Top
130°

Game Theory: Are Gamers Killing Video Games?

There's someone out there killing the video game industry, and that person is YOU!

This is the part 2 of the three-part series by the Game Theorist (The part 1 is below in case you missed it) explaining why Nintendo and the industry are struggling with innovation and how the gamers are killing the gaming industry. Check it out!

Read Full Story >>
crunchyroll.com
The story is too old to be commented.
XiNarutoUzumaki1350d ago (Edited 1350d ago )

Yes they are!

Buying the same rehashed COD and shooters every year and ignoring the games that try new ideas. I don't blame devs for not making new stuff, I blame you for not supporting good and innovative games-- for not taking the risk of trying somethin' that you might like.

Summons751350d ago

its a double edge sword. Gamers are rsponisble for buying the rehashed stuff but devs are also to Blame for not taking risks are stepping out of the 'safe' route.

Anthotis1350d ago

Sure. Devs aren't gonna take any risks if they think they won't be rewarded. So we get uninspired crap a lot of the time, but at least it makes them some money, even if they don't win any awards.

crusf1350d ago

Yes because fuck the people who legitimately enjoy CoD and shooters. I like CoD but I love playing other games too. But since I like playing CoD people discriminate and immediately think I'm less of a gamer for it. I enjoy Ghosts and Steam world digs on an equal level. Is that so wrong?

3-4-51349d ago

If all you offer us is CRAP, eventually we are going to have to pick the best of the crap, but it's still crap.

Not all games are this^, obviously but it still applies to this past gen.

* Too many Dev's take one idea and try to stretch it into an entire game.

contradictory1350d ago (Edited 1350d ago )

nice seeing this on N4G too.

on the subject itself though it's sad but also true
people aren't likely to buy a game from a new franchise
as opposed to franchise they're familiar with

Okami is also a great example they brought up.
it sold like crap and was still one of the most
critically acclaimed game on the PS2

Baccra171350d ago

Here we go again. No it's not gamers fault. In fact this trend started just before the golden age of gaming was beginning to end and the last generation began.

The japs didn't want to be innovative anymore, they wanted to move away from that and stick to sequels and rehashes. Why? Sequels were already established and had fans, but new games and innovation could be hit or miss and profit wise it made sense to go the churning/safe route. Turns out though that didn't work to well for the japs or the game industry as a whole.

But of course lets be corporate apologist and blame gamers yet again.

bennissimo1350d ago

I don't know about the games, but on the tech side...

MS tried to implement some amazing features into the Xbox One, and a lot of idiots complained that they'd have to change their gaming habits slightly in return for a vastly improved experience.

The Xbox One could've been so great at launch, if it weren't for those morons.

Now, we have to wait for MS to gradually implement the same policies, so those fools don't get too butthurt.

MoveTheGlow1350d ago (Edited 1350d ago )

That's a good point, and you also have to figure PR, marketing, and advertising into this entire argument - it's lacking for both the video and this Xbox One argument.

For example, yes, Modern Warfare 2 sold a ton more copies than the previous two CoDs. Some of that is indeed from the familiarity - the original MW, CoD 4, had an amazing single-player campaign. Most of it, though, was a giant advertising blitz. With Activision knowing full well that this game was hot, it ramped up advertising to bring more people on board, knowing that at the very worst, their return on investment would be covered by decent sales. It did well, of course. Yeah, EA did some good Mirror's Edge marketing to no avail, but most of the time, the risky games just weren't advertised on a grand scale.

The Xbox One, on the other hand, had those features ready to go, and according to a few anonymous employees on forums (for whatever that's worth), they were trying to make it a new Steam-like thing with an affordable chunk of hardware to support it. They, in no way, communicated that to the public, with "Deal with it" tweets and Mattrick-isms replacing an explanation of the positive plans for this DRM. Heck, when they officially detailed what was going on with the DRM, they didn't even mention why it would be *good* for the digital market! That made the Xbox One look like it was running a UPlay-level DRM scheme. The guys at the top of the marketing and advertising chain really, really screwed it up. In the meantime, Sony had its finger on the pulse of gamers, and they benefited greatly.

The backtracking didn't help. People hated Steam when it first appeared - why did I have to make an account to play Half-Life 2? - but they were trusted over the years because Valve largely did well by their customers. They were also transparent and informative when something went wrong. If Microsoft gave it time (and nixed the required Kinect, lowering the price), perhaps this would have gone better for them by now.

donwel1349d ago

Yes, it must be the gamers!
Not the games "journalists" who dish out high scores and game of the year awards for average and poor games (honestly, you'd think the reviews were paid for, lol!). No they CAN'T have anything to do with it, surely!
If games "journalists" were more trustworthy with their reviewing and not trying to force their agenda down our throats constantly then it might make the industry a little bit more tolerable.

Show all comments (11)