Topic: Games Industry Death Watch 2010-present

[NWR_insanolord]

You know, it would be nice to have multiple companies making game systems, akin to smartphones, tablets, PC's, TV's, etc. There should be a standard upon which all game systems are based.

Well Mr. Dyack, I must be forced to remind you that TOO HUMAN SUCKS BALLS

I actually kind of liked Too Human. It was flawed, but had good ideas. I wish they'd gotten a chance to do a sequel because I think it could have been really good.

You know, it would be nice to have multiple companies making game systems, akin to smartphones, tablets, PC's, TV's, etc. There should be a standard upon which all game systems are based.

That's been tried a few times and has always been a colossal failure. Also, Nintendo would never let that happen.

I'm talking about making the game platform a standard piece of tech that any company can make; like a TV, mobile phone, tablet, PC, etc. Game systems shouldn't be this proprietary.

I know what you were talking about, and it's been attempted a couple times. One of those massive failure consoles in the mid '90s, maybe the CD-i, tried to do that, and then somebody else did later on. It's just a bad idea, because the whole advantage of a dedicated game console is one cohesive environment, which you don't get if too many companies are involved. If you want a game system that isn't proprietary, go build yourself a Linux box.

[Sarail]

Yeah, Adrock kind of explained how I feel about the situation. I feel like a 1-on-1 direct competitor would force more creativity out of Nintendo. And in a way, it's true. As I look back fondly on the Nintendo vs. Sega days, there were tons of creative games and IP coming out left and right out of Nintendo's wahzoo. Almost unbelievable.

With Microsoft being Nintendo's only rival, it could turn into a western developer vs. eastern developer type of game to see who could take over the other's "gamerscape." Would definitely be interesting, methinks.

Naughty Dog as a Nintendo exclusive developer? Yes, please.

[TJ Spyke]

But that is not the same. Cell phone gaming is not unified, you have iOS, Android, Windows Phone, Symbian, BlackBerry. It is just as fragmented. With console games, you just have Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft.

[Kytim89]

You know, it would be nice to have multiple companies making game systems, akin to smartphones, tablets, PC's, TV's, etc. There should be a standard upon which all game systems are based.

That's been tried a few times and has always been a colossal failure. Also, Nintendo would never let that happen.

I'm talking about making the game platform a standard piece of tech that any company can make; like a TV, mobile phone, tablet, PC, etc. Game systems shouldn't be this proprietary.

I guess what I'm thinking of is something like Android or Windows, where there are multiple devices from multiple manufactures using a standard OS.

Keep in mind that competition breeds quality, so if there is a single piece of technology shared by many then the quality will inevitably go down as a result.

[tendoboy1984]

Devices that share a similar OS (Android, Windows) are unified because they are built using the same architecture. For the "console standard" to work, multiple manufacturers would have to design their hardware around a unified OS, and each device would need to support the same games (similar to how games for Windows or Android work).

Microsoft is already experimenting with this, in a way. According to that leaked Xbox document, Microsoft wants complete integration among Windows, Xbox, and Windows Phone devices, with each device sharing games and apps.

If manufacturers could agree on a unified standard for game consoles, it would be the end of porting, because games would be playable on any device that is built using those standards. And there would be a wider variety of devices to choose from.

It's what made Windows and Android so popular. All those devices share a common OS.

[tendoboy1984]

I just looked up that OUYA console, and it's basically what I'm describing. A game console that is based on an open OS (Android) that will (presumably) be manufactured by multiple companies. Microsoft and Google already standardized cell phone and PC development with things like Windows, DirectX, Android, etc. So why can't this same firm of standardization work with game consoles?

If I buy a PC game, it will work on any Windows PC, regardless of the brand (HP, Samsung, Lenovo, Toshiba). All DVD players play the same movies. Any Android phone will run the same apps, regardless of manufacturer.

See my point? If game consoles were built to a singular standard (all games will run on any device, regardless of manufacturer), it would make game development so much easier.

If it worked for the PC and smartphone industries, it can work for game consoles. They would just have to use the same OS and hardware configuration to ensure cross-compatibility. Like how Windows or Android devices work.

[TJ Spyke]

Actually, PC games don't work on "any Windows PC". Even if you ignore the technical requirements, there are games that only play on older versions of Windows. Ouya will (if it even comes out) only be made by one company, and the flaw with Ouya is they are encouraging people to basically pirate it.

There is not much benefit to Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft to give up the royalties they make from games on their hardware. Right now, Microsoft makes money on every first AND third party game released on Xbox 360. In fact, Microsoft relies on third party support more than Nintendo or Sony, so why would they give up all that extra revenue?

[tendoboy1984]

there are games that only play on older versions of Windows.

I really wish you would stop taking things I say our of context. When I said "any Windows PC can run any game" I specifically meant modern games running on Windows 7 (or eventually Windows . There's a standardization going on across all Windows PC's. And then we have Steam, which is completely cross-platform.

When I say I want an open console environment, I mean something akin to a Windows PC or Android phone. You buy a game and it can run on any device that uses the same OS and system architecture. True cross-compatibility.

That's how Steam works, right?

[Oblivion]

In any case, you can run compatibility mode.

[ymeegod]

Eurocom is shutting down.  Their last two games were 007's Goldeneye and 007 Legends.  Legends scored an 4/10 avg.  Personally, 007 brand has been tranished so bad that ever if a decent one did come around I doubt anyone would notice.

Not sure what deal Activision has for the 007 but it's long overdue that someone else take over because James Bond is the one that needs saving :0.

[EasyCure]

would this affect legend coming to wii u? :-(  i want it....

[TJ Spyke]

would this affect legend coming to wii u? :-(  i want it....

Considering the game should be done (it's supposed to come out in North America December 11), I doubt it.

[EasyCure]

i doubt it too, but I don't doubt publishers making stupid decisions

[tendoboy1984]

So after the success of GoldenEye, one mediocre game (007 Legends) can kill an entire company? Didn't Activision fund them enough money to complete the game on time?

[Kytim89]

So after the success of GoldenEye, one mediocre game (007 Legends) can kill an entire company? Didn't Activision fund them enough money to complete the game on time?

It is pretty simple math when one realizes that we are living in a a very expensive period of the gaming industry in terms of development costs. The huge leap in technological prowess by the PS3 and Xbox 360 created the unfortunate side effect of huge game budgets just to get a game on the market. Also, the ever tanking global economy,  fall of the dollar, and currency fluctuations, then even a five million dollar game can make or break a game studio.


The bottom line is the herd of the gaming industry is going to be increasingly culled if console makers like Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo do not find a way to make consoles cheaper to develop for. Today's multi-billion dollar game company is tomorrow's iPhone exclusive developer due to the thinning of profit margins.

[tendoboy1984]

So casual mobile games are the future of the gaming industry. All that hard work pushing graphics and hardware tech will go to waste. Got it.

[NWR_insanolord]

Not necessarily casual mobile games, but we've pretty much reached the limit of what can be done in terms of graphics on a reasonable budget. No matter how much better the tech gets, it'll be too expensive to take advantage of very often, and even now one bad move can cripple a studio. That's what Kytim's saying: we've seen multiple studios hit hard by games that didn't meet expectations, and the only way for them to stay afloat was to downsize and switch their focus to the low-risk casual market.

[MagicCow64]

Not necessarily casual mobile games, but we've pretty much reached the limit of what can be done in terms of graphics on a reasonable budget. No matter how much better the tech gets, it'll be too expensive to take advantage of very often, and even now one bad move can cripple a studio. That's what Kytim's saying: we've seen multiple studios hit hard by games that didn't meet expectations, and the only way for them to stay afloat was to downsize and switch their focus to the low-risk casual market.

This is why I'm becoming more convinced that Microsoft is going to keep the Durango reasonable from a tech angle. It'll run UE4 to keep Epic happy, but I don't think it's going to blow the WiiU out of the water like much of the gaming press seems to assume. It would probably make tactical sense as well to keep the Durango modest and let Sony faceplant again with another Cadillac console. Xbox's probable larger userbase and range with the WiiU would probably make it the target console once more, and the cheaper development would just make PS4 exclusives that much more unappealing. If I was Microsoft, I'd definitely want to take out one of the competitors at this point, and they won't be able to stomp out Nintendo this Gen. Sony is vulnerable.

[broodwars]

Not necessarily casual mobile games, but we've pretty much reached the limit of what can be done in terms of graphics on a reasonable budget. No matter how much better the tech gets, it'll be too expensive to take advantage of very often, and even now one bad move can cripple a studio. That's what Kytim's saying: we've seen multiple studios hit hard by games that didn't meet expectations, and the only way for them to stay afloat was to downsize and switch their focus to the low-risk casual market.

Or they could make games that people actually want to buy. Just sayin'. As badly as some studios have had it this generation, those that have discovered what people want to buy this generation have performed quite well.  Generally, that's how it is every generation, so you'll excuse me if I won't jump on the pile with the rest of you to denounce actual effort into production values as the Death of the Industry.

I liked Eurocom's work on GoldenEye, Dead Space Extraction, and even The World is Not Enough back in the day, but if everything I've heard of 007 Legends is true it's hard to feel too sorry for them.

I honestly wonder how well GoldenEye actually did on the Wii, given the Wii's deserved reputation with 3rd party sales.  Activision was pretty quick to port the game to the HD consoles in a much better state, after all.  And given the reviews and general lack of buzz around that port at the time (though I really enjoyed both versions), I get the feeling the HD port didn't sell very well.  I don't think it was just 007 Legends selling poorly that did them in.  I get the feeling this was built-up from multiple failures this generation.

Really, just look at their output this generation  (according to Wikipedia):

• Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (Xbox360, PlayStation 3, Wii, PlayStation 2, PSP, PC) (2007)
• Beijing 2008 (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, PC) (2008)
• The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (DS, PlayStation 2, Wii) (2008)
• Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, Wii, PS2, PC) (2009)
• G-Force (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, Wii, PS2, PC) (2009)
• Dead Space: Extraction (Wii) (2009)
• Vancouver 2010 (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, PC) (2010)
• GoldenEye 007 (Wii) (2010)
• Rio (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, Wii) (2011)
• Disney Universe (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, Wii, PC) (2011)
• GoldenEye 007: Reloaded (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360) (2011)
• 007 Legends (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, Wii U, PC) (2012)
• Harry Potter for Kinect (Xbox 360) (2012)

Yeah, that's a real list of winners right there.  It wasn't just 007 Legends that took them out.

[shingi_70]

This really isn't a case of a massive budget though. The game had a very short development period and used the same Engine as Goldeneye as well as the bulk of its assets. 

Plain and simple this was just a very bad game that tried to quickly cash in on Skyfall by putting Daniel Craig into a whole bunch of old bond movies. While this worked for Goldeneye which was a more grounded film in the first place it doesn't really work where your trying to shoehorn Craig's bond into Moon Raker and the golden gun.

After Goldeneye they should have went with the next games being similar too Bloodstone where its a whole new adventure taking place in this universe. Probably my favorite moments of blood stone and Goldeneye were the Intro's being like the movies and the james just being various adventures the Craig Bond had in his life time. 

Hopefully the bond lisence is taken from Activsion and given to someone like Ubisoft.


Also even if Durango/Orbis are both big tech jumps it doesn't excatly mean that Budgets will go up. I think middleware like Unreal 4 and cryengine 3 will help alleviate a lot of the early budget inflations as they both have a lot of common with their predesscors. That and almost every major third party dev uses middleware for smaller projects but have their own game engines being used company wide by all of their studios (Frostbite, Anvil, Lumionious).  I'm expecting all of EAs sports games to be running on the same engine next gen as well.


Also most developers are pretty good at working with HD games in a reasonable time frame. Only ones I can see having a hard time with HD development are nintendo and Square enix.

Thrid parties shouldn't have a hardtime and should still be able to put out impressive games as long as they remember they can't pull a Naughty Dog or 343i without going bankrupt if the title doesn't sale.[youtube][/youtube]

[NWR_insanolord]

Or they could make games that people actually want to buy. Just sayin'.

Because it's just that simple. Eurocom should have set out to make a game people would like instead of purposely making a broken game.

I'm not saying developers shouldn't put effort into presentation, but you can't deny that it's a very risky proposition when a developer with a proven track record slips up once and is effectively destroyed by it.

[tendoboy1984]

Well according to the various analysts out there, mobile devices will eventually kill game consoles and PC's. I guess Xbox, PlayStation, and Nintendo aren't relevant anymore... I wonder if these analysts realized that mobile devices and home consoles are completely different, and are marketed to different demographics... Consoles have adapted to market changes in the past (becoming all-in-one media boxes), so why wouldn't they be able to compete in the future?

[noname2200]

Also even if Durango/Orbis are both big tech jumps it doesn't excatly mean that Budgets will go up.

Folks said similar things last generation, along with the argument that costs will decrease over time as the tools improve. I don't think it'll be true this time either.

[Kytim89]

Also even if Durango/Orbis are both big tech jumps it doesn't excatly mean that Budgets will go up.

Folks said similar things last generation, along with the argument that costs will decrease over time as the tools improve. I don't think it'll be true this time either.

The cost of current generation game development is still not cheap. Until this is fixed then I do not see Sony and Microsoft's next consoles being that much of a leap over the Wii U. The entire industry has a vested interest in driving down costs for their own survival.
 
Didn't EA say a while ago that either Dead Space 3 or Mass Effect 3 had to sell five million copies just for them to mae a profit?

[noname2200]

The cost of current generation game development is still not cheap. Until this is fixed then I do not see Sony and Microsoft's next consoles being that much of a leap over the Wii U. The entire industry has a vested interest in driving down costs for their own survival.
 
Didn't EA say a while ago that either Dead Space 3 or Mass Effect 3 had to sell five million copies just for them to mae a profit?

I don't recall that final quote one way or the other (not saying it wasn't said, just that I don't remember it), but I definitely think development costs are already too cost-prohibitive for the long-term health of the industry. That said, I'm decreasingly convinced that most of the big publishers care, and I'm not certain that the smaller developers (are there even any mid-sized developers left?) have enough say on the matter to do anything besides go handheld-only or make indie digital games.