Jimquisition: How Skyrim Proves The Industry Wrong

[shadowstriker86]

roflcoptor @ the ending

 

[Zeekar]

Sorry for the lack of content, but "IN YOUR FACE GAME INDUSTRY! OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH-"

That'll be all *continues playing Skyrim*.

 

[irishda]

"You can kill dragons galore."

Why is that a selling point for a 2011 fantasy game? Congratulations Elder Scrolls, you finally included something every other fantasy RPG game has had since the beginning of video games.

 

[tmande2nd]

Its not going to change anything.

Probably some people who tried Skyrim then were pissed that there was no rails guiding them or something.

 

[Darkmantle]

He misspoke. Instead of "if you want people to buy a game, just make a good game", I believe what he should have said was "if you want people to buy a game, start a long-running series that slowly grows a dedicated fan base by having each successive title becoming larger and utilizing more marketing, until the series has such a large fan base it can't possibly fail". Goddamn, Skyrim is not some mystical dark horse that exploded onto the scene and surprised everyone. It didn't "beat the market without being the market" because IT ALREADY WAS A PORTION OF THE MARKET. Games with multiplayer or shooter games like CoD and BF3 command a large portion of the video game market because they appeal to people who don't like locking themselves away on a game for 50+ hours. The audience for these games is so wide because it appeals to a wider base. But it will never be THE market because there'll always be the RPGers, the RTSers, and everything in between that'll clamor for more specialized games.

Look at the sales figures for it's predecessor. Oblivion took around six months to sell 3 million copies, but it didn't release a PS3 version until a year later. It's hard to tell what those figures would look like had a PS3 version been released at the same time, but a comparable equation is not what we're looking for. We looking at the fact that at least 3 million people played essentially the same game. If we assume that a great majority of those 3 million were such fans that they decided they were going to buy Skyrim when that came out, (remember we're not even counting the number of people that picked up the game in the last three other years between the two games or the PS3 customers that were included in 2007), then the fact that the game sold that many in the opening days isn't so remarkable.

TL;DR: Resounding sales figures for Skyrim is just the slow culmination of almost a decade of a growing fan base. This is not a new or original game that spat in the face of industry standards. In fact, congratulations RPGers, you've essentially become the CoD fanboys you despise so much, since this game is pretty much the RPG version of Modern Warfare 2.

May I direct you to minecraft? a "mystical dark horse that exploded onto the scene and surprised everyone". Like it or not, minecraft is a runaways success, is not part of a franchise did not have steller marketing or big budget. sooo..... the point stands?

 

[irishda]

TL;DR: Resounding sales figures for Skyrim is just the slow culmination of almost a decade of a growing fan base. This is not a new or original game that spat in the face of industry standards. In fact, congratulations RPGers, you've essentially become the CoD fanboys you despise so much, since this game is pretty much the RPG version of Modern Warfare 2.

May I direct you to minecraft? a "mystical dark horse that exploded onto the scene and surprised everyone". Like it or not, minecraft is a runaways success, is not part of a franchise did not have steller marketing or big budget. sooo..... the point stands?

Minecraft is an exception, not a rule. May I direct you to Psychonauts, Okami, Eternal Darkness, No More Heroes, Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood, more than half of the games on XLBA and the PS Store, etc.? Occasionally, awesome games with no marketing, budget, or established fan base break through and become popular like minecraft. But more often than not, they simply whither on the shelves, and just prove game publishers right about which games they should invest in. Skyrim is a part of the problem, not a solution like minecraft at all. Besides, Jim's point was that Skyrim was a dark horse that spat in the face of convention, so no, the point still doesn't stand.

 

[Durgiun]

As much as I love Jim Sterling, I gotta say he looked like a complete ass at the end.

 

[Darkmantle]

TL;DR: Resounding sales figures for Skyrim is just the slow culmination of almost a decade of a growing fan base. This is not a new or original game that spat in the face of industry standards. In fact, congratulations RPGers, you've essentially become the CoD fanboys you despise so much, since this game is pretty much the RPG version of Modern Warfare 2.

May I direct you to minecraft? a "mystical dark horse that exploded onto the scene and surprised everyone". Like it or not, minecraft is a runaways success, is not part of a franchise did not have steller marketing or big budget. sooo..... the point stands?

Minecraft is an exception, not a rule. May I direct you to Psychonauts, Okami, Eternal Darkness, No More Heroes, Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood, more than half of the games on XLBA and the PS Store, etc.? Occasionally, awesome games with no marketing, budget, or established fan base break through and become popular like minecraft. But more often than not, they simply whither on the shelves, and just prove game publishers right about which games they should invest in. Skyrim is a part of the problem, not a solution like minecraft at all. Besides, Jim's point was that Skyrim was a dark horse that spat in the face of convention, so no, the point still doesn't stand.

I would say the problem is a marketing problem. Minecraft is not surprising because it's a single player game, It's surprising because it was never marketed and still successful. Furthermore, the lack of marketing for those games may be as a direct result of this silly mentality. Publishers may not be willing to put their marketing power behind a game with no multiplayer because "only multiplayer can succeed" I don't remember seeing a single trailer for the games you listed (exception to bound in blood, but I only saw it once, then I bought the game). Skyrim had all kinds of marketing that attracted a slew of new customers, minecraft only got popular through fan marketing.

I say you should be supporting Jim in this, maybe the industry will be willing to actually MARKET the games instead of leaving them in the cold. Seems to me like the games you mentioned were expected to fail and were not given a fair shake because they committed the sin of "single player".

 

[irishda]

TL;DR: Resounding sales figures for Skyrim is just the slow culmination of almost a decade of a growing fan base. This is not a new or original game that spat in the face of industry standards. In fact, congratulations RPGers, you've essentially become the CoD fanboys you despise so much, since this game is pretty much the RPG version of Modern Warfare 2.

May I direct you to minecraft? a "mystical dark horse that exploded onto the scene and surprised everyone". Like it or not, minecraft is a runaways success, is not part of a franchise did not have steller marketing or big budget. sooo..... the point stands?

Minecraft is an exception, not a rule. May I direct you to Psychonauts, Okami, Eternal Darkness, No More Heroes, Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood, more than half of the games on XLBA and the PS Store, etc.? Occasionally, awesome games with no marketing, budget, or established fan base break through and become popular like minecraft. But more often than not, they simply whither on the shelves, and just prove game publishers right about which games they should invest in. Skyrim is a part of the problem, not a solution like minecraft at all. Besides, Jim's point was that Skyrim was a dark horse that spat in the face of convention, so no, the point still doesn't stand.

I would say the problem is a marketing problem. Minecraft is not surprising because it's a single player game, It's surprising because it was never marketed and still successful. Furthermore, the lack of marketing for those games may be as a direct result of this silly mentality. Publishers may not be willing to put their marketing power behind a game with no multiplayer because "only multiplayer can succeed" I don't remember seeing a single trailer for the games you listed (exception to bound in blood, but I only saw it once, then I bought the game). Skyrim had all kinds of marketing that attracted a slew of new customers, minecraft only got popular through fan marketing.

I say you should be supporting Jim in this, maybe the industry will be willing to actually MARKET the games instead of leaving them in the cold. Seems to me like the games you mentioned were expected to fail and were not given a fair shake because they committed the sin of "single player".

Except Skyrim also didn't succeed "despite not having multiplayer", just like Minecraft isn't a surprise because it's solely single player (even though I think it does have a same server, multiple people mode). No other Bethesda RPG uses multiplayer, but that's not solely the work of Bethesda. Bioware never utilized multiplayer for their RPGs. Ubisoft didn't use multiplayer for a lot of their action adventure titles. Most rpgs don't have a multiplayer mode that isn't a sort of co-op (with the exception of Dark Souls and Demon Souls, but they integrated their multiplayer as part of the story). The industry standard that games need multiplayer was never true for many different genres. It really only applied to shooters. If Bethesda, or any company really, makes a great shooter that utilizes purely single player, that'll be a cause for celebration.

 

[G-Force]

But there are loads of great games released this year that haven't had online connection, but because they weren't THIS property, an Elder Scrolls game, then they didn't sell as well, despite being very popular things in their own right. Arkham City and DX:HR spring happily to my mind. Where was the fucking jubilation then?

Sheep.

- Arkham City relied on online pass activations to access the Catwoman missions in order to drive up new sale copies.
- DX:HR was also praised by Jim as he made an entire episode saying that because he was so addicted to the game that he would be back in a week to do a proper one. It's just when DX:HR was released the whole issue of online activations, passes and disc locked content was not a huge issue in his eyes. However he gave that game glowing reviews.

I hate his video.

It has the gal to say this 1 game proves the entire system wrong, yet barely mentions the others that have done the exact same damn thing in the last 2-3 years. It also bases it's entire argument on saying that because 1 example of a video game does what isn't generally though of as successful content yet manages to be successful, it therefore proves the entire industry wrong. To use an analogy, it's like saying all turkeys are poisonous to humans if all we have to go on that statement is 1 damn turkey killing someone by somehow containing poison. that just doesn't work. It certainly shows evidence, but not sufficient to make such a blanket claim.

Also, if I somehow missed the point of this video, someone can enlighten me if they feel like it.

The point of the video was how companies were looking toward the online aspect of gaming to appeal to the current buying habits of gamers to the point where they shoehorn multiplayer into titles that don't need them. Bioshock was a great single player FPS known for its storytelling and atmosphere and it was a shame to see them tack on a rather mediocre multilayer mode as it felt like they weren't secure about their single player campaign. Batman and Saints Row the Third fell into this trap as well as while they withheld on disc content (Catwoman missions/online modes) and were only available if you bought a brand new copy. Saints Row takes it a step further with their announcement of 3 DLC mission packs right after the game was launched as if to imply that they need to promise more content in the future in order to entice players to get their game right now.

In comes Skyrim, a MASSIVE single player game with near infinite repeatability that does NOT force its players to jump through hoops in order to access content locked away in the disc. Nor did it feel to add a multiplayer mode in order to encourage more players to buy it. Instead they focused on giving their paying customers (new or used) the FULL game experience. By industry standards this would be suicide but when it sold over millions of copies it just goes to show that treating gamers with respect and making great content will win over their wallets as well.

 

[bushwhacker2k]

I've been ragging on Jimquisition before but I actually find myself agreeing most heartily in this video. He makes his point clear and states evidence that backs it up. Good work.

Nicely said about copying other games, individuality and originality beats copying something that did well.

I actually hesitate to say the entire industry has been claiming things, but on the other hand... they really are. Many of the biggest companies are shameless, promoting DRM and DLC and multiplayer and carbon-copy games over innovation and creativity. Thankfully, companies like Bethesda are around to give us something good when we need it.

 

[The Random One]

This video suprised me because of two things,

1. Jim Sterling is actually right, and made his point without an ironic twist, and
2. Jim Sterling can still go FUS ROH DAH! after nearly getting an hernia from it in podtoid 176. Dragonborn, he is not.

 

[bushwhacker2k]

Nicely said about copying other games, individuality and originality beats copying something that did well.

You know Skyrim is basically an amalgamation of Oblivion with some of Fallouts most liked elements right? There is literally nothing original in Skyrim. It's a great game to be sure, but original it ain't.

It certainly has elements of Bethesda's older games, but it's definitely different enough that it can be called a completely different game. That's something that Bethesda does in every Elder Scrolls game, it takes elements of the older games but changes enough that it can't be called a copy or unoriginal. I guess what I'm saying is that if what you're saying is to be held true then pretty much no games are original... so Skyrim is original. It DOES take elements of the other games, but it's a different game.

 

[greyseven]

So, so true.

 

[xDarc]

TL;DR: Resounding sales figures for Skyrim is just the slow culmination of almost a decade of a growing fan base. This is not a new or original game that spat in the face of industry standards. In fact, congratulations RPGers, you've essentially become the CoD fanboys you despise so much, since this game is pretty much the RPG version of Modern Warfare 2.

May I direct you to minecraft? a "mystical dark horse that exploded onto the scene and surprised everyone". Like it or not, minecraft is a runaways success, is not part of a franchise did not have steller marketing or big budget. sooo..... the point stands?

Minecraft is an exception, not a rule. May I direct you to Psychonauts, Okami, Eternal Darkness, No More Heroes, Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood, more than half of the games on XLBA and the PS Store, etc.? Occasionally, awesome games with no marketing, budget, or established fan base break through and become popular like minecraft. But more often than not, they simply whither on the shelves, and just prove game publishers right about which games they should invest in. Skyrim is a part of the problem, not a solution like minecraft at all. Besides, Jim's point was that Skyrim was a dark horse that spat in the face of convention, so no, the point still doesn't stand.

Dark horse or not, the market for this type of game is expanding when 3 million copies are sold in 2 days vs. 6 months. You talk as if it's the same base of bethesda gamers behind skyrim, but it's gonna make the rounds to a much wider audience this time.

People play the shit the industry shovels because they don't remember anything else. Beyond an overarching appearance of linear progression in any business, there's a cyclical behavior as to what drives a market.

 

[Machocruz]

Then Dark Souls turns around and proves to Bethesda that RPGs don't need to cater to the lowest common denominator to sell.

 

[Jyggalag]

Jim Sterling has neat arguments that prove reason to his madness, but I still would never want to meet him in person.