Game companies exist to make money

The video game industry is just that.

An industry.

Which means that it exists in a capitalistic world. You know, a free market. A place where you’re welcome to spend your money on whatever you please… or to refrain from spending that money.

Those companies that put these products out? They’re for profit businesses. They exist to produce, market, and ship great games ultimately for one purpose. First, for money, then, for acclaim.

[aquamala]

no way, I thought they care about us core gamers

[2pacalypsenow]

They care because core gamers bring them money too

[doctorstrange]

No shit

[ZBlacktt]

Correction: All companies exist to make money.

[baraka007]

is this new or has the world always been like this ;)

[TongkatAli]

Why is Sony bleeding money left and right for its products ? Cause they're batshit crazy for its core fanbase and the goal with their products is the term "futureproof", they always use that word, lol.

That is why i'm supporting them more this time around, classy niggas that actually take risks all the time.

[JBSleek]

Sony bleeds because they are inadequate in the TV business mainly not because they particularly care about the core fanbase.

They produce over-priced(compared to the market not value) products in a way more competive marketplace.

Just an observation though.

[from the beach]

Good on him for saying it.

[Fluke_Skywalker]

I'm not stupid enough to think that some board of executives gives a shit about my enjoyment.
But in all seriousness, if all the care about is money then why not fuck off and make it somewhere else. These companies are ENTERTAINMENT companies, therefore they should put entertaining their customers first and if they get that bit right then the money will take care of itself.
Go be a banker if you care about is money.

[dcbronco]

No one is saying that there aren't people within a company that cares about whatever it is that they're doing. Ken Kutaragi cared. But those aren't always the best people to put in charge. He loved gaming so much it got him fired. When you borrow money and sell stock, you have a responsibility to others that comes before your loves. If you only want to care about the products and throw caution to the wind, buy back all of your stock and go private. Until then, you have to make smart business decisions.

[Hingle_Mcringleberry]

Somebody should have given SONY that memo cause they aren't making much money. Or is it that they love the core gamer so much they don't care that they haven't made back the billions they spent on the ps3?

[Good_Guy_Jamal]

You're just asking for trouble saying that. You got brass, I'll tell ya that.

[SDF Repellent]

According the N4G, only Microsoft cares about money. Sony, on the other hand, don't care about money and will kiss the so called "core" gamers' rear because they love them so much.

Of course Sony is in for the money. Core gamers are only a small percentage of the potential gaming population and that is why the PS Move and the new PSeye were developed to get as many people onboard as possible. It is not rocket science.

[Hicken]

Stupid. May I call you Stupid?

No?

I'm calling you Stupid, anyway.

Stupid, you've got it backwards. It's not that "only Microsoft cares about money," but "Microsoft only cares about money." You see, Stupid, Sony and Nintendo care about money, too; they just so happen to have AT LEAST AN ILLUSION of caring about their customers, as well.

They cater to the core- or their respective cores- first and primarily, and without fail. Why?

Because they're the constant source of money. They're the SURE source. Casuals are, by their very nature, an unreliable income source. So while they ARE an option for large amounts of money quickly, they're definitely not the basket you want to put all your eggs in.

This is ESPECIALLY true at the start of a generation, or the launch of a new console, as core gamers make up the overwhelming majority of those early adopters. And guess what:

If the core isn't there at the start, the system may not be around long enough for the casuals to get interested. So, yeah, there's that. Nintendo and Sony recognize that, and they act accordingly, for the most part.

Microsoft, your preferred company(nothing wrong with that, I guess), seems intent on pulling a bait-and-switch on their core. You know what sucks about that?

Their core- comprised of people like you- doesn't seem to mind.

Edit: I called him Stupid because he says so many things that give you that impression. It's not even a matter of being a fanboy; his comment is asinine, an you both know it. The whole purpose was for him to say, "Sony's not special; they're the same same as any other money-grubbing company."

And yeah, I think I have a pretty good idea what the 360 core wants, since I sold systems and games to them for years. Since I have been friends with them for years.

Of course, since you two are also firmly against Sony in particular, it's no surprise to see you come to your fellow hater's defense.

In particular, maniac, you paint a pretty picture of some sort of objectivity; the comment about exclusives "bombing," however, shows your bias. If you can, I'd like you to point out where Sony said even ONE of their exclusives didn't do what they'd hoped.

You can't. They might not be putting up Halo numbers, but they see sequels, anyway. Which means Sony's happy. Which means they sold well enough. So get your shit straight.

[Good_Guy_Jamal]

Wow! Resorting to name calling huh? This is what SONY love does to a person.

[maniacmayhem]

This is what blind obsession will get you folks.

It's funny that a known Sony fanboy like Hicken actually knows what the 360 core wants. In fact it is actually hilarious that only people that think that MS has left the core behind are the blind Sony followers.

But god forbid anyone bring up how most Sony exclusives don't sell or that the only two exclusives last year bombed. Nope, media bias or Sony gets a pass as Hicken stated in the past.

Of course if I was a blind, raving lunatic sony a** boy, i guess I would go around calling posters on N4G who didn't share my same views stupid also.

Good job Hicken.

[Roper316]

There is making money & being profitable & then there is ripping off people and I will use Scamcom aka Capcom as a example. Do you like paying for content that is purposely locked on the disc? They are just trying to make money?

not Capcom related but do you like having to pay a extra fee to access Netflix which you are already paying Netflix to use? They are just trying to make money?

I am all for companies making money on the products they sell but feel like my above examples are a company blatantly trying to rip you off.

[dcbronco]

I think people are missing the point of charging for online play. The infrastructure needed to run that system and secure it cost 100's of millions a year. Microsoft chooses to charge customers to cover those cost. Sony chooses not to. I appreciate what Sony is doing. But I have no problem with what Microsoft is doing. I think people are delusional to think that anyone should take on that expense for free. I will say that PSN + is a good way to get people to pay. But I still have no problem paying $35 a year either.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

***"The infrastructure needed to run that system and secure it cost 100's of millions a year."***

Can you explain to me why MS is the only that holds multiplayer hostage though? Ninty and Valve seem to have no problem offering their services for free. The only answer I can come up with for that is that's Microsoft's 'hook.' The mulitplayer keeps people coming back. Just as the games is Sony's 'hook' and is what keeps people resubscribing.

If MS offers MP for for free you'd definitely see people taking days-months (or stop paying altogether) before renewing Gold whereas before most would renew it instantly.

I see MS dropping the fee if not when they announce the next Xbox then sometime down the line next gen in order to either remain competitive or perhaps if they finally have something else that they are fully confident in would be a great replacement 'hook.'

[dcbronco]

Nintendo doesn't have much of a multiplayer system. So they don't really matter. With Sony, I appreciate the idea of them being willing to give away something that cost them millions and millions. But considering that they are a company holding on by a thread, it's terrible business.

I haven't paid attention to the last year of annual reports but MS is in a position to give it away for free. Sony might be. As sales get higher and higher online free begins to work. But I have no problem paying for something that cost them so much. It was a bad precedent for Sony to start.

Look at this. Sony eventually foot the bill for this because they had inadequate security.

http://www.examiner.com/art...

This is even worse if you look at the Forbes article(please don't have a fanboy mentality and say Forbes just hates Sony).

http://venturebeat.com/2011...

All because Sony didn't spend the money on a proper security system because they were already spending so much on a free service. At least if they had been charging they would have been safer or would have had some available money to deal with it.

I do agree that people would take longer to renew if MP was free. I also believe they are going to offer a lot more on the 720. They haven't hired all of the TV execs and producers and writers for nothing. And I also believe they will drop the charge for MP.

They make a lot of money from Live. Much more on purchases than subscriptions. But at the same time they have over 40 million paying so maybe they will just use the money to offer more as Sony makes PSN better. That would be smarter. Original programming, free games and more content will make the money worth it.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

Yeah I see what you are saying. That is why they introduced PS+ and I definitely see PS+ being a hell of a lot more attractive next gen than it is now. I feel like the PS3 was limited on what it can do in terms of updates because of Sony's lack of taking the future into consideration. I'm sure adding stuff must have been a huge chore for them this gen and as a result are making sure that adding updates and features to the PS4 will be a lot easier for them to do.

As for MS, I don't see them dropping it as long as people are willing to pay. It wouldn't make sense at all for them to do so. That's why I say they'll only do it to remain competitive. They can always play the "free" card if they ever need it next gen to get an edge.

[dcbronco]

I agree on MS. And I believe this generation will be extremely competitive so they will most likely have to go free on MP and basic services. But it all equals more for gamers so the tight competition is a good thing. I really wish Nintendo had gone a little more for power and we could have got better prices on games too(maybe). Hopefully digital will bring better pricing since they will be saving so much on other things that go along with physical disc.

[ShaunCameron]

I like how the author brought up the arcade. It puts a lot of the current developers' and publishers' business practices into perspective. What EA and Capcom are doing now isn't all that different from how arcade developers used to make games hard on purpose so gamers would **** more time and money away on trying to beat a certain part of the game as opposed to the whole game itself.