Editor's Note: State of the Industry

[sleeky01]

Wow. That's.... quite bad indeed, i guess. Also, I had some minor problems understanding if parts of the text were written sarcastically, or just angrily...but then again, English isn't my base language, so i might have just misinterpreted it.
"Developers are now being forced into contracts stating they will not get paid if their "meta-average" does not hit a certain percentage point."
Aw, come on. This cannot be right. Or was this a joke? Cause if this is true, it's just plain retarded. And really depressing.

Well from what I understand of the industry I could believe it. I've not seen specific examples, but I could believe it.

You said English is not your base language so you might have trouble in this video I'm going to link, but Adam Sessler gave a brief little speech at GDC 09 on what Metacritic was up to then.

 

[Sunder845]

EDIT: Post fail.

 

[Sunder845]

Satire is usually angry. Very few satirists are pleased with the things they are satirising.

I suppose it would be more clear to say; "I cant tell if this is a sattirical angry rant or an actual angry rant." But I feel most people got my meaning.

 

[Bostur]

For every dollar it takes to make a book or album it probably takes 100 for a game. Are you that deluded that you think one guy creating a book is the exact same as an entire company making a game?

One guy making a book needs to get lucky to sell a few thousand copies, and the cost of printing them are greater. And even the price is much lower than that of a game.
If game companies can't make a profit, maybe they should consider lowering their production costs a bit.

You're going to tell me that creating a million copies of a game and shipping them world wide is going to be cheaper than 10,000 copies of a book and transporting it in one country?

10,000 copies of a book x $20 = $200,000
1,000,000 copies of a game x $60 = $60,000,000

You do the rest of the math. In practice one book is more expensive to copy and distribute than one game.

Both of those sale numbers are probably very optimistic, but they were some you made up ;-)

 

[manythings]

For every dollar it takes to make a book or album it probably takes 100 for a game. Are you that deluded that you think one guy creating a book is the exact same as an entire company making a game?

One guy making a book needs to get lucky to sell a few thousand copies, and the cost of printing them are greater. And even the price is much lower than that of a game.
If game companies can't make a profit, maybe they should consider lowering their production costs a bit.

You're going to tell me that creating a million copies of a game and shipping them world wide is going to be cheaper than 10,000 copies of a book and transporting it in one country?

10,000 copies of a book x $20 = $200,000
1,000,000 copies of a game x $60 = $60,000,000

You do the rest of the math. In practice one book is more expensive to copy and distribute than one game.

Both of those sale numbers are probably very optimistic, but they were some you made up ;-)

Are all the books selling for $20? The games aren't. The retailers buy games for $25-$30 a pop. Suddenly your sixty million is half consumed by retail. Transport? Storage? Damaged copies that are returned? Refunds that aren't exchanges? Lost shipments? Stolen? Destroyed in transit? All those things together could easily turn that thirty million into twenty million or less. How does the game sell? Is it anywhere close to a million copies? How much is it panned by critics? How many people on the fence see that meta-crtic score and say Doesn't sound great" because of that one asshole who had an asshole reason to hate the game? Suddenly you've sold a hundred thousand copies and the game cost fifteen million to make. Congrats, you're in debt.

Maybe people could get over this belief that making games is free and the money from sales is pure profit.

 

[PrinceofPersia]

I'll say what I said back when Jim wrote an article like this: the industry can suck it. If the only way the video game industry survives is by my paying hundreds of dollars a month buying crap I don't like and never expected to like, then the industry can crash and burn for all I care.

In all likelihood it would herald a new golden age of independent developers and a whole new reason to spend more money on good, interesting and innovative games (with lower graphical standards, sure, but probably more fun).

There is just one problem with your plan: Numbers. Your one individual who will no longer consume these items. There are however legions of other consumers behind you that are willing and able to pay money for this luxury. So lossing one customer isn't even a slap on the wrist. Only numbers, or events, large enough to effect these companies bottom line will get them to change or disappear.

As for the article itself well played sir, well played.

 

[Bostur]

Are all the books selling for $20? The games aren't. The retailers buy games for $25-$30 a pop. Suddenly your sixty million is half consumed by retail. Transport? Storage? Damaged copies that are returned? Refunds that aren't exchanges? Lost shipments? Stolen? Destroyed in transit? All those things together could easily turn that thirty million into twenty million or less. How does the game sell? Is it anywhere close to a million copies? How much is it panned by critics? How many people on the fence see that meta-crtic score and say Doesn't sound great" because of that one asshole who had an asshole reason to hate the game? Suddenly you've sold a hundred thousand copies and the game cost fifteen million to make. Congrats, you're in debt.

Most of the above happen to books as well you know.

Trolling aside, I'm pretty sure it's not the distribution costs that breaks the budget. But of course a high budget game with low sales will.

So as I said, maybe they should cut the expenses a bit so they don't need to sell millions.

 

[manythings]

Are all the books selling for $20? The games aren't. The retailers buy games for $25-$30 a pop. Suddenly your sixty million is half consumed by retail. Transport? Storage? Damaged copies that are returned? Refunds that aren't exchanges? Lost shipments? Stolen? Destroyed in transit? All those things together could easily turn that thirty million into twenty million or less. How does the game sell? Is it anywhere close to a million copies? How much is it panned by critics? How many people on the fence see that meta-crtic score and say Doesn't sound great" because of that one asshole who had an asshole reason to hate the game? Suddenly you've sold a hundred thousand copies and the game cost fifteen million to make. Congrats, you're in debt.

Most of the above happen to books as well you know.

Trolling aside, I'm pretty sure it's not the distribution costs that breaks the budget. But of course a high budget game with low sales will.

So as I said, maybe they should cut the expenses a bit so they don't need to sell millions.

How many people will go back to the PS2 generation of graphics on a PC or console? I think a lot of people would vomit with rage at the sight of graphics consistent with the early part of the current generation and not buy a game like that on principle.

 

[BodomBeachChild]

When I read the first word I knew this article was gonna be spot on. I agreed with pretty much all of this. When my game list consist of nothing buy sequels to sequels I bought last year you know something is wrong.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Well, I've been saying that the industry has been moving towards a crash for quite a while now.
It hasn't happened yet, and I doubt a crash will be particularly visible even if it does happen (a bomb goes off in a forest, but nobody immediately sees it for all the trees still in the way; why yes, I do have a license to torture metaphors) until it's too late.

But hey, I voted with my wallet for what I did or did not want. I didn't fill the developer's inbox with my petty demands nor the Publisher's with my fury because I understood that it was a business as much as a hobby.

 

[108Stitches]

It wouldn't be the first time the industry crashed either. There was a serious lull in gaming between the good ol' Atari days and the appearance of the NES / Sega Master system. Even those systems didn't really kick the industry back into a higher gear, and you were still able to see quite the diversity in games.

It will be interesting to see how long the downturn is IF there is a next time. The problem as I see it is you are well into your second generation of gamers. I grew up a gamer, my son has grown up a gamer and he's entering college. There's a certain bit of "entitlement" that I think those second generation of gamers feel due them. It can only get worse when they start having kids....

Guess I am the old gamer sitting on the porch talking about how good things were "back in the day" and yelling at all the punks to get off my lawn!

 

[Stammer]

So the industry is allegedly "fucked", and you've given us a lot of reasons for why it is so. But "fucked" how? How could the industry really be all that much better?

If people would just step back and realize that every medium is perpetually stagnant (assuming that's the problem we're referring to here) in the same way that gaming is, then you can also realize that we have nothing to complain about.

Think of it this way: If every game was as intriguing and well-made as Portal, the industry would still be stagnant. But it would be mediocre at that level of quality. Even for the kings of mediocrity like Call of Duty, if we looked at them 10 years ago we'd think they were the greatest games ever. With every generation and sub-generation of games, we get a little bit better. It just so happens that some games shoot up ahead a few years to what we'd consider mediocre then.

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

Eh? What? What happened?

*confused*

Was there a point to this editorial? Can someone tell me what it was?

 

[Sartan0]

Hey, don't worry! Games are still beating out books and magazines as entertainment!

Oh wait, I still read books. (Old School)

 

[Manji187]

Gaming industry crash 2.0 .... coming soon huh?

 

[incal11]

A lot of words have died defending the position that videogame making is an art form through which god-like developers share transcendent experiences, yet the degree to which that may be true is eclipsed by the fact that, first and foremost videogames are entertainment and, as such, serve at your pleasure.

In principle all art with a big A is for entertainment anyway, I don't know why it's such a big problem that video games happen to be interactive...
Just a though, don't know how serious you were when you wrote this

 

[grigjd3]

Anyone who is willing to blast his or her source of income either has very huge sack or is missing a large part of their head. Is it safe to assume both in this case?

 

[Ruptuk]

I don't think the games industry is going to crash, I certainly hope not or I am out of a job. The industry is however fucked for much deeper reasons than these.

To make a block buster game it takes many years, so if you want something to happen you are just going to have to wait.

Oh, and support the industry by buying new where ever possible

 

[hem dazon 90]

It'd be interesting to compare this to the state of movies today. How are game companies any worse off than movie studios? Don't they have to deal with most of these same demands?

Depends on the industry really.

I think games are in between Bollywood's exponential growth and innovation and Hollywood's Stagnation and failure.

 

[Tim Latshaw]

I'm optimistic: I like to think that there is so much going wrong in so many different areas of the gaming industry that you can't just pinpoint one problem as a major influence. And maybe, if we're lucky, everything will somehow manage to support itself on a mishmash of rubble cemented by bullcrap.