-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
"The flops are piling up for video game titans" - Daily Herald
- Thread starter Killer
- Start date
Wage stagnation and lack of disposable income is a significant issue that affects entertainment products, yup.
Cost of development has increased dramatically while prices have remained static. Most forms of additional monetization are received negatively by consumers, at this point I think publishers just need to say fuck it and increase game prices.
I don't know about that. Streaming doesn't really make any money.
It almost seemed like a typo, but it seems serious. https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-19-microsoft-hiring-for-a-major-xbox-aaaa-console-title
The same rehashes releasing over and over are the biggest games on the market every year though, with a game called cod being the best selling game for more than 10 years except in 2013 and 2019.
Except their lunch is getting eaten by games that cost $0.
Increasing prices is going to make it worse.
I'm really curious how the streaming model that will be the inevitable future of games distribution will impact developers and publishers.
How would that even work? Platform owners (sony, ms) pay a flat fee to the developer for the rights to have the game on their service? Bonuses paid out for certain numbers of streams/downloads?
How would that even work? Platform owners (sony, ms) pay a flat fee to the developer for the rights to have the game on their service? Bonuses paid out for certain numbers of streams/downloads?
I think we would have entered a new era of red dead flopped. I wish it would have. Bring back mid tier.
That will lead to fewer sales, horrible idea. Again, wage stagnation and lack of disposable income. The market is competitive, you succeed by competing, not by raising prices past what consumers are willing to pay
The classic "we're only making some of the money and not all the money" mentality is how battlefield 5 or tomb raider can have disappointing sales.
I mean if bungie wants to continue making destiny based products or a game on that scale they're going to need a publisher or investors.
Outside of fortnite, how many f2p games have truly cause disruption in the market?
Idk, maybe it just me, but there isn't a game I've played this gen that I've paid $60 for that I wouldn't have also paid, say, $70 for, and if that extra $10 up front keeps mtx and lootboxes at bay, or at least to a minimum, the I'm all for it.
And the problem, one of the problems, is that the games aren't realistic in the end. Not even RDR 2 is believable in that sense. To me they are just wasting their time obsessing with these things.
While EA stock fell Wednesday by 13%, it has since risen by 16.05% today to end $5.10 higher than before it fell Wednesday.
Any of the successful ones. DOTA 2, League of Legends, Warframe, etc.
What you are talking about already exists, it's called a deluxe edition. They arent going to raise prices and then get rid of microtransactions, because that's leaving money on the table. It's not gonna happen.
Yeah... Why does a massive corporation have to assume that the next game in the series will be better and gain more cultural traction than what is arguably the biggest hit of all time? Couldn't they be slightly more realistic with their expectations? Isn't it slightly risky to just assume you will always make more money than the year prior?
Most publisher execs would get massive bonuses with a 40m seller. It's a huge number no matter what franchise you're talking about. Nobody should consider it to be a disappointment, unless they have a terrible business strategy.
Do you have proof that it would lead to lower sales? I'm pretty sure $60 games do consistently better than $20-40 games. Who's to say that $70 games would suddenly flop? Gaming is a far cheaper form of entertainment than anyone ever gives it credit for, and a small increase in prices wouldn't change that.
There is such a stark contrast between Japanese game budgets and US budgets. I feel like the Japanese business model has been much more sustainable as they seem to know their target audiences much better, as opposed to shooting to the moon and trying to get everyone on board with the next gaming fad so they can cash in ASAP. The budget in most Japanese games reflect that. Games like Neir and Persona can sell 1 million copies and be considered a huge success. EA being disappointed by 7.5 million sales of Battlefield just shows how unsustainable their practices have been.
A deluxe edition is an option to spend a little more to get a little more, I'm talking about a universal increase to the standard price if games.
Because the problem this article is talking about is games underperforming at full price. Why do you think BFV being $70 instead of $60 would have led to higher sales? Why do you think that revenue streams like lootboxes and other microtransactions would suddenly disappear because the sticker price rose $10?
This is basic stuff, when you raise prices you are inevitably price some consumers out of the market. In an industry where prices already lower within a matter of months in order to remain competitive and move units, you think that raising the base price will have no affect on sales? You arent thinking things through.
EA released the game Apex Legends, which has so far been well received.
Sorry shareholders. There's other games besides yours, most of which treat their customers better.
I never said increasing price would lead to higher sales, I said that a small price increase would generate more revenue upfront without having any significant affect on sales. As I asked before, how many games have people paid $60 for this gen that they'd pass on at $70 for? I can't think of anything personally.
That's fucking stupid!
That's less than half of the previous number sold and you really want to argue expecting more than less than half is too much. I cant. If that's what I'm arguing against in this thread, I fucking can't.
A significant portion of consumers don't even purchase at the $60 price games start at...that's why games go on sale. If prices go up, demand will lower, especially when it comes to entertainment goods. Asking people for personal anecdotes doesn't change this, it's basic supply and demand.
Halo 5 is a failure for more reasons than just sales. It sold less than most of the other titles in the franchise not only that it's just not a very good game that has hurt the halo name. I know I am not the only one that is incredibly wary of 343 handling of halo and how they dropped the ball in so many ways with it.
Except most of what you said is an opinion at best. Let alone Halo 5 was a financial success and has done better than Destiny 2 on the Xbox One.
User banned: (2 weeks): hostility and accumulated infractions
Oh no I understand how it works thx also keep up being condecending right up until EA shuts you down next, also are you guys ever gonna fix the cheating problem in BF5 ?
While they have nothing else. If COD stumbles, it will take Activision with them. maybe Blizzard survives but probably under a new master (tencent)
Meanwhile RE 2R/Spider man/KH 3 sell millions in less than a week
Stock market analysts don't understand games or the game market but I'm starting to feel like neither do publishers.
You should run the math on what you said again.
The market would strongly disagree. If companies could raise the base price of games, they'd do it.
The issue is just a chain of factors:
1) Gamers want bigger, prettier, longer games. People (like Jim Sterling for example) can say nobody asked for that, but they would be wrong. Digital Foundry exists to literally check minuscule shit like pixels and grass shading and whatever, and we should all remember the dumb controversy over puddles in Spiderman. If studios could make this shit cheaper, they would, but they would get blasted by dumb gamer rage for every compromise.
2) Gamers won't pay more than $60 for a base game, and today, often pay less through deals and coupons and all that. And that price is like 20 years old. The $60 today doesn't even go as far as it did back then.
3) So you can't cut costs or raise prices on everybody. So then you supplement the revenue with DLC and special editions (which effectively raise the base price for some customers who wanna pay extra).
That's how we get to today. Gamers are why companies can't raise prices, and they bitch like crazy if devs cut costs too.
Personally, I'm fine with DLC and MTX and all that. It's just a good way for cheap people like me to access games without paying more. I already budget pretty well, but an across the board price hike would just make that harder.
I don't agree that consumers are unpredictable. This industry is incredibly quality focused, now more than ever. It's not just about creating a good product, you have to create something authentic that resonates with people. That's where many have faltered.
Yet I look at these companies, and in some cases, like Activision Blizzard, they exceed their projected earnings and their shares still shit the bed.