We've brought this on ourselves. Musings about the state of the industry.

[xDarc]

I buy 3-5 games a year. There are days where I will sift through the Steam store for an hour trying to talk myself into buying something, anything- but there's so much garbage out there I just can't do it... so I do something else. I was all happy because I dropped 5 bills on a 7970 at the end of 2011 and thought I'd get back into gaming... The 3 games per year thing has been going on circa 2006, partly because I'm just getting too old/busy to play games- but partly because games just aren't interesting anymore and I've probably played something similar, that was better, years ago.

Anyway, I bought the 7970, and mostly I have just been playing Skyrim, New Vegas, a little DayZ (regretful waste of time) and a lot of black ops zombies- I don't play MP CoD at all aside from zombies. Dead Island was meh. I got Metro 2033 for free thanks to someone on here alerting me to a promo. That's pretty much been the extent of my gaming over the past 2 years.

Seriously, my steam games list does not even have a scroll bar. Plus I'm coming up on 31 here in a few weeks, and now that I finally have money, game companies don't seem to want it. Fuck it, I'll take it to home depot instead. I need a patio set for my house. I'll be outside drinking smoothies and my computer will be gathering dust.

 

[ResonanceSD]

I buy 3-5 games a year. There are days where I will sift through the Steam store for an hour trying to talk myself into buying something, anything- but there's so much garbage out there I just can't do it... so I do something else. I was all happy because I dropped 5 bills on a 7970 at the end of 2011 and thought I'd get back into gaming... The 3 games per year thing has been going on circa 2006, partly because I'm just getting too old/busy to play games- but partly because games just aren't interesting anymore and I've probably played something similar, that was better, years ago.

Anyway, I bought the 7970, and mostly I have just been playing Skyrim, New Vegas, a little DayZ (regretful waste of time) and a lot of black ops zombies- I don't play MP CoD at all aside from zombies. Dead Island was meh. I got Metro 2033 for free thanks to someone on here alerting me to a promo. That's pretty much been the extent of my gaming over the past 2 years.

Seriously, my steam games list does not even have a scroll bar. Plus I'm coming up on 31 here in a few weeks, and now that I finally have money, game companies don't seem to want it. Fuck it, I'll take it to home depot instead. I need a patio set for my house. I'll be outside drinking smoothies and my computer will be gathering dust.

That's an excellent card, to be honest. New Vegas and Skyrim were both great titles for the modern industry. Given the industry's addiction to crap DLC and microtransactions, they were both games with great DLC packs as well as awesome games.

Ok, that's not including Honest Hearts or Hearthfire. but still, F:NV is my favourite fallout so far.


I agree with you about companies not seeming to want the money though. Respect for consumers seems to be at an all time low. And for this, I blame the actions of consumers.

 

[Squilookle]

You simplify things too much here.

I was really looking forward to playing Tales of the Abyss when that was rleased in Europe for the first time. I knew that I was going to love the game, but I held off buying it. What was the rsult of this decision not to pre-order? It was sold out when I wanted to buy it. I checked everywhere, I even looked in foreign online stores and I couldn't get it. After6 months of searching every online retailer I know weekly, after cancelling it from several who didn't get it in stoxk weeks after I had ordered it I finally got the game and I loved it despite the fact that I had not read a single review, had not seen anyone talking about their opinion of the game. I even enjoyed it more for diving in blind rather than have it hyped up or knowing important details about it beforehand.

So what's the problem? You got the game, they got your money, only they had to wait and risk you losing interest because they failed to meet supply demands. Sounds like a system that worked perfectly, with the publisher only having itself to blame for delayed sales.

Then there's Bioshock. I bought that game a few months after it was released, I had read the reviews, I had read what other people thought of it Nd I had played and loved the demo. I played for an hour and then quit when I realized I didn't like it one bit. Despite the reviews, despite one of my friends recommending it, despite liking the demo I was still disappointed by my experience with the game. There are games that I have been sure I am going to love and I usually end up loving these games. Then there are games like Bioshock or Mass Effect that I buy because they receive a ton of praise and I end up not liking.

You would have reached that conclusion had you pre-ordered or not. How you got the game here was irrelevant. The only problem here is that you put too much faith in the widespread praise those games recieved.

If I don't pre-order, then how am I going to get my hands on the Collectors Edition?

Listen closely.

You DON'T.

Then, after a while, you will either come to the natural realisation that your game works perfectly fine without the unnecessary waffle they taunt you with in the "collector's edition"...

...or you wait a mere handful of days after release, and check ebay, and you will find some other poor shmuck has pre-ordered, got the game and realised it isn't the bee's knees, and has put it up for sale. Then you get your precious collector's edition, and at a discount to boot.

It's really quite simple.

1) Never pre-order. Doesn't matter how inviting it looks, how much you like the company or series, you don't ever do it. No, shutup. Just don't.

I think that's a bit unfair. I think companies should be punished when they make shit products, for sure, but I also think they should be rewarded when they make good ones. Valve has a consistent reputation of producing quality games, so I happily pre-ordered Portal 2, happily enjoyed the 10% discount that pre-order earned me, and happily played the game when it came out. Of course there's always a bit of a gamble, but if you know and trust the dev and they have a history of treating you right then why not? I don't remember anybody complaining about pre-ordering Skyrim or any Valve game, but just looking at EA's reputation as of late and all the bad press it was getting there was plenty of warning that SimCity was going to be shit.

Yes, good companies should be rewarded. You reward them by buying the games full stop. All preordering does is let them know ahead of time they have a sale. If they're getting the sale anyway it doesn't really help them any extra anyway. It's actually worse, think about it; if you really wanted to reward a company for the stellar games it makes, you would be buying their games full price to show your support, instead of taking the 10% discount they suspend over gamer's heads like a fish hook.

Besides, evidence has shown that even the mightiest of quality game developers aren't foolproof. I feel sorry for any poor sucker that pre-ordered GTA IV thinking it was a sure-bet for GTA goodness.

Actually I don't feel sorry for them, because... they pre-ordered.

2) Don't buy games until they're a week old, or until a handful of post release reviews are out- whichever comes last. It's these goddamn first week blind sales that drive the direction of the industry, and they are defined entirely on how well something is marketed.

One could also say you should boycott DRM and always online games, but that sentiment is as lost as a fart in a hurricane.

Again, this is a great strategy for punishing bad devs and publishers, but if you do this for all games then you're also hurting the guys who do it right. Not rewarding bad business practices is important, but so is rewarding the practices we want to see more of.

There's some truth in that, but it's only a short term hit, with much more beneficial long-term effects that a dev will reconsider trying to pull the same stupid deception on customers again. It may suck for a Dev to lose sales over something seperate from the gameplay entirely, but what's the alternative? Have the consumers just bend over and take whatever draconian measures devs and publishers think of next? Do we not have the right to be angry when SimCity utterly fails to work because of it's rubbish broken always online system? Are we supposed to adapt ourselves to the requirements of a game that outright won't let you play unless your internet is up to scratch- even on a freaking singleplayer only title!!? Are we not allowed to be frustrated when, before booting up a game for a quick stress relieving session, we have to sit there waiting and waiting for Steam, Origin, Uplay or god knows what else to update all these features of itself that apply to games you don't even own!?

Well nuts to that. At one stage we had games that worked first time, every time straight out of the box, with all game content right there on the disk ready to use. Anything, and I do mean anything that provides less for the customer than that, is a step backwards for the gaming industry as a whole, and I'll be damned if any developer or publisher has the gall to tell me I don't have the right to be affronted by their utter failure to match this bar of service once commonplace and downright expected in the industry.

 

[Smeatza]

Oh hey, Saints Row called...

Actually there's preorders for SR4 going on right now.

Saints Row isn't satirical. Looking at their catalogue I don't think Volition are capable of satire.
The game Saint's Row rips off though, GTA. Now that is satire. Rockstar actually put social criticism into their jokes, as opposed to just "herp derp, drugs, sex, violence."

OT: I think the only reason developers/publishers get away with such underhanded, oppressive measures is because there are so many people these days that haven't been playing video games for years and aren't aware of when they're being ripped off.

 

[Yopaz]

You simplify things too much here.

I was really looking forward to playing Tales of the Abyss when that was rleased in Europe for the first time. I knew that I was going to love the game, but I held off buying it. What was the rsult of this decision not to pre-order? It was sold out when I wanted to buy it. I checked everywhere, I even looked in foreign online stores and I couldn't get it. After6 months of searching every online retailer I know weekly, after cancelling it from several who didn't get it in stoxk weeks after I had ordered it I finally got the game and I loved it despite the fact that I had not read a single review, had not seen anyone talking about their opinion of the game. I even enjoyed it more for diving in blind rather than have it hyped up or knowing important details about it beforehand.

So what's the problem? You got the game, they got your money, only they had to wait and risk you losing interest because they failed to meet supply demands. Sounds like a system that worked perfectly, with the publisher only having itself to blame for delayed sales.

Not sure if you read my post, but the problem was months of frustrations and anger. It was about how much of a pain in the ass not buying it right away caused me. Was there any problems besides having to put a lot of effort into buying the game? Anything besides the fact that I had to spend hours every week, write emails to places that had sold me the game and not delivered it 3 weeks afterwards?

Well, yes there is. Because the game was considered rare when they finally got it in stock the retailer could charge extra for it.

Then there's Bioshock. I bought that game a few months after it was released, I had read the reviews, I had read what other people thought of it Nd I had played and loved the demo. I played for an hour and then quit when I realized I didn't like it one bit. Despite the reviews, despite one of my friends recommending it, despite liking the demo I was still disappointed by my experience with the game. There are games that I have been sure I am going to love and I usually end up loving these games. Then there are games like Bioshock or Mass Effect that I buy because they receive a ton of praise and I end up not liking.

You would have reached that conclusion had you pre-ordered or not. How you got the game here was irrelevant. The only problem here is that you put too much faith in the widespread praise those games received.

Yes, this is true, but that's not my point. I wouldn't have liked the game better if I had pre-ordered it, but waiting for reviews, waiting for advice from friends or gaming communities didn't help. One of my best friends love the game. I don't. Some of my favourite games have been getting a lot of negative reviews and I might have missed those if I had read them before I bought the game. Reviews can't tell me my own opinion of a game. That is my point.

I am not trying to say you're wrong, you offer some good advice, but you're thinking that it's really simple. I have followed both of your tips on how to avoid getting shit, both have backfired. If I am not sure about a game I will wait for it to drop in price. Whatever reviews it got doesn't matter because I will most likely disagree with those anyway.

Diving into games without knowing what to expect gives me a better experience. I get to experience it without knowing what to expect. If I don't know the minor flaws someone found while playing it I might not even notice it, if I know about it might be looking for it and already be annoyed with it without even encountering it. If I am told the combat system is the most awesome thing ever I will most likely get disappointed when it turns out to be merely great.

 

[lumenadducere]

This is all well and good, but you have to consider that we are not the majority of people purchasing the big titles like Halo, CoD, or Assassin's Creed. The huge franchises that stagnate and get condemned for being repetitive still get their huge numbers because a lot of the people buying them aren't all that into gaming culture. For them, gaming is a casual hobby and they only buy a few games. I knew a lot of people in college that would only play a few of the EA Sports games and CoD. And that's it. They didn't care about other games, were never interested in trying something new. And they never knew anything about what company made which game or whether or not it was a good game. The new Sports games had the new rosters, and everyone online moved onto the new CoD game so they would follow because they want the same playerbase. And that's not a bad thing. Everyone has the right to enjoy games in their own way, and I certainly won't knock someone for their personal preferences.

I think it's important to understand that we're still a relatively small group. Imagine, if you will, someone who is a huge film buff. They know a ton about studios, directors, composers, and producers. They follow career moves of various actors and they know the latest about who's been cast for what role and what new films have been greenlit. Most people aren't like that - they'll catch trailers and see or hear about a new movie whenever it gets enough word of mouth or promotional material, but it definitely isn't something that they actively keep track of. You have to draw the parallel between the movie buff and us. Those of us who come to gaming sites and keep track of new releases are the equivalent of the movie buff. We know what's coming out, we follow the industry, and we know more about the medium than the average gamer who is just going to wait to see what comes in the next wave of big-budget promotional material. So even if we already know better than to buy crap, it isn't going to do a whole lot because it's still going to reach the average person who plays games, and they're still going to be the main purchasing audience for those games.

Which, again, isn't necessarily a bad thing. We can (and arguably) should have those games if the audience wants them. The problem comes when wonderful gems are critically acclaimed yet fall by the wayside because they don't sell. This is usually because they're a little too "out there" for the gamers who aren't into gaming culture so they never hear about it. The games don't get the same amount of promotion or marketing, and thus it never reaches that critical level of word-of-mouth that is likely to reach those who don't follow the industry. Those players don't bother to read reviews, they'll just see commercials or posters and maybe talk to a random storeclerk (who probably doesn't know anything either if my local Gamestop guys are any indication) about a big-budget title and then purchase it if it looks fun. So the problem isn't a matter of "let's stop purchasing crap" because most of us on this website (and other gaming websites) are already enthusiasts who know not to purchase crap. The problem is more "let's promote and make these awesome games viral" so that other companies see that these cool new ideas are worth pursuing.

Hell, look at what happened to Minecraft. It's started a whole wave of more open, sandbox-driven games that are straddling that indie-yet-popular line. And the big publishers have definitely taken note, even if it's not something that they're pursuing. Minecraft was promoted by word of mouth and it became huge. So let's do that again. Let's find awesome games and spread the word as much as we can and convince people that it's worth the money. That will be a much more effective way to produce the change we want in the industry than just swearing not to buy games that already have big followings. If cool new titles are making tons of money, people will take note. That's just my take on it. We've seen big titles flop with no real change in publishers, because publishers are really resistant to change even in the face of failure. But with success? Publishers have been reactive to the big success all around them. Look at the expansion into social gaming and now mobile gaming. Publishers are behemoths that are slow to act, and they have a tendency to get into markets after it's too late to catch the big wave of profitability. But they do react to it if it's big enough, more than they do to failure. That's why to me it's a better idea to focus on making good games profitable instead of making bad games unprofitable. The audience is there, the hype and word of mouth can spread much better, and we're able to make more lasting impact on developers rather than trying to convince masses of uninterested people that they shouldn't buy the game that everyone else is buying.

 

[Lilani]

Yes, good companies should be rewarded. You reward them by buying the games full stop. All preordering does is let them know ahead of time they have a sale. If they're getting the sale anyway it doesn't really help them any extra anyway. It's actually worse, think about it; if you really wanted to reward a company for the stellar games it makes, you would be buying their games full price to show your support, instead of taking the 10% discount they suspend over gamer's heads like a fish hook.

Besides, evidence has shown that even the mightiest of quality game developers aren't foolproof. I feel sorry for any poor sucker that pre-ordered GTA IV thinking it was a sure-bet for GTA goodness.

Actually I don't feel sorry for them, because... they pre-ordered.

What exactly is your problem with people purchasing the things they want? I'm not just talking about this bit I quoted here, I'm also referring to your telling that other person to never buy collector's editions. People can invest in stupid things, but at the end of the day they're going to buy what makes them happy, and just because you see it as a rip-off doesn't mean you have any right to question whether or not they like it. Collector's editions are basically publishers getting a bit more money out of the hardcore fans, but you know what? Hardcore fans want to spend the money. To them, it's a worthy investment. And who are you to question them? The market is driven by supply and demand. If there are people who demand expensive collector's editions, then publishers are going to buy them. If you don't want to buy it, then you can just not buy it. But stay the fuck out of people's business if they do want it.

And also fuck off if I want to preorder a game. I got a discount for preordering. I wanted it at day one anyway, and preordering saved me $10. You don't like it? Well too fucking bad. That is my business, not yours. Just because you wouldn't have purchased that way doesn't mean I shouldn't.

I'm all about encouraging people to vote with their wallet, but I'm not about to sit here and tell them they're wrong or they shouldn't buy things just because their vote may not be the same as mine. That's just disgusting and arrogant. Don't you fucking tell me a business transaction I am perfectly happy with was the wrong thing to do. Don't you fucking dare.

 

[Zeh Don]

How?

Simple, really.
If the statistics indicate games with high review scores sell more, the Publisher starts buying reviews from the sites that they calculate out to have the most weight with regards to public opinion. This can be done by simply withholding advertising, which is the life-blood of the internet and printed publications for gaming. If Activision Blizzard won't buy your space for this year's 'Call of Duty' and run those advertisements for the usual five month period, what would you do to get them back?

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/189448/Metacritics_weighting_system_revealed.php

Something like this serves as a wonderful shopping list for publishers, advertising where and how to spend their money.

Thinking perhaps they won't sink to such levels?
Buying reviews to mislead the public is not considered a jail-able offense within most of the Western World. Infact, after the GFC hit critical mass, the people who had been paid to provide ratings for the securities bonds - essentially an in-depth review of the quality of the bond - successfully argued before the USA Congress that reviews, ratings and other such stamps where protected under the First Amendment as a matter of opinion - thus, protected by free speech.
The possible fines for such public misleading are, quite literally, nothing compared to the US$1,000,000,000.00 Call of Duty makes every single year.

If the statistics indicate that pre-orders are declining, they'll do what they do now - box in greater and greater rewards to entice the casual purchasing market to cover the difference.
You see, the gaming community is divided into two core components - the 'hardcore', and the 'casual'. The hardcore gamers are you and me - we comes to forums like this, talk about things like this, and make intelligent purchasing decisions based on all of the available information.
The casual market does not, and evidently out-numbers us to such a degree as to be a non-issue if the publisher's lose our business. That is, of course, assuming every single one of us sticks to our guns and stops pre-ordering.

http://www.aeropause.com/wordpress/archives/images/2009/11/12580353958411.jpg
http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/724035/diablo-3-breaks-pc-sales-records-moves-more-than-35-million-units-in-24-hours/

And we both know that's never going to happen because, collectively, we're a spineless bunch of fucking pussies.

I only read reviews on Destructoid & RPS these days...

And those are entirely questionable as well, depending on who you talk to. Here's a quick example:
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/605603-resident-evil-6/64197667

It's a matter of perspective, which rules out reviews a "sure fire" method for removing publisher control. As I mentioned above, the more important reviews are, the more money publishers will spend to make them positive. Activision Blizzard already send the most important reviewers to resorts to review their games.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2010/11/call-of-duty-black-ops-review-event-press-gifts-detailed/

...I'm saying if we all didn't decide to force feed shitty publishers our money, it wouldn't be an issue. Trim the fat and keep the meat.

And I'm saying that for every method you think you've got, they'll find another way to screw you - right down to making the developers crank out fake, false and misleading previews, buying up reviews, and making false word of mouth reviews.

http://au.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29352777/aliens-colonial-marines-marketed-with-fake-gameplay-demo-walkthroughs
http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/11/18/telltale-employees-genetically-engineer-jurassic-park-scores/

You're dealing with the single most profitable entertainment industry in the world. You're not dealing with a few dishonest people who you can defeat with a forum posts and a couple of petitions on free websites. I like what you're trying to do - but we lost the war, my friend.
We lost it the day The Smurfs Village was allowed to sell US$100.00 in-app purchases to children. We lost it when Call of Duty's profits became the focus of the entire industry. We lost it when the journalists cheered, applauded and roared in joy when the game demo of 'The Last of Us' featured a close-up display of a shotgun blast to the face as it's highlight. We lost it when Diablo III sold 12 million copies.

Sorry.