Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Devs & Media VERSUS Gamers - A Healthy Discussion.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Devs & Media VERSUS Gamers - A Healthy Discussion.

    I came across this video and wanted to share it. All of the viewpoints are spot on and well balanced, and I really wish more people would hear it.

    "Without Games, Life would be a Mistake" - All of the Founding Fathers, in unison.

  • #2
    Last edited by Mike; 08-05-2019, 05:46 PM.

    Comment


    • Trout
      Trout commented
      Editing a comment
      Dont forget that 100% of the game was one that one storage unit, that the game didnt ship if it was incomplete or bugged to the point of being unplayable.

    • Zagreus_Veritas
      Zagreus_Veritas commented
      Editing a comment
      I just buy most of my games on GoG instead, and focus on user reviews. Yes it is a digital purchase but if I wanted to I could write an autoexec script and then burn the whole thing to a DVD, DRMless.

  • #3
    @Mike
    I would not agree more.
    But yet, we won't actually win.
    Despite I am classic games player myself (and most games on GOG are considered NEW to me), playing on WINUAE (Amiga Emulator) or DoxBox (all know this one), despite I do honestly love the games. I also must admit that the GUI is usually clunky, the gameplay is limited by the hardware, the games were built (20, 30 or more years back).
    So what we are losing -> is having the same or better standards, but on new platforms,
    It are the potentially GREAT games (either inspired by previous games, or totally new, surprising, breathtaking...), that we are NOT getting right now.
    Devs might work like slaves, sometimes 80+ days/week, for fixed salary, but the distributor / company will push them to unbearable completion dates. Logically cutting from devs actual potential, skill and subsequently from the game potential (and fun).

    I just learned that Slitherine bought Master of Magic rights from Atari.
    But instead rejoicing (as I am huge MoM fan), I am very deeply concerned, that the re-make (and no one actually stated, that there will one in first place, so still 'wishful thinking') will be crappy and built just to drag attention, pose in previews, flash gamers with first 5~6 hours of beta-tested gameplay, but then going haywire and becoming either buggy or boring.
    As I have seen in many other examples.
    Ruined franchises: I could waste my day naming them here.

    The turning point was during The Knights of the OLD republic. Devs were sharing, how investors are handling them, changing management, pushing them to impossible goals, or silencing those coders, who actually stated their concerns.
    It was us - the community, the players, who betrayed them. We did little to nothing to fight for them. Despite the devs, after being fired, did still develop unofficial patches, just due their devotion to the game (of course for free), we did not stand up for them.
    So the companies learned one thing: no one gives actual fok about devs, and people actually buy games, that not only are tainted with inhuman handling of devs, but are even proclaimed as buggy, and nearly impossible to complete.
    Precedence we, players, created ourselves, now we are wondering why things are, as they are.

    That is why, I see this situation for us as lose-lose.
    (games, we could be playing right now, won't exist and we will either stop being gamers, or play old games till our fuse burns / or we cave in, and will play new shitty games, and supporting those, whom we allowed to destroy the gaming world.)

    Comment


    • Zagreus_Veritas
      Zagreus_Veritas commented
      Editing a comment
      Not all new games are terrible though. Just most of the really big ones.
      Take Age of Wonder: Planetfall for example, that's a new game but it seems ready to take on all comers. So far I haven't been able to find anything wrong with it, and it's available on GoG, so DRMless.

  • #4
    To be honest I am disappointed with Indie developers no longer respecting their costumers.
    As Obi Wan once said.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	11fb22e667374a49cd0aced462da433573558ce4ffd4f36ac82de410f78df01d.jpg
Views:	11
Size:	44.6 KB
ID:	61084

    We live in a age that businesses spit in the faces of their costumers, they still expect said costumers to be glad they spit on our faces and give them all our money.
    Currently I am studying Logistics and I facepalm every time I compare it to today's gaming situation.

    The 101 of any store / factory / merchants / businesses.
    It's clearly don't make your costumers angry and short term profits won't help you in the long run, specially if you are just starting your business, you must always think of long term profits.

    We are going back to the dark ages if this keeps happening on today's economy.
    ( ´・ω・`)_且~ Would you care to join me for a cup of tea?
    Sips Tea Majeeeeestically!

    Comment


    • Zagreus_Veritas
      Zagreus_Veritas commented
      Editing a comment
      Ironically, Obi-Wan was wrong on all Counts, the prophecy only stated that Anakin would "bring balance to the force". And he certainly did, just not in the way the Jedi intended.
      ...I just hope that metaphor is not also going to apply to Epic.

  • #5
    I didn't see video yet, plan on it eventually. But in regards to the last post. I don't think Indie devs 'became' the assholes too. Just some of them, naturally, the ones the media promotes of course. There are lots of indie devs who cater to their customers a lot, but they of course aren't the indie companies that are media darlings like Phil Fish was with Fez, or ... Zoe Quinn and her hypercard-looking 'game'. We already k now the media hates gamers, so naturally the game companies who on their good side is most likely encouraged to hate on gamers.

    Comment


    • #6
      That's a question I was wondering about when I first joined these forums. In the case of Ooblets, their customer is Epic and not the end game gaming community. Because of it, they really don't need to curry favor with players, just Epic and journalists. Gamers seem to be a source of frustration to them with their ideas and demands. As is, they could release their game and call it a commercial success. Why even patch the thing, they'd just be better off starting work on the next project.



      Comment


      • #7
        The video raises important points, but not the ones it intends. It is a "deep dive" intro the industry yet it talks about a single instance of one person writing one thing, then goes to tar an entire industry with the same brush. Why is that any better than the things he is being critical of?

        The big problem is people latching onto one instance of something and making it out to be the norm, and the reason they do that is simple....rage clicks. One person does something so in order to make 1,000,000 videos about it to get that rage-click revenue people have to imply that this is a massive industry-wide problem, but it isn't....it was one person saying one thing. Not only to people try and inflate how widespread the problem is, they try and inflate the impact too so that they can be even MORE angry about it. If people stopped responding to rage-clickbait then all sorts of "problems" would disappear overnight.
        Iconoclast

        Jeremy: ResetEra is a forum full of outrage merchants
        Also Jeremy: Join ExclusivelyGames, a forum full of outrage merchants

        Comment


        • #8
          Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
          their customer is Epic and not the end game gaming community.
          Not really, they got a chunk of change and a sale amount guarantee so what do they have to pander to Epic for? Not only do they not need them for money, but catering to Epic rather than the consumers isn't going to get them income, is it? It's not going to make Epic think they got value for money. To do that people need to buy the game, and they won't buy it if it isn't any good. If they do pander to Epic rather than the consumer then what value does Epic get from that? Nothing. A game they've paid a lot of money for that isn't selling.
          Iconoclast

          Jeremy: ResetEra is a forum full of outrage merchants
          Also Jeremy: Join ExclusivelyGames, a forum full of outrage merchants

          Comment


          • #9
            Originally posted by Aidy View Post
            chunk of change and a sale amount guarantee
            From the Ooblet's devs....

            Epic is covering 100% of their sales goals on all other storefronts. That's their post release sales goal, not just some chunk of change. Their entire projection.

            Originally posted by Aidy
            Not only do they not need them for money, but catering to Epic rather than the consumers isn't going to get them income, is it?
            From the Ooblet's devs...

            They have been placed in the position where it is impossible for them to fail. They are guaranteed profitability at this point as they have already achieved their sales goals.

            Originally posted by Aidy
            It's not going to make Epic think they got value for money. To do that people need to buy the game, and they won't buy it if it isn't any good.
            According to Tim Sweeney, their current strategy won't return a profit this year. https://www.engadget.com/2019/04/03/...re-exclusives/

            It's uncertain if the strategy is paying off for Epic, although Sweeney noted that the cash outlay was "significant" and that his company might not turn a profit from exclusives in 2019.
            The goal isn't necessarily to get games that are selling. The goal is to get games that are unique on their site and Epic is willing to cover their expected revenues in exchange. They recently rejected a game called SkateBIRD because the dev wanted to be able to sell on other storefronts. Epic told them that they were focusing on Exclusives. It wasn't a quality/curation issue, it was an exclusivity issue.

            Originally posted by aidy
            Nothing. A game they've paid a lot of money for that isn't selling.
            Did we forget that they are handing out games for free? How much revenue does a company earn on a product they give away for free?

            So why would a video game company pander to Epic? Because with a deal like this they can get the same revenue in one transaction without any additional investment versus having to compete in the market. Any additional purchases above and beyond this point for the developer is a bonus. A nice surprise. Furthermore, Ooblets may gain some additional help in getting their game transferred to the console market.

            Ooblets is a doorbuster for a store still in it's grand opening. That is their value, a prize to be handed away to every customer during one select week in the hopes to gain traffic. Traffic who may one day become paying customers on their store.



            Comment


            • #10
              Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
              Epic is covering 100% of their sales goals on all other storefronts. That's their post release sales goal, not just some chunk of change. Their entire projection.
              I don't see what point you're trying to make. By a chunk of change and a guarantee I assumed they would get money for doing the deal (the chunk of change) as well as the minimum sales guarantee. That might be wrong, they might just be getting the sales guarantee but I'm not sure they've clarified things one way of the other, but regardless it doesn't affect anything I said, my point was that they are getting guaranteed money, they don't need to worry about it.

              Edit: at the risk of being patronising, on second thoughts it looks like you were thrown by the "chunk of change" idiom. It's one of those sarcastic idioms that means a lot of money.

              Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
              They have been placed in the position where it is impossible for them to fail.
              Yes, that's my point. You said Epic were their customer and I asked why they had to pander to Epic when they already have their money. I don't see how what you're saying now goes against my argument, in fact it seems to be contradicting your own.

              Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
              According to Tim Sweeney, their current strategy won't return a profit this year. https://www.engadget.com/2019/04/03/...re-exclusives/
              He's almost certainly right, I don't think anyone is saying they are doing this for profit. Again I don't see how this relates to the discussion at hand, and I don't see how it relates to what you've quoted me on?

              Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
              The goal isn't necessarily to get games that are selling. The goal is to get games that are unique on their site and Epic is willing to cover their expected revenues in exchange. They recently rejected a game called SkateBIRD because the dev wanted to be able to sell on other storefronts. Epic told them that they were focusing on Exclusives. It wasn't a quality/curation issue, it was an exclusivity issue.
              Yes, everyone is aware of that. Once more I'm struggling to see how that is relevant? Your argument was that Ooblets now needs to pander to Epic as Epic is their "customer". Nothing you are posting is backing that up. Everything you are posting is effectively agreeing with me, that Ooblets has their money in the bank, they have nothing to pander to Epic for any more. From here on in they can focus on serving the actual customer which is the people who buy the game, and being financially secure is a great way to do that. You seem to be implying that Epic "owns" Ooblets and now Ooblets will do whatever to please Epic rather than gamers. My point is that is illogical....they have the money already, what will pleasing Epic at the expense of gamers get them on top of that? Nothing.

              Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
              Did we forget that they are handing out games for free?
              Who is handing what out for free? Again I fail to see the relevance of this comment.

              Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
              So why would a video game company pander to Epic?
              No, that's not what I asked. I asked why the developers of Ooblets would now pander to Epic because that is the point you made....that the makers of Ooblets have to pander to Epic. If you could answer that question, that would be great.
              Last edited by Aidy; 08-08-2019, 05:43 PM.
              Iconoclast

              Jeremy: ResetEra is a forum full of outrage merchants
              Also Jeremy: Join ExclusivelyGames, a forum full of outrage merchants

              Comment


              • #11
                A chunk of change is not the same as receiving their entire sales projection, the leadup to your question was poor. Their income was provided upfront. The Epic store has fewer paying customers than all other storefronts both individually and combined. A small number of people will buy it at release. A larger number of freeloaders will pick it up for free when it's offered as a doorbuster. But the largest paying customer will still be Epic games, larger than all other paying pc customers combined.

                Let's look at player feedback for a moment on Epic games. There is a forum for developers to communicate with Epic games. Developers rave that this is a great way to speak with Epic and to get feedback on their questions. There is no forum for developers to communicate with their players at the Epic Game store. There is no user reviews at the Epic Game store for players to hold the developer accountable. Bug fixes, due to this, will be significantly slower if done at all. There is a diminished relationship between the customer and the store and also between the customer and the developer. There is a stronger relationship between the Developer and the Store, one which an Ooblets would be more motivated to maintain.

                What about future decisions, like extra content. They will have released to a diminished audience, mostly of people who received the game for free. Because of the lower playerbase, you are likely to see less content unless they can get Epic to provide further sales guarantees. If Epic says no, then you hold that back in order to help create a new game to sell Epic. The end result is that they are building content, not for the end user, but for the storefront that purchased it.

                If the deal between a developer and a storefront is this good, it's likely to good enough to do multiple times as long as the deal remains. A future product will be built towards gaining Epic's approval. The sales of the first game won't matter since it was only offered on one storefront and will be blamed on lack of users on that storefront. Feedback from the first game won't reach Epic since there are no forums. Feedback barely makes it back to the developer due to their choice of feedback tools (discord/twitter). The developer can reassure Epic that any issues were resolved regardless of action taken. Content will be built towards retaining Epic as a customer and not towards the end user.

                Comment


                • #12
                  Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                  A chunk of change is not the same as receiving their entire sales projection
                  I didn't say it was, I said a chunk of change and a guaranteed sale amount.

                  Originally posted by Aidy
                  they got a chunk of change and a sale amount guarantee
                  Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                  Their income was provided upfront.
                  I know, no-one has said otherwise.

                  Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                  A larger number of freeloaders will pick it up for free
                  Where does it say it will be offered for free? I can't say I've done exhaustive research but the Ooblet's FAQ doesn't mention it will be free.

                  Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                  But the largest paying customer will still be Epic games
                  And they've already paid....so....again Why does Ooblet's need to pander to someone they already have the money from?

                  Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                  If the deal between a developer and a storefront is this good, it's likely to good enough to do multiple times as long as the deal remains. A future product will be built towards gaining Epic's approval. The sales of the first game won't matter since it was only offered on one storefront and will be blamed on lack of users on that storefront. Feedback from the first game won't reach Epic since there are no forums. Feedback barely makes it back to the developer due to their choice of feedback tools (discord/twitter). The developer can reassure Epic that any issues were resolved regardless of action taken. Content will be built towards retaining Epic as a customer and not towards the end user.
                  Come on, you have to admit there are a lot of assumptions in there and a lot of conjecture. You are trying to base an argument around your guess of what will happen in the future. I see you're also now talking about the "next product", but again that's not what we're talking about, we're talking about Ooblet's and why they have to pander to Epic for this game when the money is already in the bag. If your argument is that it is to keep them sweet for future games then you're welcome to that opinion but I don't think that will be crossing their mind at all. I think right now the only thing on their mind will be getting the game they are working on now sorted and the best it can be for the gamers who buy it. If you have a hard time believing that then maybe it's because you've bought into this notion that everyone is greedy, everyone does everything for greed...this forum isn't a good barometer for the real world. It was those very sentiments that they were shining a light on in their recent statement. Ooblet's is a passion project from some guy and his wife, not some faceless corporation out for world domination. We should give them the benefit of the doubt that they just want to make a good game and saw this as the best way of making that happen despite the flack they knew they'd get.
                  Iconoclast

                  Jeremy: ResetEra is a forum full of outrage merchants
                  Also Jeremy: Join ExclusivelyGames, a forum full of outrage merchants

                  Comment


                  • #13
                    Ugh, talking about media today goes far beyond just games, and gets into topics this forum exists to avoid discussion of

                    Comment


                    • #14
                      Originally posted by Aidy View Post
                      they got a chunk of change and a sale amount guarantee
                      Their income was provided upfront.
                      Aidy: I know, no-one has said otherwise.
                      Oh?

                      Aidy: Not only do they not need them for money, but catering to Epic rather than the consumers isn't going to get them income, is it?


                      Aidy: Where does it say it will be offered for free? I can't say I've done exhaustive research but the Ooblet's FAQ doesn't mention it will be free.
                      Most have noticed that Epic has been offering games for free for those willing to traffic to their site. Epic pays the developer in exchange for the keys. The developer gets the money. A customer gets a free game that they wouldn't otherwise purchase. And the storefront gets traffic. The exclusivity deals are a guarantee for a number of sales in exchange for keys. Ooblets will be handed out for free due to this arrangement at some future date. It is the nature of their arrangement.

                      Aidy: If you have a hard time believing that then maybe it's because you've bought into this notion that everyone is greedy, everyone does everything for greed...this forum isn't a good barometer for the real world. It was those very sentiments that they were shining a light on in their recent statement. Ooblet's is a passion project from some guy and his wife, not some faceless corporation out for world domination.
                      Strawman.

                      aidy: You are trying to base an argument around your guess of what will happen in the future.
                      The game hasn't released yet. We're all making statements based on the future. Their agreement stipulates that they need to have a finished game. Do I really need to say this? Apparently so.

                      I believe this set of developers has the capability to work in the present and plan for the future. Let's be honest, some people just lack the ability to work in the present and still be able to plot a future. I feel like I explained why a dev like this would cater towards epic on their current and future projects perfectly well above. Because they can earn the vast majority of their income upfront.

                      Comment


                      • #15
                        Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                        Oh?
                        Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                        Word to the wise; don't go belittling people when it's you that doesn't understand. It's really not a good look.

                        Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                        Ooblets will be handed out for free due to this arrangement at some future date.
                        Maybe it will, maybe it won't.

                        Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                        Strawman.
                        That wasn't an argument so it can't be a straw man. Pretty rich coming from the person that is making on average 10 assumptions per post yet stating them as facts and building an argument around them.

                        Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                        Their agreement stipulates that they need to have a finished game.
                        No-one has said otherwise.

                        Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                        Because they can earn the vast majority of their income upfront.
                        The vast majority? LOL you'd just been trying to convince me they've got all of their income upfront.
                        Iconoclast

                        Jeremy: ResetEra is a forum full of outrage merchants
                        Also Jeremy: Join ExclusivelyGames, a forum full of outrage merchants

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X