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

[Triality]

Gee, with all these crippling triple-A budgeted games trending the industry towards the drain, us poor consumers will be forced to buy more Triple-B or C games such as XCOM, Mark of the Ninja, The Swapper, Lone Survivor, Amnesia, or Thomas Was Alone!

What ever shall we do with these poor choices?!

 

[Boggelz]

I generally don't mind Cliff but he seriously needs to consider what he says before he says it sometimes. Perhaps if devs quit putting all their eggs into one basket it won't have to nickel and dime us. Seriously, Jim Sterling makes a great point. Don't put high budgets into games that aren't a guaranteed sell.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

Does this guy just like being contrary to what people are thinking?

I mean, he says SOME reasonable things at times. But the stupid shit he says just makes him look like an egotistical nutjob.

"Assassins Creed games are made by thousands of devs."

And they're still shit Cliff.

"The visual fidelity and feature sets we expect from games now come with sky high costs,"

Uhh. Cliff didn't you say that Microsoft and Sony should open up their consoles to users and independent game makers? [http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-02-25-industry-turmoil-worst-since-80s-crash-says-bleszinski] The indie developers who DONT REQUIRE large costs? Oh you know what, nevermind, you said this also:

"It is up to Epic, and [Epic CEO] Tim Sweeney in particular, to motivate Sony and Microsoft not to phone in what these next consoles are going to be. It needs to be a quantum leap. They need to damn near render Avatar in real time, because I want it and gamers want it-even if they don't know they want it."

 

[seditary]

I think CliffyB would fail at Game Dev Tycoon.

 

[Snotnarok]

And most of these statements are counterable.
Use games and rentals eat up sales. Well if games came out priced vs 60 dollars every time then maybe people would be willing to buy the games new.
When pubs kick out unfinished games at 60 dollars to take advantage of the ignorant is THAT good business practice? Quick cash in games with no replay value, length and half assed effort 60 bucks.

Want your game to sell better? Offer nicer incentives instead of removing them, like online passes, eco-boxes that damage games, removing manuals.

 

[Seracen]

Honestly, he should just go work for EA, I think he'd be a perfect fit.

Out of control budgets are never to blame for a game's shortcomings, perish the thought...

Online passes are online passes, but they are a damn sight better than a complete lockout of used games altogether.

$60 price points aren't viable anymore? Fine, make the games cheaper. Feel free to charge me for DLC, but I'll be damned if I let Capcom and EA charge me full price for a game and then charge another 10-20 bucks for held back content.

Just don't spend as much money on stupid Superbowl adds that aren't necessary to sell your game. Audience amounts aren't going to change noticeably anyway, not with such unfocused, bloated strategies.

Everytime this jackass opens his mouth, I wish Jim Sterling had never apologized. I'm willing to bet the apology was never even acknowledged by this bro-dude.

Hey man, remember a few years ago when you couldn't afford that Ferrari? What would that version of you say about you today?

 

[frizzlebyte]

I know he's worked in the games industry a long time an all, but he's still managed to some how NOT know what the fuck he's talking about.

it's admirable in a way, and sad in another.

the only reason costs are so high is because of one thing they have control over, marketing, pretty much every one save a few devs have let it get so out of had we hear things like 'Dead Space needs to sell 5 million to stay viable' and this asshole is part of that problem.

If they didn't spends millions upon millions more then they needed to on marketing, for games most people have already made up there minds on no less, no one would even care about 'the evils of used games'

Actually, I don't find it admirable at all, just sad.

It's not just marketing that makes it overly expensive. Among other things, it's the idea that you need "top-tier" graphics in order to make a successful game. If a game were kick-ass in the first place, it wouldn't matter if each character had physics calculations determining where each bloody *strand* of hair should fall on their shoulders when they walk or fire a gun.

I knew I was forgetting something when I hammered that out, so thanks for the correction.

Not sure if sarcasm? Sorry if my post seemed hostile. I wasn't intending to be.

At any rate, I agree with your marketing argument as well. After all, if the overall budget were lower, it would be a lot easier to sustain the games industry. But we have so many publishers thinking that "more money spent = more profits gained, as long as every freaking game moves 5 million units," which is a completely broken idea, that we are seeing a painful learning period for the industry as a whole, I think. Ultimately, it may be the indies who benefit the most from it though, because they can tailor the requirements to a bunch of different PC systems, and nobody thinks indies have to go balls out on graphics to make a good game.

It's the same argument in a lot of ways to the one I hear that says we can't have truly meaningful, truly engrossing game narratives until we have something akin to the holodeck. What they don't get is that quality and immersion is not really dependent on superficial things. Sadly, those superficial things have been driving the games industry nigh-on forever, and we are hitting a point that it's going to kill the industry (or eat up consumer rights, a la Xbox One) if something isn't done.

 

[Frezzato]

snip

Unfortunately, Mr. Bleszinski seems to have bought into the mainstream gaming industry's primary equation: (budget x hype) = sales. There's no room in there for understanding how customers think, no comprehension of stories like yours; in their minds, even if gamers buy and hate GenMilShoEMU (Generic Military Shoot-Em-Up) 2, if GenMilShoEMU 3 comes in a slick-enough package with enough whiz-bang commercials and Mountain Dew / Doritos contests, those gamers will buy it anyway. And they believe that, without the ability to buy the game used or rent / borrow it, those same gamers will buy it on release day for full price.

These beliefs are wholly divorced from reality- sorry, Cliffy, but if I think your $60 is only worth $20, I'll either wait until it goes on sale or just not buy it at all- and another sign that the mainstream gaming industry is bound and determined to dig its own grave.

The thing that blows my mind is that, arguably, if all games cost the same price all the time (say $60), then people would buy less games, and nobody seems to understand that. Less games equals less variety, less involvement with a franchise, less investment of time and familiarity/trust of a developer.

Heh, I just remembered that I bought DiRT used, which led to me buying DiRT 2 & 3 new.
And F.E.A.R. used led me to buy F.E.A.R. files and F.E.A.R. 2 & 3, all new.

At the end of the day, it's just sad and pathetic how tech companies with the brightest, most talented minds JUST DON'T GET US.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Nintendo's stance on used games: make games that are so good that people will want to keep them forever.

It's just that simple. That or try not to spend so much money making a game where fishes move out of the way when you swing close to them, or dogs look so realistic you want to pet them. It's nice, but making something pretty isn't enough to keep people interested. A good story, multiple endings, various paths and choice, etc. Of course there's always making games cheaper so people don't sell them to buy a new one each time.

The problem is that making good games is HARD. There are no tricks when it comes to level design or game design unlike with presentation. There is no other way to do that other than sheer WORK. Furthermore, too many studios are obsessed with showing of their beloved tech porn projects and thus it bloats budgets. Take that away and you'll get a bunch of self-involved auteurs throwing tantrums because apparently they forget that limits are needed.

 

[lacktheknack]

But here's the thing, Cliff.

Game production quality is plateauing. It's just what happens when things get more advanced.

It's not worth pushing forward into new graphic and presentation tech at this point. It would be better for everyone - customers AND developers - to start focusing on cost reduction. You know, getting things to work faster on current hardware.

You know full well, my dear Cliffy, that gaming is going in an unsustainable direction... you said so yourself.

 

[Frezzato]

Honestly, this is the primary reason I buy used. And oddly enough, I don't buy used in competition with new titles. That is to say, if I'm buying a game used, it's probably not a new title to begin with (and might not even still be on shelves in the new section).

And further agreement: do you know what I don't buy? Gears of War games. Why don't I buy them? Used games? No. Rentals? No, though the fact that you can beat them in a rental period is probably why Cliff hates rentals. No, the reason I don't buy them is they're BORING, borderline unenjoyable experiences. I had fun with the first, but...Four games? No. Just...No.

Actually, he's probably lucky people remember him for Gears and UT, because when he steps off the tried and true....Yeah. Not pretty.

It's amazing just how little these companies understand the people they're selling their products to. Sometimes it seems that the business majors are calling the shots in terms of game play--and the game developers are pretending to be finance majors.

Meant no offense about Gears by the way. Six million customers for Gears 1 is pretty impressive.

 

[UberNoodle]

I'm sorry, I just don't understand why the video game industry thinks it should have some special exemption from used sales. When I buy a used car does the original manufacturer get a cut? When I sell an old tv to a friend does samsung get a cut? Besides, I fail to see why we are responsible for the budgets and costs of any game.

Do yourself a favor, dont ever use that argument again, you will just end up looking foolish.

Your average modern TV has a lifespan measured in maybe single digit years, and your car requires gas, parts, ect and will eventually just fall apart on you, a game will work forever if you have even two braincells to rub together when it comes to handling the things.

As for the OT: Used games are the same as piracy. They are a big bad boogy man but in reality they effect very little.

You should lead with your reasoning rather than your obnoxiousness.

The average game also has a lifespan in the single digit years. When the next consoles come out and that game is long out of print, second hand is the ONLY means to obtain it. The hardware which plays it is defunct. whether a person plays that game every day or once a year is irrelevant. People drive cars daily, watch films over and over, listen to CDs again and again and read books multiple times. The number of times you use a product and for how long is irrelevant to the issue at hand. If games are to be a subscription service, then make them so, or make REASONABLE aspects of game use that model.

As for the car requiring gas and spare parts: gas sales are certainly not providing income to the car manufacturer. Neither are the spare parts half the time, especially as a significant number of people purchase used and reconditioned parts. Either way, a great many parts are universal across all makes of car and aren't necessarily manufactured by those companies.

And games are NOT the same as piracy. That is a poor equivalency for obvious reasons that at least one sale to the manufacturer was made. Subsequent reselling and trades are also generally via stores and shop fronts online. Thus legal income is being made by various parties involved, which is only made to appear criminal because of the industry's huge non sequitur.

 

[suntt123]

"The visual fidelity and feature sets we expect from games now come with sky high costs,"

1- Don't care about visual fidelity
2- WHO'S FAULT IS THAT???

Who is this obviously insane person, and why should I care what he thinks?
Why is it that Nintendo never seems to be bothered by this stuff?

 

[UberNoodle]

And games are NOT the same as piracy. That is a poor equivalency for obvious reasons that at least one sale to the manufacturer was made. Subsequent reselling and trades are also generally via stores and shop fronts online.

Used games are EXACTLY the same as piracy. Atleast from the viewpoint of a publisher, one copy gets sold, and passed around X times in both cases.

You've missed the point. It's only 'exactly like piracy' because of a fallacious equivalency between the two which serves to toe the current corporate line. Besides, you've failed to take into account that the second hand market relies on physical product which cannot multiply exponentially. Each product sold as second hand is also legit and eligible for official support from the manufacturer. A second hand sale is a transfer of license from one party to the next. Thus the number of users remains at a 1:1 ratio. So no, these two things are NOT 'exactly alike'. Even as the publishers recognise the similarities between the two, they know that they are both worlds apart. Unless you'd like to argue that second hand sales of other product is also 'exactly the same' as piracy and counterfeiting?

 

[gamegod25]

He is right...that the current "AAA" business model is not sustainable as it is. However that is their fault for spending more than they can realistically make back, charging more for less content, charging consumers for content they already paid for, and gating off content behind online passes. Make a game people will want to buy day one and keep forever...boom...problem solved.

Pardon me if I don't shed a tear for you Cliffy with all your money you've made "despite" a healthy used/rental market out there. Not all of us have millions of dollars to spend on every game out there like you do.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

Minecraft
FTL
Orcs Must Die 1 and 2
Audiosurf
Bastion
Torchlight
Limbo
Super Meat Boy
Braid

I can keep going, Cliffy. You know, listing indie games that had maybe no more than 30 people tops working on them (if anywhere near that many) that sold hundreds of thousands if not MILLIONS of units. All due to strength of game play and word of mouth over how fantastic these games were.

Then tell me why we need the huge budgets and whatever. It will be an enlightening conversation.

 

[gamegod25]

Does this guy just like being contrary to what people are thinking?

I mean, he says SOME reasonable things at times. But the stupid shit he says just makes him look like an egotistical nutjob.

"Assassins Creed games are made by thousands of devs."

And they're still shit Cliff.

"The visual fidelity and feature sets we expect from games now come with sky high costs,"

Uhh. Cliff didn't you say that Microsoft and Sony should open up their consoles to users and independent game makers? [http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-02-25-industry-turmoil-worst-since-80s-crash-says-bleszinski] The indie developers who DONT REQUIRE large costs? Oh you know what, nevermind, you said this also:

"It is up to Epic, and [Epic CEO] Tim Sweeney in particular, to motivate Sony and Microsoft not to phone in what these next consoles are going to be. It needs to be a quantum leap. They need to damn near render Avatar in real time, because I want it and gamers want it-even if they don't know they want it."

Because as we all know graphics are the most important thing above story and actual gameplay. No we need those brown and grey chest-high-walls to be photo realistic!

 

[Lunar Templar]

I know he's worked in the games industry a long time an all, but he's still managed to some how NOT know what the fuck he's talking about.

it's admirable in a way, and sad in another.

the only reason costs are so high is because of one thing they have control over, marketing, pretty much every one save a few devs have let it get so out of had we hear things like 'Dead Space needs to sell 5 million to stay viable' and this asshole is part of that problem.

If they didn't spends millions upon millions more then they needed to on marketing, for games most people have already made up there minds on no less, no one would even care about 'the evils of used games'

Actually, I don't find it admirable at all, just sad.

It's not just marketing that makes it overly expensive. Among other things, it's the idea that you need "top-tier" graphics in order to make a successful game. If a game were kick-ass in the first place, it wouldn't matter if each character had physics calculations determining where each bloody *strand* of hair should fall on their shoulders when they walk or fire a gun.

I knew I was forgetting something when I hammered that out, so thanks for the correction.

Not sure if sarcasm? Sorry if my post seemed hostile. I wasn't intending to be.

At any rate, I agree with your marketing argument as well. After all, if the overall budget were lower, it would be a lot easier to sustain the games industry. But we have so many publishers thinking that "more money spent = more profits gained, as long as every freaking game moves 5 million units," which is a completely broken idea, that we are seeing a painful learning period for the industry as a whole, I think. Ultimately, it may be the indies who benefit the most from it though, because they can tailor the requirements to a bunch of different PC systems, and nobody thinks indies have to go balls out on graphics to make a good game.

It's the same argument in a lot of ways to the one I hear that says we can't have truly meaningful, truly engrossing game narratives until we have something akin to the holodeck. What they don't get is that quality and immersion is not really dependent on superficial things. Sadly, those superficial things have been driving the games industry nigh-on forever, and we are hitting a point that it's going to kill the industry (or eat up consumer rights, a la Xbox One) if something isn't done.

wasn't sarcasm, and i took as one would take a factual correction, I really did forget about the graphics thing (cause T tend to not play games with super high end stuff cause it waste money better spent on other things)

I love the 'we can't have meaning full experiences in games till we have X-level of graphics' it makes me giggle from just how totally wrong they are. Dust; An Elysian Tale, made me cry, twice, and it, well looks like this [http://www.vgnetwork.it/images/Dust_An_Elysian_Tail/dust-an-elysian-tail-02.jpg], not exactly 'cutting edge graphics is it? And yet I care enough about the characters and world to shed tears at a couple points.

they want games to be en grossing and meaningful? Learn2write, simple as that.

 

[UberNoodle]

He is right...that the current "AAA" business model is not sustainable as it is. However that is their fault for spending more than they can realistically make back, charging more for less content, charging consumers for content they already paid for, and gating off content behind online passes. Make a game people will want to buy day one and keep forever...boom...problem solved.

Pardon me if I don't shed a tear for you Cliffy with all your money you've made "despite" a healthy used/rental market out there. Not all of us have millions of dollars to spend on every game out there like you do.

Yes, the problem as Cliffy B and others describe it is entirely circular.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

Dude....

I see your lips moving but all I hear is:
"PONCEPONCEPONCEPONCEPONCE"

Ugh never liked this dude.

Yeah. When I saw the headline I thought, "And I should care about CliffyB's opinion...why?"

He was a part of some key things in this generation, but that doesn't mean he suddenly knows everything about how the industry does and should work.

Here's my thought, CliffyB: movies and books have had second-hand markets and rental markets for decades, not to mention that you can borrow loads of books and DVDs from the library for free. A second-hand market is an inevitable part of a capitalistic society, unless you start placing sever restrictions on consumer rights and freedoms, and those things are the greatest things about capitalism.

If the industry can't handle the existence of a second-hand market, then the industry needs to adapt around it, rather than trying to undermine it.