Amy Hennig: People ask for linear Story-Based Games but aren’t necessarily buying them

[TyGuy]

Shes right, people do love single player games, but they play them less. Usually one play through and you're done. Very few single player games will get a multiple play through from me. I spend much more time on games that don't end. It seems like that is teh same for most people. Hence prioritizing online games that don't end with in game purchases to fund more and more content.

 

[Vena]

A lot of the discussion on streaming could be, rather easily, replaced with the discussion of piracy. In fact you should just switch out the words and the same structure would form:

"Why buy a game when I can pirate/watch it?" - for single player games with no online component... what does it matter? Either way you don't buy the game and experience 'the meat' for free. Streaming/let's plays of the game just happen to not, currently, be considered with open hostility.

"People watching/pirating the game may turn into a sale!" - this logical has been used in the past, and is probably true in either case.

"People watching/pirating weren't going to buy the game any way!" - also probably true in both cases.

It goes on and on. But these things definitely hurt the buying audience's interest in buying a product, and access to video playthroughs of games is extremely easy nowadays and in fact part of a daily routing for most people. Its now as trivial (and infinitely more legal at the moment) to watch a video of a game and 'get the experience for free' as it was to pirate DS games a decade ago and 'get the experience for free'.

And people make a living off of the former now, much as those selling flashcarts made a living off of the latter.

 

[Hamlet Machine]

I guess it's a generational thing, but I'll never understand why people would rather watch "Lets Plays" of other people playing a game, rather than experiencing the game for themselves. Why on earth would you watch a game, even the entirety of a game, on a stream, then decide to play it yourself? You will then already know what to expect and what happens, there will be no surprise or anticipation because you know exactly how things will play out.

Obviously I'm talking about the Single-player Narrative-focused games.

Click to shrink...

If i was younger and didn't have access to financial autonomy, i guess i would do it.
For the games that i couldn't afford or to see if the game is worth the investment.

 

[apozem]

Lot of discussion about the $60 price point during the Battlefront II controversy. A small number of gamers said they'd pay $100 for a top-tier single-player game with no loot boxes. I agree, but I can't imagine there are many people who would spend that as well. It would just be a hard sell next to $60 boxes and consumer expectations, especially in the age of the Steam sale.

 

[Altera]

While I'm mainly a single player gamer, I do enjoy linear story based games and I will tend to buy them as long as they're a decent length (nothing crazy), but if the game jumps so far past the cinematic line to where the gameplay is overly controlled for the sake of making it "cinematic" (The Last of Us), I'd probably end up not buying it and just watching "the movie" on YouTube instead.

 

[CGiRanger]

It is sad but true though as the marketplace for single-player games has diminished significantly. The vast majority of consumers are pretty much into online multiplayer either through MOBA's or Team-based shooters or through Mobile Games. And one cannot argue with the overwhelming revenue stream the successful titles in those categories generate on a daily basis, compared to a physical product that is only purchased once.

Of course that leaves people like me who only play single player games in a bind with the number of offerings diminishing. Obviously there are companies like Nintendo who are still keeping those games going, but of course there's usually a lot of caveats added like lots of DLC or "open-world" design.

I personally am also not a fan of open world design. I find it to actually be more limiting in terms of the in-game environment than a more linear-structured game could provide. Because a key tenant of open-world design is that you cannot lock content from the player (or you must avoid it as much as possible) and it must always be accessible no matter at what point you are within the game. This in turns actually leads the in-game world to be very "static" and unchangeable which actually makes it less imaginative and interesting than otherwise.

Take Breath of the Wild, the world is pretty much constant and static, it never changes, no landmasses alter or disasters can strike to change things up. So that leaves it looking the same throughout the 100+ hours you'll spend in it. It's honestly very limiting and unfortunate.

 

[woozey]

I used to think like that as well when I was in my early 20s. But now in my 30s, I no longer care about kids half my age screaming racist insults in their mics, 95% of games I play now are single player story driven games. Tastes change, your income changes as well and 60$ for a 10 hour top notch story driven game starts looking like a bargain compared to other forms of entertainment.

Click to shrink...

lol taking the kids to the movies is damn near 60 bucks for the 4 of us and that is 2 hours of entertainment.

 

[EDarkness]

I'm not sure I go for that. People are still buying games like Mario by the millions. RPGs like Skyrim and Fallout are still selling fairly well. Single player games are still popular regardless of whether or not folks watch them on Youtube or Twitch.

 

[Ian Henry]

That's fair. I think UC is what put her on the map in regard to the mainstream.

Click to shrink...

Honestly, I do recall Legacy Of Kain being pretty well known. The Soul Reaver games have been heralded. So is Defiance. I guess as time went on it's relevance faded due to no more games being released. However, people still talk about the franchise. So it's not what I consider a cult franchise given it's pretty well known.

 

[eyeball_kid]

I think AAA single-player games aren't what they once were in terms of interest, but single-player games are still going strong, as evidenced by the strong sales of Persona 5 and Yakuza 0 last year.

I do think the $60 ceiling has to change. That price point hasn't been adjusted for inflation in 20 years (let alone rising dev costs), yet movie ticket prices have at least doubled since then.

 

[Deleted member 1698]

If people are buying them and bouncing off because they find them boring then fine, more power to them.

That's not the issue here. The issue is that these games are not getting bought in the first place.

Click to shrink...

The issues are linked.

Take the follow up to Deus Ex HR. Did I buy that? No. Why? Because HR was a deeply mediocre experience. It wasn't the lack of marketing, it was simply that I didn't want more of the same of something I didn't enjoy. I can say the exact same thing of dishonoured 2
. Wolfenstein 2 I did buy... but I never played New Order so that is consistent with what I'm talking about. While it is "fine", I'd also not buy another one after because it just isn't fun to actually play.

So if single player linear shooting games are not getting bought I'd say that is because those games being produced are poor and lacking innovation (something that the multiplayer scene is excelling in at the moment). To combat that you either try harder, or drop the budget so it is less risky.

Companies like EA will do neither and haven't done so for a decade, so I'm not sure what Amy was thinking was going to happen.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

It's a funny one.

I saw some thread on Twitter where I believe someone may have used VGZhartz numbers to show Fable 3 sold more copies than Horizon Zero Dawn, yet Microsoft didn't want to go with a traditional Fable after 3 despite good sales, but are now inspired to make one by a game that sold less than Fable 3.

How ironic.

 

[Deleted member 35126]

Honestly, I do recall Legacy Of Kain being pretty well known. The Soul Reaver games have been heralded. So is Defiance. I guess as time went on it's relevance faded due to no more games being released. However, people still talk about the franchise. So it's not what I consider a cult franchise given it's pretty well known.

Click to shrink...

Now that I think about it, I'm not sure I'd chalk up Amy's notoriety to either of those franchises. Really, I think most of her fame came from the controversies of being forced out of ND followed by being attached to Visceral amidst a studio closure without anything to show for her time there. I just don't recall people talking about Amy otherwise. I could be totally wrong on that, but she was at least never a Kojima or even a Ken Levine from my perspective on how people knew and viewed her. Regardless, I didn't care for her work at ND anyways, so it doesn't matter much to me one way or the other.

 

[TalonJH]

I must be out of touch, but are there really that many people who prefer watching somebody play through a whole game on Twitch/YouTube, rather than actually play the game and experience it their self?

Click to shrink...

I run into a lot of people who if a linear game doesn't score 95 or above and is isn't 60 hours long, they say it's not worth $60 and rather watch it on youtube. The Last of Us was a game that a lot of people just watched on YouTube.

 

[mael]

Horizon Zero Dawn says hi.

Click to shrink...

There is no way that Horizon is a single player linear narrative driven game.
The fact that Guerrilla went from linear fps with multiplayer component to open world with such success speaks loudly of the value non linear single player content.

Same goes for Zelda btw.
The shift to open world basically revived the franchise.

 

[Nerfed Llamas]

As someone who primarily plays single player games and has a very strict budget, I have to be discerning with how I spend my money on video games. I don't spend a whole lot on games anymore because I can't afford it (house note, bills, family responsibilities, etc.). The problem I run into with single player games, or why I pass on many of them, is player engagement and replayability. I want games like Mass Effect 2, Witcher 3, Super Mario Odyssey, Stardew Valley, Catherine, Neir Automata, Binary Domain, Portal 2, etc. that have engaging game play, engrossing worlds, and invites the players to return for multiple plays to discover new paths, quests, or stories. I'm also huge on player choice and being able to find creative solutions to the challenges in a game. The way games are made today, and the kind of games being made are changing, and that means that single player games that want to sell like Witcher 3 or Super Mario Odyssey need to start offering more game for the dollar. I'd much prefer fewer single player games of higher quality to come out, than a lot of subpar single player games with very little meat to them. I'm also OK with publishers and devs monetizing their game to help absorb the growing costs of making these AAA games, because for a good game I will buy a season pass or DLC pack if the content is worth the price (Witcher 3, Breath of the Wild, and Mass Effect 2 are good examples here). Ultimately, what separates a purchase from a pass for me is whether or not I can see myself playing the game more than once, and if I think the game has something special/unique to offer. In many ways, linear single player games don't offer much of what I'm looking for anymore.

 

[Ian Henry]

Now that I think about it, I'm not sure I'd chalk up Amy's notoriety to either of those franchises. Really, I think most of her fame came from the controversies of being forced out of ND followed by being attached to Visceral amidst a studio closure without anything to show for her time there. I just don't recall people talking about Amy otherwise. I could be totally wrong on that, but she was at least never a Kojima or even a Ken Levine from my perspective on how people knew and viewed her. Regardless, I didn't care for her work at ND anyways, so it doesn't matter much to me one way or the other.

Click to shrink...

i

I respect your opinion. In that case, why don't you think people talk about her a lot?

 

[Deleted member 29682]

The issues are linked.

Take the follow up to Deus Ex HR. Did I buy that? No. Why? Because HR was a deeply mediocre experience. It wasn't the lack of marketing, it was simply that I didn't want more of the same of something I didn't enjoy. I can say the exact same thing of dishonoured 2
. Wolfenstein 2 I did buy... but I never played New Order so that is consistent with what I'm talking about. While it is "fine", I'd also not buy another one after because it just isn't fun to actually play.

So if single player linear shooting games are not getting bought I'd say that is because those games being produced are poor and lacking innovation (something that the multiplayer scene is excelling in at the moment). To combat that you either try harder, or drop the budget so it is less risky.

Companies like EA will do neither and haven't done so for a decade, so I'm not sure what Amy was thinking was going to happen.

Click to shrink...

If the games you were talking about were widely considered to be mediocre then that would be reflected in user and critical responses. Except Prey, Wolfenstein 2 and Dishonored are by and large well regarded by those who played them. If it were a simple case of 'good games = good sales' then they should have sold a lot better than they did. But there's more to it than that, otherwise Wii Sports would be the 4th greatest video game of all time. Marketing and target audience are things to consider.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

She's not wrong, but at the same time, if a game is made around multiplayer I'm definitely not buying it, so I'm screwed either way. If single-player games disappear there's no reason for me to even own a console anymore.

The industry needs to get its shit together and get costs under control.

 

[Brinksman]

Now that I think about it, I'm not sure I'd chalk up Amy's notoriety to either of those franchises. Really, I think most of her fame came from the controversies of being forced out of ND followed by being attached to Visceral amidst a studio closure without anything to show for her time there. I just don't recall people talking about Amy otherwise. I could be totally wrong on that, but she was at least never a Kojima or even a Ken Levine from my perspective on how people knew and viewed her. Regardless, I didn't care for her work at ND anyways, so it doesn't matter much to me one way or the other.

Click to shrink...

Amy's been popularly making the rounds since Soul Reaver. There's no end of old articles I could probably dredge up. I'd suggest there may be a difference in that she's historically considered a bit more reserved than others, and tends to avoid promoting herself overmuch. The Legacy of Kain community latched on to her as the mastermind running that series because of what her colleagues and others had to say about her, not because she ever attempted to portray herself as a genius auteur.

 

[Holundrian]

I bought Yakuza 0, DQ11, Trails of Cold Steel 3, Tokyo Xanadu, Kiwami and Nier Automata as single player story based games last year. Sure it's no the Uncharted production quality for any of these but most of them don't need that anyway as story based games.

 

[Deleted member 11832]

people aren't necessarily buying them. They're watching somebody else play them online.

Click to shrink...

I think this is becoming more and more true.

More and more people are watching games rather than playing them. The question of whether the revenues should be shared among streamers and developers will be re-open sometime in the future, when it becomes much more pronounced, and not just for solo games, MP games too.

I don't know if there's an elegant solution to this.

 

[Deleted member 35126]

i

I respect your opinion. In that case, why don't you think people talk about her a lot?

Click to shrink...

I think what generally defines you in the public eye, for better or worse, are your most recent achievements when we're talking about creators. Simply, Amy hasn't released a game in quite some time because of the unfortunate circumstances we've already noted. And as I mentioned previously, I think all 3 Uncharted games under her belt have been overtaken by Uncharted 4 which, to me, was a superior game in all regards. That may have an impact on people's perception of her work on that franchise as well.

Edit:

To clarify, I just don't think there's much to say at this point in time.

 

[esserius]

I think this is becoming more and more true.

More and more people are watching games rather than playing them. The question of whether the revenues should be shared among streamers and developers will be re-open sometime in the future, when it becomes much more pronounced, and not just for solo games, MP games too.

I don't know if there's an elegant solution to this.

Click to shrink...

I think Sean Vanaman proposes working with those people rather than fighting against them. The initial adversarial reaction isn't going to help any company in the short or long term. Embracing those new cultures is part of what can make indies so successful (and it could benefit larger organizations too, if they didn't still believe streamers were going to end them somehow).

 

[Deleted member 176]

Sadly, that's what happened with Deus Ex Mankind Divided :(
We 9n era love linear games, those with an story, but the industry, and the game buyers, are going on a different direction.
It's true you can have success with those types of games, but it's much more difficult now, I think.

Click to shrink...

What happened to Dues Ex mankind Devided was they tried to pull the same BS they do with multiplayer games and ended up delaying it to a month when much better games came out because of the backlash.

 

[Comet]

Of my many gamer friends I can't think of a single one that watches streams of others play. Maybe it's an age thing and the younger generation lives on Twitch? All I know is that all I play are single player story-based games.

 

[MisterBear]

I'm yet to be convinced of the economics of raising the price. I'd love to see a AAA game come out at a REDUCED price. We all thought Gran Turismo was dead on arrival until Sony pushed it hard and cut the price. I'd be really curious to see how a game would do if it was getting great word of mouth and hit shelves in huge quanities at £20 / ~$30

Click to shrink...

While I totally get that, the line of thinking is; well if it is $80 you only sell 500k and if it is $60 you sell $1.2 million. But I think people forget that is what eventual price drops are for though, I'd be interested to see how much the initial sales impact is-- which is the main factor. I think those that buy a game day one, wouldn't change DRASTICALLY if it costs $60 or $80. The people that want it at a cheaper price point are the ones that wait anyways...

But yea, I'd be interested in hearing how this works. Because then at that point, just charge $5 per game and you'll reach the largest player base possible.

 

[Thatguy]

I buy them. My problem with videogame stories is that usually they are written by some wanna be producer turned writer and are terrible. The industry needs to start hiring writers with nothing but literature background. True some have good stories. Kojima wrote interesting stories. But most stories and character drama are terrible in games though so I understand why they don't take off.

 

[Kill3r7]

What happened to Dues Ex mankind Devided was they tried to pull the same BS they do with multiplayer games and ended up delaying it to a month when much better games came out because of the backlash.

Click to shrink...

Do you mean No Man Sky and Madden 17? Because those were its competitors in August 2016. Unless you want to count WoW Legion on PC.

 

[Deleted member 1698]

If the games you were talking about were widely considered to be mediocre then that would be reflected in user and critical responses. Except Prey, Wolfenstein 2 and Dishonored are by and large well regarded by those who played them. If it were a simple case of 'good games = good sales' then they should have sold a lot better than they did. But there's more to it than that, otherwise Wii Sports would be the 4th greatest video game of all time. Marketing and target audience are things to consider.

Click to shrink...

I'm a user who only plays single player games and in general hates open landscape experiences. I'm telling you that in my opinion those are not good games.

It isn't the marketing. It isn't the youtubes, it isn't the lack of multiplayer. I know what those games offer and it is very little fun.

Am I alone? I doubt it. I think the market of people who want good single player games is as strong as it has always been. You just need to actually budget to make a game for that market and not just add "visceral action coop side quests!" To appeal to a bigger market that doesn't give a shit.

 

[GlitchyDegree]

I'm not sure I go for that. People are still buying games like Mario by the millions. RPGs like Skyrim and Fallout are still selling fairly well. Single player games are still popular regardless of whether or not folks watch them on Youtube or Twitch.

Click to shrink...

She is talking about short, linear, story driven games like Uncharted. Skyrim & Fallout are long open world RPGs & The most Recent Mario game is a open world platformer.

 

[Faust]

I think this is becoming more and more true.

More and more people are watching games rather than playing them. The question of whether the revenues should be shared among streamers and developers will be re-open sometime in the future, when it becomes much more pronounced, and not just for solo games, MP games too.

I don't know if there's an elegant solution to this.

Click to shrink...

I doubt I'm the majority but it's also made me buy games I had no desire to before because the game looked really cool.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

If the games you were talking about were widely considered to be mediocre then that would be reflected in user and critical responses. Except Prey, Wolfenstein 2 and Dishonored are by and large well regarded by those who played them. If it were a simple case of 'good games = good sales' then they should have sold a lot better than they did. But there's more to it than that, otherwise Wii Sports would be the 4th greatest video game of all time. Marketing and target audience are things to consider.

Click to shrink...

I would be buying those games if they weren't first person shooters. But as long as your "narrative game" asks me to walk around as a disembodied camera carrying a gun shooting things, I'm not gonna bother with it.

But my situation is probably different from most people's.

 

[Tauntaun]

I think a more honest discussion when it comes to talk of raising the 60$ price, is if a linear 8 hour story game really need those insane budgets.

Perhaps they should scale back and be budget titles, loose the excess baggage of insane marketing campaigns, big name voice actors and have more realistic goals for the project. I wish we had more AA budget games instead of the constant huge multi studio efforts.

Based on the kotaku write up on that cancelled star wars game, it had issues from day one, I think her response now is partly to save face. just imo of course.

 

[texhnolyze]

I bought Yakuza 0, DQ11, Trails of Cold Steel 3, Tokyo Xanadu, Kiwami and Nier Automata as single player story based games last year. Sure it's no the Uncharted production quality for any of these but most of them don't need that anyway as story based games.

Click to shrink...

Congrats for ignoring the 'linear' part of the title, let alone the article.

 

[Deleted member 29682]

I'm a user who only plays single player games and in general hates open landscape experiences. I'm telling you that in my opinion those are not good games.

It isn't the marketing. It isn't the youtubes, it isn't the lack of multiplayer. I know what those games offer and it is very little fun.

Am I alone? I doubt it. I think the market of people who want good single player games is as strong as it has always been. You just need to actually budget to make a game for that market and not just add "visceral action coop side quests!" To appeal to a bigger market that doesn't give a shit.

Click to shrink...

Fair enough, I'm not going to force you to like them. What would you say are good examples of modern linear SP games that do what these games don't? What could games like Dishonored 2, Prey and Wolfenstein 2 do to garner more interest from players like yourself?

 

[DMVfan123]

No lies detected
This is why I don't complain about microtransactions

 

[ABIC]

Based on the kotaku write up on that cancelled star wars game, it had issues from day one, I think her response now is partly to save face. just imo of course.

Click to shrink...

I think what she's saying has some sense, but it doesn't explain Ragtag much.

Additional monetization post-sale is the name of the game now. Third party publishers and Microsoft are already implementing it heavily. Sony has only dipped its feet with Uncharted multiplayer.

Going forward, Sony needs to balance its dominance of that AAA linear single player space with additional monetization lest they be left behind. There's too much money on the table.

I don't think pushing linear single player game budgets downwards is going to work. The spectacle drives the attention and the sales at the very top. They're going to be stuck between a rock and a hard place..

 

[Holundrian]

Congrats for ignoring the 'linear' part of the title, let alone the article.

Click to shrink...

I read the article and nowhere does it make the distinctive exclusion to which linear only means absurdly high budget cinematic experiences that are highly controlled.
I consider the games I cited as very linear story experiences given that there is no story branching(Everyone experiences the same story start to finish). If you wanna pretend that somehow it's side content that some of these games have somehow disqualifies them from being linear story experiences but yet somehow let's them do fine(unlike my implication that maybe linear story based games don't need all the AAA budget and maybe can actually shine through their story alone) then be my guest.

 

[Staticneuron]

All I was saying is that money doesn't always work out and that article is of course one I've read and that helps demonstrate that money doesn't always work out. Shit happens, and the type of money behind a game like The Witcher in another groups' hands don't guarantee anything. That's a simple statement and not one your post contradicts. I don't know what you're getting at by accusing me of wanting to "pull that card" and frankly it's kind of rude. I'm not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes or anything.

Click to shrink...

That is not all that you were saying if that is how you frame a response.

Here is what it seems like you did.

Many have also not, like Dishonored 2 and Mankind Divided. It really goes both ways and tbh the majority of the ones that have been sales successes have also been pretty much universally GOTY material. I think it's tougher than ever right now to be a good-but-not-GOTY-caliber AAA single player game.

Click to shrink...

some one responded

and then there's lawbreakers and battleborn becoming monumental flops with a AAA budget and the most casual gameplay model on the market.
the only argument i will accept is that its easier to catch lightning in a bottle with an MP game that it is with single players games , who almost always have to be good succeed .
But this makes the situation with well funded devs chasing after chance success even more questionable.These guys have the money to get a witcher 3 calibur made if they wanted to, developers of ark didnt thus they took the easier route.
I also find it hard to believe EA are happy with the profits being made off of their biggest game last year. Its january and im already starting to see half filled lobbies and completely dead modes. And now they cant do lootboxes and they have to add free dlc to it throughout the year.
This is with the most easiest game formula on the market with the easiest selling ip on the planet.

Click to shrink...

And you point out the one single player game that had such blatant issues with development. That is misleading. The poster points out a direction the publishers are going with their IP in search for more money. That includes setting a hard date on the SP game that was having issues. The difference is that CD project would not have released until they felt comfortable as they are both the Devs and Publishers. In this situation EA didn't care. The biggest issues and the cause for alot of SP games to go down is that the pubs aren't interested in the polish as they are more interested in the product and its means to make them money. That is what drive some series to be "Annual" releases and that is what pushed EA to a "Games as a Service model".

AAA games don't need to be GOTY, the issue we are seeing recently is AAA games either not being advertising or released in a state riddled with bugs, unrealistic sales expectations (only SE it seems), and a general shift away from these games meaning the failures seem more pronounced in comparison to earlier generations which were filled with linear AAA experiences.

The failure of andromeda is not a normal thing to expect with AAA money being handed to an established dev that has been around for more than two decades. Amof, given what happened despite how decent it looks, I am actually worried about Anthem.

 

[Deleted member 29682]

I would be buying those games if they weren't first person shooters. But as long as your "narrative game" asks me to walk around as a disembodied camera carrying a gun shooting things, I'm not gonna bother with it.

But my situation is probably different from most people's.

Click to shrink...

Yeah if you're avoiding first-person shooters Wolf isn't going to be your bag. I'd be a bit hesitant in calling Dishonored and Prey first-person shooters, if only because they allow a fair bit of flexibility in how you play, allowing for more subtle approaches and sandbox-y problem solving. Think more Hitman and System Shock respectively. And while Dishonored's story and characters certainly aren't going to light the world on fire, Prey is a great showcase of environmental storytelling, building up a pretty rich background narrative.

But yeah if you're looking out for less violent games then they're tough to find outside of indie efforts. I guess it's the nature of the medium that the big action-movie style games dominate the high-budget AAA side of things. A really interesting game just came out called The Red Strings Club which has been almost completely overlooked on ERA. Only got an hour in but it could be your thing.

 

[Deleted member 1698]

Fair enough, I'm not going to force you to like them. What would you say are good examples of modern linear SP games that do what these games don't? What could games like Dishonored 2, Prey and Wolfenstein 2 do to garner more interest from players like yourself?

Click to shrink...

That was my earlier point. In the AAA space there really isn't any I can think of beyond the last of us which was five years ago now.

Wolfenstein for example is the brain deadiest of brain dead shooters. Now that isn't necessarily a problem in itself because there is a small group of gamers who want an experience just like that.

But did they buy it for the story? I doubt it, if they did I bet the gameplay was dead boring. Did they buy it for the gameplay? If so the story isn't all that relevant, more of an added bonus and not something to spend 50 million on. Nostalgia? That works, but only once.

Personally I'd play it for the story hoping to tolerate the gameplay just enough to get through it (see neir automata which is 100% a linear game btw as there is only ever one thing worth doing). This kind of works but doesn't have me lining up for a sequel.

 

[Lindsay]

Dunno who she is but if she's using that arguement she already lost points in my book.

Or maybe I'm outta touch and in some super minority of people who only play single player games! Also I can't say that I watch other people play games instead of playing 'em myself. Even ones I wouldn't normally play anyway.

 

[Deleted member 15948]

On a slight tangent, from one of the articles about Remedy linked:

He then reiterated that a "one-and-done" type of game also frustrates developers from a creative standpoint, as consumers tend to play those games very quickly after the creatives have spent years of their lives conceiving this fictional world.

Click to shrink...

This is one of the stupidest things I've read in a while. Do these people think that authors are disappointed when someone reads a book that took years to write in a handful of hours (if that)?

 

[Wagram]

There's only so much I can buy and play as a single individual. I put my money where my mouth is.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Yeah if you're avoiding first-person shooters Wolf isn't going to be your bag. I'd be a bit hesitant in calling Dishonored and Prey first-person shooters, if only because they allow a fair bit of flexibility in how you play, allowing for more subtle approaches and sandbox-y problem solving. Think more Hitman and System Shock respectively. And while Dishonored's story and characters certainly aren't going to light the world on fire, Prey is a great showcase of environmental storytelling, building up a pretty rich background narrative.

But yeah if you're looking out for less violent games then they're tough to find outside of indie efforts. I guess it's the nature of the medium that the big action-movie style games dominate the high-budget AAA side of things. A really interesting game just came out called The Red Strings Club which has been almost completely overlooked on ERA. Only got an hour in but it could be your thing.

Click to shrink...

It's less a violence thing and more I don't enjoy "IMMERSIVE CAMERA MOVEMENT" and mute or near-mute protagonists. The camera constantly moving around to "simulate" a character's head movement makes me nauseous, and all of Bethesda's first person games love to do that. I never feel like I'm playing a character, I feel like I'm just being jostled around and the discomfort always outweighs the entertainment factor.

Guns also bore me, which is the other half of the equation. "Aim for weak spot, hit kill button" just doesn't really do anything for me.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

I think a more honest discussion when it comes to talk of raising the 60$ price, is if a linear 8 hour story game really need those insane budgets.

Perhaps they should scale back and be budget titles, loose the excess baggage of insane marketing campaigns, big name voice actors and have more realistic goals for the project. I wish we had more AA budget games instead of the constant huge multi studio efforts.

Based on the kotaku write up on that cancelled star wars game, it had issues from day one, I think her response now is partly to save face. just imo of course.

Click to shrink...

There have been several numbers people in this thread that have pointed out that there is a clear relationship between marketing/development budget and sales.

Smaller, cheaper games are paradoxically more risky since for every PUBG or Cuphead, you have hundreds of thousands of forgotten lower budget games that like 12 people bought

 

[Poutine Runner 2049]

I want and buy single player games. Fuck me, right?

 

[SaintBowWow]

There's just so much to play now and games devalue so quickly that there's no incentive to buy a 10 hour linear game on day one. Being a part of the zeitgeist for a multiplayer game or even an open world sandbox is so much more fun than a linear game where you can really just discuss the same story that everyone else experienced. So even though I like linear single player games every now and then, I pretty much always buy them for $10-$20. There's no real urge I ever have to buy the latest one because the enjoyment of playing it at the same time as anyone else is minimal, and if I have a craving for that type of experience I can just pick up a linear single player game from the last year or two that I haven't played yet.

 

[Deleted member 29682]

But did they buy it for the story? I doubt it, if they did I bet the gameplay was dead boring. Did they buy it for the gameplay? If so the story isn't all that relevant, more of an added bonus and not something to spend 50 million on.

Click to shrink...

This might surprise you but playing a game for both story and gameplay is possible. It's not an either/or situation. In fact I think most people prefer games which do well with both.
But I get it, a good-for-FPS story like Wolfenstein isn't exactly the high target you're aiming for, there are certainly better game stories out there.

So what could Prey and Dishonored do to improve?