getting so tiring to me. I don't know a single casual gamer from where I work - this is where I see them - who would ever buy a console. They weren't ever going to buy one, they aren't ever going to buy one. But yes, they will plunk a buck down on a game for their phone.

Do these guys honestly think that people like me will ever believe that my friends who play ME will just give up on those kinds of games because phone apps are just so much more fun to play? Honestly?

When Boone's puts Dom Pérignon out of business, maybe I'll be worried.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

When open-platform tablet PCs with far more flexibility and an actual use not already covered by a laptop come out, sure.

That would scare Epic even more because they believe PC gaming is FULL OF PIRATES!!!