This is why you should all support Nintendo and punish companies such as EA.

#41kdognumba1Posted 3/27/2013 10:45:51 PM(edited)
This is a pretty good video. I love how they point out that this is not exclusive to EA but most if not all the major publishers are messing up and putting games out just to put games out quickly rather then making quality titles, Nintendo included. I also like how they pointed out that despite Valve's development time being longer they're doing well financially and make great games because they take their time and work hard on their games.

With that said, towards the end when he started talking about how the industry hasn't gotten back its steam after the economy crisis, including Gamestop, I actually think he missed a big loophole as there's definitely another side to this coin. One of the reasons why the industry has had such a hard time getting back on its feet is actually BECAUSE of Gamestop. Gamestop, aggressively goes after sales of used games that are current but ignores games from the past. What this means is they push trade ins and selling of used games especially for games within the last year, usually selling the used copies for $5 less then the new, but completely ignore the many times very rare and very lucrative generations that came before the current. Taking into account what the video has said (and what I seen by walking in gamestop on many occasions) with many of the gamestop customers being casuals (who generally have little to no knowledge of the industry), many people decide to by the 5 dollars less, used copy (that usually has a messed up book, case, and disc) over the 5 dollars more expensive new copy usually after the employees are forced to "inform" them of the used "saving".

This aggressive tactic that this company has picked up has been echoed somewhat by many other companies including Best Buy, Hastings, Amazon, and Walmart who all tried or are trying there hands at used game sales. Because of this, the publishers have had to adopt these tactics that nobody is fond of in their games. Even the games that they spend a long time making and are of high quality, usually don't make the sales numbers that justify the investments. This of course isn't always true as games like Call of Duty for example make way more then their deserved sales imo but for the lesser known series's and newer IP, they're getting completely murdered by these tactics.

This is where Steam comes in and why Valve has been doing well financially. Valves biggest market is PC gaming and there biggest source for sales is there incredibly polished service, Steam. There are no used games on Steam and there's still DRM but because Valve isn't aggressive with how they use DRM, how they go about the relation with the consumers AND developers and because gamers can get games at dirt cheap prices during sales, not many complain and the ones who do usually are the ones who don't want DRM at all. I'm not going to defend DRM here either cause yes, I'd love for 1 game to work on all my devices but DRM is there so people can't copy games. If you don't know about what copying games can do to a game company, look up Sega and their last system, the Dreamcast.
---
backloggery: http://backloggery.com/kdog254 twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/kdognumba1
3DS: 1676-3698-5986 PSN: jotaroxtreme NID/XBL: kdog254 Steam: kdognumba1
#42nonexistingheroPosted 3/27/2013 10:54:01 PM
I don't think another crash will happen. The gaming industry has too many things to fall back on to crash. There might be a drop soon though, if the PS4 and Xbox 3 won't really sell. But I think the Wii U will do just fine.
---
Read the mania: http://www.fanfiction.net/~nonexistinghero
In SA2, it's Super Sonic and Hyper Shadow.
#43nonexistingheroPosted 3/27/2013 11:42:07 PM
iovandrake posted...
Basing your system around a controller is not right. Was the SNES a bad system because it didn't have a tablet? Was it bad because it didn't have motion controls? No. Part of the problem is people buying what the industry feeds them. That they NEED certain features to have fun. This is true of all of the companies and Nintendo isn't the worst offender when it comes to modern gaming problems, but does contribute in its own way.

I didn't watch the video, btw. I was merely giving a blanket statement since I know a lot of people on this board seem to think Nintendo is a saint that has saved gaming. Nintendo did a lot to damage gaming. The 3ds you all love could have been out years sooner had Nintendo cared. They didn't though. They had a monopoly on the handheld market for a decade with the original gameboy and held that tech back on purpose. Nintendo would do that continually if they could get away with it.


Systems mostly are based around their controller. It's what you use as an interface. It's what makes you control the stuff that happens on the screen. You're a fool if you think the SNES controller didn't influence each and every game ever made for the system.
---
Read the mania: http://www.fanfiction.net/~nonexistinghero
In SA2, it's Super Sonic and Hyper Shadow.
#44DBPanterAPosted 3/28/2013 12:49:35 AM
koolguy5 posted...
Well I'm glad im not the only one who thought the way the guy in the video did, makes sense to me. But just a question to senior gamers..what benefit is there to Sony when it decided to make a patent like it did? What was the business strategy? It's hard for me to believe that they would oversee the absolute negative feedback from consumers and the renting industries by such a decision.


Sony are no angels (to be fair, not one company that sells video games that is on the stock market is an angel). The idea behind this explained in the video. By preventing used sales or rentals (people trading their games over and over again to gamestop to collect trophies/achievements is renting a game in the 21st century), they receive a larger chunk of change. Fact is, the PS3 actually cost Sony money. They spent more on production and development than they made back. They banked hard on blu-ray as they did with DVDs and the PS2, the problem was the vast majority of the public began using devices like Netflix/Amazon/Hulu to stream content and blu-ray never caught on like VHS or DVD. In fact, many brick and mortar retailers are down sizing their DVD/Blu-ray selection because they don't sell.

I would recommend googling LA Times and "Anatomy of a $60 video game. Each time a 3rd party sells a PS3 game, such as EA, roughly $7 goes to Sony as a royalty. This is also why I get angry when supposed Nintendo fans say they are glad a certain game isn't on a Nintendo console. It's a win-win for everyone even if you don't buy the said game.

The issue that Sony will have, and this is something I don't feel they will announce at E3 but will in the weeks leading to the PS4 launch, but a PS+ account will be needed for backward compatibility. That nominal fee will also go up in price to something similar to XBL. Researching enough on Microsoft you realize that with 40 million people on XBL at $60 a pop means 2.4 Billion a year. That is a lot of money regardless of what they offer.
---
NNID: Minny612
3DS FC: 5155-2933-9036
#45DBPanterAPosted 3/28/2013 1:00:32 AM
This video was interesting and brings up some good points, but the real issue here is not simply bad games.

Video games are an entertainment industry. They fight for consumers eyes just like the TV, the internet, facebook, smart phones, computers, films, etc. The issue is there are all these devices that offer many of the same things and have tremendous overlap, and people want the most content for the cheapest investment. I will always say that a $60 is easily the cheapest form of entertainment when comparing the hours of enjoyment you receive relative to going to a sporting event, a concert, or a movie.

Because of the stock market crash, the investors of these companies began losing faith and wanted to see positive results. If a game sells 2 million, the next one needs to sell more to put more money in the investors pockets. It's that simple. This is why the past 6 years has been dominated by IPs that have been around for a bit. You don't spend $20-200 million making a game, throwing out a ton of money for advertizement on a brand new IP.

I am old enough to remember renting games on the NES and spending hours in arcades. I don't see the issue with DLC pricing, because let's face it, its like putting quarters into skiball when all I want is Street Fighter 2. You have the option not to buy it. These companies are about making money, and will do their best to make as much money as possible. Nintendo included.

Lastly, take a look at what happened to Activisions stock the day it announced that Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 became the fastest form of media to achieve 1 billion dollars in sales (15 days). It went down. Why? Stock holders believe they should make more money on the game and that it is under-priced, especially considering how many hours people sink into it. Do not be surprised if some of these games require a fee for on-line play. These companies are willing to sell less games, but make it back in a monthly fee of some sort.
---
NNID: Minny612
3DS FC: 5155-2933-9036
#46jairusmonillasPosted 3/28/2013 1:22:27 AM
Atleast EA makes games for everyone, Nintendo only makes games for kids and for childish adults. Nintendo never make games for the real gamers and hardcores.
#47DBPanterAPosted 3/28/2013 3:33:33 AM
jairusmonillas posted...
Atleast EA makes games for everyone, Nintendo only makes games for kids and for childish adults. Nintendo never make games for the real gamers and hardcores.


That is a pretty ridiculous thing to say. Categorizing an entire companies offerings as "kiddie," then following up with the "real gamers" and "hardcore" nonsense. A real gamer buys all genres of games, not a certain subset; therefore those "kiddy" games a real gamer will play. A real gamer also plays all genres and spends the most money. They are not the sort to play a certain genre or play games only with a T or M on the cover.

I won't even tackle hardcore, but if you actually watched the video you would realize a hardcore gamer is someone who sinks a good amount of money into their hobby each and every year. To me "hardcore" is someone who spends north of $600 per year, as that is 10 games per year.
---
NNID: Minny612
3DS FC: 5155-2933-9036
#48iovandrakePosted 3/28/2013 3:57:35 AM
nonexistinghero posted...
iovandrake posted...
Basing your system around a controller is not right. Was the SNES a bad system because it didn't have a tablet? Was it bad because it didn't have motion controls? No. Part of the problem is people buying what the industry feeds them. That they NEED certain features to have fun. This is true of all of the companies and Nintendo isn't the worst offender when it comes to modern gaming problems, but does contribute in its own way.

I didn't watch the video, btw. I was merely giving a blanket statement since I know a lot of people on this board seem to think Nintendo is a saint that has saved gaming. Nintendo did a lot to damage gaming. The 3ds you all love could have been out years sooner had Nintendo cared. They didn't though. They had a monopoly on the handheld market for a decade with the original gameboy and held that tech back on purpose. Nintendo would do that continually if they could get away with it.


Systems mostly are based around their controller. It's what you use as an interface. It's what makes you control the stuff that happens on the screen. You're a fool if you think the SNES controller didn't influence each and every game ever made for the system.


A system is not based around it's controller. The controller is made for the system. Having four face buttons, a d-pad, start, select, and two shoulder buttons didn't make the SNES less of a system. You can always ALWAYS make a new controller to plug into a system. The system is NOT the controller. The only reason you believe otherwise is because Nintendo told you so.

Was the PS3 or 360 built around Move or Kinect? No. They were added on later. It was stupid, but still it proves my point. A controller is not the system. The controller is designed after the system. Nintendo designing the controller to be their number one feature is stupid. They should design a system that can play the best games it can. Not worry about a controller that hooks into a shoddy system.
#49IcedEarthaholicPosted 3/28/2013 4:36:20 AM
nonexistinghero posted...
I don't think another crash will happen. The gaming industry has too many things to fall back on to crash. There might be a drop soon though, if the PS4 and Xbox 3 won't really sell. But I think the Wii U will do just fine.


I disagree, a crash is going to happen, not today or tomorrow but give it 5-10 years and it will be game over as we know it. I actually find it fascinating, and look forward to seeing what all arises from the ashes as old companies and IPs die off completely, hopefully EA burns along the way. Activi$ion too.
---
Want to help bring Fatal Frame Deep Crimson Butterfly to NA?Join Operation Zero https://www.facebook.com/pages/Operation-Zero/131582506953973
#50MelkacPosted 3/28/2013 5:39:48 AM
I'm so hyped for the videogame crash of 2013/4/5!! *-*
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43C2aBKMqeA