* The people in charge of developing games know nothing about developing games. Major studio execs are almost never gamers, and the decisions major studios make reflect that.
I've read this article before, while I agree that the stuff it lists is definitely a problem, the gaming industry this at this point is more or less at the point of "too big to fail" to ever have anything like the 80's crash without something extremely drastic & improbable happening.
Though I wanted to point out this particular entry, because the issue of being top heavy in administration is probably an issue for most modern businesses these days. You've more people than likely necessary making decisions that affect so deeply on what gets done, yet have no idea what it takes to do anything or how their decisions are going to affect the process beyond what data correlations tell them. --- Remember kids, it's only an RPG until someone gets hit with a meteor; Then it's a JRPG! SSBB: 3869 0521 7142
The industry is nothing like the shape it was in he 1980s. If PC gaming weren't a viable alternative to consoles like they are now...then maybe. But because PC is an open system where literally anyone can make a game for it, there's always room for other people. And in a capitalistic system, cream generally rises to the top. Meaning good ideas and what people like will continue to get made and supported. Thus there will always be a certain level of quality you can expect, of course there are exceptions, but the amount of terrible games being made isn't anywhere near like it was in the 80s.
What'll happen if things go sideways is that the bigger companies like EA will have to slim down some and refocus their efforts on a smaller amount of titles. Instead of having their hand in a little bit of everything, they'll be focused on stuff like Battlefield, Mass Effect/Dragon Age, and a few other higher profitability titles. I think some mid tier companies might go belly up, Square Enix (among other Japanese devs...Japanese gaming industry is in big trouble IMO). --- Big Money. Big Women. Big Fun. Skillz Ferguson
And in a capitalistic system, cream generally rises to the top.
Not true. Cheap crap with broad appeal generally rises to the top. Look at any sort of privately operated industry that isn't prone to "natural monopolies," and you'll find that whatever's at the top isn't of the best quality. Sometimes the best quality finds a niche, sometimes it doesn't, but it hardly ever rises to the top. --- http://thecrankyhermit.wikispaces.com/ Year-by-year analysis of the finest gaming has to offer, and (eventually) more!
I noticed the qualifier. That doesn't make your point less wrong. "Almost never" as a qualifier would make you more right.
Point being if you make a genuinely good game, you'll most likely do alright with it.
That's actually not the point you made, but that's also not true. Plenty of genuinely good games have failed commercially. --- http://thecrankyhermit.wikispaces.com/ Year-by-year analysis of the finest gaming has to offer, and (eventually) more!
The difference this time is that there are thousands of old games that are amazing that many of us have yet to play.
Gaming cannot collapse because there is already an unbreakable foundation of these games to fall back on if new titles fail to deliver. --- No game will ever come close to the fun I had playing Castlevania: HD. PSN/Gamertag/Steam: NinjaGuerra