The AAA Game Market Crash of 2019

[Corsayr]

1 hour ago, dagobaking said:

Apples and oranges

The key difference is in Japan they don't blow up their own companies to try and break the unions instead using them as a key partner to make their companies successful.

 

 

1 hour ago, dagobaking said:

Upon further reflection, you're right. It most likely would cost you nothing. Since it would be the other company that would have to find out and choose to sue the person. Unless there were actual damages (stealing IP for example) there would be no good reason for them to even write a lawyer letter.

still nope more like 10000 to 20000 and 2 years of your life without work. AKA not worth it 

 

But we are too far off topic now so I am out. 

[dagobaking]

40 minutes ago, Corsayr said:

The key difference is in Japan they don't blow up their own companies to try and break the unions instead using them as a key partner to make their companies successful.

That would make sense if not for the inconvenient facts I've already pointed out:

 

Western unions fought for and achieved higher pay, fewer hours to work, more expensive benefits relative to what Japanese workers did. Observable fact. And that is what made the US products less competitive in comparison. Observable fact.

 

There's really no way to spin around those realities. Japanese unions are more like pro-company clubs where they put in private time for the company for free. Western unions threaten the company with slow-downs and strikes until they get paid for down time during which they travel to Hawaii.

 

The idea that US game development unions would resemble Japanese company organizations instead of the UAW is wishful thinking.

Quote

still nope more like 10000 to 20000 and 2 years of your life without work. AKA not worth it 

If the company finds out and sues you. You have provided no realistic reason why they would do this.

 

They wouldn't unless there was something for them to gain that is greater in value than the time and cost they would lose. And that requires pretty high stakes with IP or staff poaching as I mentioned above.

[Corsayr]

8 minutes ago, dagobaking said:

snip

 

what part of we are getting off topic do you not understand? You would think a green name would know better

[dagobaking]

9 minutes ago, Corsayr said:

what part of we are getting off topic do you not understand? You would think a green name would know better

I'm sorry? Are you in charge of when I should view something as [too far] off-topic?

 

You are free to make that decision for yourself. Please afford me the same liberty.

[Deso561PL]

14 hours ago, Ernest Lemmingway said:

Blizztard is remaking Warcraft III and planning to introduce Classic WoW legacy servers in summer, Bugthesda is giving people who bought [censored] (I don't want to get a warning for saying the name of the-game-that-must-not-be-discussed) free copies of FO1, 2, and Tactics, it seems like the current tactic among desperate game companies is to go back to what worked. As both compensation for their ineptitude or a way of staying afloat.

 

Will it work? Maybe for Blizz, not likely for Beth. Classic WoW no one can play because it's an MMO and effectively doesn't exist outside of private servers (which I would love to find) so they have a decent chance of attracting old customers back. But the prior Fallout titles are offline games and there are still plenty of copies floating around. Plus the current FO fan base, used to the FPS version, isn't likely to enjoy the originals. They're graphically dated (which seems to be what kids today care about more than story), tricky to get working on Windows, and very different games from everything BGS ever did with the IP.

I can assure you, no this will not work for Blizzard either. Blizzard since Blizzcon maked two huge shitstorms for what they will pay as soon possible.

 

Annoucing Diablo Immortal, without even an teaser for Diablo IV is actually the same level bullshit, like was back on E3 2018 C&C Rivals announced by EA.

 

While on Heroes Of The Storm canceling previously announced Heroes Global Championship and Heroes Of The Dorm, maked another huge impact. Now community has taken hands to making E-Sports back like Heroes Longue announced few days ago, a Heroes S Division where professional players are invited to play. Interesing facts are, that few days after the announcement, they get 10K$ dollars funds to organize it. Also former proplayers like Zaelia, confirmed to play in this division.

 

But hell shitstorm in HOTS was still smaller, than Diablo Immortal. Few days later after announcing canceling HGC 2019, Kaeo Milker came to forums and announced something.

 

https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/heroes/t/heroes-of-the-storm-content-update-december-21/10904

 

Is there still hope for HOTS? Let me say this clear. HOTS dev team is last among Blizzard devs, who still got passion and love what they doing, and community loves HOTS devs.

[GrimReaper]

Our economy depends on infinite growth and that's kinda a problem. Generally speaking, a company starts with carving out their place in the market and expanding further to reach more customers. When the maximum potential is reached, companies start cutting down on costs, which means decreasing quality and laying off as much workers as you possibly can. When that's done, companies either shrink so they can grow again or go out of business. The unfair part is that workers aren't included in the growth, yet are the first to suffer the consequences of a failing company. Unions are there to make sure that it doesn't go out of hand, at least that's the idea. But whether you have unions or not, every company will eventually reach the point where they can no longer grow.

 

[Miss AshleyJ]

In five days, the minimum hourly wage here in New York City will hit $15. four years ago it was $9. So if you worked an 8 hour day four years ago, you got $72 before taxes. Come Monday, that same amount of work gets you $120 before taxes. (and before you try doing the math, NYC collects it's own income tax on top of the Feds and the State)

 

The problem is a lot of the minimum wage makers are retail jobs and as anyone can tell you, retail is suffering badly in a world where I can get anything and everything with the push of a button, lounging on my couch with my pants off. I worked at a Staples until recently, and they shed roughly half the stores in the district in the time I was there and we got bought out and privatized. If you had 35 workers (that's about as many as my old job had at once) doing 30 hours a week, your payroll over the last three years has gone up by a minimum of $325,000. that's not including raises and other costs. 

 

So if you factor poor retail sales and a massive uptick in payroll, lot of people around here are going to be working less or not at all. and that circles back to the gaming industry because if you can't work, you're not spending a shit ton of money on games and DLCs and microtransactions, which is part and parcel to the problem. 

[Ernest Lemmingway]

5 hours ago, Deso561PL said:

<snip>

I'd heard about that but I quit following what stupid moves Blizztard made years ago. The only reason I know what I do now is it was mentioned in GameInformer magazine. Frankly Blizz is long overdue for a reckoning for what they've done to their games and it looks like it's finally happening, fanbois be damned.

[dagobaking]

7 hours ago, GrimReaper said:

Our economy depends on infinite growth and that's kinda a problem. Generally speaking, a company starts with carving out their place in the market and expanding further to reach more customers. When the maximum potential is reached, companies start cutting down on costs, which means decreasing quality and laying off as much workers as you possibly can. When that's done, companies either shrink so they can grow again or go out of business. The unfair part is that workers aren't included in the growth, yet are the first to suffer the consequences of a failing company. Unions are there to make sure that it doesn't go out of hand, at least that's the idea. But whether you have unions or not, every company will eventually reach the point where they can no longer grow.

 

In what sense does our economy depend on infinite growth?

 

Some companies have followed the pattern you describe. But, not all. It depends on company decisions and the nature of their industry.

 

I'm not sure what is meant by saying that workers aren't included in growth. In many cases, companies can't grow without adding workers. Sometimes, technology allows scaling back on workers. But, that benefits society at large, including the workers directly involved.

 

I'm not sure how unions demanding higher pay, earlier retirement and more expensive benefits helps to avoid them suffering the consequences of a failing company. The evidence suggests that it speeds up the failure of the company, even at the workers own detriment.

 

[Looping this back to the topic:]

 

Game development companies already have a problem with scaling back, even without unions. They do fine when sales continue to grow. But, when they have a down year they tend to implode and shut their doors instead of adjusting with the market and surviving ups/downs.

 

Unions would only make that problem worse. They would make it even more likely that the companies just shut their doors because they would be unable to make the adjustments needed to get through leaner times. But, worst of all, they would make the cost of starting a new company more expensive and complicated. So, many new companies that we have currently enjoyed would quietly disappear from the market completely.

[GrimReaper]

54 minutes ago, dagobaking said:

 

In what sense does our economy depend on infinite growth?

 

Some companies have followed the pattern you describe. But, not all. It depends on company decisions and the nature of their industry.

 

I'm not sure what is meant by saying that workers aren't included in growth. In many cases, companies can't grow without adding workers. Sometimes, technology allows scaling back on workers. But, that benefits society at large, including the workers directly involved.

 

I'm not sure how unions demanding higher pay, earlier retirement and more expensive benefits helps to avoid them suffering the consequences of a failing company. The evidence suggests that it speeds up the failure of the company, even at the workers own detriment.

 

[Looping this back to the topic:]

 

Game development companies already have a problem with scaling back, even without unions. They do fine when sales continue to grow. But, when they have a down year they tend to implode and shut their doors instead of adjusting with the market and surviving ups/downs.

 

Unions would only make that problem worse. They would make it even more likely that the companies just shut their doors because they would be unable to make the adjustments needed to get through leaner times. But, worst of all, they would make the cost of starting a new company more expensive and complicated. So, many new companies that we have currently enjoyed would quietly disappear from the market completely.

Because the people investing money - investors, shareholders and banks - want to see a return on their investment. Growth can be achieved in many ways. Selling more units, selling at a higher price, cutting production costs etc. Streamlining the process is at least as important as simply making more money by selling more units. 

 

The replacement of human labor by machines and software is another topic alltogether, but I'd say that the benefits of technological advancement mostly benefit a select few. Full employment won't be possible in the near future, maybe it already isn't anymore. I know that a few industries are retiring the job with the worker so they can replace them by automated systems.

 

I'd say the gaming industry has a problem with scaling back because there's not much to scale back, they're already streamlined and exhaust every single option to exploit the market, sometimes even going as far as simply evading taxes. So, when they've reached the peak, that's all there is. There's no way down or up anymore.

[GrimReaper]

3 minutes ago, Alkpaz said:

The infinite growth thingy I think he was referring to: 

  Hide contents

 

 

 

Not really. I'll try to explain what I've meant with a simple numbers example:

Let's say you make 100$ in profit. People invest money into your business because they think it's promising, so they expect to get something out of it. If you have a steady growth, like 10%, you'll get 110$ in profits. Not amazing, but steady if you can keep it that way. The gaming industry however exploded, going from 100$ to 1.000$ in a pretty short time. You can't sustain that. It's a get rich quick scheme for investors, not something to reliably generate a stable growth.

[dagobaking]

3 minutes ago, GrimReaper said:

Because the people investing money - investors, shareholders and banks - want to see a return on their investment. Growth can be achieved in many ways. Selling more units, selling at a higher price, cutting production costs etc. Streamlining the process is at least as important as simply making more money by selling more units. 

 

The replacement of human labor by machines and software is another topic alltogether, but I'd say that the benefits of technological advancement mostly benefit a select few. Full employment won't be possible in the near future, maybe it already isn't anymore. I know that a few industries are retiring the job with the worker so they can replace them by automated systems.

 

I'd say the gaming industry has a problem with scaling back because there's not much to scale back, they're already streamlined and exhaust every single option to exploit the market, sometimes even going as far as simply evading taxes. So, when they've reached the peak, that's all there is. There's no way down or up anymore.

A return on investment doesn't require growth. That can be realized by profit.

 

I think that increased productivity due to technology is closely relevant to this topic. It removes the need for as much human labor. Tech advancement is not the only kind that reduces labor. There are also logistics improvements. Both benefit everyone. Not the select few. They allow for higher quality at lower prices for everyone. So, everyone's income goes further toward improving quality of life.

 

If gaming companies were streamlined to the bone they wouldn't have fancier office buildings than just about any other industry I can think of. I think it's the opposite. They are in a highly competitive industry. So, the people working there are not willing to stay with pay cuts because they have head-hunters trying to hire them away at the rate they were making.

[dagobaking]

25 minutes ago, Alkpaz said:

The infinite growth thingy I think he was referring to: 

  Hide contents

 

 

 

Oh my gosh. That video is full of logical fallacies.

 

 

 

16 minutes ago, GrimReaper said:

Not really. I'll try to explain what I've meant with a simple numbers example:

Let's say you make 100$ in profit. People invest money into your business because they think it's promising, so they expect to get something out of it. If you have a steady growth, like 10%, you'll get 110$ in profits. Not amazing, but steady if you can keep it that way. The gaming industry however exploded, going from 100$ to 1.000$ in a pretty short time. You can't sustain that. It's a get rich quick scheme for investors, not something to reliably generate a stable growth.

Growth and profit are not the same. A company can stay the same size and continue to deliver good profit to share-holders each year.

 

Not sure if you own stocks. But, there you can see the difference realized as changing share prices as growth and distributions as shares of profit.

[dagobaking]

4 minutes ago, Alkpaz said:

Actually, it makes sense Dago, you cannot have infinite growth in a population with finite resources. Unless you know of a way to make more fossil fuels, you need energy to make energy (keep that in mind). Before the neato discovery of industrilization our world population stood at about 1 billion, within a little over 100yrs we exploded to 7 billion. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that with the increased human population we need more "stuff", more rare earth metals to make our computers and cellphones, and there is a reason why they are called "rare earth" because they are indeed "rare", sure we recycle those components by shipping them off to some backwater 3rd world country where we could care less that the average lifespan of the people who live there is 25yrs old. But that doesn't really "solve" the problem. We live on a finite planet, and those dead dinos ain't gonna last much longer, given exponential growth. 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

It's one of those ideas that sounds logical. But, does not stand up to scrutiny:

 

 

[Ernest Lemmingway]

Folks, this thread about what's going on with the AAA Game Market, not world population growth. Stick to games or take it to another thread, please.

[GrimReaper]

4 hours ago, dagobaking said:

A return on investment doesn't require growth. That can be realized by profit.

 

I think that increased productivity due to technology is closely relevant to this topic. It removes the need for as much human labor. Tech advancement is not the only kind that reduces labor. There are also logistics improvements. Both benefit everyone. Not the select few. They allow for higher quality at lower prices for everyone. So, everyone's income goes further toward improving quality of life.

 

If gaming companies were streamlined to the bone they wouldn't have fancier office buildings than just about any other industry I can think of. I think it's the opposite. They are in a highly competitive industry. So, the people working there are not willing to stay with pay cuts because they have head-hunters trying to hire them away at the rate they were making.

Sorry, by growth I meant 'increase in profits compared to the previous year/quarter/whatever'.

 

Technological advancement is a good thing, yeah. The problem is if society and the economy doesn't adjust to that, they're clinging to what worked previously. But if machines and software simply outcompete humans, you need some re-adjustment. Else you have these high-quality and cheap to produce products with no one having the money to buy them.

 

The streamlining always happens at the bottom, not the top. I remember reading that when the banks had severe issue a couple of years ago and had to be saved with tax payer money, they still gave themselves bonuses. You think someone like Bobby Kotick will downgrade to a less impressive office? I also don't think that game development is competitive at all. The time when a designer, programmer or artist could rise to individual fame is a thing of the past. If I remember correctly, it was one of EA's goals to make the brand important, not the names that made them.  Which isn't to say that there are a few highly sought-after individuals, but as far as the common peon is concerned, nah. They're easily replaceable. Here's a good read about the topic, imo: https://www.reddit.com/r/valve/comments/8zmp07/former_valve_employee_tweets_his_experience_at/

 

I know it's reddit, sorry.

[KoolHndLuke]

Don't worry folks!! Scientists are working overtime figuring out how to A) Keep us plugged in 24/7 and B) How to manipulate and control us while we are. In another decade or so we won't know what the hell is going on because we will all be playing fantastically addictive games!! Let's just hope they don't completely monetize mods by then. We can forgive everything they do to us except take away our entertainment. GAME ON!!! 

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, KoolHndLuke said:

Don't worry folks!! Scientists are working overtime figuring out how to A) Keep us plugged in 24/7

We already figured that out 15 yrs ago.

31 minutes ago, KoolHndLuke said:

B) How to manipulate and control us while we are.

We already do that.

31 minutes ago, KoolHndLuke said:

In another decade or so we won't know what the hell is going on

It's already that way you just don't realize it.

[KoolHndLuke]

20 minutes ago, namaradus said:

We already figured that out 15 yrs ago.

We already do that.

It's already that way you just don't realize it.

Is that you Uncle Bob? Sure is swell to hear from you!!

 

[dagobaking]

2 hours ago, GrimReaper said:

Technological advancement is a good thing, yeah. The problem is if society and the economy doesn't adjust to that, they're clinging to what worked previously. But if machines and software simply outcompete humans, you need some re-adjustment. Else you have these high-quality and cheap to produce products with no one having the money to buy them.

I agree with this. I think the adjustment is in having a system that allows people who can't find work (because there just isnt enough work for humans to do any more) to not have to be destitute. I'm interested to see how experiments with Universal Basic Income go as a possible solution.

2 hours ago, KoolHndLuke said:

Let's just hope they don't completely monetize mods by then. 

Don't get me started on that subject again!

[Kendo 2]

Now we're talking about the virtues of Communism.  LOVELY.  How about you people get off the bullshit and get back on topic.

[MadMansGun]

18 minutes ago, Kendo 2 said:

Now we're talking about the virtues of Communism.  LOVELY.  How about you people get off the bullshit and get back on topic.

too late, it's just another shit show now.

 

[Kendo 2]

17 minutes ago, MadMansGun said:

too late, it's just another shit show now.

The membership here can fuck up an anvil with a rubber mallet.  Activision's stock dropped 80% in value in early November and COMMUNISM!  Wait...what? ?

[shadowlord445]

Maybe a crash is what this industry needs.  I'm tired of these gigantic, soulless, AAA bug riddled messes that are loaded with micro-transactions.  I'm tired of these fucking companies who shill preorders, and have the gall to say, "Preorder now and play the beta 2 weeks before launch"  No, motherfucker, I will not preorder your game, and I will not your bug test your trash, because that is your fucking job, not mine.  These companies don't even try to innovate anymore, they just look at what is popular and making shit tons of money, and they try to copy that, not realizing that trying to catch lightning twice is a fools endeavor.

 

Look at what EA has done.  They have ruined so many great studios that have made wonderful games, all because of their greed and hubris.  HURR Dead Space 3 didn't sell a bajillion, into the trash pile it goes.  Of course these dipshits didnt realize that was never a AAA game, it was a middle market A to AA horror game, a niche game and genre.  They are doing the same thing to Bioware.  Bioware is a company that made middle market, narrative focused RPG's.  Now EA has them making bloated, boring shit like Anthem.

 

Look at Bethesda.  All they had to do was make another Fallout that fixed the shit that was wrong with 4.  But nope, they had to try and get that Fortnite money, so they made F76, and look what happened, it bombed.  Did the Fortnite kiddies flock on over to F76?  Fuck no, they don't give a shit about Fallout, and now you've pissed your core fans, who just wanted another single player RPG.

 

This industry needs one gigantic dick slap.

[Kendo 2]

The new Instinct/Grapeshot game 'Atlas' has turned out to be a train wreck in early access.  It's not even at the stage of in-house beta and they're pushing it out anyway.  Compared to the 'big four', Grapeshot is minor league but they're pulling triple A level dev/publisher bullshit.  It's a private company but the budget comes from somewhere and if the game tanks that's money flushed down the toilet.  EA gets away with their financial antics because of FIFA.  There's going to be an industry-wide correction and one or more of the big companies might not survive it.  Blockbuster and Nokia used to be big market players but shifts in technology and buyer preferences cratered them.