Jimquisition: The Unholy Trinity Of Blind Greedy Bastards

[Lazy Kitty]

I love the new background banner.
Now you just need a more dictator like looking podium desk lectern thing.
And some kind of band around your arm with the same thing as the banner.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

a couple of things i disagree with you there Jim, its just indie games taking advantage of the situation, mid sized devs still not blinded by money are also taking advatage, guys like triumpth studios, paradox and double fine


also i dont think early access stuff is exempt from criticism, quite the contrary, early access games desperately need feedback so the final product doesnt suck

 

[RunicFox]

Wierd, I've never heard of of Clash of Clans. Is it popular? I gotta assume so since apparently these marketers a CEO's feel that all games ever made should be based on it.

It is right now assuredly making millions of dollars a day. No exact figures are usually released but when something can be extrapolated it points to millions of dollars.


The largest generator (world wide) is Puzzle and Dragons, which makes 10s of Millions a day I believe? And on the high end.

Further PnD info:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/210021/GungHo_reaps_over_1_billion_in_Puzzle__Dragons_revenue.php

 

[Thanatos2k]

...

I've never even heard of Clash of Clans. Is it a big mobile title or something?

Seconded. What the hell is Clash of Clans?

A pathetically popular profitable mobile game.

There's a reason it's on the list. Each of the titles on the "Rotten Three" list make up a different approach to scam money out of dumb people:

Call of Duty - generic multiplayer shooter that scams money out of people through endless DLC, season passes, and "Prime" subscription services.

Candy Crush - Pay to win and pay to progress free to play mobile game.

Clash of Clans - Free to wait pay-for-convenience mobile game.

 

[Hutzpah Chicken]

I can't say I can agree or disagree. Most of the games I play are not by AAA producers (but I figure Valve falls into AAA) so I can't say I'm all that informed. Considering the last great game I played that was made by EA was Road Rash, I'll leave this one up to other people.

 

[Mastemat]

Your new backdrop.....
um...
How should I say this...
um...
It's very.....
National Socialist....
>_>
<_<
...
You might want to adjust... something... so that the boxy symbol can be more displayed... but then.... I wonder if raising it slightly will induce the same effect that the National Socialist Party's flag and symbol was meant to project onto Hitler... ie: a halo.
But then the irony in that might be worth doing...
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.

Anyways... just thought you might want to adjust it abit... (the boxy symbol doesn't help being obstructed... cause in pieces it's close enough to a swastika that it illustrates my NAZI comparison even moreso...)

 

[AldUK]

Jim, I feel a bit like I'm being indoctrinated into an abusive regime hell-bent on world domination after watching you speak in front of your new background. Wait, was that your plan all along?!

 

[Thanatos2k]

So when we've been saying that those games are "destroying gaming" we've actually been right? Huh. Fancy that. It's not hyperbole when it's true, now is it?

I think that's inherently incorrect. It's doing a lot of things that long-term will be effective. A lot of people who never played video games are now playing them on mobile. The downside is that some of those experiences are taking advantage of them. BUT when their pallet grows and they experience better titles, their expectations will be adjusted.

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.

 

[WildFire15]

also i dont think early access stuff is exempt from criticism, quite the contrary, early access games desperately need feedback so the final product doesnt suck

Largely this, but also if you put something out to the public, especially if you then ask money for it, then you get the criticism or acclaim you deserve regardless of what you think. 'But it's in Beta!' really reads as 'we knew it wasn't ready'

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

also jim if you want to say something nobody wants to hear, just say "Jimquisition is over, also i just accepted a job at EA on their marketing department, buy Battlefield 8, now with more Gritty Realism?!"

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

also i dont think early access stuff is exempt from criticism, quite the contrary, early access games desperately need feedback so the final product doesnt suck

Largely this, but also if you put something out to the public, especially if you then ask money for it, then you get the criticism or acclaim you deserve regardless of what you think. 'But it's in Beta!' really reads as 'we knew it wasn't ready'

heh, that reminds me of this

also, fuck generalivan, he had dubbed this and many other comics amazingly until he deleted all his videos to work on the vidya business


anyways i agree if a dev is willing to put their game in beta, up for the scrutiny of the general public, they better fucking man up and take any criticism

 

[GonzoGamer]

I posted this on last weeks show but I feel it's relevant again here. The only way we're going to see things change is if gamers become the dominant investors in the game industry. Now it's hard because very few gamers actually pay attention to the industry at all or have any interest in economics. However it could also be easy because game industry stock isn't usually high priced and there are a lot of gamers. So if we were able to get the word out and (as a whole) own a good portion of these companies, we would have a say at who runs them and how they are run.
The reason we have goods marketing people calling the shots is because the current shareholders are the usual banks and traders who don't care about games, they just care about how fast the stock price can rise.
And I live by this too. At my last estimation, about 15% of my stock holdings are invested in the game industry. I'll admit it doesn't always make my portfolio more healthy (though, I have at least made more money than I've spent off video games) but if I like the games a company makes, I kind of feel like I should own some of it rather than some banker looking for another quick buck.

 

[RunicFox]

So when we've been saying that those games are "destroying gaming" we've actually been right? Huh. Fancy that. It's not hyperbole when it's true, now is it?

I think that's inherently incorrect. It's doing a lot of things that long-term will be effective. A lot of people who never played video games are now playing them on mobile. The downside is that some of those experiences are taking advantage of them. BUT when their pallet grows and they experience better titles, their expectations will be adjusted.

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.

That's a pretty unfair statement. It's that sort of mentality that helps these games that you dislike thrive -- we're not welcoming to the community. A lot of people, maybe not yourself, play mobile games when in transit, walking, or even the bathroom as you stated. But the games they play still have design tenants (well, most of them) that make them excited, that they enjoy. There is still fundamental design philosophy found in both Clash of Clans and Candy Crush..which is what makes them appealing. They're also fast paced and don't really take any longer than 5 minutes to 20 minutes.

These games are meant to be bite sized. Have you played Ridiculous Fishing? How about minecraft mobile? Infinity Blade? All of these are things people call games and they are on mobile phones. Mobile is a real market for real people. Saying they're not "gamers" is strange to me. Some of them are new, some of them are veterans, but all of them are playing games.

 

[jehk]

also i dont think early access stuff is exempt from criticism, quite the contrary, early access games desperately need feedback so the final product doesnt suck

Largely this, but also if you put something out to the public, especially if you then ask money for it, then you get the criticism or acclaim you deserve regardless of what you think. 'But it's in Beta!' really reads as 'we knew it wasn't ready'

Now I understand what he was getting at. I recall reading an argument that people shouldn't review games in early access/beta/whatever because it doesn't represent the final product. So long as the reviewer doesn't pass it off as a review of the final product than so what? That was my reaction at least.

 

[gridsleep]

Jim Sterling, you are rarely far wrong, and you make me laugh, which is quite a feat for a viewer with bipolar disorder. Now, we need some clever people to make sure your editorials stream onto the screens of all those dimbo executives each week so they can't claim they didn't know. Hackers, assemble.

 

[SilverStuddedSquirre]

The Unholy Trinity Of Blind Greedy Bastards

Only three videogames in the world exist, according to those who now get to make all the videogame decisions. The blind lead the blind, and ignorance reigns supreme.

Watch Video

Or to Paraphrase! At the 2:40 mark, notice the advent of the "Marketing Department"

 

[AznaktaX]

Each of the titles on the "Rotten Three" list make up a different approach to scam money out of dumb people:

Call of Duty - generic multiplayer shooter that scams money out of people through endless DLC, season passes, and "Prime" subscription services.

Candy Crush - Pay to win and pay to progress free to play mobile game.

Clash of Clans - Free to wait pay-for-convenience mobile game.

I was about to write something along the lines of "Now, now. Just because you don't like something, it doesn't mean that people who like it are dumb" until I remembered the sheer amount of sequels Call of Duty spews out with little to no new content, and yet people still buy them. And I don't know about the other two, so yeah.....aaahhmm...this is awkward. *quietly walks away*

 

[SilverStuddedSquirre]

Jim Sterling, you are rarely far wrong, and you make me laugh, which is quite a feat for a viewer with bipolar disorder. Now, we need some clever people to make sure your editorials stream onto the screens of all those dimbo executives each week so they can't claim they didn't know. Hackers, assemble.

That would actually be Hysterical. If CEO's all woke up one day and for 24 hours all they could get on their computers was this episode, Industry full of cowards and Monetizing Whales on continuous loop - on every PC in the company.

The sad fact is that their content would fall on deaf ears, and hungry Lawyers.

 

[Christer Jonsson]

I'm not to upset by the way the AAA publishers are behaving. What the market giveth, the market taketh away. Going 'Me too!' is a sure fire way to fail in the long run. I have stopped caring for most of the big budget games except a select few games. What is really encouraging to me is the resurgence of the medium sized developers and publishers. Companies like CD Projekt Red, Paradox Interactive and Larian Studios showing that you can do some quite impressive stuff without bloating budgets. Let the towering behemoths collapse under their own weight.

 

[Thanatos2k]

So when we've been saying that those games are "destroying gaming" we've actually been right? Huh. Fancy that. It's not hyperbole when it's true, now is it?

I think that's inherently incorrect. It's doing a lot of things that long-term will be effective. A lot of people who never played video games are now playing them on mobile. The downside is that some of those experiences are taking advantage of them. BUT when their pallet grows and they experience better titles, their expectations will be adjusted.

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.

That's a pretty unfair statement. It's that sort of mentality that helps these games that you dislike thrive -- we're not welcoming to the community. A lot of people, maybe not yourself, play mobile games when in transit, walking, or even the bathroom as you stated. But the games they play still have design tenants (well, most of them) that make them excited, that they enjoy. There is still fundamental design philosophy found in both Clash of Clans and Candy Crush..which is what makes them appealing. They're also fast paced and don't really take any longer than 5 minutes to 20 minutes.

These games are meant to be bite sized. Have you played Ridiculous Fishing? How about minecraft mobile? Infinity Blade? All of these are things people call games and they are on mobile phones. Mobile is a real market for real people. Saying they're not "gamers" is strange to me. Some of them are new, some of them are veterans, but all of them are playing games.

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.