Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
I think we will see many mobile to console ports at some point.
-
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.
Konami: The future of the video game industry (Spoiler: It's not console)
- Thread starter ZhugeEX
- Start date
I know I sound bitter, at best, but I'm really not digging the whole product-and-revenue-focus displayed in these presentations, all I'm hearing is conjecture on where to make the most bucks in the coming times. I've always thought of games as an entertainment product, a labor of love built to entertain an audience and bring them new experiences. While I agree that you can't make games without moolah and you need money to live and operate, the focus shift from creating entertainment because it's awesome to creating entertainment to make the most money possible seems contrarian to what an entertainment product is supposed to be or what the intention behind it, like any form of art for instance, is supposed to be. Julien isn't talking about making awesome games that enchant people, he's talking about making a product almost clinically tailored to extract money from consumers. There's no passion, none. And it saddens me.
I agree. But that's mainly because he's the technology director and not a game creator as such.
Konami isn't going to get a dime from me by porting MGS series on mobile phones.
Or even making a sequel on mobile phones
Theres no way that I'm going to play MGS on a small touch screen.
Same goes for Silent Hill.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
While it's easy to rebut with "it's all just business dude", you do have a point. Look at Disney. That is a money making machine, which at the same time seems to be actually creating works of entertainment that people in the organization genuinely care about. They want to make their customer happy in a way that also fosters longtime brand loyalty.
Everyone needs to bring in analysts and look for the best opportunities ... But I do think that Konami has chosen a particular path here, partially out of ideology. They are a gambling and lifestyle company, and so it makes sense for them to pivot in directions that have no concern for their home gaming customers at all. But Nintendo would never pivot that way even though they are facing the same market realities. They'd keep their focus on making colourful gaming products regardless of the situation. Or look at Square Enix. They seem to see themselves as an entertainment company, and whatever way they pivot will revolve around that.
This isn't just the numbers that mandated Konami. This was a particular choice that was made, because there was no corporate culture in place at Konami which had any vision to preserve their legacy and please their loyal customers. It didn't have to be this way.
bodyboarder
Member
User acquisition cost. Business speak is the best.
Rushersauce
Banned
Tegra x1 is only 512gigaflops.... It's 1TF in 16bit precission.
Nvidia marketing is stronk, it's not the first time i've read the TegraX1 1TFLOP/s lie.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
Hopefully, if people buy the game, but completely ignore microtransactions, they'll get the fucking hint.
ScatheZombie
Member
Your mistake was misappropriating mainstream entertainment for 'art'. We make products. Always have. Always will. AAA development is a purely product-driven business model. The artistic endeavor within most entertainment media, specifically referring to film and gaming, comes from independent development where creators are able to take creative risks. And even within that landscape, you'll have plenty of creators aiming towards mass-market financial success rather than purely intentioned artistic experience.
The shift in focus, for mainstream development, happened almost two decades ago. The entertainment industry has always been about how the product is going to make the most money after the first few steps of its infancy. And this has been true within gaming specifically as well. The mainstream business is, without question, profit-driven and profit-focused. What you are describing can only be found within independent business. But there's always been a hurdle to independent game development that independent film hasn't really had - the required capital and diversity of skill required to create content. Those hurdles are starting to fall away and independent development is beginning to rapidly expand and grow.
But where is it growing the most? PC and mobile.
I see your sentiment frequently among long-time gamers and it's confusing to me as a AAA developer. Because I always assumed everyone knew we were (mostly) only really in this show for the money. But it's becoming pretty clear that the veil was pulled away recently for a lot of people and they're really upset at being duped for so long. The mantra of making 'awesome games' has always had the hidden caveat of 'that make a lot of money'. The only shift is in how transparent that caveat has become.
The goal of any professional in a creative/artistic space is to make money. People who create content or art for the sake of it are called hobbyists.
Reductive and wrong.
It all boils down to a short term versus long term strategy. Konami is clearly focusing on short term returns with mainly short term plans.
Companies that focus on delivering value to the customer and are customer centric tend to be around longer and more profitable long term.
I don't think this is way off base. Much of GAF may not like it, and much of the traditonal home console gamer may not like it, but the industry is without a doubt at a crossroads.
I do second some of the thoughts in this thread about the NX platform being the first evolutionary model along these lines. At the end of the day, Microsoft does not need XBox and Sony doesn't need Playstation. If either tanks, the parent companies survive. (Sony... maybe). Nintendo needs to be a video game company and if they don't innovate they die.
I do second some of the thoughts in this thread about the NX platform being the first evolutionary model along these lines. At the end of the day, Microsoft does not need XBox and Sony doesn't need Playstation. If either tanks, the parent companies survive. (Sony... maybe). Nintendo needs to be a video game company and if they don't innovate they die.
ScatheZombie
Member
Are you attempting to argue the semantics of 'professional' or the definition of 'professional'? Because if you are attacking the semantics of the word, you could make an argument that it isn't entirely accurate in all facets. But by the real definition the statement is true.
Or are you just drive-by disagreeing with a statement you don't like?
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
What would really help consoles is some way of radically lowering development costs. Probably not happening, but you never know.
Isn't Konami a bit late to the party on this?
I mean Epic did Infinity Blade at least 5 years ago, basically a console graphics game on a mobile. Same goes for EA and Square and just about every other publisher.
Also he seems to be using very vague and random assumptions on how many people would actually buy content on F2P games vs a full price game with micro transactions. There's no knowing how many copies World of Tanks would sell at $60 vs it being F2P. I think if you're an established franchise or have a reputation in the interest then you can make it a full price game, but if you're an unknown quantity then its also not so a bad idea to do F2P as you can get a lot more people to try it out first.
I do agree with him saying consoles should be iterative rather than having generations. I have been saying this for years since iPhones have started this trend. Steam had the perfect opportunity to do this with their steam machines, but because they've gone for a whole bunch of 3rd party solutions, its not really a great solution imo. Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft should be making a platform where the hardware comes out annually just like the iPhone and all your games are under one account and can be moved from hardware to hardware. The game scales according to your hardware. Maybe NX will do something like this. Its definitely the way forward imo. Nintendo are more or less doing it with their handhelds now anyway.
I mean Epic did Infinity Blade at least 5 years ago, basically a console graphics game on a mobile. Same goes for EA and Square and just about every other publisher.
Also he seems to be using very vague and random assumptions on how many people would actually buy content on F2P games vs a full price game with micro transactions. There's no knowing how many copies World of Tanks would sell at $60 vs it being F2P. I think if you're an established franchise or have a reputation in the interest then you can make it a full price game, but if you're an unknown quantity then its also not so a bad idea to do F2P as you can get a lot more people to try it out first.
I do agree with him saying consoles should be iterative rather than having generations. I have been saying this for years since iPhones have started this trend. Steam had the perfect opportunity to do this with their steam machines, but because they've gone for a whole bunch of 3rd party solutions, its not really a great solution imo. Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft should be making a platform where the hardware comes out annually just like the iPhone and all your games are under one account and can be moved from hardware to hardware. The game scales according to your hardware. Maybe NX will do something like this. Its definitely the way forward imo. Nintendo are more or less doing it with their handhelds now anyway.
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
It is pretty reductive though, and you come off as a bit jaded and cold by your experiences in the AAA sphere. Making money is the goal of publishers definitely, but are you gonna tell me someone like Tim Schafer got into the biz solely due to the money? Why did Naughty Dog bother with making a good script for TLoU if the end goal was solely profit? It can be both ways ya know, someone can want to make their art and have that be important to them while using that vocation to make a living.
I agree. Iwata's legacy will be the game changer.
ArchedThunder
Banned
I absolutely agree with this, especially now that the PS4 and Xbox One have good architectures for this. The industry switching to hardware upgrades every 4 or 5 years would probably help a lot, and it even seems to be the direction Nintendo is going as well. A PS4.1 and Xbox One.1 released in about 2018 with specs about as strong as possible for $400 but still just being an upgrade would be pretty great, new games would look and run better on the new hardware but also work on the old hardware(basically getting rid of the idea of cross gen games) and some games would be exclusive to the new hardware while some big old games would receive updates to look a little better and/or run a little better on the new hardware and they could slowly phase out the old hardware over a couple of years. It would also be nice to not have to worry about backwards compatibility or "losing" your library of games as you jump generations.
Omega Kirby
Member
Yup, I'm actually starting to move slowly but surely to F2P games, but the real good ones you know?
Wowfunhappy
Member
Guys, forget that this Konami and we all hate Konami, and look at what they're actually saying instead. Because their logic is sound.
I don't like it very much, but it makes sense, and that scares me. :/
I don't like it very much, but it makes sense, and that scares me. :/
ScatheZombie
Member
And those people are, by definition, hobbyists.
The very act of making your creative enterprise your sole income forces you to consider the impact your decisions make on your income. Unless you are already independently wealthy (or largely naive/ignorant) and that income is irrelevant, you will make choices that increase potential revenue generation more often than not, many times at the expense of creative enterprise.
This is compounded the further you remove the content creator from the actual content - i.e. when we're talking about mega-corporation publishers. At that level, the disconnect is so large that not only is the necessity for income impact decisions, it is the sole driver for most decisions. If you want to widdle it down to the individual 'artist', it still holds true. The only creatives with the luxury of not having to consider financial ramifications are those that aren't doing it for the money. And if you aren't doing it for money, then you are, by the very definition of the word, not a professional in the sense of someone for whom this is your profession.
I left open the semantic argument because you could, for instance, assert that a professional is anyone with a certain skill level or expertise rather than someone who does something as their primary vocation and income generator. In that case, I would agree.
But that doesn't apply to a single publisher, or studio, in the entire industry, so I feel its largely a semantic and moot argument.
Your example of the TLoU is strange because you seem to be implying that because something is 'good' it can't be primarily focused on generating revenue. Because, in theory, focusing on revenue and profit is, I assume in your opinion, 'bad'. Studios who happen to make the things you like are just as profit-focused and product-focused as studios who happen to make things you don't like. The only difference is the level of transparency and honesty between the two. Did Naughty Dog make a good script for TLoU? Sure. But there's also 139 DLC items on the PSN. Those are obviously for the 'art', I'm sure.
The prediction about A/AA games seems to be the opposite direction in which the market is currently headed. With PS4 + XB1 flourishing in sales, indie devs that can port their games on to consoles from the PC have such a larger install base to sell to. On top of this, both MSFT and Sony have huge indie initiatives to not only get more games on to their consoles BUT market them as well!
So, in short, I disagree.
So, in short, I disagree.
This is something I'd agree with as well, PC has seen a resurgence recently and whilst yes, there will be a lot of PC exclusives from A/AA developers a lot will also come to console thanks to initiatives from Sony/MS,
No way, once every year is overkill and would not work at all.
There is no need to change the standard 5 year console cycle (maybe slightly shorter) but it's more about the ecosystem and having games working across all dedicated hardware with that ecosystem.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
What scares you, specifically?
KimonoNoNo
Member
I have to wonder whether his use of PC has the same meaning as we traditional think of it.
If it means more former console exclusive games coming to Steam then great, but if what he means is f2p versions of AAA games only for Asia then we're onto a loser.
If it means more former console exclusive games coming to Steam then great, but if what he means is f2p versions of AAA games only for Asia then we're onto a loser.
They mean an emergent model in future of videogames as a business.
Gaming in the AAA/ current sense as we know it will never disappear. There will always be someone to fill this space even if legacy IP holders like Konami fold and take the app/nickle and dime way out. What I would like to see are more quality F2P games.
Gaming in the AAA/ current sense as we know it will never disappear. There will always be someone to fill this space even if legacy IP holders like Konami fold and take the app/nickle and dime way out. What I would like to see are more quality F2P games.
would not surprise me, it's a booming market and selling to a market that could be more likely to pay for f2p (citation needed)
Sword Of Doom
Member
They look at mobile growing and consoles growing slower and stagnating and figure mobile is the way to go. In a way them abandoning consoles will contribute to it happening. Not talking about konami alone but other companies as well.
PC also covers web/browser/social gaming
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
I really hope that this all backfires and Konami gets new management soon.
7DollarHagane
Banned
Just seems like more bullshit ways to figure out how to trick people into wanting what's most profitable for your company, rather than figuring out what your customers want and making best effort at providing that.
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
Wait, someone that makes a living making games yet is fiercely passionate about the creation of it is a hobbyist? Never heard that creative definition before, sounds like tales from my ass. Out of curiosity what AAA studio do you work for? Oh lemme guess ya can't say
It almost seems like you harbor a bitterness towards the consumer base you create for, or maybe it's the work in general. Why did you get involved with game development initially?
7DollarHagane
Banned
F2p as a design choice can fuck right off. Nothing in a game can make me want to spend real money to finish a level or accomplish something or have bragging rights to friends.
Optional add ons for a great game are fine. Counter strike skins are the perfect example. They add nothing but visual flair and are wildly popular and expensive based on rarity.
But without them the game would be just as good and complex.
Optional add ons for a great game are fine. Counter strike skins are the perfect example. They add nothing but visual flair and are wildly popular and expensive based on rarity.
But without them the game would be just as good and complex.
While you are right about creating products not art, I think the counter example offered with Disney is a pretty strong argument for building a quality brand and not just looking to the next fiscal quarter.
I think people assume that evolving compatible hardware is the direction manufacturers want, but I think the opposite is true. The urge to resell us the same games or remastered versions is a mighty big impediment to adopting a more PC style upgrade cycle.
I'm neither an economist nor in the game industry, but what the presentation contains appears to have a strong and coherent argument.
The flip side to that is that for all the attention placed on mobile/web based gaming now, is that trends change. Just as we all laughed at claims of "mobile being the future" back when Snake and NGage were it, we don't know what other future trends may emerge.
The economics side is essential because without it, there is no stability for the creative types to stand upon. And without that there is no industry as we see it.
Whatever the future industry looks like, I hope it is healthy enough to support mobile and PC and arcade and AR and VR and console and handheld systems and more.
Buster Machine
Member
They are actually one of the worst examples to use. We're talking about the company that's almost single handedly responsible for completely fucking up US copyright just to protect their profits. Holding them up as some example of "passion" or "wanting to make their customers happy" is laughable.
Tell that to Nintendo, who's looking to be taking this route with both their consoles & handhelds under the NX umbrella.
Yup. Exactly my thoughts as well.
gundamkyoukai
Member
I think we all know that things going to change the question is just by how much and when .
If VR takes off it will change the gaming market .
How much longer will we have boxes under the tv when companies working on streaming .
Still i will say one thing putting all your eggs in one basket is not the way to go .
On Japanese side i would say SE and BN have a much better game plan than Konami which is to make content for everything .
If VR takes off it will change the gaming market .
How much longer will we have boxes under the tv when companies working on streaming .
Still i will say one thing putting all your eggs in one basket is not the way to go .
On Japanese side i would say SE and BN have a much better game plan than Konami which is to make content for everything .
The mobile red ocean/black hole was interesting. However that strategy of reusing 360/PS3 assets might be good for them in the short term but won't provide for something that is sustainable in the long term. It will also only redden the ocean and accelerate the rise in dev costs on mobile for everyone. After a few years when users start getting bored and want something new, the black hole may well open up.
Overall the presentation says to me that Konami is out of ideas, and although there are more options than ever in terms of gaming platforms the whole gaming landscape is one big red ocean. User expectations grow with time and so development costs on every platform go up, however with massmarket smart devices with digital games user expectations of price go down.
Overall the presentation says to me that Konami is out of ideas, and although there are more options than ever in terms of gaming platforms the whole gaming landscape is one big red ocean. User expectations grow with time and so development costs on every platform go up, however with massmarket smart devices with digital games user expectations of price go down.