Main Event TV, Entertaining take on the state of gaming

[Ginaz]

This guy seems very passionate about gaming and his thoughts on the current state of the industry is pretty spot on IMO, esp. his point that good games will sell and developers that get pissed about rentals and re-selling have no one else to blame but themselves for making shitty games that no one wants to buy (at least for full price).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMnxKCtymGs&feature=player_embedded#at=705

[Velorath]

That shit made my head hurt.  Especially when he started rehashing the (incorrect) complaint some people had about SWTOR pre-orders costing an additional $5 on top of the normal retail price, which isn't at all what actually happens.

Edit:  Seriously, this guy is like a youtube version of one of sinij's "circling the drain" topics.

[jakonovski]

That shit made my head hurt.  Especially when he started rehashing the (incorrect) complaint some people had about SWTOR pre-orders costing an additional $5 on top of the normal retail price, which isn't at all what actually happens.

Edit:  Seriously, this guy is like a youtube version of one of sinij's "circling the drain" topics.

Back when the SWTOR debate was hot, I'm pretty sure I read from multiple sources that when the game is released, it will cost $5 less on Origin than it does now. But I suppose we'll find out in due time.

[Velorath]

That shit made my head hurt.  Especially when he started rehashing the (incorrect) complaint some people had about SWTOR pre-orders costing an additional $5 on top of the normal retail price, which isn't at all what actually happens.

Edit:  Seriously, this guy is like a youtube version of one of sinij's "circling the drain" topics.

Back when the SWTOR debate was hot, I'm pretty sure I read from multiple sources that when the game is released, it will cost $5 less on Origin than it does now. But I suppose we'll find out in due time.

I'm pretty sure you're the only person I've seen mention that, and the source according to you over in the SWTOR thread was "some dude on NeoGaf" who had it confirmed by EA customer service, which leaves quite a lot of room for there being a miscommunication of some sort.  Regardless, it was clear from watching this video, that the guy was making the same mistake a lot of other people did from looking at the pre-order page on Origin in assuming the $5 pre-order fee was in addition to the full retail price, which would be a somewhat forgivable mistake if this video wasn't uploaded over a week after everything was made fairly clear.

All that aside, the guy just has a very simplistic take on everything, and just goes the route of "if I say everything with enough conviction people will just assume I'm right".

[tgr]

I have to agree with him on a few aspects, though, specifically f.ex the XCOM justification for not making it another strategy game, the increasing online activation/connection requirement, and stuff like how dragon age's DLC was implemented.

I've been vocal about how I think today's games are increasingly being made with way too big budgets, so crap like the always-on DRM, dragon age's DLC (unlike Fallout's DLC), and this ridiculous war on rentals and second-hand sales, actually "makes sense". Personally, I've been increasingly going more and more away from large "AAA" releases because of all this, and I feel that indie developers are more than sufficiently picking up the gap for my needs.

Honestly, even though that video might've been a bit painful to watch (I hate watching overly agitated people), he's not completely wrong in a lot of his points.

[Margalis]

his point that good games will sell and developers that get pissed about rentals and re-selling have no one else to blame but themselves for making shitty games that no one wants to buy (at least for full price).

This really does not make sense.

If a game can be rented, pirated or bought used what is the reason to buy new other than being a kind soul? It has nothing to do with a game being "shitty" or not. If you make a single-player game Gamestop will try to hawk it used the SECOND it comes out, the only reason not to buy it used is that you are a kind person or are acting for the greater good. There's no selfish benefit to buying new. That's true whether the game is $60 or $10 and whether the game is great or terrible.

"Make better games" is just a complete non-point. There is no "better" that magically makes people pay more than they have to.

[tgr]

So, what? Customers are evil and EA/etc are justified in any measure taken?

[Kail]

If a game can be rented, pirated or bought used what is the reason to buy new other than being a kind soul? It has nothing to do with a game being "shitty" or not. If you make a single-player game Gamestop will try to hawk it used the SECOND it comes out, the only reason not to buy it used is that you are a kind person or are acting for the greater good. There's no selfish benefit to buying new. That's true whether the game is $60 or $10 and whether the game is great or terrible.

The argument could be made that making better games makes people more likely to act "kindly" towards them, though.  A lot of gamers get their moral justification for pirating games out of the whole "us versus them" mentality that is starting to become the norm between a software company and it's customers.  "EA is trying to screw us, but I'mma screw them first" kind of thing.  The opposite is often true as well, with people buying games to support developers rather than because it's the only way to play the game (because in this age of rampant piracy, it's not like there are a lot of people who don't know that you can get a game for free by pirating it). There's a lot of people who will even buy multiple copies of a game if they like it (on Steam, for example, to de-disc it).  Not everyone is in the "steal what you can, fuck the earth" mindset where you don't pay for something you like unless you're forced; some of us realize that game companies have to make money to keep making games.

You could make the argument that the money this earns you isn't equal to the money piracy costs you, but I'd say that much, at least, depends on price.  It's a lot easier to support a developer you like for $10 or $15 than it is to drop $60 on it.  There are a lot of top selling games on Steam which are cheap little indie titles outselling big name releases because they're inexpensive and because people want to support them, not because Terraria's DRM is so much more advanced and difficult to crack than Portal 2.

[eldaec]

His point was that people don't trade in games they like, eliminating supply - I'm not entirely convinced that this is a good or necessary argument, but he wasn't claiming people will be nice to nice publishers (though the experience of publishers who eschew obnoxious drm suggests there is a something to it)

[Bzalthek]

If a game can be rented, pirated or bought used what is the reason to buy new other than being a kind soul? It has nothing to do with a game being "shitty" or not. If you make a single-player game Gamestop will try to hawk it used the SECOND it comes out, the only reason not to buy it used is that you are a kind person or are acting for the greater good. There's no selfish benefit to buying new. That's true whether the game is $60 or $10 and whether the game is great or terrible.

"Make better games" is just a complete non-point. There is no "better" that magically makes people pay more than they have to.

I used to buy used games.  Half of them were damaged or missing booklets and shit.  I don't like buying used because people can't take care of shit.  I'm also more willing to lay down 60 bucks on a good game than whatever schlock infested fuckup AAA studios are foisting on the market these days.  Even if it's a good game, it's highly unlikely I'll buy it if it's infested with draconian DRM.  People pay more than they have to all the time.  Plenty of people paid more than nothing when Radiohead released 'In Rainbows.'

[Margalis]

The argument could be made that making better games makes people more likely to act "kindly" towards them, though. ...

This is true to some extent.

By the way I hate DLC and DRM so I'm not the "publishers should do everything in their power to milk users for every dollar" guy. I do think that creates an antagonistic relationship. Iwata just said that Nintendo does not pursue DLC for exactly that reason - it may lead to short term gains but doesn't build good customer relations. (At least for some types of DLC...obviously there are better and worse DLC packages.)

But I strongly object to the notion that if people buy a game used that is the developer's fault for not making the game good enough. You can go into Gamestop and find EVERY game available to buy used in the first couple days of release. It's not just bad games, or unpopular games, or games that are considered overpriced. It's ALL games. Period.

There is no game good enough that there isn't a significant immediate used market for it.

[Mosesandstick]

I think one additional problem is that publishers are going out of their way to punish those who buy used, instead of rewarding those who buy new. I think this is what Nintendo does with their points rewards system?

[tgr]

That's the thing that annoys me the most about an increasing amount of publishers, they're increasingly applying more stick than carrot, and when that's not working it's "the used games market" or "piracy" that's at fault. Very rarely does it seem to be the fact that the game's budget was so huge that it might be hard to get enough sales to recoup the investment.

[Kageru]

I thought renting was a fairly natural reaction to the fact a lot of console games are intense, very pretty, and very short. If a game is 3-5 hours of gameplay for 110USD$ (Australian prices) then renting or borrowing from a friend is a no brainer. Whereas renting something with depth and replay value makes a lot less. For example I doubt anyone rents the sims or civ.

Of course steam has effectively solved this in an acceptable fashion in the PC space.