EA: Withholding The Next Great Videogame Franchise For The Next Console Is Good Business
from the so-you-get-GTA42-instead,-jerks dept
I'll admit that video game producer Electronic Arts confuses me quite often. Any company their size is going to suffer from some internal conflicting opinions, but as an organization EA sometimes comes off as suffering from multiple personality disorder. One personality says that sales pricing on games is horrific, while the other embraces free games. They've shown that they can use trademark law well, but then manage to swallow a crazy pill when it comes to recognizing how an endless stream of sequels hurts their business. That last link is from 2007, when the boss of EA at the time admitted that pumping out sequels instead of original titles was having a negative effect on the bottom line. It seems that in five short years, the new brass at EA forgot that admission.Speaking with Games Industry, current President of EA's labels, Frank Gibeau, discusses the chaos of the marketplace and the golden era of gaming he believes is going to come out of it. I'll admit, there's some very encouraging stuff in the piece, between once again acknowledging the emerging success of new business models, free to play games, and the power of the internet to massively expand the marketplace for gaming as a whole. That's all good thinking. But then we get to where he discusses EA's intellectual property strategy.
"The time to launch an IP is at the front-end of the hardware cycle, and if you look historically the majority of new IPS are introduced within the first 24 months of each cycle of hardware platforms," Gibeau says. "Right now, we're working on 3 to 5 new IPs for the next gen, and in this cycle we've been directing our innovation into existing franchises.In case you don't want to parse through the exec speak, let me break this down for you. EA is actively working on new, original franchises, but they won't release them until the next generation of consoles comes out. This is under the notion that new franchises released in the middle or late stages of a console's life are doomed to failure or mediocrity. There are examples of why that outlook shouldn't be taken as gospel: Pokemon (released 7 years into the original Game Boy's life), Grand Theft Auto (released roughly 4 years into the original Playstation's life cycle), Gran Turismo (released roughly 3 years into the original Plastation's life cycle), or Guitar Hero (released roughly 5 years into the PS2's life cycle). All of those titles, by the way, are among the best selling franchises of all time. The point is that if you match the desire for new titles that Gibeau acknowledges with great game franchises, you build huge sales.
"As much as there's a desire for new IP, the market doesn't reward new IP this late in the cycle; they end up doing okay, but not really breaking through."
But even if Gibeau's supposition was true, there is a problem: the console life cycle this go around is longer than previous generations. While rumors about the next generation of gaming consoles surfaced way back in 2010, everyone's best guess for the soonest release is sometime in 2013 (and by "sometime", they mean Christmas at best). The XBOX 360 and PS3 came out in 2005 and 2006 respectively, which puts us somewhere in the neighborhood of a seven or eight year gap between console releases, depending on who gets to market first. Wii consoles are in roughly the same boat.
For the sake of comparison, here are some other timelines for console generations:
- Console generartion jump between the NES to Sega Genesis: 4 years
- Console generation jump between the Genesis/SNES to Playstation/N64: 5 years
- Console generation jump between the Playstation to PS2/Xbox: 5 years
- Console generation jump between the PS2/XBOX to PS3/XBox 360: 4 years for Xbox, 5 years for Playstation
The point is that the strategy is going to have to change with what is looking like something between 1.5 and 2 times the life cycle of the console. Customers simply aren't going to buy sequels for longer periods of time and if EA doesn't want to fill their need for new titles, someone else will. And, despite his earlier words, even Gibeau hints that he recognizes this.
"This is the longest cycle that any of us have ever seen, and we're at the point where a little bit of fatigue has set in, and people are wondering what they can possibly do next. I've seen the machines that we're building games for, and they're spectacular."But then he goes right back to discussing how balls-droppingly great the next generation of hardware is going to be and how that's where they'll focus.
"Gen 4 hardware is a huge opportunity, and it's going to lead to a huge growth spurt for the industry."Once again, it seems like they have multiple personality disorder. In the meantime, perhaps actually developing new material for the consoles your fans will have to deal with for the next couple of years yet might do wonders to turn around that sliding stock price.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: consoles, video games
Companies: ea
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
>Good business
Yeah, no.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I happen to agree with them that right now, it would be a pretty horrible time to bring out a new franchise, and there are plenty of reasons. I think the most important is that the next gen technology is going to be so much better than the current stuff, there is going to be so many more possiblities, that it's hard to imagine a star product for that technology even being workable on today's hardware.
It's particularly important when you look at the graphics engines. The new cycle video cards will be at least double the clock speed, with tons more memory, processes, and so on. They will also be native to driving HDMI / HD screens, which were still a major ass luxury when most of the current units were developed.
There is also the question of networking and network integration. With more overall horsepower, much more can be done to integrate remote gaming. I actually wouldn't be shocked to see 1 or more of the new consoles offer multiple screen output, to allow a two player (or even 4 player) back to back gaming situation.
For EA to develop new franchises that don't use this power would be to perhaps waste a good franchise by bringing it out half assed.
I think perhaps Mike this is one of those cases where your tendencies towards short term gains and short term thinking hurts. I think EA is exactly on track here, They can see the existing consoles are dated and the market perhaps run down, it's time to gear up for the next generation, which will be great - and they can perhaps be again a dominant force.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Between terrible DRM schemes and rapid franchise releases that are always more of the same and at the same time hardly worth the $60 they want to charge for a game, I'll go elsewhere to other companies that make games.
Those two are off the list to ever buy because of past bad decisions. It'll take way more than just a bunch of fancy words to change that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wrong
As the story points out the really great games don't seem to be synchronised to the hardware update cycle. This is because really good ideas cannot be subject to anything as banal as that. I could add quite a few more examples - the biggest of which is Tetris - which would have been implementable on the hardware of 5 or 6 years earlier..
(incidentally I understand that this "new great hardware" more or less corresponds to current top end PC hardware and so will be ~ 2 years out of date when it arrives).
My observation is that the new games that are produced to "exploit the new console" tend to be mostly rubbish - because it takes some experience and customer feedback to find out what works - and there is no guaranteee that the new hardware will result in anything worthwhile anyway.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Wrong
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I have to disagree here - the point is that advanced in technology are pretty much played out - it is difficult to think of hardware improvements that will have any real impact on what you can and can't do in a game. The proof that I am right is in the fact that these new platforms have been so delayed. They don't exist yet because the motivation for making a new platform has subsided. Rendering has reached a kind of saturation level where improvements are purely cosmetic in their effect. Advances in modelling and physics have yet to be exploited by gameplay that actually makes use of them. In the meantime the big switch has been back to casual games for small devices.
What EA is doing is trying to find an excuse for their own lack of ideas.
Having said that I have to admit that new ideas in the console space are hard to come by so the lack thereof is not surprising.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Also EA :P
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
FPIC EAIL
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
True -they use what is available - and the way the numbers work it kills less powerful hardware. But the key is this: -
Just looking at the visuals can you tell the difference?
Often increases in hardware power simply result in less efficent programming and modelling so the end result isn't much better.
Even if you can then does the actual gameplay show any benefit from that difference?
The key is that - as has been well known in the graphics community since just about forever- once you are immersed in a task the quality of the visuals becomes unimportant except insofar as they provide direct cues that affect the task.
and they can do much, much better.
In pure visual terms "much much better" doesn't exist. In the areas where "much much better" does exist - the problems are conceptual ones relating to software. Only when those problems are solved will hardware again enter into the equation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
WHAR?!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Such as? I'm always suspicious when someone says that better graphics/sound/whatever will somehow make things possible in terms of gameplay that aren't possible now. If you have ideas in that area, I've be interested in what you have to say. Maybe other capabilities of the consoles with introduce new benefits, but what is not possible now, exactly?
"It's particularly important when you look at the graphics engines."
Apart from making games look prettier and more realistic, is there anything that the current graphics engines is really holding back?
"I actually wouldn't be shocked to see 1 or more of the new consoles offer multiple screen output, to allow a two player (or even 4 player) back to back gaming situation."
There's a possibility, but is that really at the core of any game?
"I think perhaps Mike this is one of those cases where your tendencies towards short term gains and short term thinking hurts."
Except, that's usually not what he does. In fact, many of the things suggested refer to the long tail and the end to the "opening weekend" obsession most in the major entertainment industries have.
The fact is this: EA is currently suffering in the minds of many gamers not just because of its anti-gamer stance on things like DRM and second hand purchases, but it's stale franchises as well. Even at the best estimates, it will be well into 2014 before the install base of any new console comes close to being truly significant, possibly 2015. It might be longer depending on the teething problems the new technology has - remember, both Microsoft and Sony suffer extremely expensive issues with their hardware early in their lifecycles. It might be a smooth release with huge numbers of purchases this time round, but it's too early to tell.
Also, I remember people trashing the PS2 when the PS3 was on the horizon. God Of War came out at that time. I don't remember that being a poor decision with regard to release strategy. In fact, PS2 sales experienced a bump in its later lifecycle as GoW2 and FF12 on top of other franchises and price drops increased its attractiveness to non-early adopters. Unless there's a reason why important gameplay elements cannot be handled by current gen hardware, it seems rather short-sighted to put all eggs in that basket.
That doesn't mean it's not a good long-term strategy to look toward next gen improvements or capability, but I do question the idea of solely releasing on that platform. Your typical "this is my opinion and it's the only truth" stance doesn't convince me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
What he actually meant from the above was "I screwed up didn't bother checking the name of the author before attacking him yet again, but I'll try to deflect blame before anyone notices".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Wrong
With the PS2, check the quality of the launch games and then check the last few major franchises released on the console (e.g. God Of War 2), and then compare those to the PS3 launch games. I defy anyone to tell me that the launch games for the PS2 or 3 compare to those late cycle games in anything other than prettiness - and not even that for some games.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I don't bother with early adoption, and I was proven correct in my opinion last gen. Because I didn't jump straight in, I avoided the RRoD issues on the 360, avoided the high prices and manufacturing problems with the PS3's initial hardware, and came in when games and consoles were not only cheaper but had online marketplaces and gaming infrastructure that had matured sufficiently to be useful. Unless they come out with something absolutely astounding, I doubt I'll upgrade my consoles in the next 3 years, and even then I might not upgrade if the anti-used, anti-physical threats come to fruition.
Nope, I'll sit out the next gen while they fight it out, and may go to a competing console instead if the Android console (I forget the name) or the rumoured Valve system turn out to be real and high quality. While waiting, I might be convinced to buy into a new franchise on my current hardware, but there's no way in hell I'll ever upgrade to play a single game.
Time will tell, but I'm not convinced.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
On second though, perhaps I am wrong about you being Frank Gibeau because your comments seem even further from reality than the original Gibeau article.
For one thing you say that advances in networking will greatly enhance the gameplay experience. Most console game play is done from homes. Have you checked the situation in the US home broadband market? The US is far behind the rest of the world, and at least one recent study has shown us getting even further behind. In fact, we might start going backwards. Big ISP's are playing with the idea of bandwidth caps in an attempt to thwart cable cutting, and this would throw a massive wet blanket on internet gaming.
An even bigger issue in your comment, and apparently in the original Gibeau article, is a failure to consider mobile gaming. Perhaps the next gen consoles will have much more spectacular hardware. However, the next gen of phones and tablets will still be far behind the current gen of consoles. So if the success of the next gen of video games is going to rely on incredible hardware to make them spectacular they probably will not be even playable on what is becoming a major platform of choice.
Sometimes I wonder if there will even be a next gen of consoles. Or, perhaps there will be a next gen but it will fall flat.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Seriously, Tim use to have his own voice and it was easier to pick him out. Now, it's not so obvious, his stuff is really right on tone and message with Mike.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
At least I can always tell which AC is posting...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I would. That would mean they just gave up the chance to sell you 2-4 consoles, 2-4 copies of the same game and if it's Microsoft, 2-4 user accounts with pay-to-play multiplayer. Split-screen multiplayer hasn't been almost universally dumped because of lack of "horsepower" much less a lack of multple screen output, but as a revenue enhancing device.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I think their blanket statement that it's a bad idea to introduce new IP this late isn't true, although I agree with the general premise.
If you release early in the hardware cycle, you have that much longer to potentially sell the game. You also have the hype engine working (people get jazzed up about a new system) and much less overall competition on the platform. A new platform is only going to have a handful of really good games in the first months/year. Introducing to an old platform means there is many other options (including low price ones that can snipe customers).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So he's going back to the SNES / Genesis (Mega Drive) era?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_%28fourth_generation%29
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Been a long week, has it? Maybe doing double shifts as a republican for a nickel a post over on the Huffington Post? I know times are tough and you've gotta make ends meet, but this pace is gonna kill you.
Your quality is slipping too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're welcome to your opinion, but all I'll tell you is if you can't tell the difference between Mike's writing and mine, you may be a chimp....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I wish they hadn't tainted great franchises like Halo, GTA, Assassin's Creed and Metal Gear by exposing the story-lines to hardware long out dated by modern standards.
/sarc
No, I'm not of the opinion that waiting on a franchise for a new platform is good for anything except driving user adoption (spending). In fact many end-of platform games are BETTER than concurrent release versions on next gen consoles. Just because the processors go twice as fast doesn't make the game better.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I think my point still stands.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
A new console will be the death of consoles.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is the longest summer in living memory but......
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Doom a lot about exploring complex maps and finding all the keys and pathways and secrets?
I do agree that modern FPSs are long hallways punctuated with cutscenes . . .
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
This is so tragic. The reason is girlfriend gamers. Borderlands 2 has realized this and has a girlfriend mode. My wife plays games with me now, after years of watching me play. It is near impossible to find games to play together (she's no good at FTS, yet). I'm not buying two laptops so we can play Diablo 3 together, but if consoles don't fix this, we just might.
If a new console came out (OUYA, maybe) which realized this, it would kill in this market.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
That's certainly one point of view, especially if the new platform lacks backward compatibility so there's truly very few options for gamers on that platform. On the other hand, the install base on the new platform will be far lower as well, so a best seller on that platform may sell fewer copies than even a moderate seller on the old one.
There's definitely merit to both arguments. I think that the most notable thing here is that EA - a company heavily criticised for simply rehashing its old franchises - are bypassing the existing install base completely to gamble on the new. It could work. It could be a disaster. We shall see.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And those of us that use pirate chimps as our avatar, too.
*reports DH*
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
So, in that example the new hardware was what helped sell the game whereas the game may have been overlooked if it had been developed for hardware that didn't deliver the "wow" factor even if the story and gameplay were the same.
On the other hand, I'm sure we can all think of games that underperformed because the pretty, pretty next gen graphics weren't supported by anything else of interest.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
If they can do so much better on the PC, why don't they release their titles there?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Because there's nothing but piracy on PCs.
That's not my answer, but that's the standard answer that they've given before. With no supporting evidence whatsoever, beyond hand waving and "take our word for it".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
God, no.
Don't need multiplayer, don't need third person "action", don't need "Don't turn off your PC..."
Please God, let them make good computer games again.
I'm willing to pay, but not to be a chump.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
When new hardware comes out, people will buy it.
When they buy the new hardware, they also buy some new games.
When they buy new games, they're likely to buy the new flagship games.
Also take into account the fact that some of the new games can actually take advantage of the new the hardware.
So releasing a new IP with new hardware is a way to hedge a bet with some increased sales of people who will get the hot new game to play with the new hardware.
Could they release new IP on the existing hardware or PC? Of course, but they're just looking to hedge their bets a lil.
What's the big deal? How is this even news worthy?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Don't believe me? I would like you to take the games that were released in 1992 and compare them with the games that were released in 2012. Computers are still computers, pushing 1's and 0's around. The only real difference is that hardware has gotten much much more advanced. Faster, more powerful, more parallel.
And where that really matters a lot is math and physics. Take Half-Life 2. The game play relied heavily on simulating real world physics. Using the gravity gun to throw something across the field to hit an enemy for instance. The math involved for that would have taken several computers a long time back in 1992 running at 66MHz.
(http://www.computerhope.com/history/1992.htm - Intel 486DX2 66MHz was the screaming fast top of the line chip)
Since we don't know much about the next series of consoles, it's hard to say what specifically they are designing the games to do. But there are, right now, modern computer games that will not run on the current consoles.
(http://www.gamespot.com/news/skyrim-dawnguard-dlc-may-never-come-to-ps3-6394066)
It's a bit like going to IKEA on a whim and then trying to fit an entertainment center in to the backseat of your sedan because for some reason you decided not to drive your minivan that day. (personal experience)
It becomes a case of "What am I willing to give up in order to get an entertainment center today. I can fit a box that is 60 inches, and that one is 80 inches long. So I need to go back upstairs and find an entertainment center that is 60 inches or less."
The decision makers at EA looked at their grand vision, looked at the next set of hardware, and then looked at the current hardware, and had to make a decision. "Do we start cutting pieces off until it will run, and make it look and play less than it's best, or do we sit on it for a little while, improve it, and wait till we have something that can do what we really want."
They could, however, start building a following for the console by releasing a PC version that makes use of modern technology. That may be to strategic for them to handle though.
tl;dr: designing games on the console RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT is a little bit like trying to get your feet into your baby shoes. Something is going to get removed to make it work. Wanting to wait for the better hardware so you can release something really impressive is not a bad idea.
tl;dr2: Release a PC version to start building the brand!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Unless Mike changed his name to Tim, he didn't write it.
As for your main point though, how does it make sense to convince people to buy new hardware with untested franchises? There's been no evidence of this, ever; the Vita sold terribly, and it had new and mediocre franchises to launch. The 3DS lacked big brand titles (read as: Mario) and didn't really pick up steam until the first Mario game released.
But even without looking at contradictory examples in history, how is spending $400 on a new console supposed to be easier if the only games I can buy are complete shots in the dark? Would you have adopted Blu-ray if they refused to release the popular movies for a couple years? "It's ok, I know we aren't releasing Avatar/LotR/Whatever, but look at this other movie you have no desire to watch. We made it as well, so it's obviously just as good!"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
A lot of the counterpoints to the above points are already listed in other comments, but the main point is that EA is a company that's particularly criticised for rehashing stale old franchises. So, it's notable that they're saving all new franchises for new platforms, essentially saying "screw the current platforms (and their large install bases), we'll try to get a head start on the new ones".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh, wait. you're serious. Let me laugh even harder.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
PC infringement has far more to do with certain games companies being complete asshats when it comes to customer satisfaction. EA is one of these (see also, early SecuROM), as is Ubisoft (see also: UPlay, Ubi Game Launcher).
Valve have no issues - nor do other companies such as Insomniac and Naughty Dog.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I wonder if Sony and MS would actually allow this to happen? That MS Glass demo at E3 was pretty cool and could be used in this way I would imagine.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Ouya.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
I don't know why console game designers won't expand out of the cubby holes they build around themselves and produce decent games that aren't cookie cutter copies. To this day Sony thinks the strategy genre begins and ends with tower defense games.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Just a smoke screen...
They aren't waiting for the new consoles because of some whacky notion that franchises do better during the initial few months of a new console.
They are waiting because the next gen consoles are going to try to cut out the used game market. It has been repeatedly stated that both Sony and Microsoft will have 'features' (one time activation codes, always on internet, digital distribution only, etc.) that will virtually make it impossible to let someone else play your copy of a game (without buying their own access code).
It's all about the DRM! Cut out piracy and the Gamestop's of the world, cause in the end they are both the same to EA, just a bunch of freetards, stealing their goodtimes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Great graphics don't make a game fun any more than poor graphics make it less fun.
I can play Robotron or Defender or Tempest arcade right now and it's an adrenaline rush. Or River Raid for Atari 2600. (My kids still fire up Adventure with you as a square and the duck-billed dragons and the sword that looks like an arrow.) You still see Galaga/Ms PacMan machines in arcades and everyone loves Puzzle Bobble/Bust-A-Move. None of these games have great graphics. All of them are fun, even 25-30 years later.
I am reminded of Bill Budge (of Pinball Construction Set fame). He made the first PC pinball where the physics were nearly perfect. It "felt" like a real pinball, but the graphics were lines and boxes and circles. He showed it to some marketing execs and they didn't even want to touch it. He finally convinced them and they started playing and they were having a blast. Then he hit a key combination and showed them the actual graphics.
He said, "I know a game is fun when it's fun even without good graphics. Chess is a great game with crappy graphics."
I feel like from Doom and Civ until Portal and Lego people have forgotten that games are supposed to be fun. Now they are long FPS hallways (that look really cool) and grinding to raise crops, armies, etc., that are so boring that people invent bots to play the game for them.
I agree that games are FINALLY getting to the point where great graphics and great gameplay are finally getting together (Arkham City was the most amazing game I ever played. I WAS Batman.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I was merely pointing out that that's what a majority of game publishers say about PCs. That piracy is running rampant on them and as such they release specific titles only to the console market.
I for one have had to download cracks and "pirate" fixes to make games I've legitimately purchased actually be playable. The last game I had to do that for was Starcraft II, at which point I swore I'd avoid doing business with most of the big companies again.
And I'm a huge fan of Steam. I love the deals they have their and their "DRM" is actually beneficial and not harmful to myself or my computer. (The fact that my Humble Bundle Android purchases can also get Steam unlock codes just makes me that much more glad I use Steam.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
FTFY
Seriously. You just wrote a comment to tell Paul (twice now) to fuck off. Really adding to the thread there sparky. /s Keep it up and you'll keep having your off-topic and abusive comments reported for the thread killers and waste of space/time they are. (Oh, and it's not censorship. Before you or some other idiot AC decide to dig up that old bone.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
When Blu-Ray was on the horizon, the studios didn't stop releasing DVDs to wait for HD. Are you kidding? They were only too thrilled to release the DVD, knowing full well that they could resell the same title on Blu-Ray when it was finally released.
Likewise, if a game comes out for current consoles and is a huge hit, it stands to reason that quite a few people will buy it again when it's released for the next gen console with stunning NEW graphics and gameplay.
Duh?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Of course not. Everyone knows that video games started with the original Playstation!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But yes, the fundamental issue is that of the digital sales market, there are around six major players, and two of those have serious rep issues (uPlay store and Origin). Of the remaining four, two are barely available outside the US, and the other two are hugely succcessful (but not without their downsides).
If you purchase a game, it should be fully, or very nearly, working out of the box. Paradox are notorious for releasing buggy horribad messes that generally are cleaned up by the second patch - howeverm the games are generally of very good quality for the genre once these issues are sorted.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Haven't heard much about the TG16, but you can get some new games for the Atari 2600, 5200, 7800 and the C64. In fact, a recent new C64 game, Souless, has been getting rave reviews. It's available on disk, tape and cartridge. You can also find cracked copies on the net for use with emulators.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Just a smoke screen...
OUYA here I come.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You pugs just keep dumping your money down the proprietary system hole. The only guarantee you get when you buy a console is that you'll wish you hadn't 5 years later, when it's worthless.
5 years after that, when every single game ever made for that platform can be had for free on a PC emulator, you should feel like a pure blood jerk, but you'll probably be clutching the new hotness in your monkey paws, without a thought in your head.
Your driving all the developers to crappy console-ware, and that's sucking quality out of the PC side.
Come on apes, get a PC and play games like a big boy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shouldn't "free to play" be "paid DLC"? It's not like you buy the game, get the entire thing and then can play it free. You buy a shell of a game and then have to pay and pay and pay for all the rest of the stuff that you need to make it practical to play the game beyond a certain level.
Once again, it seems like they have multiple personality disorder. In the meantime, perhaps actually developing new material for the consoles your fans will have to deal with for the next couple of years yet might do wonders to turn around that sliding stock price.
Interesting choice of words. Are you saying that current consoles suck and that gamers are eager to replace them? It's funny, back before they came out, people were drooling over the new consoles and now they're considered garbage that gamers have to "deal with".
Historically, some of the best games came out late in each console's lifetime as the programmers learned how to really take advantage of its quirks.
Not to mention that in the past, the jumps from 16 colors to 256 colors and then to 16 million colors were huge. Then 3D cards came out. Now, each new generation of graphics is only a slight improvement from what came before. Once they reach the photo-realistic level, there won't be any room for improvement left.
And let's face it, these new consoles aren't being designed for the benefit of gamers, they're for the benefit of the company. The longer a console is available, the less a company makes on it as people expect the price to drop. Also, hackers learn how to exploit the system and things like mod chips are created for it. Releasing a new console allows them to charge a hefty new price and the hackers will have to start over again from scratch.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Then things plateaued. You could do just about anything design wise, given enough time. But graphical fidelity continued to increase and became and obvious benchmark for hardware and software development. Game makers started to pull resources away from level and gameplay design and put more emphasis on art and graphic development.
End result? We started with ugly and simple corridor shooters, went to reasonable looking complex levels, and now we're getting to the point of extremely pretty and shallow corridor shooters.
Of course that's just in the FPS market. Other genres of game have their own problems.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Try again some other day when you have a different anon icon.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_Anniversary#Reception
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
It's way, way ahead graphically. Higher res, better effects, better FPS everything.
Try playing the Witcher 2 on Xbox 360, then on a good PC. The PC's gameplay looks better than the Xbox 360's prerendered cutscenes.
The 7-year-old specs on the ps3/xbox360 were great back when they released, and the upcoming refresh of the consoles will be a pretty good dollar to performance value assuming the spec leaks are true, but right now PC gaming blows console gaming out of the water graphically.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Other than it provides a useful foil for people to arc their hatred towards EA that was already there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
duno if you are a gamer but the sites i visit about gaming says that with more power there are bether graphics thats a given but you also have more complex ai, more units, npc, character displayed on a map, gemplay could flow more smother at a tru 1080p at 60fps which current consoles at best give 720p most of the games are upscaled version so graphicaly we will se a jump but not as big as ps2 to ps3, also with the beter ai i was trying to say you also get more complex worlds, bigger and more players on fields, if we compare compures can have 100+ players but consoles only 16-32 that can be also a plus
"Apart from making games look prettier and more realistic, is there anything that the current graphics engines is really holding back?"
i dont know much about engines but i think they are incharge of the ai and how complex the world and levels can by also i have read the current engines unreal 3 is only at 20% on the ps3/360 which are the strongest consoles in the market, so i think they are holding back a bit xd
"There's a possibility, but is that really at the core of any game?"
this is an easy one have you looked at nintendo DS or 3DS or maybe the wii U i think those are multiscreen output devices :D
the last question i will refrain cause i think mike didnt wrote this article
i only will say that i kind off side with EA because i have seen that it need to be a really good idea to get a new ip to work this late in the cycle, case in point tim wrote some of the most successfull :D
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
I'm hoping Ouya fulfills that prophecy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I don't get it
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Argh
:rolleyes: The only thing that makes stocks go up is firing all the employees and suing everyone else for [insert ridiculous reason here]. Hence why using stock prices as a measure of the health of ANYTHING utterly ridiculous.
[ link to this | view in thread ]