Interesting. Is that some sort of slang term for "idiots?" (That's a rhetorical question BTW)JET1971 said:Two words "Share holders".canadamus_prime said:I want to know how this happened. How is it that people who know nothing about video games ended up running video game companies?
hiring based on CV and "past experience" rather than actual knowledge. There is a reason they say that CEO positions are a revolving door.canadamus_prime said:I want to know how this happened. How is it that people who know nothing about video games ended up running video game companies?
well, there is a shit ton of "Were like amnesia and were on youtube" clones there too. so obviuosly somone is doing that as well.Evonisia said:That almost seems like some twisted April Fools joke, not reality. It's frankly maddening to think that this is the thought process for these people. I mean, can't they see the numbers for any other game like XCOM: Enemy Unknown or Amnesia and think "if we do that we'll make all the money?". Square Enix did, right?
I never played it but from what i read it looks like Travian on steroids and ipad.Abnaxis said:I've never even heard of Clash of Clans. Is it a big mobile title or something?
Its all about the money, its all about the ding ding ding.chrissyJ said:Long time watcher, first time poster, what piques my interest in this episode is why these 3 & only these 3 games grab marketeers attention and no others.
I'm sure I could play devil's advocate and come up with a couple of half baked ideas as to why but I'm fairly sure there are some nuanced arguments beyond the all or nothing motivation put forward in today's episode.
Many thanks for a compelling episode.
Love the new banner, but please don't start making the set too nice, I appreciate the skeezy under & overtones of the show.
i never bothered with making top lists myself. i would need to think real hard to list top 10 movies and i saw literally over 3000 of them. I only played 125 games (yes, i count) so the list to pick from would be shorter, but still coming out with top 10 instantly would not be easy, unless i would just be stating random games that i remember first, which i guess would technically work for situation, but wouldnt be fair. not everyone is obsessed with listing their things as favourites.garjian said:I just pictured a scene in my head...
Asking a room of these executives to list their top 10 favourite video games, and if they can't even think of 10 to list, telling them to get the fuck out.
Remember, they're not allowed to use the internet to help, so I'd expect this to be a real challenge for them.
to be fair, its perfectly possible to complete the game without paying a cent. its more of a pay to win faster than anything. In fact id say its one of the rare mobile pay to win games where you can actually win without paying. Or at least it was so in the past, i deleted it once KING started making trademark trolling.Thanatos2k said:Candy Crush - Pay to win and pay to progress free to play mobile game.
wow, and just like that, for a day, i got to be "The 1%".Mastemat said:And also the irony that I'm pretty sure 99% of anyone who reads my post won't realize ...
if they play games, they are gamers. what you are talking about is game enthusiasts. also i know quite a few hardcore gamers that play on mobile.Thanatos2k said:But people who play games on mobile are not gamers. They just have a phone and play games on it. They did not make a conscious decision to game, they just do it when they have nothing better to do on the way to something else, waiting around, or in the bathroom.
only crazy people build 2000 dollar gaming PCs anyway. how about a 500 dollar PC? and there are many free to play games on other devices beside mobile as well.Thanatos2k said:But it's also a true statement. Getting people to play games on their phone is not going to get them to buy a console, or build a $2000 gaming PC. So this "expanding the gaming audience" is pointless in getting better games made for the actual gamers.
People who only play "bite sized" games are not like us. If anything, they'll bring their "I don't pay for games" mentality with them, ruining things even more.
Game industry will not crash. It is too dirverse to crash.TwiZtah said:I'm waiting for the inevitable game industry crash, at least the AAA crash. The indies will still make loads of good games and money.
Many many people have [http://www.reddit.com/r/Minecraft/comments/lx5g3/complete_list_of_minecraft_clones]Ickabod said:What I don't get is why none of the AAA developers has tried to copy Minecraft? It's made truckloads of money, it's on every platform. Everquest Next is sort of going there but how much remains to be seen.
actually, the mainstream companies tried and actually did sell less copies. now, the quality of those games can be discussed of course, but the fact is that the female protagonist games do factually sell less.Fdzzaigl said:Throwing all the marketing shit out might be a good way to start. It's something a lot of sectors are suffering from atm.
It even takes on the form of self-fulfilling prophecies imo. Look at the stuff with female protagonists. "Games with female protagonists sell less copies", they say. So what happens? No mainstream games use female protagonists, only niche games that sell less by default do, further reinforcing their own beliefs while they aren't actually based on anything.
baiscally Jim was doing a lot of youtube videos with early acess games and the comments often told him he cant blame the game because its early acess and thus will be fixed, as in you cant criticize early acess, hence the retort.Atmos Duality said:Also: I must have missed the point behind the strawman mockery of Early Access. I don't know what imbecile suggested that criticism is null and void when something is in beta, but they could not get any further from the truth. Criticism is supposed to be encouraged during beta testing so the product gets better.
he was accused of being extremist leftist multiple times based on what he said on his podcast (the Dismal Jesters).Blood Brain Barrier said:Did you even watch the video? It's fervently anti-capitalist. I'm surprised Jim hasn't been accused of being a socialist by now, which, judging by the video, he is.
We live in a world of professional CEOs. If you were a great CEO of a shampoo company, and were able to double sales of X shampoo then it makes perfect sense (In the current world that is Corporate America) that you would be just as good running a company that has traditionally made RPGs. The idea is this, because you market shampoo, people like the ads for the shampoo and like the social stature associated with said shampoo, they buy the shampoo and use it. Thus if you market the game well, people like the ads for the game, and like the social stature associate with the game then you have done your job. The fact that shampoo is a bunch of chemicals put into a bottle and shipped out, whereas a game is a piece of art created by a collective group and then copied over a million times for resale doesn't really enter into the equation.canadamus_prime said:I want to know how this happened. How is it that people who know nothing about video games ended up running video game companies?
Mastemat said:Your new backdrop.....
um...
How should I say this...
um...
It's very.....
National Socialist....
>_>
<_<
Oh, get off your high horse. What on earth leads you to that conclusion?And also the irony that I'm pretty sure 99% of anyone who reads my post won't realize that NAZI is a shortening of National Socialist until I mention Hitler.
It always catches me off-guard that Americans consider "socialist" (not to mention "anti-capitalist") to be an insult. Not going to lie, it amuses me.Blood Brain Barrier said:Did you even watch the video? It's fervently anti-capitalist. I'm surprised Jim hasn't been accused of being a socialist by now, which, judging by the video, he is. It's only because he didn't say the "C" word once during the video that no one noticed the real target of his rant. So instead of accusing him of being an anti-American commie, everyone agrees with him. He's a clever guy. Socialists would be a lot more successful if they learned to do the same thing.
Well probably the Parteiadler, which is the bird that was a very prominent Third Reich symbol. So yeah, the Red and Black imagery of the Jimquistion with the eagle mixed in certainly is satirically referencing the Third Reich.Eamar said:1) Incredible backdrop - congrats.
2) Captain America. See it. Now.
Mastemat said:Your new backdrop.....
um...
How should I say this...
um...
It's very.....
National Socialist....
>_>
<_<
Oh, get off your high horse. What on earth leads you to that conclusion?And also the irony that I'm pretty sure 99% of anyone who reads my post won't realize that NAZI is a shortening of National Socialist until I mention Hitler.
Ummm... yes? I know that, that was the point of the first part of my post (hint: open up the spoiler tags). I was asking how he came to the conclusion that 99% of Escapists would have no idea that Nazi was an abbreviation of National Socialist. It's pretty damn arrogant, not to mention insulting to the rest of us.Rabidkitten said:snip
Even despite the DRM alarm bells that are blaring away at reading "Universal Music Group", I have to agree with you that someone with a background in making music, TV or movies would be a far better choice for a games company CEO (or marketer) than anyone from a packaged goods background.UNHchabo said:Yeah... even if you want to find executives from outside the games industry, why don't they go for executives from elsewhere in the media industry? I feel like someone who knows how to sell movies can figure out how to sell games, despite the differences.
After some quick Googling, I did find that Bruce Hack, CEO of Vivendi Games before the Activision Blizzard merger, had previously been Vice Chairman of Universal Music Group, and CFO of Universal Studios. That's a resumé that makes sense for an outsider coming in to run a games company.
Actually the 1982 crash was due to people who didn't understand basic business sense being in charge of game companies. Over-saturation, little to no quality control, and a new emerging competing market were all things that were ignored.nightazday said:Wasn't that the reason for the Video Game Crash of the 80s? People that didn't know anything about games being in charge of game companies?
How do these guys get into this position?