Jimquisition: An Industry Of Pitiful Cowards

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

Purely, this is a beautiful and a well-constructed episode, there was no sinle moment in this 7min episode where i found myself not listening due to change of pace or abrupt change of topic.

Daemascus:
The same happened to space fighter games... The industry dropped them cause they thought they weren't popular, after great stuff like X-Wing versus Tie Fighter and Freespace 2. Right up till Star Citizen proved them 41 million dollars wrong. And still counting.

And I have to question, outside of those that have backed the project, and thus are already going ot get the game, who else is going to get it after being completed?

God of Path:
I very rarely disagree with Jim. His points are cogent, as always, and are never poorly thought out. However, in this case, I think what really drove game companies to forsake 'the good old games of yester-decade' was their increasing success and eventually the profit motive for those public companies. Check out MatPat's video on this very topic. I think this provides a very interesting counterpoint to Jim's video.

My only problem with this video is that he highly over generalizes. The same mistake the suits are making. For example, the Mario thing. He's assuming that just because the top selling Mario games are still 2d platformers that they didn't innovate. I can't say anything about Super Mario Bros. Wii but Super Mario World did a ton of new things at the time. Just because it exists in a genre that previously existed doesn't mean that it didn't enhance or change the experience. He's also comparing the success of old titles to the success of new ones. Which doesn't make sense because the industry was much smaller back then. Plus some of the old titles have had years longer to sell than some of these new games. And what about marketing, some of those games didn't even appear until they came out. No one but the most dedicated gamers even knew about them.

And besides asking for innovation doesn't mean going completely left field and into completely foreign territory. It means build on your current successes. The reason the 3d marios weren't nearly as big as the 2D ones was predominately because it was faaar too different. You have to add new features over time. Maybe release a spin-off at best. Not make huge dramatic changes out of no where. Because then nobody knows what the hell your doing. But there is another factor he doesn't account for. Risk. The customer has a huge risk when it comes to buying a game. With few to no consumer protections or return policies in this industry and demos pretty much a thing of the past, there is a huge risk to buying a bunch of completely new games you've never heard of. This is also in an economy where, at least in america, wages haven't increased much at all since before gaming was a thing, all while the cost of everything else has increased.

The guy has a point, somewhat. But he isn't looking at all the factors. As far as I can tell from this video, he's overlooking countless other factors that play into this.

I simply could not agree more. They went out of their way to fix things that were no broken, broke them, then freaked out making even more bad mistakes. It's kind of fiscal responsibility 101 to me. If things have gone down the shitter, then you have to look at what you were doing last time the company did well. Depending on the situation, I'm not saying to go back exclusively to your old ways, but maybe look at then and look at now, and see what extreme decisions have resulted in.

It would be an interesting footnote in the industry if this means their next JRPG ends up being an FPS. Hilariously sad to think about.

I only scanned over the posts so far and I think no-one's added this modest detail:

This sort of bullshit isn't happening in just games, but all media.

The good Mr. Chipman pondered the question "How, by the ghost of Orson Welles, did Battleship become a freakin' movie?

Test screenings and end-user panels have been a tool in AAA media for a long time. But in today's desperate times, we take their word as sacred. This is symptomatic of the cover-your-ass attitude prevalent in corporate US. When a big title fails (that is, fails to be as spectacularly awesome a blockbuster as bean-counters predicted), they always scapegoat people in the production, and so it's safer to be able to point to the consumer panels and prior "similar" successes and the branding identity association and say "We ran the numbers. It should have been a shoe in."

In Agatha Christie's era, there was a notion that money makes us all murderers. These days, money makes us all cowards, especially corporate capital that isn't ours, knowing that but for the providence of a target audience, we would have their lives systematically ruined by the auditors. Corporations who can afford to make AAA titles are generally risk-adverse, and thus can't allow for the creative liberty necessary to make a brilliant and meaningful AAA title. And that's the case whether they publish games, movies, music or books.

238U[1]

[1] As of this posting I have not received a US National Security Letter or any classified gag order from an agent of the United States.
Encrypted with Morbius-Cochrane Perfect Steganographic Codec 1.2.001
Monday, April 07, 2014 12:01:48 PM
window senator migraine jealousy safe voting sunburn chip

Lightknight:
It would be an interesting footnote in the industry if this means their next JRPG ends up being an FPS. Hilariously sad to think about.

Starring Lightning.

image

Oh god....

Your...nakedness is disgusting. And a change too! I don't like change and will throw a hissy fit about this!

Incidentally, when you were talking about survival horror, what game did you have on the screen where you were running around in the sewer with a camera and it looked like banshees were chasing after you?

Sir Shockwave:

NuclearKangaroo:
dunno about that, what about the total war series and company of heroes?

THQ went under. While Relic did resurface, COH 2 was heavily panned (for all the wrong reasons**) and as a result wasn't as successful as everyone hoped (DLC'ing the game into oblivion hasn't helped matters), and so everyone went back to playing the original COH. It's doubtful we're going to see a COH 3 or even an expansion pack anytime soon.

Total War is also a niche genre within a genre - called grand strategy*. It is also currently the ONLY grand strategy title out there, with nobody else daring to jump in (and has schizophrenic enough quality to drive off everyone else).

*Not to be confused with 4X Games like Civilization, Galactic Civilizations and Age of Wonders. Turn Based Strategy in itself is turning into a healthier market.

** Mostly comments about it's historical accuracy because they dared to depict Order 227, over things like the game having crappy optimisation and (as mentioned) the DLC'ing.

I'd argue that Paradox is the main competitor for the total war series. While they don't play the same, a lot of paradox games do scratch that same itch and like to call themselves Grand Strategy games as well.

Completely agreed on COH2 by the way, the fact that most of the DLC commanders are head and shoulders above the freebies is utterly disgusting and should have people more furious with Sega.

Quiotu:

Woah now... hold on. What did they do to DMC other than make the main character less of an embarrassment? It still has DMC mechanics, and was one of the few games with actual decent platforming. The others I understand, but they didn't change DMC's genre... they just removed 90's loose-cannon cringe-worthy Dante from the equation.

I actually think DMC is a good game. However, it's also a game that openly MOCKED old-school Devil May Cry fans (both in the game itself, and the developers did so frequently during conferences). The game itself was fine (apart from cutting the framerate in half...), but the ATTITUDE they had drove the old school fans away.

If you ever want to expand your audience, do not blatantly insult the fans you're trying to win over to their faces. I'm still baffled they did so, and it killed the interest of many fans on the fence about it.

Fear alone isn't a motivator to do anything, except run away. A lot of points have been brought up that probably played a part in this, and another one I think would be the greed of those who saw a chance to sow the fear and then reap the benefits, by seemingly being the ones who had the solution to a future problem at hand, ready to be sold. Want to rise up in the company, but don't have anything good to contribute? Tell the others that the times they are a changin', pretend to know what will happen and how everyone can be saved, and they will follow you, I guess.

Uriel-238:
I only scanned over the posts so far and I think no-one's added this modest detail:

This sort of bullshit isn't happening in just games, but all media.

The good Mr. Chipman pondered the question "How, by the ghost of Orson Welles, did Battleship become a freakin' movie?

Test screenings and end-user panels have been a tool in AAA media for a long time. But in today's desperate times, we take their word as sacred. This is symptomatic of the cover-your-ass attitude prevalent in corporate US. When a big title fails (that is, fails to be as spectacularly awesome a blockbuster as bean-counters predicted), they always scapegoat people in the production, and so it's safer to be able to point to the consumer panels and prior "similar" successes and the branding identity association and say "We ran the numbers. It should have been a shoe in."

In Agatha Christie's era, there was a notion that money makes us all murderers. These days, money makes us all cowards, especially corporate capital that isn't ours, knowing that but for the providence of a target audience, we would have their lives systematically ruined by the auditors. Corporations who can afford to make AAA titles are generally risk-adverse, and thus can't allow for the creative liberty necessary to make a brilliant and meaningful AAA title. And that's the case whether they publish games, movies, music or books.

Actually I think movies are in a different yet still sad boat. Because Hollywood is unable to come up with competent new ideas, movies are made SOLELY on brand recognition now, not genre.

That's why this has happened:

Thanatos2k:

Lightknight:
It would be an interesting footnote in the industry if this means their next JRPG ends up being an FPS. Hilariously sad to think about.

Starring Lightning.

image

Oh god....

Don't give em ideas...

Sir Shockwave:

NuclearKangaroo:
dunno about that, what about the total war series and company of heroes?

THQ went under. While Relic did resurface, COH 2 was heavily panned (for all the wrong reasons**) and as a result wasn't as successful as everyone hoped (DLC'ing the game into oblivion hasn't helped matters), and so everyone went back to playing the original COH. It's doubtful we're going to see a COH 3 or even an expansion pack anytime soon.

Total War is also a niche genre within a genre - called grand strategy*. It is also currently the ONLY grand strategy title out there, with nobody else daring to jump in (and has schizophrenic enough quality to drive off everyone else).

*Not to be confused with 4X Games like Civilization, Galactic Civilizations and Age of Wonders. Turn Based Strategy in itself is turning into a healthier market.

** Mostly comments about it's historical accuracy because they dared to depict Order 227, over things like the game having crappy optimisation and (as mentioned) the DLC'ing.

now youre absolutely wrong there, paradox is making a killing with their grand strategy titles, crusader kings 2 and europa universalis 4 have been particulary successful

i do agree CoH 2 was disappointing, my first pre-order and i deeply regret, tough not a bad game by its own right, is significantly worse than CoH 1, but i believe the main reason for this is was THQ going under, you can see the budget hit the game good, the ingame cutscenes are some sort of weird pre-rendered ingame thing, they look terrible

I miss the backdrop too, Jim.

Trishbot:

I actually think DMC is a good game. However, it's also a game that openly MOCKED old-school Devil May Cry fans (both in the game itself, and the developers did so frequently during conferences). The game itself was fine (apart from cutting the framerate in half...), but the ATTITUDE they had drove the old school fans away.

If you ever want to expand your audience, do not blatantly insult the fans you're trying to win over to their faces. I'm still baffled they did so, and it killed the interest of many fans on the fence about it.

They didn't mock old-school DMC, they mocked old-school DMC Dante. As well they should, Dante was a melange of tired tropes that needed to die. The super-serious 'stop mocking what I like' hardcore fans of old Dante also should be mocked. Yeah, he put on a white wig and thought it was stupid... well, THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!

I hope the DMC hardcore fans cling tightly to the first four games, because not being able to take a joke ended up killing the series. It's all but guaranteed Capcom's putting that IP in their vault and won't touch it for a VERY long time now.

Games have always been largely homogenized based on a singular, big success. And if you don't think so, you haven't been paying attention.

Game theory recently released an episode on how the "bro" games make more money. Most companies have been trying to make that money to please their stockholders.
The most recent of the best Survival horror games...Amnesia made over 1-2 million$. On the other hand RE6 made over 5-6 million. Neither saying RE6 is a better game than Amnesia, nor that horror games don't sell. Its just that most niche titles don't sell enough to please the execs-so the homogenization. As one of the previous episodes of Jimquisition said-more money means more burden to sell.
It is also important to note that our hobbies are seen as 'products' instead of 'artistic en-devour'.

It's just because of a few suits in not so high places that had to justify their wages because "everything's fine" doesn't scream "useful advice". There's got to be something, right? RIGHT?!?

Chemical123:
I think the problem is that the executives are sitting in giant echo chambers. They think something is a bad idea and go out of their way to ensure that it fails (executive meddling, less development time, lower budgets and so on) and then point to that failure and scream "SEE!?!?! IT FAILED!!!!". This is not unique to the video game industry, anyone who is a fan of Sci-Fi and good cartoons on television will attest to the same shit happening (Firefly the most famous example among many others). And if they think something is a good idea then they will put all of their resources into it and even if it fails they will blame everyone and everything (pirates, new console generation, microwaves, conspiracy of journalists, mind control).

Also, to expand on some of the genres that were mentioned in the video, here are some more:
Space Sim genre is dead outside of X series, Eve online and possible hope of Star Citizen

It kind of was for several years, but also don't forget the Evochron series, and upcoming Elite: Dangerous(which I backed on kickstarter and looks to be coming along nicely, based on all the updates I'm getting in my email).

Chemical123:
WW2 FPS are gone

DDR, Guitar Hero, Rockband also gone

To be fair, these all outstayed their welcome. We had a period with too much of them and people got tired of it. They might be ripe for comeback soonish, but people were genuinely complaining about being fed up with them, because of the oversaturation of the market.

Chemical123:
Video Game industry is bigger than it ever was and at the same time it is blander than ever before. And I have no idea what can be done to wake those executives up. Bravely Default acted like a wake up call but most publishers are not willing to risk even a small niche title whose success might shock them.

To be fair, it's mainly the big publisher part of the market that's bland, there's plenty of colour in the indie scene(though blandness exists there as well), and we have an ever growing indie scene, it's veritably exploded in the last few years, the noughties were much more barren of indies. Part of the reason the indie scene has exploded so much is because of the blandness of the big publisher side.

Quiotu:

They didn't mock old-school DMC, they mocked old-school DMC Dante. As well they should, Dante was a melange of tired tropes that needed to die. The super-serious 'stop mocking what I like' hardcore fans of old Dante also should be mocked. Yeah, he put on a white wig and thought it was stupid... well, THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!

I hope the DMC hardcore fans cling tightly to the first four games, because not being able to take a joke ended up killing the series. It's all but guaranteed Capcom's putting that IP in their vault and won't touch it for a VERY long time now.

Funny you say that, since the main problem people had with the new Dante was he was a foul-mouthed, more serious and angsty version of the original, who was created more as an intentional, wacky and over-the-top parody of action heroes. He has an elongated poetry dance off with a villain in DMC4. It was never meant to be taken so seriously, so the fact Capcom felt the need to do away with that "less" serious version in favor of a more grounded and gritty version is pretty telling.

This extended beyond just the wig scene. In several conferences, the new developers outright mocked the old Dante (that, mind you, a lot of people loved) and even overtly implied he was a flamboyant homosexual (backed up with photoshopped images... all at Capcom's official conferences). They responded to a lot of the complaints with mocking contempt, dismissed the cutting of the framerate in half as a non-issue, and just, in general, did absolutely nothing whatsoever to build a bridge between fans of the old character and the new iteration.

Regardless of your feelings of the old Dante, you MUST admit that openly insulting the legion of Dante fans of the older games (the ones that also bought games such as Viewtiful Joe, Shin Megami Tensei, and Marvel Vs Capcom 3 because of Dante's inclusion, as well as the anime series) did nothing but hurt their sales. The game was the worst-selling installment in the series and is still chided by fans as a disrespectful game to fans of the original. They have no one to blame but themselves for that.

It strikes me that the mindset of a lot of these companies is that of someone addicted to buying lottery tickets. They hear that someone made it big playing ticket X (ex FPS games) and so they start buying it exclusively hoping to make it just as big. Somehow they get in in their heads that ticket Y (say single player horror) will never win so they swear off that one kind entirely even if people have won just as often with it. A few winning tickets happened to have the number 7 in them (multiplayer components) so now every time they buy a ticket it HAS to have the number 7 too no matter what! There is no real reasoning or logic just blind guessing and assumption.

Chemical123:
I think the problem is that the executives are sitting in giant echo chambers. They think something is a bad idea and go out of their way to ensure that it fails (executive meddling, less development time, lower budgets and so on) and then point to that failure and scream "SEE!?!?! IT FAILED!!!!". This is not unique to the video game industry, anyone who is a fan of Sci-Fi and good cartoons on television will attest to the same shit happening (Firefly the most famous example among many others). And if they think something is a good idea then they will put all of their resources into it and even if it fails they will blame everyone and everything (pirates, new console generation, microwaves, conspiracy of journalists, mind control).

Also, to expand on some of the genres that were mentioned in the video, here are some more:
Space Sim genre is dead outside of X series, Eve online and possible hope of Star Citizen

No Star Citizen is heading in the direction of Broken Age, a kickstarter dev getting way to much money for a game that doesn't need that much, that they will lose focus on what matters & spread their development time over to many extra features & milestones rather than polishing what the game needs. The Mandate is our hope of reviving the space sim genre. It shows proof of actual progress on a regular basis.

NuclearKangaroo:
now youre absolutely wrong there, paradox is making a killing with their grand strategy titles, crusader kings 2 and europa universalis 4 have been particulary successful

i do agree CoH 2 was disappointing, my first pre-order and i deeply regret, tough not a bad game by its own right, is significantly worse than CoH 1, but i believe the main reason for this is was THQ going under, you can see the budget hit the game good, the ingame cutscenes are some sort of weird pre-rendered ingame thing, they look terrible

NuclearKangaroo:

I'd argue that Paradox is the main competitor for the total war series. While they don't play the same, a lot of paradox games do scratch that same itch and like to call themselves Grand Strategy games as well.

Completely agreed on COH2 by the way, the fact that most of the DLC commanders are head and shoulders above the freebies is utterly disgusting and should have people more furious with Sega.

I've not heard nor seen figures for Europa Universalis, Crusader Kings and such mainly because it's not one I keep track of, my apologies. At any rate, Total War I imagine is probably still outdoing them by virtue of name recognition alone (and the fact that Paradox is synonymous with exceptionally buggy releases), though this could always change because Grand Strategy is not one I keep tabs on...especially after the atrocity that was Sword of the Stars II.

On a related note, three of the highest rated Steam reviews (of five you'll see unless you go poking around)for Company of Heroes are negative. Right now, it really does look like a credible fight between Focus and Blizzard...though that's like trying to put a Tiger up against Godzilla X3

Wow... That was an episode with so much truth in it, you could have made two out of them!!! :)

For a long time I was thinking that I am not a "mass market compatible gamer" any more since most current AAA games just did not interest me at all. But I also wondered who actually liked those games that turned out by those strange direction changes in big franchises. Now you offered the perfect answer: Nobody is really interested in them, but the publishers fearing that they have to deliver these games...

I feel enlightened, just a little bit more than usual ;) By the way: I loved Bravely Default! Let's hope SE keeps its promise and delivers.

Another good example is turn based strategy games. Who decided that they are not "successful" or "fun" anymore? Probably not Firaxis Games as they churn out great and awesome titles in that genre on a regular basis.

Sir Shockwave:

NuclearKangaroo:
now youre absolutely wrong there, paradox is making a killing with their grand strategy titles, crusader kings 2 and europa universalis 4 have been particulary successful

i do agree CoH 2 was disappointing, my first pre-order and i deeply regret, tough not a bad game by its own right, is significantly worse than CoH 1, but i believe the main reason for this is was THQ going under, you can see the budget hit the game good, the ingame cutscenes are some sort of weird pre-rendered ingame thing, they look terrible

NuclearKangaroo:

I'd argue that Paradox is the main competitor for the total war series. While they don't play the same, a lot of paradox games do scratch that same itch and like to call themselves Grand Strategy games as well.

Completely agreed on COH2 by the way, the fact that most of the DLC commanders are head and shoulders above the freebies is utterly disgusting and should have people more furious with Sega.

I've not heard nor seen figures for Europa Universalis, Crusader Kings and such mainly because it's not one I keep track of, my apologies. At any rate, Total War I imagine is probably still outdoing them by virtue of name recognition alone (and the fact that Paradox is synonymous with exceptionally buggy releases), though this could always change because Grand Strategy is not one I keep tabs on...especially after the atrocity that was Sword of the Stars II.

On a related note, three of the highest rated Steam reviews (of five you'll see unless you go poking around)for Company of Heroes are negative. Right now, it really does look like a credible fight between Focus and Blizzard...though that's like trying to put a Tiger up against Godzilla X3

oh please, just because of a stinker doesnt mean relic is out of the game (pun intended), CoH 2 is not really a bad game, just a disappointing one, and i definitively dont agree with relic's monetization strategies, i can see that doing them more harm than good

these are the guys who made the most critically acclaimed RTS of all time (CoH 1), the homeworld series and the dawn of war series, im sure theyll be back with something great

I've had the worrying thought for a while that, outside of just paranoia inside the companies of what will or won't sell, the more "powerful" (in relative terms anyway) game consoles have gotten, the more companies feel they need to show off. the more they show off, the more bland things get over time because we're not interested in big epic exciting in your face stuff, we want moar, do it better, flashier.....its like gambling, smoking, drinking, drugs, etc, you get used to one level of it, and look for more exciting stuff. but ironically in chasing and pushing that market, the companies fell into the traps of grittyness and boredom by overstepping their ability too quickly. maybe its not the same as the crash of 83, but it follows a similar facet, of rushing along with blinders on, until its too late to change course. at the least, I'll agree its good that SE is getting their head in gear and turning around, maybe we'll finally get another super mario rpg 8D.......i jest, the chances of that are slim, but hey one can dream.

NuclearKangaroo:
oh please, just because of a stinker doesnt mean relic is out of the game (pun intended), CoH 2 is not really a bad game, just a disappointing one, and i definitively dont agree with relic's monetization strategies, i can see that doing them more harm than good

these are the guys who made the most critically acclaimed RTS of all time (CoH 1), the homeworld series and the dawn of war series, im sure theyll be back with something great

It all depends on a hypothetical COH 3 if they can bounce back or not. I don't think there are many people lining up to play COH 2 right now.

Uriel-238:
snip

Yeah, the problem is the same for Hollywood and the game studios: despite all the risk-aversion, "writing by committee" tactics, when you spend such insane amounts of money at such a fast pace in such a mindless fashion, all you need is one particularly unlucky year when all your major releases fail (not that they flop completely (although the definition of that became ridiculously skewed in the era of 8-figure budgets and 7-figure game sales) just barely make back their budget on average) and you can be in some extraordinarily deep shit. You can't say they're not innovative though: they have figured out how to "bet safe" in a breathtakingly reckless way.

Chemical123:
Snip!

Those are all valid points.

The thing is, the biggest culprit seems to be the need to make sure most games' budgets conform to AAA norms. Players are used to lavish cinematics, hours and hours of gameplay time, extensive customization and a certain modicum of freedom, and offering these things costs money - on top of the ever-increasing graphics pipeline.

The only way you can recoup the cost of a typical AAA title is if it sells like hot cakes. A JRPG not selling hugely isn't a tragedy, normally, largely because there's maybe one or two titles in that genre that qualified as benchmark titles for their console of choice. FFVII is a chief example of that, in regards to the PSOne. Most of everything else can coast on by looking average, so long as the art direction is impressive, the combat or RPG-esque mechanics are gripping or the plot happens to be somewhat worthy of some analysis. Squeenix has its own take on art direction (I don't really need to introduce Tetsuya Nomura and his Gackt fetish), they have decades of play systems to revisit if they so chose, and JRPGs already come with the guarantee that you'll be saddled with something that's up there with the sappiness of a Diablo title, coupled with an upteenth lesson on friendship or love. They have a few basic narrative hooks that they keep revisiting, but it does seem to work well for them.

The long and short of it is that JRPGs have enough of a following and enough strengths or quirks to draw in a substantial player base.

The problem really lies in devs not so much seeing a problem as profit that could be made. Resident Evil 6 turned into an unofficial Gears of War clone precisely in order to belatedly court the Shooter crowd. Single-Player's been minced into bloodless chunks in the Call of Duty titles for the simple reason that the multiplayer masses are providing Activision with an argument to cut costs and reinvest in what APPEARS to be selling copies. Similarly, the horror genre APPEARS to have been eradicated on consoles because the Shooter crowd's generated profits are several times higher than anything Outlast's PS4 release could hope to produce.

Ultimately, Jim is especially right at the conclusion of the episode. In chasing profits, the publishers tend to sap all energy or creativity out of their yearly-iterated darlings. That leaves us with little miracles (Assassin's Creed 4: Black Flag, in my honest opinion) amidst a drove of fairly samey episodes. Play one AC and you've mostly played all of them.

It's like tending to crops, essentially. Over-harvest what a given plot of land has to offer, and you exhaust the soil's minerals faster than they can be regenerated. If farmers rotate crops to keep the soil fresh, then maybe publishers should stop thinking that they ABSOLUTELY have to rake in the millions, and instead start on a schedule of sorts.

This is just me postulating, though - but I do think that system could work. Quarter One is your Shooters quarter, the second is your RPGs-devoted one, the third is geared towards Open-World stuff and the fourth would be a kind of three month-long Amnesia Fortnight. Sports games would be iterated more slowly, with prices for released titles staying at full retail for slightly longer than they already do. That would discourage basic "roster update"-type yearly releases.

Wait, if FF XIII wasn't a real JRPG, then what was it? And how did it lose $million's when it branched out from JRPG's into other genres? I like Deus Ex: Human Revolution and thought the Tomb Raider reboot/prequel sold really well.

Sir Shockwave:

NuclearKangaroo:
oh please, just because of a stinker doesnt mean relic is out of the game (pun intended), CoH 2 is not really a bad game, just a disappointing one, and i definitively dont agree with relic's monetization strategies, i can see that doing them more harm than good

these are the guys who made the most critically acclaimed RTS of all time (CoH 1), the homeworld series and the dawn of war series, im sure theyll be back with something great

It all depends on a hypothetical COH 3 if they can bounce back or not. I don't think there are many people lining up to play COH 2 right now.

you cant destroy 15 years of RTS experience with just one game, it simply doesnt happen, and if that was the case, relic wouldve died with impossible creatures, not CoH 2, IC had a worse critical reception than CoH 2

NuclearKangaroo:
you cant destroy 15 years of RTS experience with just one game

Petroglyph. I don't really need to say any more on that.

Chemical123:
I think the problem is that the executives are sitting in giant echo chambers. They think something is a bad idea and go out of their way to ensure that it fails (executive meddling, less development time, lower budgets and so on) and then point to that failure and scream "SEE!?!?! IT FAILED!!!!". This is not unique to the video game industry, anyone who is a fan of Sci-Fi and good cartoons on television will attest to the same shit happening (Firefly the most famous example among many others). And if they think something is a good idea then they will put all of their resources into it and even if it fails they will blame everyone and everything (pirates, new console generation, microwaves, conspiracy of journalists, mind control).

You should totally gone with Dollhouse for your all the resources example. It would totally have put a bow on your argument.

captcha: "way to go donny!"

It's the issue with publicly traded companies in this current financial industry. With a lot of them, it doesn't really matter because the companies don't produce art. It's kind of easy to make more steel and sell it and get a higher profit. Steel is steel, it can be judged objectively. Videogames, provided they function, always have to be judged subjectively. This is where shareholders and publishers come in and fuck with things to try to increase potential profits. Where they fuck up is the execution of this often makes something neither crowd wanted.

If they want Gears of War, they can play Gears of War. Give them Resident Evil. If they want an action RPG, they can go find one. Give them Final Fantasy. It's one trap Nintendo didn't fall into. Sure, they did it via what I would call stagnation, but Nintendo games have always felt like Nintendo games. Their first party stuff generally doesn't try to be something it isn't.

You are over-thinking this one Jim. Japanese publishers didn't declare all those genres dead because they were afraid they wouldn't sell well. The real reason they did all those stupid things was greed. They wanted CoD money. They were counting on names like Resident Evil and Final Fantasy and they knew fully well how successful those games would be in their traditional form. But that wasn't enough for them. They wanted more. They wanted to be like Activision and EA. They wanted their audience as well as the audience they already had. And it backfired.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here