Video Game Crash?

[FalloutJack]

Sorry, but while some big BUSINESSES might crash, the gaming industry is now too powerful to crash itself. It's all very simple, really. If someone falls, even a number of people fall, someone ELSE wins and picks up the slack with the sudden increase in capital.

 

[Entitled]

Does anyone who post topics like this even understand the causes of the crash? It seems that they do not.
Here were some of the conditions that led to the 83 crash.
1. Atari had a near strangle hold on the entire industry, which at the time was a very niche thing relegated more towards hobbyists.
2. You had the choice of 14+ consoles to choose from.
3. There was a significant lack of publishing control at that time. Any bedroom programmer could put out a game on the systems and because of that games that were simply broken were sold. (No not the popular use of the work broken, but games that were utterly broken such as not being about to start a game at all)
4. Because of their strangle hold when Atari went down just about th entire industry went down with it.

Those are some of the most prominent causes of the 83 crash.

You are aware that multiple reasons can cause a crash, right?

The housing market crash, the dotcom bubble's crash, the Great Depression, the gaming crash of '83 and the tulip mania's crash happened for entirely different reasons.

A market can crash because it is revealed to be entirely fictional, built on hopes and fantasies. It can crash because of a sudden stock market panic. It can crash because one or a handful of lead participants go bankrupt. It can crash because of overconfidence, and assuming infinite growth.

Sorry, but while some big BUSINESSES might crash, the gaming industry is now too powerful to crash itself. It's all very simple, really. If someone falls, even a number of people fall, someone ELSE wins and picks up the slack with the sudden increase in capital.

That sounds like a semantic debate. Yeah of course, the entire concept of selling games won't be eternally destroyed, but then again, neither was it in '83. Activision, EA, and several other companies have survived though that crash. Even Atari itself survived, and only lost dominance.

The dotcom bubble didn't destroy Amazon and eBay either.

Nevertheless, when number of big businesses of a given industry crash at the same time, that's what we call a crash of that industry.

If, say, next year, Microsoft and Ninendo would drop their hardware businesses, and after losing that much of their target platforms, EA and Activision would need to cut 70% of their employees, while Square Enix and Ubisoft an Capcom go bankrupt, that would be commonly called "the video game crash of '14", and not "The Microsoft-Nintendo-EA-Activision-Square-Enix-Ubisoft-Capcom crash".

 

[FalloutJack]

Narf

The first one pretty much sets the precident and cannot be followed because it wasn't about companies crashing. It was about the market drying up, for a time. Companies suffering back then was an effect, not the cause. It was, as this time allegedly, due to a massive DO NOT WANT from the customers, all of this during a weaker point in gaming market history where it could have potentially been destroyed. Yes, it could have, because the interest and the technology level made it only a curiosity back then, as easily endable as Beta-Max.

That's the basis of MY theory. The actual great crash was indeed a CRASH, from which the victim could have died at this make-it-or-break-it moment in history. Now that the market and the demand is so much stronger, that this is a viable product capable of making money no matter WHO is in charge, whole giant businesses could collapse and gaming would be here to stay. There will never be another crash. Any crash you would call a crash now is a pretender to the throne, a blip of sensationalism made to provoke a reaction only.

This isn't a question of semantics. It's perspective. I don't think the effect of the real one can be duplicated.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

A console crash maybe, the P.C is strong enough to survive. Even if it's just indies games that are being made, it's easier to make them for P.C than consoles.

 

[Auron]

When did we go from "computer gaming is dead" to "the entire gaming hobby will die" again? I've been listening to people(like the Epic assholes who are now saying the complete opposite.) say that computer gaming is dead for years now, it's still kicking. When Square and EA make the retarded statements about games sales they've been making of late I worry but if they can't see the writing on the wall their IP's will probably be left for someone with better vision, I do not believe games will stop being produced or anything drastic and if anything what might massively lose in the next few years is the console market, but I'm fine with that.

Judging by companies horrible PR, scumbag business practices, and just overall lack of respect for gaming and gamers as a whole, if this kind of behavior goes on/unnoticed by the community (which so far isn't and won't be anytime soon...)

By that logic, gaming should have crashed like a decade ago.

I don't recall having DLC, blatant fanboyism, 60$ half games, or even much to do with online multiplayer back in 2003 unless you had a LAN cable.

No, I remember quality 8 hour games, small but nice communities that grew into more for every game that came after, nothing but trailers at E3, and Battlefront 2/Super Smash Bros. with my friends because local multiplayer and coop was our better version social networking.
Also didn't EA's sports' old motto used to be "Its in the game" and it stayed true to that motto?

Who knows, I might just be jaded. Maybe gaming has been dead for years and I'm just naive.

DLC = Expansions, same deal but usually just one purchase instead of many smaller ones.

Blatant fanboyism = All around since ever, especially surrounding consoles, console wars have been a thing since the 8 bit era.

60$ half games = Well the 60 dollar games we have Activision to thank for and it's a new thing. If by half games you mean unfinished or in dire need of patching then you're wrong. KOTOR 2 is the strongest example I can think of about the last decade but there were others.

Online multiplayer = Maybe not on consoles but it was already a thing since the late 90's in the PC, not a new thing by any stretch of the imagination. We were all playing Quake and Age of Empires and Starcraft back then, there were also more lan parties.

 

[Entitled]

snip

Sounds like you are overglorifying the historical epicness of that particular event.

Like I said, there were plenty of companies that pretty much sat through that crash. In fact, the entire PC market wasn't in danger. What WAS in danger, was the old console business model as we knew it until then, and that indeed died, and got replaced by a different one.
Maybe if it would have ended even moredifferently, then now living room consoles would be a niche, and gaming would mostly happen on PCs and handhelds. Or maybe it would have led to the PC filling the empty space in the living room. But to say that the soncept of gaming was at stake, is an exaggeration.

Yet this was still big enough to call it a "games industry crash".

This is simply how language works. You can make up your own theories about what the word "crash" ought to mean, but all you will achieve is derailing every thread that was started for discussing looming industry crisis, (that the average person would simply describe as a "crash"), just to bring up your own quirky definition.

During the banking crash of 2008, no one came up to start nitpicking how technically only SOME banks collapsed but banking is still around. Because it's so OBVIOUS that whole industrial segments won't just disappear overnight, the massive crisis and series of failures inside an industry *is* what we call a crash, nothing more and nothing less.

 

[head desk tricycle]

It definitely seems like a crash is happening. Two of the three consoles were loss leaders even before the recession, made by massive feuding corporations that caused an insane glut of third party developers and video game schools, and one of those corporations is going broke (Sony) while the other is basically a software company that only got into the business to keep the other off its turf (Microsoft). Meanwhile, the third console is made by a company that isn't even really connected to the industry (Nintendo).
Also, video game crashes don't affect PC. PC gaming is a technical thing, not an industry thing. Even the MMOs.

 

[mad825]

Does anyone who post topics like this even understand the causes of the crash? It seems that they do not.
Here were some of the conditions that led to the 83 crash.
1. Atari had a near strangle hold on the entire industry, which at the time was a very niche thing relegated more towards hobbyists.
2. You had the choice of 14+ consoles to choose from.
3. There was a significant lack of publishing control at that time. Any bedroom programmer could put out a game on the systems and because of that games that were simply broken were sold. (No not the popular use of the work broken, but games that were utterly broken such as not being about to start a game at all)
4. Because of their strangle hold when Atari went down just about th entire industry went down with it.

Those are some of the most prominent causes of the 83 crash.

So every crash is the 1980s crash?

Hell, most of those points fit today with exceptions and alterations. Big publishers own the majority the IPs that are developed today, consoles and accessories are expensive, development focus on the causal market; an unstable market which as a result lead to shorter development cycles and poorer quality of development.

Sure, we might not see a crash like the 1980s but we'll see the 2010s crash.

 

[Zeckt]

The way thing's are going triple AAA games are becoming too much of a niche while companies and developers go out of the way to shrink the market with terrible consumer treatment in the form of DRM and always online. If the new systems are as anti consumer friendly as they are saying as well as having no backwards compatibility they will never be able to make the money back making the games for these new systems.

I could care less honestly, the independent / small developer team scene is thriving. What do I care if the big companies who go out of their way to treat us like trash fall? I'll take Royal Trap or Retro City Rampage over halo 4 any day.

 

[fix-the-spade]

captcha: stand by me

When you're not stroo-ooong and I'll be your friend, I'll help you caaaaarryyy on!

#Ahem#

Nah, I think if some cataclysm does befall gaming it'll be a sputter and phutt rather than a crash.

THQ's already gone, EA is downsizing, Activision is basically CoD/Warcraft-ivision and the biggest publishers are ever more reliant on a few blockbusters to make themselves work...

...but at the same time indies are going great guns, Valve continues to grow and mobile/handheld is in rude health.

I can see a lot (more) of the well established developers quietly getting shuttered in the next three years as well as EA steadily becoming EA sports/Battlefield/bugger all else. But a flat out crash? Nah.

 

[XMark]

Most of the casual gaming market has drifted off to mobile devices and social networks. And for the hardcode gamer demographic, the gaming PC is having a bit of a comeback too. This is likely because of how long the current generation has lasted (longest console generation in history), which gave PCs more than enough time to overtake current consoles' technical abilities by a lot. Meanwhile, consoles are becoming much more PC-like, and Valve is promising to deliver a console-like PC. And most major games have multi-platform releases so we're basically seeing the console and PC gaming markets kind of converging into each other.

So I think we're heading into not really a crash but a change in the definition of what a game console is at its core.

That said, we're still awaiting official confirmation on rumors of always-on DRM and the potential elimination of the used game market. If the worst of those rumors are true, then the gaming industry is in trouble of a major backlash against anti-consumer policies, in which at least a couple of big publishers are going to go down hard.

 

[rob_simple]

Question: why would the console market crashing destroy gaming markets that have nothing to do with consoles? Why would Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo failing in the next generation mean that people suddenly threw their computers in the bin and stopped using Steam? Would people just throw their iPhones away, closing down the app store?

What will probably happen is a collapse of the bloated AAA industry, which is in no way a bad thing. Big companies like EA have lost their way and become blinded by money, eventually it's going to come back and bite them in the arse, but all it means in the current market is that smaller, indie developers will get a chance to take the limelight and probably, ultimately start the whole cycle all over again.

But to answer your question: There is never going to be another crash like the one in the 80's because the market is now so fragmented it would be literally impossible, short of a complete financial meltdown in every facet of the economy.

 

[rasputin0009]

No. Multiple reasons why not:

- Nintendo will never crash or leave the industry (stupid amount of cash simply sitting in the bank/ videogame-first company)
- Microsoft is fighting to rule the living room and videogames are a part of that (strong emphasis on "part")
- PlayStation compliments all of Sony's other ventures and is a good place to test new ideas on a strong market
- Indie developers are HUGE right now (more quality competition = stronger market)
- Activision/Blizzard are incredibly strong right now and will be for at least another 10 years
- No matter how many "hardcore" gamers boycott a publisher's business practices, they're still a small minority of the market

What I think might change:

- EA will move towards primarily mobile games and keep their annualized sports games while milking the fuck out of all their other IP's until they don't exist (also not picking up anymore new ones/ dropping almost all studios)
- More surprise indie hits like Minecraft will surface (causing a lot of not-rich developers become rich and then do asinine development projects that break them)
- In-game advertising will become the norm amongst AAA publishers
- Microtransactions on top of $60 games will become the norm
- A large publisher will get a new CEO and then does a turn-around of its business practices (making it the example for other publishers to follow and a golden age of gaming follows)

 

[KungFuJazzHands]

An industry-wide crash? Unlikely.

A Triple-A crash? Already happening now -- it started with THQ, and it is now solidifying with EA's and Square's current financial problems. I honestly can't wait for the peak to hit.

 

[FalloutJack]

Heh

Sounds like you missed the part where I said perspective. Incidentally, the nit-picker is the one who decided to go out of their way to annoy me about things. The thing to remember when you DO that is to make it relevent to me. Telling me about semantics and over-glorification doesn't make you look good. It makes you look - as I now perceive you - like someone planning to argue and not discuss. The ones who are Chicken Littling 'The Next Great Video Game Crash' are the glorifying ones, so obvious it hurts. The ones arguing semantics are ON that side of things, YOUR side.

Holy crap, another thread predicting the end of gaming. YAY!

This fella, on the other hand, has perspective. He knows this is silly. Welcome, brother. We've been expecting you.

 

[Entitled]

Question: why would the console market crashing destroy gaming markets that have nothing to do with consoles? Why would Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo failing in the next generation mean that people suddenly threw their computers in the bin and stopped using Steam? Would people just throw their iPhones away, closing down the app store?

What will probably happen is a collapse of the bloated AAA industry, which is in no way a bad thing. Big companies like EA have lost their way and become blinded by money, eventually it's going to come back and bite them in the arse, but all it means in the current market is that smaller, indie developers will get a chance to take the limelight and probably, ultimately start the whole cycle all over again.

There is never going to be another crash like the one in the 80's because the market is now so fragmented it would be literally impossible, short of a complete financial meltdown in every facet of the economy.

The 80's crash didn't affect "every facet of the economy" either, it left the PC gaming industry untouched (that's also why EA survived it as a young company), and it happened right at the middle of the so-called "Golden Age of Arcade Gaming", that went on for years after it (and was, in fact, ended by the next successful home consoles).

If only the AAA parts of the industry alone would fail, that would in itself be a larger portion of gaming than in the 80's, and gaming is a larger portion of the world economy than then. That's enough to warrant calling such a scenario a major industry crash.

 

[Ebonrul]

Short answer, yes.

A crash happens when a product's price returns to normal after having been inflated beyond it's value. It's how a person ends up $300,000 in debt on a home that's only worth $100,000. The industry is telling us everyday that the end is nigh if this or that title doesn't make asstarded amounts of money. If you want to recount history, recount all of it. This is how every crash starts.

A market crash is financial, not a PR snafu. The numbers of customer's complaining about DRM policies or on-disc DLC isn't a real number until those same customers stop paying for it. Sure everyone complained about Diablo III, but I remember it selling fairly well (for being broken out of the box...exceptionally well). Can you hear Blizzard not giving a fuck about the whining while they count the huge stacks of money they made?

However, that was last year. This year, the AAA developers have had to resort to outright bribery to keep eyeballs on them. As consumers we've been told, in no uncertain terms, that heads will roll unless we start handing over our money with both hands up front and receiving the product (or service) piecemeal because of the (self-inflicted) astronomical cost of making it. Kind of like when you're told that the economy will survive so long as everyone gives bankers the rest of their money, or there won't be another Dead Space unless the current one outsells the Bible.

Is there a video game crash coming? It's already happening.

 

[rob_simple]

The 80's crash didn't affect "every facet of the economy" either, it left the PC gaming industry untouched (that's also why EA survived it as a young company), and it happened right at the middle of the so-called "Golden Age of Arcade Gaming", that went on for years after it (and was, in fact, ended by the next successful home consoles).

If only the AAA parts of the industry alone would fail, that would in itself be a larger portion of gaming than in the 80's, and gaming is a larger portion of the world economy than then. That's enough to warrant calling such a scenario a major industry crash.

I didn't say the 80's crash affected every part of the economy, I'm saying that to kill the gaming industry, today, there would need to be some sort of global financial meltdown. Even if AAA gaming did collapse it still wouldn't be a crash in the same sense as the one in the 80's, which is what the OP seems to be implying. Yes, it would be on a much greater scale than the one in the 80's, but only because the market is bigger; the ramifications wouldn't be nearly as severe.

All we've heard about for the last few years is how every AAA release is failing to meet its sales targets, while other markets are flourishing and raking in money hand over fist. The market for handheld, MMO's, app gaming, F2P, flash games, and the indie community is profitable enough that the industry could easily sustain itself and re-structure. Consoles like the OUYA would potentially thrive and stuff like Steam's TV box thing would have a chance to take the place of the super-expensive current consoles we're being lumbered with.

I think the real difference here is that whereas the 80's crash almost killed the console industry, having it happen now could be a good thing, because it would give a chance for a console market rebirth that could potentially return us to a time when games were primarily about having fun, and not showing off how many polygons you can cram onto a screen or how easy it is to share everything you're doing with Facebook.

It's worth remembering that gaming was nowhere near as big in the 80's as it is today: it could have quite easily passed away like a fart in the night back then, following the crash. Now gaming is as ingrained in our society as books, music or film, so there is absolutely zero chance of it ever going away.

 

[Entitled]

Even if AAA gaming did collapse it still wouldn't be a crash in the same sense as the one in the 80's, which is what the OP seems to be implying. Yes, it would be on a much greater scale than the one in the 80's, but only because the market is bigger; the ramifications wouldn't be nearly as severe.

I understand that, and I'm not saying that the next crash will be as severe as the one in '83, I'm saying that you misunderstand how severe the crash of '83 was to begin with.

You brought up how people would't throw away their PCs and their iPhones, so there would still be a gaming market.

But people didn't throw away their PCs in '83 either, and there was an Arcade all along. There *was* a gaming market. The crash of '83 was only about investors suddenly losing faith in the home console software market after a few infamous failures, and that crisis alone was big enough to call it a "crash".

All we've heard about for the last few years is how every AAA release is failing to meet its sales targets, while other markets are flourishing and raking in money hand over fist. The market for handheld, MMO's, app gaming, F2P, flash games, and the indie community is profitable enough that the industry could easily sustain itself and re-structure.

Are you talking about the individual corporations, or about the abstract concept of there staying some sort of "games industry" in the future? Because if it's the former, then I could actually see your idea that there won't be a crash, EA and Activision won't go bankrupt, Nintendo won't pull out of business, etc, they will just change their business models.

Though I don't think that will happen. Right now, EA is laying off Popcap, Activision is starting to run out of WoW money, and indies are ridiculously small compared to the big ones. So while I see how these could be the seed of a new industry, the current one is already beyond the point of no return.

Consoles like the OUYA would potentially thrive and stuff like Steam's TV box thing would have a chance to take the place of the super-expensive current consoles we're being lumbered with.

I think the real difference here is that whereas the 80's crash almost killed the console industry, having it happen now could be a good thing, because it would give a chance for a console market rebirth that could potentially return us to a time when games were primarily about having fun, and not showing off how many polygons you can cram onto a screen or how easy it is to share everything you're doing with Facebook.

Just like how the crash of '83 gave the industry a chance for a rebirth through Nintendo's new business model with the seal of quality?

It's worth remembering that gaming was nowhere near as big in the 80's as it is today: it could have quite easily passed away like a fart in the night back then, following the crash. Now gaming is as ingrained in our society as books, music or film, so there is absolutely zero chance of it ever going away.

Like I said, that's probably a hyperbole. Even if we assume that we just got lucky with Nintendo, without them, there still would have been other segments of gaming. That way, maybe the Arcades would have flourished longer, or the PC would have had more dominance, but that's about it.

And even if it's true, it's irrelevant. The OP didn't ask about whether gaming culture is about to disappear, but about whether a crash is coming. And yes, a big, ugly crash is coming.

Pointing hout how the cultural context is not exactly the same, is an irrelevant detail. At best, we can be more hopeful that the industry will be reborn afterwards, than the guys in '83 were.

 

[WoW Killer]

Is gaming becoming more and more like a religion every day?

Much like religion, we've now got our own doomsday prophecy, and much like religion, we've got a small minority actively hoping it will happen.