• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

[GI.biz] Cheap money and bad bets: How the games industry turned pandemic success into disaster

Topher

Gold Member
We look the many challenges the games business faces, and where the industry goes from here


By all estimations, the video game market was expected to contract once the COVID-19 lockdowns ended but even the worst-case scenarios for a return to normalcy predicted net growth when compared to pre-pandemic levels.

Instead, a perfect storm of global political and macroeconomic factors, along with executive hubris, left us in a state of disarray and despair.

So how did 2023 despite being arguably one of the best years for games, become one of the worst for those who make games happen at the same time? And why are we still feeling the pinch?

What does a 'generation' mean anymore?​

Beginning in the seventh generation, Microsoft and Sony began taking a page out of Nintendo's handheld hardware playbook. Mid-generation refreshes became a motivating force for living room consoles, in part out of necessity.

This has created a set of expectations in the market among executives and investors. For two generations we've seen a resurgence in hardware spending that requires a specific set of circumstances: component cost savings, realizing manufacturing efficiencies, and a global economy that allows for price cuts rather than hikes. A global pandemic, an escalation of armed conflict, and an inflation crisis have all worked in opposition to this pattern repeating in the current hardware generation.

"2024 in particular seems to be the year where pricing has become more of a challenge," Mat Piscatella, executive director and video game industry advisor at Circana, writes over e-mail. "Hardware spending in the US is down 30% for the year ending May when compared to the same period in 2023. That's not great! And while some of that decline can certainly be attributed to the aging Switch device nearing the end of its lifecycle, sales of PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X/S have also declined sharply so far this year.

"Combined with a less commercially appealing slate of new games when compared to 2023 (yes, there have been some hits in 2024, but not at the scale the market experienced last year - at least thus far) it is reasonable to assume that extended aggressive pricing may be a driving factor."

It would be difficult for ninth generation "Pro"-style releases to succeed at the same scale as the past two generations given all of these factors. The lack of launch model price downward movement means there's less room for more powerful Pro models at an accessible entry fee. The announcement of the PlayStation 5 Pro at $699.99 (plus a $79.99 physical media drive) exemplifies the challenge the hardware market is facing. Pro models were always aimed at the center of the core segment, but with pricing this high, the target audience is even more focused. The higher price will severely limit reach and player adoption. This, in turn, would mute the number of used launch consoles entering the market.

With no price drops and a restricted supply of pre-owned hardware, in combination with macroeconomic forces, this generation simply is not as affordable at this point in the cycle compared to the PS4 and Xbox One era. This is a large part of the reason only 50% of PSN accounts activated on PlayStation 4s have made the move to PlayStation 5. And while PS5 is only trailing PS4 sales slightly as of March 31, 2024 (59 million PS5s vs 60 million PS4s), Piscatella and Circana's outlook on hardware sales for the rest of 2024 isn't terribly rosy. However, console manufacturers may be starting to budge a bit.

"We're already starting to see some discounting happening, and really both Sony and Microsoft can't allow these declines to continue at these rates until 2027 or 2028 (or whenever the next wave of devices and/or services arrive)," Piscatella explains.

"A couple of things will really impact how things go: Nintendo's next hardware device, expected to arrive next year, could significantly disrupt the market. Of course, not much is known about this device beyond rumor, but a highly successful new Nintendo device could apply downward pricing pressure across other devices. But we'll have to wait and see.

"Many are expecting (hoping) that Grand Theft Auto 6 will encourage a wave of mass market adoption, even at these higher price points. As the launch of that game goes, so could what happens with the console hardware offerings. There are signs suggesting that younger players are choosing PC and Mobile devices to play, rather than consoles. Price could certainly be an issue here, but it may be more about the games that these folks are playing (Fortnite, Minecraft, Roblox, etc.) and how they are not reliant on having new console hardware to experience."

All of this is just table setting for the real challenges facing the industry, though. While war and the totality of the global economy might be outside the sphere of influence of AAA executives, these factors exacerbated a short-sighted strategy built on the belief that the COVID-19 boom would last forever (or at least rocket the industry to new heights of profit).

Let the good times roll and roll and… oops​

Over the last decade, publishers have become intoxicated by the staying power of Games-as-a-Service (GAAS). The best way to monetize a player is to keep them engaged through expansions. Seasonal content and battle passes have made this even more appealing, creating a fully greased flywheel to reach into people's pocket and keep them spending on the same games.

There is one problem with this strategy, though: time is finite. As publishers greenlit more and more live service games, players became unable to keep up. The downside of incentivizing players to become heavily invested in one or two games is that it worked.

According to Newzoo's 2024 PC and Console Gaming report, 61% of playtime in 2023 was attributed to games more than six years old. Minecraft, Grand Theft Auto V, a variety of Call of Duty games, Fortnite, and more have their hooks deep in players, and they are not letting go.

"The switching costs are so high," consultant and Nocturne Games partner Jason Della Rocca says, referring to the monetary, psychological, or intangible cost of leaving one option for another. Because players invest so much time and money through battle pass and cosmetic purchases, the more impactful moving to a new service game feels. Especially with younger players seeing games with strong social elements as their third space (like a playground or library), there's a deep sense of connection.

"Switching costs on Roblox are very high," Della Rocca explains. "Switching costs on Fortnite are very high. So yeah, you do need to factor that. It kind of goes into how you build the game and which audience you're going after."

Even with understandable development delays as studios pivoted to a "working under quarantine" model, publisher coffers overflowed. Investors started asking questions, wondering how things were going to change when we could finally poke our heads outside safely into a post-COVID world.

The answers were optimistic.

We'd see a downturn as part of a "return to normalcy," but we'd be in a better position than we were in 2019, before the pandemic. It was safe to spend that cash to strengthen portfolios, continuing an arms race that started in 2013.

Those that didn't acquire, spun up new teams and grew their headcount. Pandemic prosperity in the video game industry inspired a tidal wave of hiring. As publishers leveraged their existing and new studio holdings, they pushed more and more "forever games" out the door. Players simply could not keep up.

In the first week of February 2023, the GAAS sector was shaken. In a bloodbath that has been labeled the "GaaSacre," eight high-profile live titles were either canceled or put into an "end of life" phase. These include EA's Apex Legends Mobile and Battlefield Mobile, Smilegate's Crossfire X, Square Enix's Dragon Quest: The Adventure of Dai, Iron Galaxy's Rumbleverse, Konami's Among Us-like Crimesight, and Velan's Knockout City. Even VR players felt the pinch as Meta-owned Ready at Dawn announced it was sunsetting Echo VR.

Since then, we've seen the tolerance for risk on service titles get smaller and the runway made shorter. Today, it's not uncommon to see games get less than a year to prove they can sustain an audience. If a title doesn't launch with big concurrent users and monetize well, it isn't likely to last more than a handful of months. No game is greater evidence of this than Concord, with a reported eight years in development and a budget of more than $100 million. Sony launched Firewalk Studios’ hero shooter on August 27 before removing it from sale and scrubbing any mention of it from the PlayStation website on September 6. Live service games require a healthy player base to warrant further investment, and Concord peaked at only 697 concurrent players.

Combined with unanticipated global events that sent the world into the dreaded combination of inflation and contraction, the costs of goods and services – including manufacturing and shipping – climbed, making it more difficult for consumers to purchase as much or as frequently.

In a piece written for the ACM Games: Research and Practice Academic Journal, analyst Amanda Farough likened this to the dotcom bust in the early 2000s. And, in many ways video game companies were able to go on spending sprees because of the dotcom crash and the global financial crisis that happened at the end of that decade.

"This free flow of capital during COVID-19 was a continuation and expansion of corrective measures taken by governments to mitigate the 2008-09 subprime mortgage crisis in the United States that led to the 2008 Global Financial Crisis," Farough writes. "Thanks to low interest rates (a.k.a. 'cheap debt'), we saw big bet after big bet in a non-stop deluge of investment and acquisition announcements."

The post-lockdown correction was more severe than executives anticipated. Publishers had over-indexed on service games, which suddenly weren't uniformly perennial cash cows. And then the other shoe dropped on the wave of acquisitions that dominated the news for five years.

The good times came to a crashing halt in 2022.

An unprecedented video game industry labor crisis​

The tricky thing about late-stage capitalism is that investors make unreasonable demands on corporations. In some ways, shareholders and institutional investors are like looter-shooter players; investments are a never-ending quest for "number go up," they want it to go up forever – and it simply cannot. It's not just about growth, though. Investors expect to see the rate of growth to increase year after year.

As the economy started to sour and growth slowed after the lockdown ended, executives began to worry. Shareholders and investors are not content if companies contract, even if the economic environment is treacherous. To counter this, executives pulled their favorite lever: layoffs.

While we don't have exact numbers due to obfuscated reporting and news that doesn't always spread far enough to catch reporters' eyes, job losses since 2022 are nearing 30,000. Statista, a data and business intelligence firm, estimates that we lost 11,250 jobs in 2023. In the first six months of 2024, that number was nearly eclipsed.

Sony, Microsoft, EA, Take-Two, Ubisoft, Embracer Group, Paradox, Thunderful, TinyBulld and many others have all had a hand in the destruction, closing studios and displacing hundreds of employees. We've seen horror stories from people who moved across a continent for a job only to have that position eliminated in mere weeks. All the while, executives remain untouched, raking in large bonuses for keeping share value up at the expense of jobs.

Dozens of indie teams have had to give up their dreams and shutter their studios due to a challenging funding environment. Professional service providers in the game industry orbit are feeling the pinch, too, as budgets get slashed and everyone is being asked to do more with less. The state of the global economy is also creating a crisis in games media as jobs are disappearing at alarming rates. Even storied outlets like Game Informer, which was shut down by owner GameStop in August after 33 years, are unable to escape.

Publishers are mitigating risk by demanding developers present even more during the pitch phase. Instead of prototypes, developers are being forced to fund full vertical slices (a fully-functional, polished segment of a game that demonstrates all of its key systems). Where developers had been leaning on publishers for a full suite of communication support (PR, marketing, community, and social), now funders are expecting to see healthy community interest before signing deals.

"The rewards for a hit can be very high," 1Up Ventures partner and community builder Kelly Wallick says. "In theory, this type of business should be well suited for [venture capitalists], which can take bold risks. But they need to be bold, calculated risks.

"One way to offset this is to better understand as much of the risks as you can, and one of these vectors is to have the founders that are pitching provide more product, more context and more conviction than they may have had to a few years ago. This can translate into all kinds of upfront risk for the founder, such as building a prototype, self-funding, building early community hype and traction, etc.

"The degree to which this needs to be done also relates to the general experience level of the founder. New talent will have more to 'prove' on the execution side and more experienced founders will have more to 'prove' on the startup mentality side for example."

The pain is being felt worldwide. While eyes are often on Western teams, Asian studios and publishers are feeling the pain, too.

"Many of the same factors impacting game companies in the West have also led China-based companies to initiate mass layoffs and restructure their business to focus on a smaller portfolio of games with high revenue potential," Niko Partners Director of Research Daniel Ahmad says.

"We've also seen a slowdown in video game-related deals being announced and closed over the past year or so. There are multiple reasons for this. Growth of video game companies has slowed globally. Interest rates are no longer as low as they once were. Investments in new technology areas related to gaming such as VR, Cloud Gaming, and Web3, among others, have not yielded expected results."

The brain drain will be felt for years to come. We're losing talented senior and mid-level developers to other industries. And there is no room for the flood of juniors coming out of game development education programs. The cost of capital has increased so severely, while venture capitalists and private equity have been burned by fad technologies. This means the typical groundswell of new indie studios operating on the back of equity funding isn't happening this time around. Laid off staff have nowhere to go.

But there are some glimmers of hope that things may be starting to improve, if slowly.

Where do we go from here?​

In a year that has seen multiple smaller titles, like Palworld, Helldivers II, and Enshrouded dominate player engagement, large publishers are still choosing to eschew experimentation and smaller investments. Instead, they are making bigger bets on fewer titles. Square Enix, EA, Nintendo, Microsoft, and more are all signaling further risk aversing by leaning into established franchises at larger scales.

With the cost of debt still so high, we're seeing shifts in how funding is coming together for teams of all sizes.

"I'd say deals generally take longer, are for smaller amounts of money, and at lower valuations," Wallick tells us. "Which means larger amounts of the companies are being sold for less money in equity rounds. Although it kind of seems like the pricing and raise amounts now are more aligned with how it looked prior to the bubble, so it might be better to think about it more as an equalization on that front than anything else. There are still fairly active pre-seed and seed funding, but the later, larger rounds have slowed."

Similar shifts are happening in Asia, with Chinese companies taking a different approach. "Chinese companies have started focusing on internal expansion, through the creation of new studios, rather than the buying spree approach they took prior," Ahmad explains.

However, the Middle-east and other areas are getting infusions of cash. Saudi Arabia is using the industry to sportswash its human rights reputation.

"The MENA region, particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE, have strong government backing," Ahmad says. "Both markets have looked to diversify their economy away from oil, with gaming and esports as notable growth sectors. This has led to the creation of dedicated policies and plans within Saudi Vision 2030 and the UAE Digital Economy Strategy such as Saudi Arabia's National Gaming & Esports Strategy and Dubai's Program for Gaming.

"This investment is leading to the creation of the largest esports tournament in the world, the buildup of dedicated game development studios in the region, and robust infrastructure to support gaming growth. While it's still early for the region, it's clear that this is a long-term strategy."

Della Rocca reflects that other regions are emerging, too, noting studios in Poland and Romania opening recently from notable talent and major investors, like Amazon Games. In addition to the cost of doing business in cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, or London, the loosening of geographic restrictions is a major financial incentive.

"Everyone's connected on Discord and Slack," Della Rocca says. "Leadership may be sitting in LA, but then the work will be split between a crew in Brazil, a couple of folks in India and maybe some other folks in Vietnam. So you can optimize the limited cash you have. Because four people in LA will cost you just as much as 40 people in Brazil or something ridiculous like that."

It's not entirely hopeless out there. The industry will eventually stabilize and improve. Players are always going to want to play games. When and how this stabilization will happen is hazy. It's dependent on executives, some of whom do not even play video games, often chasing trends like Web3 and AI rather than investing in people.

In a recent report, venture capital firm Konvoy Ventures notes that through the first half of 2024, deal value is down 7% from last year and the number of deals are down 12%. However, while growth and late-stage investments are still struggling, early-stage investment is starting to recover. This points to a positive turnaround in 2025 that could revitalize the indie startup scene.

Just as quickly as the industry swelled during COVID-19 and crashed in its aftermath, something else might surprise us and turn fortunes around once more.

"It feels like every handful of years some wildly unpredictable thing is happening in the world or in technology or in the economy that we've never seen before," Wallick says. "So maybe the cycles of unexpected 'perfect storms' are not as rare as we might think. We'll just have no idea what those will be until they happen. And anyone who says they know the future most definitely doesn't. Otherwise, what would any of us even be doing here? We could have just gone home by now!"

For the game industry to stabilize and thrive again, it must continue to expand efforts to reach as many players as possible where people play. That means lifting up underserved voices, leaning into representation, and fostering teams of all sizes. Wallick and so many others are looking forward to the turnaround.

"My hope is that this starts to cool off in the coming years," she says. "And the next iteration of this kind of investing in the games space is more robust and more able to support a wider variety of studios and content - which hopefully leads to cooler games and more opportunities for players to find and connect with what they love."



Long article, but interesting. Especially concerning the labor market. Devs in the US, particularly in US/California, should be worried as we see more and more studios popping up globally that are willing to work for a lot less.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
You ain't seen nuthin' yet, Mike.
Should have saved this article for all the upcoming Sweet Baby Titanics which have been in development for 3+ years and haven't hit the Gamer Iceberg yet.

And what about the non-Sweet Baby games that fail on a large scale? What about those?
 

Kacho

Gold Member
Oh lemme get comfortable for this one

Jerry Seinfeld Lol GIF
 

Wildebeest

Member
I don't think Palworld is enough to say that the market is moving to "smaller creative" games being huge hits. It relied heavily on its relationship to Pokemon. Some IP like Marvel and Star Wars is failing, but that could just be because modern Disney is a kiss of death. Other IP like Harry Potter, Dungons & Dargons, and Warhammer are doing fine.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
I don't think Palworld is enough to say that the market is moving "smaller creative" games being huge hits. It relied heavily on its relationship to Pokemon. Some IP like Marvel and Star Wars is failing, but that could just be because modern Disney is a kiss of death. Other IP like Harry Potter, Dungons & Dargons, and Warhammer are doing fine.

I dunno. You may be right, but Sony has to be looking at what they put into Concord and contrasting it with Astro Bot. If they ain't looking at the way that played out sideways then they really are screwed.
 

LectureMaster

Gold Member
The western AAA industry needs to scale back, you cannot form a bloated 800+ team with activists, SBI hustlers, equity over equality members to produce a mediocre product, and then claim AAA is unsustainable and we need to raise the game price to 70, 80, 90, 100 dollars.

Cut the unnecessary cost, stop the obsessive chase of graphics, and let the truly talented ones do the work. And you'll make good money, surprise, surprise.

ShiftUp is less than 300 staff, Game Science is only 150+, and for one of the richest content games in history, Larian only had 400 people working on BG3.
 
Last edited:

lmimmfn

Member
After the last bust in 2008, banks across the world were providing loans at 0% to corporations.
This was great until inflation went crazy after covid = huge layoffs as world banks increased interest rates and the end of cheap money which was used for expansion.

On top of that Blackrock/Vanguard were providing the same 0% loans based on people's investment funds to drive DEI/ESG.

Now the chicken has come home to roost. The DEI/ESG initiatives resulted in useless woke employees being hired, but companies need profit while struggling with high interest rates preventing expansion.

Woke is dying....
 

Kacho

Gold Member
For the game industry to stabilize and thrive again, it must continue to expand efforts to reach as many players as possible where people play. That means lifting up underserved voices, leaning into representation, and fostering teams of all sizes. Wallick and so many others are looking forward to the turnaround.

Aren’t we already doing that?
 

Kacho

Gold Member
The hardware collapse we’re seeing this generation is very interesting.

Xbox is toast and no one gives a fuck about their new hardware for obvious reasons.

Sony probably won’t sell more Pro consoles than they did last gen, but the higher price will make them more money in the end.

Speaking for myself. Last gen I bought an Xbox One, a One S, and 2 One X consoles. On the Sony side I bought a PS4, PS4 Pro and PS4 Slim. This generation? I bought a Series X and it isn’t even plugged in. Haven’t bought a game since June 2023. All my money now goes to Steam and Nintendo.
 
Last edited:

[Sigma]

Member
There is one problem with this strategy, though: time is finite. As publishers greenlit more and more live service games, players became unable to keep up. The downside of incentivizing players to become heavily invested in one or two games is that it worked.

According to Newzoo's 2024 PC and Console Gaming report, 61% of playtime in 2023 was attributed to games more than six years old. Minecraft, Grand Theft Auto V, a variety of Call of Duty games, Fortnite, and more have their hooks deep in players, and they are not letting go.

"The switching costs are so high," consultant and Nocturne Games partner Jason Della Rocca says, referring to the monetary, psychological, or intangible cost of leaving one option for another. Because players invest so much time and money through battle pass and cosmetic purchases, the more impactful moving to a new service game feels. Especially with younger players seeing games with strong social elements as their third space (like a playground or library), there's a deep sense of connection.

"Switching costs on Roblox are very high," Della Rocca explains. "Switching costs on Fortnite are very high. So yeah, you do need to factor that. It kind of goes into how you build the game and which audience you're going after."

Even with understandable development delays as studios pivoted to a "working under quarantine" model, publisher coffers overflowed. Investors started asking questions, wondering how things were going to change when we could finally poke our heads outside safely into a post-COVID world.
Why I fundamentally scoff at it(gaas) in the way. I know all too well just observing my nephew's behaviors and habits when it comes to fortnite and cod. I want him playing and experiencing gaming as I have and did growing up but he has a tendency to fall back on these. And not necessarily because he's enjoying himself. His behavior is more of a person who feels like he has to be playing it and getting the latest season pass which don't even use most of the time once acquiring if someone gets it for him.
 
Last edited:
'For the game industry to stabilize and thrive again, it must continue to expand efforts to reach as many players as possible where people play. That means lifting up underserved voices, leaning into representation ...''

After all that analysis and prediction, in the final paragraph we can see they haven't learned a thing.
 
Last edited:

ArtHands

Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
There are signs suggesting that younger players are choosing PC and Mobile devices to play, rather than consoles.

So basically only the console side of the industry? Nothing to worry over
 

StereoVsn

Member
This is a very well written article and makes some great points about GaaS, stupid pricing, greedy execs and investors and more.

It’s kind of a doom loop, at least for a while I feel. I guess we shall see what happens over next few years.

I do feel that both Sony and MS are kind of crazy with their hardware pricing and for every increasing software pricing (especially if you count MTX).

I can see them trying $89.99 price in US for next gen (and more in Europe, CA and so on). And they will start failing spectacularly even worse then some games are starting to crash now. The argument that games are “too cheap” doesn’t pan out in current global economic situation.
 

lmimmfn

Member
This is a very well written article and makes some great points about GaaS, stupid pricing, greedy execs and investors and more.

It’s kind of a doom loop, at least for a while I feel. I guess we shall see what happens over next few years.

I do feel that both Sony and MS are kind of crazy with their hardware pricing and for every increasing software pricing (especially if you count MTX).

I can see them trying $89.99 price in US for next gen (and more in Europe, CA and so on). And they will start failing spectacularly even worse then some games are starting to crash now. The argument that games are “too cheap” doesn’t pan out in current global economic situation.
Ask Ubisoft how that AAAA pricing is working for them 😀
 
Why I fundamentally scoff at it(gaas) in the way. I know all too well just observing my nephew's behaviors and habits when it comes to fortnite and cod. I want him playing and experiencing gaming as I have and did growing up but he has a tendency to fall back on these. And not necessarily because he's enjoying himself. His behavior is more of a person who feels like he has to be playing it and getting the latest season pass which don't even use most of the time once acquiring if someone gets it for him.
It does feel like in a way corporations are acting as drug dealers, designing their games to be addictive as possible and pushing them on to adolescents.
 

ZehDon

Member
This is a very well written article and makes some great points about GaaS, stupid pricing, greedy execs and investors and more.

It’s kind of a doom loop, at least for a while I feel. I guess we shall see what happens over next few years.

I do feel that both Sony and MS are kind of crazy with their hardware pricing and for every increasing software pricing (especially if you count MTX).

I can see them trying $89.99 price in US for next gen (and more in Europe, CA and so on). And they will start failing spectacularly even worse then some games are starting to crash now. The argument that games are “too cheap” doesn’t pan out in current global economic situation.
Publishers would rather crash the industry than walk back their over-monetisation. An industry wide crash gives CEOs and executives an easy out and golden parachutes, whereas changing pricing means they have to take a hit to their own stock prices in isolation which may mean they're removed from their companies with no parachutes. They're all in.

Console gaming relies on being cost-effective, but the home console market just hasn't grown. So, we're seeing companies try to extract more money from a smaller number of customers to create the illusion of growth for their investors, but sacrificing the very thing that makes consoles an attractive purchase. They're trying to find the absolute maximum that people are willing to pay because there's only so much money to go around. Sony's now selling their most expensive hardware ever, and there's no indication their next hardware will be cheaper. Combined with their raising games and service prices, they're squeezing PlayStation fans for all their worth with no signs of slowing down. Microsoft's about to change their approach, and offer an expensive PC-hybrid handheld and a very expensive PC-hybrid home console, and try and use the allure of Game Pass to soften the blow. That may work, until they need to increase profits again, at which point they'll have to jack up their service prices. Nintendo are the only ones who appear to be still operating as a normal console manufacturer; deliver cost-effective hardware and high quality software, and laugh all the way to the bank. I imagine next gen is gonna be filled with more consolidation and studio closures as studios continue to go under.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
A lot of these companies overhired during covid thinking the gravy train would last forever. That seemed like a very tech-heavy view some reason. But it makes sense since tech companies were one of the industries that went up. Many went industries down where one like travel companies got nailed to the cross. Consumer goods companies like mine rode the rocky ship of good and bad of big sales for some brands, some tanked, supply chain issues, but overall it lead to us benefiting as many companies sold more than brands tanking as people stayed home hoarding, cooking, cleaning at home.

We all knew it would get back to normal at some point. But it was a matter of when, not if.

So while we tried cranking out more products, you'd find very few amping up hiring a shit load more people FT and building more factories asap thinking it'd last forever. We just road it out whether it was good times or not and waited for mask/home protocols and such to be back to 2019 normalcy. It was a 2 year journey (at least for Canada). By lets say Q1 2022, safety mandates were pretty much all taken down and any WFH people were asked back to the office hybrid style.

In tech, it seemed they all amped up. And some companies like Peloton tried growing as if they hit the lottery. They had a one year wonder of sales and they spiraled down the toilet as soon as the $3,000 machine buyers dried up and gyms opened back up.

Making it worse was any companies (like Embracer) or anyone at home buying a new house taking advantage of 2% loans. At one time in 2022 right before rates increased like crazy my mortgage was something stupid like 1.20%. It was free money. Fast forward to 2024 and if youre on a variable rate, or your fixed rate loan or mortgage is coming up for renewal soon, you're now paying 5-6%. Maybe even 7% a year ago before rates came down a touch the past half year. You ca now get fixed rate mortgages for under 5%, so things are coming down. But good luck with that rate compared to 2%. And thats personal loans. A business loan is surely jacked up a few pts.

If people and companies just rode out covid like normal, youd get a lot less headaches coming out of it.

Check out Embracer's acquisition log. They bought so many studios before rates jacked up. Then the second they hiked up, it came to a dead stop. Bit them in the ass years later.
 
Last edited:
Crash isn't the right word. A crash implies an entire industry and everyone loses.

More like an involuntary reset with many losers and some winners. And it isn't the entire industry. Mobile will not even notice. Smart Indies and AA keep on doing the niches they carved out for themselves. They won't even notice.

Now AAAs. Specifically the Western AAA pubs and devs?

It's going be a bitch. I mean it isn't 'coming'. It's already here and this is just the beginning of the movie.
 
Last edited:

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Crash isn't the right word. A crash implies an entire industry and everyone loses.

More like an involuntary reset with many losers and some winners. And it isn't the entire industry. Mobile will not even notice. Smart Indies and AA keep on doing the niches they carved out for themselves. They won't even notice.

Now AAAs. Specifically the Western AAA pubs and devs?

It's going be a bitch. I mean it isn't 'coming'. It's already here and this is just the beginning of the movie.

Western AAA studios will be fine. There's been some bloat there for the last 5-8 years. The fat is being trimmed. Western devs will be fine after the reset is complete.
 

Wildebeest

Member
I dunno. You may be right, but Sony has to be looking at what they put into Concord and contrasting it with Astro Bot. If they ain't looking at the way that played out sideways then they really are screwed.
The problem with this is hindsight bias. Why wouldn't the developers of Concord have said before release that it was the real "creative" project that was doing something new that the market didn't know that it wanted? It is only after they come out that we say for sure that the generic looking 3d platformer is the "creative game" that nobody knew the PS5 market needed, and that Concord is the generic hero shooter that wasn't "creative" that everybody knew wasn't needed. OK, when the games are basically finished and people have seen them we can be more confident, but what about much earlier than that? If you remove that, then we are just saying that costs for game dev have to come right down because risks are too high. Well, good in principle, then someone else makes a really spendy game in your field and then nobody would piss on your budget conscious game if it was on fire.
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
Western AAA studios will be fine. There's been some bloat there for the last 5-8 years. The fat is being trimmed. Western devs will be fine after the reset is complete.

Not if they keep poisoning the product with heavy-handed DEI messaging they wont. 1 underperforming title is survivable, 2 back-to-back and they are in deep shit.

The reality is pretty obvious at this point that going hard with that sort of messaging does not help sales. No matter the plaudits from the activist class within the enthusiast press.

Sorry, but this is so fucking stupid its bordering on criminal. If your budget is so big that you need to shift millions of units to break-even, you cannot afford to alienate swathes of your potential audience by ramming any particular flavour of politics down their throats. You need everyone's favour across the spectrum.

Contrary to the line that's been pushed for a few years now, everything is not political to most people; they just want to be entertained.
 

atyourservice

Neo Member
Is the home console part of the industry might be heading towards disaster on both the hardware and software sides?

Maybe. Seems more likely than not that these publishers will drastically change their business models in the next decade, but still too much to consider for a definite wholistic prediction from anyone
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Not if they keep poisoning the product with heavy-handed DEI messaging they wont. 1 underperforming title is survivable, 2 back-to-back and they are in deep shit.

The reality is pretty obvious at this point that going hard with that sort of messaging does not help sales. No matter the plaudits from the activist class within the enthusiast press.

Sorry, but this is so fucking stupid its bordering on criminal. If your budget is so big that you need to shift millions of units to break-even, you cannot afford to alienate swathes of your potential audience by ramming any particular flavour of politics down their throats. You need everyone's favour across the spectrum.

Contrary to the line that's been pushed for a few years now, everything is not political to most people; they just want to be entertained.

I think all of the bolded is incorrect. I know that's been the hype and talking point of the "man-o-sphere" in gaming circles as of late, but it lacks 70 layers of nuance. God of War: R, Spiderman 2, and TLOU2 were all considered "WOKE" games when released and they all did great sales wise. There's no real debate there.

The point is those games were really good games overall (regardless of any individual opinion about them). The games that failed that had "so-called" DEI influences that failed, were also just bad games. People say Alan Wake 2 is a DEI game and that's why it's failing. But, I'd argue not being on Steam hurt it waaaay more than having a lead that's a black woman (1 half of the leads of the game btw). Plus Remedy's games are slow burners usually also.

However, I agree with your last point. We all want to be entertained and you can NEVER go wrong with that. Just look at Astrobot.
 

GHound

Member
I know exactly one type of person that speaks like this and they're all cringe.
For the game industry to stabilize and thrive again, it must continue to expand efforts to reach as many players as possible where people play. That means lifting up underserved voices, leaning into representation, and fostering teams of all sizes.
adjqKST.jpeg
 
Dont very worry for PS5 sales, GTA VI is coming. And PS5 pro will outsell PS4 Pro in just a few days thanks to that only game. And with more hardwares sold, more games in general will be sell too...
 
Last edited:

Majukun

Member
The western AAA industry needs to scale back, you cannot form a bloated 800+ team with activists, SBI hustlers, equity over equality members to produce a mediocre product, and then claim AAA is unsustainable and we need to raise the game price to 70, 80, 90, 100 dollars.

Cut the unnecessary cost, stop the obsessive chase of graphics, and let the truly talented ones do the work. And you'll make good money, surprise, surprise.

ShiftUp is less than 300 staff, Game Science is only 150+, and for one of the richest content games in history, Larian only had 400 people working on BG3.
agree, but i think it's also about hiring better directors and try to safeguard the collective know-how instead to recycle everytime most of the workforce through cycles of hiring and firing.

just look at the last ubi starwars game..they put so much money in production values, yet attention to detail is worse than some xbox games, despite the fact that the genre, open world, it's bound to be gutted ane hyper-analyzed by the players by default given the emergent and experimental nature of it...of course they are gonna try shoot the animals or npc down, of course they are gonna try exploit the systems in place..there it's where the big money should have gone, much more than visual presentation

teams like rockstar with their infinite money and immense know-how can pull off doing both (albeit they have an issue with on-rail missions a lot), but when you don't have the same resources, you have to know where to channel them.
 

Porcile

Member
Game biz has been very adaptable up until now so wouldn't be surprised if a new money making scheme comes along. For example, in the late 80s and 90s when companies needed games quickly and cheaply there was licensed games to save the day. Then just when it seems the liked the well was dry in the 00s along comes DLC, season passes and micro transactions to save the day and licensed games fall by the wayside. Then the pond gets too full and along comes mobile and GaaS. Now that pond is full but no choice except to finally start shooting the fish. But somehow the creativily bankrupt mega gaming corps like EA, Ubisoft and Microsoft find a way to keep going so we'll see what the future holds.
 

BlackTron

Member
I think all of the bolded is incorrect. I know that's been the hype and talking point of the "man-o-sphere" in gaming circles as of late, but it lacks 70 layers of nuance. God of War: R, Spiderman 2, and TLOU2 were all considered "WOKE" games when released and they all did great sales wise. There's no real debate there.

None of these games were considered "woke" until after you came home and played the game.

Can you point me to a successful original IP that is "woke", that does not depend on the principle of stripping value from an existing IP that laid the groundwork without it?

OR a situation where they did this to existing successful IP, and the sequel after they tricked everyone did not suffer?

One example please.
 

Mr.Phoenix

Member
BMW had a studio size of 140 people at its peak.

140 people. And started with 20.

The issue is that Western devs need to scale back. The Chinese devs are obviously willing to be paid less and put in more work for the money.

They had an average salary of $40k/yr. Compare that to an average salary of #106K/year of a western dev.

And we have this crazy thing where average salaries are going up, studios are getting larger, and yet, games are taking longer to make, which makes no sense.

BMW took 6 years to make, started with 20 people and grew to 140. You would think that if they had a size of 280 people it could have been made in at most 4 years right? Maybe in China, that could be the case, but in the West... none of these things seem to matter.
 
'For the game industry to stabilize and thrive again, it must continue to expand efforts to reach as many players as possible where people play. That means lifting up underserved voices, leaning into representation ...''

After all that analysis and prediction, in the final paragraph we can see they haven't learned a thing.


This is a damage-control manipulative article if I ever read one.
 

Rudius

Member
Aren’t we already doing that?
What they should do is try to expand the traditional audience, boys and men, in non traditional markets, like India, South Asia, Africa and Latin America. Just look at what Wukong is doing for China. But the type of inclusion they need is not characters that "represent" them, but economic inclusion, i.e.: being able to buy the consoles and games.

There is still room to grow, just not by chasing "modern audiences", but they will never admit that.
 
Last edited:

YeulEmeralda

Linux User
I dunno. You may be right, but Sony has to be looking at what they put into Concord and contrasting it with Astro Bot. If they ain't looking at the way that played out sideways then they really are screwed.
There was an article in a Dutch newspaper.

If your games takes 8 years to develop you are tracing the popular trend of the past. Your game is outdated by the time it releases.
 

Topher

Gold Member
There was an article in a Dutch newspaper.

If your games takes 8 years to develop you are tracing the popular trend of the past. Your game is outdated by the time it releases.

Great point

The problem with this is hindsight bias. Why wouldn't the developers of Concord have said before release that it was the real "creative" project that was doing something new that the market didn't know that it wanted? It is only after they come out that we say for sure that the generic looking 3d platformer is the "creative game" that nobody knew the PS5 market needed, and that Concord is the generic hero shooter that wasn't "creative" that everybody knew wasn't needed. OK, when the games are basically finished and people have seen them we can be more confident, but what about much earlier than that? If you remove that, then we are just saying that costs for game dev have to come right down because risks are too high. Well, good in principle, then someone else makes a really spendy game in your field and then nobody would piss on your budget conscious game if it was on fire.

Eh.....that's overthinking it quite a bit, imo. What I am talking about is learning from your successes and your failures. Also being true to yourself. Astro Bot was made right out of PlayStation's DNA. Concord, not so much.
 
Last edited:

Wildebeest

Member
Eh.....that's overthinking it quite a bit, imo. What I am talking about is learning from your successes and your failures. Also being true to yourself. Astro Bot was made right out of PlayStation's DNA. Concord, not so much.
I'm saying, it is easy to say the lesson is "bet on winners, don't bet on losers" but not easy to do it.
 

Punished Miku

Human Rights Subscription Service
It feels like Covid really backfired on these studios and gaming as a whole. I don't get it, but there was obviously some really stupid decisions made.
Personally I don't think COVID is a great excuse for it. They're just making more expensive games, slower and slower than ever. Shawn Layden and Iwata were calling this out years before COVID.
 

DonkeyPunchJr

World’s Biggest Weeb
'For the game industry to stabilize and thrive again, it must continue to expand efforts to reach as many players as possible where people play. That means lifting up underserved voices, leaning into representation ...''

After all that analysis and prediction, in the final paragraph we can see they haven't learned a thing.
WTF, isn’t that part of the reason gaming (and Hollywood) are in this situation to begin with?

“Hey here’s something that’s popular/some old IP people are nostalgic for… just imagine how much money we’d make by broadening the appeal to a bigger demographic by cramming it full of DEI!!”

Then end up making something that fails to appeal to the imaginary “modern audience” while also pissing off the actual audience.

Yeah, good luck with that if you still think that’s a winning strategy in 2024. The bloodbath is only just getting started.
 

Killer8

Member
For the game industry to stabilize and thrive again, it must continue to expand efforts to reach as many players as possible where people play. That means lifting up underserved voices, leaning into representation, and fostering teams of all sizes. Wallick and so many others are looking forward to the turnaround.

I've never seen an article nosedive so spectacularly. That is the bad bet you fucking retards!

The elephant isn't just in the room - it's throwing the limp body of the industry around with its trunk.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
'For the game industry to stabilize and thrive again, it must continue to expand efforts to reach as many players as possible where people play. That means lifting up underserved voices, leaning into representation ...''

After all that analysis and prediction, in the final paragraph we can see they haven't learned a thing.
That's what "true believers" do, double down on stupid.
 
Top Bottom