CliffyB Thinks Used Games Are Bad, Sony is "Playing Us"

[CAPTCHA]

Well I've heard Cliffy B sing this tune many a time over the last few years. He's adamant that game development costs to much and that every big release is essentially a gamble with the studio at stake. Everyone is suggesting "lower the cost of development", but that's exactly what Epic studios are doing. They've said that they are no longer making the big AAA games anymore, instead focusing on smaller games like Fortnight. That was ages ago now though. I haven't really kept up with Epic to know if they are still sticking to that decision.

 

[EstrogenicMuscle]

"Bleszinkski went on to explain his stance, saying that games have gotten so big that there is just no way the next generation can survive if the used game and game rental markets keep taking a cut."
Then let them crash and burn in a glorious cleansing fire. We don't need more games like. I also don't like the Gears of War games and its stupid portrayal of guys. So good riddance.

Aren't these the same folks who only release on XBOX? Who refuse to release on the PC due to "piracy".

Yeah, just crash and burn and go away. I'm sad that people ever bought your games to begin with.

"The numbers do NOT work people."
Yeah, the numbers sure don't add up. How much money did y'all waste making meathead shooters?

How many poor souls did you hire doing the CG detail of some guy's muscles?

 

[Webb5432]

Cliffy, I get it. I do. If you want to make such big games, you need a lot of cash. You can't make a gold idol out of bronze. I get it.

But here is my question:

Why must the idol be created of solid gold? Why not bronze? Why not marble? Hell, why not wood or stone?

Are you aware that many of us are uncaring what paints the painter used if it looks good? Does it matter if the carving of wood was done with a stone hammer and chisel, and not stainless steel? If the idol is worthy of note, we do not care to fathom how it was made, but are happy for its existence.


Have your companies ever thought of making "Single-A" games? Use the resources of the AAA industry to create smaller, more focused products for specific audiences? That is what the independent scene is essentially doing. Amnesia was done on a small budget to market toward a specific audience and no one else. It wasn't even much of a looker. It was but an idol carved out of bronze with tools of stone. But the image is displayed was one of beauty for its people. That was how it succeeded. The used market would have caused some damage, yes, but I would be willing to argue that it did not do much.

And another thing: The indie scene not only has a lower budget, but a lower cost to buy as well. Such things are the spawn of unrestrained love and passion from their creators. They are games with heart and soul, and when they shown to the world, they do not ask for great demands, but comparatively small favors.


If anyone reads this, think on this metaphor. If you have yet to understand this metaphor, here is the decoded version:

"Why spend so much money on looks and features when all we want is the actual game underneath?"


P.S. Cliffy, I know it is hard to hear this, but I personally felt that GoW3 - while still pretty good - was nowhere near as good as GoW2

EDIT: Sorry, I read this later on (was tired when I initially wrote it), and I realize my grammar/spelling is terrible. Sorry. But, I will leave this as is as a reminder to myself to be more vigilant in the future. Sorry

 

[EclipseoftheDarkSun]

Yeah, fuck Cliffy B. I'm happy for bloated AAA developers to fail if they can't manage their budgets. Just like in the forest when a big tree starts rotting. Eventually it falls and its replacement can grow.

Photorealism is not a necessary prerequisite for a good game. Games like Borderlands are a good example of using an artistic style that will always look interesting, rather than dated by superior 'realistic' graphics.

 

[AyaReiko]

Nothing really left to add to this, so I'll just summarize all that needs to be said to CliffyB in about 6 seconds...

[youtube]l3o_EDYl7a4[/youtube]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3o_EDYl7a4

 

[TomWiley]

If he is right about Sony, and he certainly is more of an expert than any of us in this thread, that would be hilarious!

 

[TomWiley]

Yeah, fuck Cliffy B. I'm happy for bloated AAA developers to fail if they can't manage their budgets.

That's a bit shortsighted, isn't it? If the AAA developers go out of business, game developers will lose their jobs which is never good for the industry. There are no studios that develop only AAA titles, and in a dev house it's common for developers to work on various different projects as once, which means that the death of a money generating AAA franchise can also mean the death of a whole lot of less famous but more original IP as the people in the dev house lose their jobs.

This "let's punish the content providers" mentality doesn't really work.

 

[WouldYouKindly]

Yeah, fuck Cliffy B. I'm happy for bloated AAA developers to fail if they can't manage their budgets.

That's a bit shortsighted, isn't it? If the AAA developers go out of business, game developers will lose their jobs which is never good for the industry. There are no studios that develop only AAA titles, and in a dev house it's common for developers to work on various different projects as once, which means that the death of a money generating AAA franchise can also mean the death of a whole lot of less famous but more original IP as the people in the dev house lose their jobs.

This "let's punish the content providers" mentality doesn't really work.

Power vacuums create new and interesting things.

This is why the more interesting and innovative games are typically indie titles. AAA devs can't take a risk due to marketing budgets and the numbers required to make a profit.

And if the publisher falls apart, that IP is up for grabs and whoever picks it up would be smart to hire some of the people who were designing it. I think a major publisher collapse would spur lots of smaller studios to pick up underdeveloped games and finish them with reasonable marketing and expectations of profit.

If they want to deal with the used market, they need to embrace digital, make it easy as hell so anyone who can do it will, and adjust their pricing models according to the demand of a game. You can keep sales going pretty long if you look at your sales numbers and adjust them a little cheaper so more people buy your game. This way, people get the used game price and the company gets some money from discounted sales.

Finally, we're not punishing them, they're punishing themselves by still demanding 60 bucks for a digital release where they get a much larger chunk of the money.

 

[TomWiley]

This is why the more interesting and innovative games are typically indie titles. AAA devs can't take a risk due to marketing budgets and the numbers required to make a profit.

All developers need to make profit sooner or later, or find a job in another industry. Indie developers are more often than not just hobbyist who work part-time with some game idea they have (and know they can't expect it to sell all that well). I love indie games just as much as the next guy, but they can't replace the big budget, sequel cycles that really bring money into the industry.

Even if the publishers die out, whatever new innovative ideas might show up in their wake would only survive if they can be turned into these big franchises with sequels coming out every year, and we're back where we started. I think what we really need is for the mid-tier of games to come back. Publishers can have their Call of Duties and what have you to fall back on, but still take risks with new IPs on the side (Like EA/Dice and Mirror's Edge).

I still agree with you in that we need to see a digitization of the market and reduced prices, I'm just saying that big publishers losing money on fewer sales won't take us there.

If they want to deal with the used market, they need to embrace digital, make it easy as hell so anyone who can do it will, and adjust their pricing models according to the demand of a game.

Yes, and what's what happening on the PC market with Steam. Digital games can be cheaper if you can cut out the game stores and discs and used games. To some part, that's what Microsoft is trying to do, digitalize the market. Hopefully, that can lead to games in the future costing less as developers can distribute their games directly on the platform.

And you see what kind of reaction they have been getting. This entire internet shitstorm is a result of Microsoft's movement towards online-based distribution - After all, Xbox One is not anywhere near as restrictive as Steam, and at least you can share your games with friends. It took Valve several years of reliable digital service before players stopped hating Steam, and Microsoft needs to get there as well. If people will even give them that chance that is.

 

[ResonanceSD]

So lower the budgets of games, take more risks, give us better content, and people may want to actually pay full price for your cover-based slog through set pieces and cutscenes, you fucking idiot.

Who cares about his opinion...he's the creator of Gears of War....that automatically makes any of his opinions white noise.

Absolutely, he's got the creative range of a dead mouse.


MORE GUNS WITH SWORDS ON THEM! OK GOOD, NOW SHIP IT.

 

[EclipseoftheDarkSun]

Yeah, fuck Cliffy B. I'm happy for bloated AAA developers to fail if they can't manage their budgets.

That's a bit shortsighted, isn't it? If the AAA developers go out of business, game developers will lose their jobs which is never good for the industry. There are no studios that develop only AAA titles, and in a dev house it's common for developers to work on various different projects as once, which means that the death of a money generating AAA franchise can also mean the death of a whole lot of less famous but more original IP as the people in the dev house lose their jobs.

This "let's punish the content providers" mentality doesn't really work.

You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. Just as we shouldn't be over-supporting the car industry in Australia - if it'd fail without excessive consumer support, it's too big to exist. These developers will find new jobs. I can live without a few games if it means things are less draconian overall.

 

[TheSteeleStrap]

AAA games don't HAVE to have such high dev costs. Let's not sit here and pretend used games are to blame for 5 million sale failures.

 

[Aggieknight]

It stuns me that someone as smart as Cliffy B doesn't get that it's not about used games.

It's about game "Ownership".

M$ wants to let me license a game. Sony will sell me a game copy.

To those of us that don't sell our games or buy used ones, that's a pretty big deal. Anyone who has ever used M$ Play for Sure knows what I'm talking about.

 

[Edguy]

Sa what you want about the used games/game budgets aspect, but I think it's pretty obvious that Sony is playing us in the wake of M$ train-wreck announcements. Certainly they will introduce similar measures, when the waters have cooled and M$ have finished taking the bulk of the hate.

 

[EclipseoftheDarkSun]

That's why I'll wait till they're both out and reviewed before I pass final judgement on whether I should upgrade from my PS3..

 

[TomWiley]

Yeah, I mean we all know how much used and rental cars are dragging down the car industry.

Well, to be fair, that's not exactly a relevant comparison.

 

[TomWiley]

Yeah, fuck Cliffy B. I'm happy for bloated AAA developers to fail if they can't manage their budgets.

That's a bit shortsighted, isn't it? If the AAA developers go out of business, game developers will lose their jobs which is never good for the industry. There are no studios that develop only AAA titles, and in a dev house it's common for developers to work on various different projects as once, which means that the death of a money generating AAA franchise can also mean the death of a whole lot of less famous but more original IP as the people in the dev house lose their jobs.

This "let's punish the content providers" mentality doesn't really work.

You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. Just as we shouldn't be over-supporting the car industry in Australia - if it'd fail without excessive consumer support, it's too big to exist. These developers will find new jobs. I can live without a few games if it means things are less draconian overall.

Developers losing their jobs leads to two things: Developers taking less risks (meaning less original titles and more Call of Duties) and publishers amping up their DLC/micro-transaction programs.

 

[Bix96]

Yeah, I mean we all know how much used and rental cars are dragging down the car industry.

Well, to be fair, that's not exactly a relevant comparison.

Why not? every other industry has to deal with people buying things used and I don't see say the movie industry saying it costs to much to make a movie and all those used copies floating around are killing them.

 

[MarsProbe]

Yeah, I mean we all know how much used and rental cars are dragging down the car industry.

Well, to be fair, that's not exactly a relevant comparison.

Why not? every other industry has to deal with people buying things used and I don't see say the movie industry saying it costs to much to make a movie and all those used copies floating around are killing them.

Well, you could always try and explain the similarities of renting a game and renting a car (besides, you know, them both being rentals). Also, I'd like to know what a used copy of a trip to the cinema looks like...

Oh, and one other thing: Dude Huge? What dark hole did that climb out of? Either I've missed something, or has CliffyB just adopted that name recently? Either way, it's ridiculous.

 

[Sledgimus]

Well, you could always try and explain the similarities of renting a game and renting a car (besides, you know, them both being rentals).

Someone renting a game isn't buying it. Someone renting a car isn't buying it. In both cases, the original producer of the item has sold it to someone else who is making money by renting it to a third party. Can you perhaps now explain why this isn't a relevant comparison?

Also, I'd like to know what a used copy of a trip to the cinema looks like...

I take it you're unfamiliar with DVDs and the second hand market for them?