Possibly the most important game article EVAR!

[medierra]

http://insertcredit.com/2011/09/22/who-killed-videogames-a-ghost-story/

I wanted to give this some attention because I think it is a very important article for those concerned with some of the more insidious and exploitative trends creeping into modern gaming. It is important for you as players to understand these schemes for what they are because only you have the power to prevent these sort of practices from creeping into more traditional games. Game studios, however altruistic they may try to be, are still businesses and need money to operate. When sources of funding such as investors or publishers see the incredible profits generated by these shady monetization practices in the social gaming realm, they want part of that action. Consequently, more traditional game makers are forced to adapt to that model in pursuit of funding.

Just to be clear, I'm not necessarily condemning all free-to-play models or anything like that. There are some free-to-play games that seem to have reasonable monetization schemes and, done right, I think they can even work to the benefit of players. I'm not sure any "social games" fit into that category though. We all want to make some money at the end of the day but I think there is a fine line between creating addictive gameplay, that the developers genuinely believe is good entertainment vs. deliberately engineering something with the sole purpose of goading people into spending as much money as possible through shameless psychological exploitation.

Ultimately, it is for you, the player audience to decide where that line is and what you're willing to accept.

[Cavar]

Chapter 1 broke my brain.

Just tell me who to give my money to for my free-to-play game and I'm good. lol

[Dejnov]

When I first joined facebook, they had all these weird wait a turn games and interact with friends games that were a bit cool, but for me the novelty wore of quickly. Within a month it went from novelty to tedium to flat-out aggression on my part with these games. I kept deleting those posts and telling people (my close personal friends) to stop bugging me. I was really happy when Facebook allowed us to opt out of actually getting game notifications. It was the single most valuable update that they did. Now I still enjoy facebook and use it for what it's really worth. To keep in contact with my friends from that aren't local and to share pictures of myself and my family with them.

With the current trend to socialize gaming, I've found myself drawn closer and closer to the more traditional board-gaming and PnP gaming than anything currently being offered. I'm still waiting patiently for a couple of video games, but most of the purchases now are in the $5 to $20 range where I know I'll be buying a product without having to shell-out a constant stream of payments. Even free to play games I'm leery of these days since I know that the payment method is hidden somewhere in the system and I just won't enjoy the game if I have to worry about 'paying' to level.

Ultimately I believe it's a fad. It'll die slowly when people realize they're getting gyped. It's a lot like clogs... they were cool, but people moved on to the next cool shoe. Yet a lot of people still wear tennis shoes and dress shoes still.


Dejnov.

[Renevent]

...but I think there is a fine line between creating addictive gameplay, that the developers genuinely believe is good entertainment vs. deliberately engineering something with the sole purpose of goading people into spending as much money as possible through shameless psychological exploitation.

Totally agree there...intent (good or bad) is reflective in any product. Like you said, it's up to us (the consumer) to decide what's acceptable and what crosses that boundary. I think the issue is when you say it's up to "you" well "you" is so broad that we really don't have all that much power over what happens in the industry.

I'd imagine most people who frequent the Grim Dawn forums comprise mostly of your more traditional gaming player base...and that probably holds true even for your typical PC gamer and console player. As the article pointed out, where these games are really succeeding is with middle aged women and kids with their parent's iTunes account.

I guess my point is I do agree with a lot of what the article is talking about...but I don't think it's necessarily killing gaming. In my opinion it's merely bringing in a whole new subset of people that weren't playing games prior (social aspect). Sure there's probably a lot of bleed over in both directions...but in large I would say that traditional gamers still expect a certain kind of game experience and therefore that market will still exist and prosper. If you look at other game trends (not just social gaming)...gaming is pretty much growing across the board!

At least that's what I hope LOL!

On a side note, that article was painful to read. I REALLY hate his writing style...way too much imagery and I was thinking to myself the whole time "just get the the f'n point!"

[GrizzlyAdam]

That was a very insightful article, and certainly one every gamer should read. Whether social games are good or bad, it's important to be aware of what is happening in the industry.

I rather enjoyed his writing personality, but I can see how one could see otherwise. I'm a fan the slow-paced, drink-it-all-in literary style.

[medierra]

As the article pointed out, where these games are really succeeding is with middle aged women and kids with their parent's iTunes account.

Yeah, the problem though is that the people who finance games are looking at that success and thinking "how can we carry this over to PC and console games?"

I guess my point is I do agree with a lot of what the article is talking about...but I don't think it's necessarily killing gaming.

No, not yet and hopefully it won't as long as people vote with their wallets. And really, I'm not talking about any particular monetization model but more about the motivation behind it. I think the game industry in general is starting to become a lot more corporate and increasingly is acting contrary to the benefit of their audience in pursuit of higher profit margins.

[Renevent]

I'd agree a lot of the 'big boys' in gaming certainly appear to be looking out for their share holders more than the people their products are for these days.

I'm not exactly ignorant to how corporate america is either...in fact after spending the last 5 years at an awesome company I'm probably going to end up leaving it due to the company being purchased by one of the largest corporations on earth. Really pisses me off actually, but that's a different topic (maybe I'll make a rant thread later). :p

Anyways the market is definitely changing, and maybe for the worse in some cases. On the other side of the token indie games are booming and even a-little-bigger-than indie studios are pushing out some very impressive games.

As long as gamers like ourselves represent a large enough market someone is bound to cater to our tastes. It doesn't have to be EA, Ubisoft, Blizzard, or whichever giant of the industry we are familiar with. That's the beauty of capitalism! Perhaps we are a dying breed though...geeze...what a thought!

As you can see, I'm probably a little more optimistic than most...maybe to my own detriment heh.

[mamba]

It is important for you as players to understand these schemes for what they are because only you have the power to prevent these sort of practices from creeping into more traditional games. Game studios, however altruistic they may try to be, are still businesses and need money to operate. When sources of funding such as investors or publishers see the incredible profits generated by these shady monetization practices in the social gaming realm, they want part of that action. Consequently, more traditional game makers are forced to adapt to that model in pursuit of funding.

I think these will fizzle, their novelty wears off quickly and just like with any trend you eventually have too many companies for all to survive, just see MMOs. Of course these 'games' are way cheaper to create, so maybe I am wrong there after all.

In any case, I never was the least bit interested in these social 'games', they never sounded like fun to me and I am certainly not interested in getting involved for a minute or two every hour or two, I certainly have better things to do with my time (just about anything sounds better actually...). I do not actually consider them games at all, but I guess there is not really a better term for them, other than 'waste'.

I for one am and will continue to fight this trend by ignoring it (i.e. never play, certainly never actually buy anything) ;)

[mamba]

Anyways the market is definitely changing, and maybe for the worse in some cases. On the other side of the token indie games are booming and even a-little-bigger-than indie studios are pushing out some very impressive games.

As long as gamers like ourselves represent a large enough market someone is bound to cater to our tastes. It doesn't have to be EA, Ubisoft, Blizzard, or whichever giant of the industry we are familiar with. That's the beauty of capitalism!

That is certainly the trajectory I am on. I will get GD, TL2, but not D3 ;)

[yerkyerk]

I find myself mostly agreeing with Renevent. Videogaming hasn't been the same stigmatized hobby it was 20 years ago. It has become a mainstream hobby and with that, has drawn the attention of the corporate market and their psychological and economical schemes.

Although to call social "gaming" gaming, that's a step too far for me. I'd rather call it interactive pseudo social media or something.

[SoetSout]

wow, that was an awesome article, and so true.

personally i think the indie game section will soon kill the big corporations, by soon i mean within 10 years, cause they always bring innovation, while big companies just bring Bugs/DLC/Updates, surere there are obviously mistakes here and there. but i have seen more problems on retail games lately then on indie games.

one of two things might happen,
1. indie gaming takes over and gaming is spread over lots of cheap fun and INNOVATIVE ideas..
2. Big developers will realize they are loosing to the indie market and will perhaps try to change their focus to pleasing the customers more then the investors.

personally i hope indie thrives, cause i love indie games in the sense they there is usualy something new/unique. or sometimes it just got that nice old school fun to it.

crate all im asking is keep it the way it is atm, i love what youve done so far

[OneEyeRed]

I have had zero use for any of this garbage personally. As in previous comments about resembled subjects, I have digressed into all phases of gaming. Simply put, the industry is not what it used to be in terms of how it shaped the evolution of gaming even 15 years ago. Now all these large corporate entities have hired psychologists, social and economical majors, mathematicians, etc....

While I understand it is no different from all the other common denominators in regard to overhead, cash flow, and making money, this industry does prey on addictive personalities, social traits and stigmas, and corralling the majority in for the long haul.

Game design, implementation, etc., was an art form at one time; an expression of creativity and desired passion. However, today we take a back burner to all that instead creating ways to keep us hooked, plowing through regardless if any creativity actually exists. Grind, halt, grind, farm, dangling carrot I must have.

There are fewer companies that can survive anymore on lone passion and creativity in this industry. I thank these men and women for continuing to bring the fruits of their creation to light; ex: Crate. However, we all know it would be so much easier for you guys to create a Facebook, droid, or Ipad app and make a mad fortune. It is the greatest thing since sliced bread now.

So now the hook has turned from the endless grind of the MMO (although it holds a vastly large audience and always will) to the seemingly simple and innocent apps we see that suck lemmings in like flies to honey. One need only look at Angry Birds, The Farm game on Facebook, a racing game with a bike (cannot find article now but this game has sold millions for smart phone app) etc...

Everything seems to also be trending to portability and that is were the largest cash influx is. Smart phones and tablets and I just don't get it personally. I have no desire to game on either platform and I find zero immersion factor. Perhaps its the old man in me who wishes and longs for the days of old with a hint of new graphical paint.

As always I have rambled on with yet another diatribe that probably has many of you going huh? Sorry, a lot on mind and sick with sinus infection #9. On a good note I get to a see a surgeon on Tuesday and hopefully I won't be another fatality like others I see getting nasal surgery and being Evac'd out for hitting arteries and puncturing spinal chords. Ugh.....

[Renevent]

Kinda related to the subject:

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/09/29/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3-promotion-offers-free-xp-with-snacks/


The Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 ‘Rank Up XP‘ promotion spotted by Forbes will put codes on bottles of Mountain Dew and packets of Doritos crisps that give players double XP time in-game.

So when you take a headshot from a high level sniper rifle, you won’t be able to tell if they’ve played more of the game guzzled a truckload of potato chips. Perhaps the guy heading a server with every unlock is quite good at Call of Duty, or he’s just consumed more litres of luminous energy drink than you.

There’s apparently no limit to the lengths marketers are prepared to go to shift a big new game, but cheapening your entire unlock and experience system for the sake of a drinks promotion crosses a line we didn’t even know existed.

Where will this end? They should rename the series Call of Dewty and replace all of the grenades with exploding cans of soft drink. Claymores can be packets of Doritos that explode when enemies approach, shredding them with a cloud of tasty nacho shrapnel. Then they’ll see a kill cam replay of their maizy death, sponsored by Pepsi, of course.


Obviously from my earlier posts I remain optimistic regarding gaming's future...but it's shit like this that does give a lot of credence to the original linked article :rolleyes:

[hay82]

Perhaps it's a good thing. It'll drag the really casual gamers away from the more normal games and as such allow developers to focus less on casual friendly aspects, at least those developers who still create normal games. The more "hard-core" gamers probably can't make companies as much money, but it's a big enough group not to be forgotten and so there'll always be games for those.

Of course the best way to use social gaming is to take money from those fools (and I use fools lovingly here) who want to pay and use that money to develop real games.

[Shogo]

Seriously, I'm very worried about the future of video games ...
This article says it all. It's all about money and easy to play nowadays.
I've never played any of theses games personally, but I've seen a lot of people playing them. I don't understand where is the fun of taking my credit card every day to pay and play.
And with smartphones it's going to be more and more like this...

Indie games are the only hope we have.

[hay82]

Indie games are the only hope we have.
And isn't that actually quite enough? I love the way Grim Dawn is doing it which is why I've bought the game alpha access key. I've also bought Xenonauts because it follows this model.
It will mean that we might have to settle for less eye candy in the games, but I don't think I've bought a game because of graphics yet, gameplay is what matters, and I have far higher hopes in good gameplay from indie developers than from big companies.

[Renevent]

Indie games are the only hope we have.

Are they?

Tomorrow I'm picking up Dark Souls for the 360...probably one of the most difficult games to come out all year. This is not an indie studio, and it's not even on the PC (it's console only).

[Shogo]

@hay82
I've never bought a game judging his graphics only, and nearly all games I've bought this year were very disappointing. Oh sure my computer can unleash his potential, but that's all. When I first play a game and finish it under 9h in the hardest difficulty, I feel quite sad...
Like you, I prefer gameplay over graphics but I feel today it's more graphics > all.
But indies I played are not like that.

@Renevent
I am a console player since Atari 2600 until PSP. I've not bought PS3 and the hardest and longest game I've played is Monster Hunter Freedom Unite and 3rd.
Don't know Dark Souls but it's just one game. Quite frankly, if I count how much games took me over 10h to finish them this year, I'll only need one hand...
The fun is here but old games had fun AND time.
That's why I play more with my old games.
I'm maybe too old :( or too hard to please... or both.

I was satisfied with TQ and his expansion, that's why I place my hopes on GD.

[Renevent]

I've been playing games for about the same time (my first computer was a 386 and my first console I played was also Atari). I play tons of games that are over 10hrs long.

I agree there is a trend in mainstream gaming, I just don't agree there's nothing at all out there worthwhile nor do I think indie games are our only hope.

PC alone I can count at least a dozen games that took me over 10 hours to complete in the last year or two, and that were aligned with my more "old school" sensibilities. I love the recent explosion of quality indie title and I believe they will continue to have a greater impact on gaming, I just don't think they are the only ones who will contribute. There are plenty of games out there that are not indie, yet still cater to our tastes.

As long as this market (us) remains, there will be plenty of companies that will cater to us.

*edit*

Speaking of game length...while a lot of the indies I play lately are fantastic gameplay wise...game length is a weird metric for you to bring up. Most of these games are much shorter (content wise) then their mainstream counterparts.

[Shogo]

@Renevent
For 2 years we've got some good games right. I can't buy all games so I've not tested them all. But just too few games are good enough IMHO. I only bought PC and PSP games lately. If I am the only to think this way, fine I still have some good old games, but my friends think the same way given the fact we play the same types of games. I assume that some types have good quality games and others not...
For example I not very fond of FPS but the last Deus Ex seems good.
I didn't say that there is nothing at all out, but very few.
Tactics Ogre for PSP was a very pleasant surprise (for me at least).
I bought too this year Blood Bowl Legendary, and it's very good.
BulletStorm completly disappointed me, way too short (but very fun).
And I don't buy a game full of DLC things, DLC are a joke.
It's just my opinion, if you want I can change my sentence "Indies are my only hope" ;).

For game length, well I only played Minecraft and one other (FPS type dont' recall it's name but quite good).
That's why I call them a hope, because they tend give more and more. Minecraft took me hours of play btw.
But you're right, my friends who tested other indies told me they were shorter, for now.

P.S. : I don't talk about MMORPG because it's a special case...

[Renevent]

I'm not really talking about MMO's either...haven't played one in a long while myself. I do, however, play lots of games across many systems. I am sure lots of people think like you and you are certainly entitled to that opinion. I can't argue with you if a game is good anyways...that's your own opinion.

With that said from a objective (well...objective as an individual can be) and having played MANY games, there really is tons of games with tons of content that last more than 10 hours. This is more than the last two years...it's...well...since I been playing games.

There was another thread not long ago where someone was slamming FPS and how if you don't like FPS games gamers barely have anything to play. Factually 2/3rds of all games released each year aren't even FPS games in the first place...making that claim really strange. Perception is one thing, but sometimes I think there can be a little too much bias injected into it. It's not even bias in my opinion, more like counter culture protesting.

Anyways I don't have a PSP so can't comment on that...but my perception of the platform (UNEDUCATED BIASED OPINION ALERT!) is that it's about as mainstream as you can get hehe :)

[hay82]

The only game this year I remember being disappointed about the length of was Limbo. It's a great game but it should have been twice as long. Thrine and Supersonic Acrobatic Rocketpowered battlecars are two of the most played games on my PS3, and I think they're both indie games.

It's a bit too early to worry too much about the future of gaming. There's still big title games coming out with great quality. This week we get Dark Souls next we get Arkham Asylum. I've also got high hopes for Skyrim. L.A. Noire was pretty great as well.
It doesn't really matter to me if games go the way of Little Big Planet where you can buy a lot of extra stuff if you want, as long as you don't have to pay extra to enjoy the game you've already bought. If a game like Dark Souls required me to pay extra for a sword before I'd really have a chance to kill a certain boss, then I'd be worried for the future of gaming.

[Shogo]

@Renevent
Totally agree with you. It seems I could explain clearly what is my feeling.
Some games will satisfy some people and others not.
I've played a lot of games which entertained me for over 10h but, like you, it's more than the last two years.

@hay82
Totally forgot Arkham Asylum. I will watch some videos if there's any.
I'm waiting for Skyrim too :D

[Stormcaller]

Is it "killing" or "enhancing", when all we want is stupid turn based wait time facebook games ?

[Veji]

Doom and Gloom. Doom and Gloom. We're all gonna go out with a big 'ole Boom!

I think you guys are being too pessimistic about all this. Yes, the Farmville games are terrible money pits, but theres TONS of gaming studios out there and not all of them are going to create these wicked money pit farmville-like games that are going to make you go broke.

Somebody said that, "Back in the day, gaming was all about art/style/expression". No sir, they were indeed out to make money back then as well. Remember "E.T." for the 2600? Shameless movie game that was so terrible, they buried the copies in a New Mexico desert somewhere. But the fun did not stop there, when the NES and Genesis popped out, look at how many shamless crap movie-related tie-in games came out for those consoles. Now, i'm disagreeing with you, yes, there were some great artistic fun games and etc. The point is this industry is about making money, creating a dedicated fanbase, and then making that fanbase happy so you can make even more money.

As far as this article is concerned - Look, I won't pay for Farmville-like games. You won't pay for Farmville-like games. Theres lots of people out there who agree. So who is going to cater to us? Lots of gaming companies who want our money, so therefore, if they can't make us play the farmville genre games, then guess they're going to have to keep us going with FPSs, RPGs, and etc. Aka, make games that we like and will pay for.

Me personally, i don't think the MMORPG model or F2P models are particularly bad, in theory. I don't mind paying a monthly fee for a game i like or paying for content and characters. BUT. I do not like greedy companies.

What are greedy companies? Blizzard and Riot are both at the top of my list. Blizzard makes WoW, charges $15 a month on a $55 dollar game and then creates a $60 expansion every 2 years. IMO, the expansions are kinda pushing it, but ok. I'm cool with that. SO then, they decide to charge anywhere from $30-$50 to transfer your characters or change factions. Its a simple database operation thats fully automated but it costs the user money? Thats greed. And we won't even mention the conspiracy theories about back door deals Blizz made with Chinese gold farmer shops in order to make a profit from the shady underworld of gold selling. I hear now that they are even selling in game mounts and pets for cash thru the Blizz store. Awesome. As if making $15 a month times however many subscribers wasn't enough...

Riot. They make League of Legends. A game you all are probably not too familiar with. Its free. Doesn't cost anything. Every game is free. You can play the game to earn points to buy champs with in game currency. If you spend around $10, you can buy either 1 new champ to play with or 2 old champs to play with. And if you really are savvy, you can blow the same amount of money on in-game skins. Ok, i'm cool with that. I don't have to spend money unless I really want to. But hey, I support the game. Its fun. Why not blow $20 on a new champ and a skin for him/her? And here is where the greed pops in! Further on down the road, as the company is rolling out new champs every 2 weeks, they begin 'nerfing' or make older champs much less viable or less powerful. So you need to buy the new champs that aren't getting nerfed and are doing quite well in the games you play. They say its "game balancing", but its not. Its a marketing ploy to make you spend more money. The real kicker is that they try to hide this marketing ploy under paid tournaments.

And the trend keeps on a tickin, but there will always be games like Torchlight, Grim Dawn, and other games that come out defy this. The only real problem is that they lack the financial umph to get the word out on these games. In addition, pirating is terrible. I hate the 'requires an internet connection to play', but the more and more I think about how easy it is to just go out and d/l premium games for free, i agree that have the online requirement is a necessity. Just don't implement it like Darkspore. lol

[KondaImmortal]

There are alot of bad games out there, people just need to recognize that ARPGs and PnP are the way to go. I have made three PnP games for me and my friends already.

[deathwings51]

Indie games are the only hope we have.
Just to let you know. There was this game called Fez I was looking forward to which also happened to win Seamus McNally award at Inide Games Fest this year. The developer then tied in with Microsoft (who were also suspiciously the sponsor of the event) and announced that game will come out as XBLA exclusive only (no PC). He also added (and I can't find the article right now), that it was hard to turn down an offer from MS.

Producers get away with pulling shit like day-1 DLC, horses and XP-boost packs because there are just more than enough number of people to pay for that. They don't care if it is morally right or wrong for them if they (think) got $60 value out of a game by just playing once through the campaign (+ some multiplayer maybe) and then trading in the game. Doesn't matter if I don't buy their product because of such things (and I usually don't), there will be a hundred others who will and they just don't care (not that they are legally bound to care but hey) for the ramifications it has on the industry. DLCs have become a bane of this industry I think and while its original aim was to provide more content to the user thus ensuring their loyalty to the franchise, they have become money whoring schemes.

I myself played Call of Duty: MW 2 and 3 and while campaign was tad short, I still enjoyed multiplayer somewhat unless it included some xp-freak who paid to win (kind of). I never bought any map pack for them because to me it was quite steeply price for just 4 maps. Also, instead of fixing bugs and balancing their game, map packs just kept flowing in. I gave up eventually and won't buy them again. Restrictive DRMs have already alienated me from GFWL/MS, Ubisoft and Most of EA games. Also a lot of publishers slap big numbers on their DLCs and games just because they can and their marketing and strategy department knows that someone (and a lot of those someones) will pay for it gladly.

Since the end of last year I've been focusing on mostly Indie titles though. While I am still looking forward to some major releases like Gearbox's Borderlands 2 and EA's Simcity, there are so few of that type in my wishlist. Also, i've said no to DLC packs mostly if it feels to me that the company is ripping me off.

/rant

[durruti]

veji, how should i go about this? some people do care about those other people stuff like this works on, there's nothing pessimistic about that. in an age where the term social degenerated to a buzzword bare its meaning that is a genuine social impulse.

i've had a hard time reading the story - not because of the writing style..., and then i saw comments like "enjoyed reading this" and was like "how can you enjoy that reality beats sarcasm hands down"?!

[Santa]

The thing with online free games that have "pay for this" system in them is not that they try to make money... its more a case of VALUE for money from the player point of view.

They tend to get players "hooked" then slowly change things to make more money offering shop choices that aren't balanced or of value. People think they are getting ripped off, not realizing the simple solution is to QUIT playing!

Once you have "invested" a lot into a game it becomes harder to just "give it up".