Topic: The game company apologist ("Companies Exist to Make Money" excuse)

[TheCruelAngel]

I don't think you get it, TheCruelAngel. It's all about The Big, Evil Corporation. The Big, Evil Corporation. Remember that.

There are no people; it's only fat-cat swindlers.

Damn those fat-cat swindlers! Them and their big, evil corporations...doing, whatever they want without any consequences for their actions! Making so much monies and buying governments, industries and making sure the consumer is screwed over!

I mean, look as these smug swindlers and their snazzy logos!

[DragonSlayr81]

All too often I see people bitching and moaning about stuff but then they grudgingly fork over the dollars anyway. So long as people do that, companies will continue to do stupid shit as long as it makes them money.

It's like, if you can literally take a shit and discover that people will step on each others' faces just to buy it off you, what insentive do you have to sell anything other THAN shit? If you can sell your own steaming pile of dookie and people love it, you're going to sell shit. If you can cut corners and release a crappy product, and people still praise you for it, why even feel the need to change? People are buying your stuff, are praising it despite it being bad. That's all that matters. There's no strive for excellence if the general consensus lowers it's standards. But like I said, soak society into this way of thinking and, sooner or later, without change to show newer generations there's "another way", this "way" becomes an inevitability. As so "all believe", then "it is so".

So gamers are stuck between a rock and a hard place: Do you choose not to support a company like that?  Or do you swallow your pride and buy their game and try your best not to think about it?

It's a tough call.

Of course, fandom has no qualms about putting each other under the stress as result of this. You have no right to rant about a bad game unless you've played it, but playing it means you either have to buy it or rent it, which is aiding the funding of these bad games. And a lot of those bastards love to rub your face in it either way.

I was reading this on NoeGAF and I can't help to think some of the opinions and posters hit the mark on the head to why this stuff is allowed to continue, and if we aren't allowed innovation, stagnation(not only in games, but as a society) is inevitable:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=511222

[TheCruelAngel]

Well, if we want to talk about advancements in gameplay and innovation in the industry, my old professor from DigiPen has a pretty good webseries about it.

Extra Credits

The 3D action genre that we know today blossomed from a bug in a survival horror title.

Also, creating something innovative and new is inherently cost prohibitive for major game companies, or to be released as a AAA title. It's something investors aren't comfortable investing in because there's no "guarantee" payoff. Something like Halo, Call of Duty or even Madden are "safe" because they're a tried and true formula (and sheep like that stuff).

But if we look at how things like, the modern multiplayer FPS, or MOAB games came about, they were from "indie developers" or specifically in those cases, modders! The two that come to mind are Counter-Strike and DOTA. Both of these were mods in already established game engines that created a new and unique play style that wasn't really available prior (CS introduced a gun purchasing system, different maps for different objectives, etc. If something else did it first, I'm unaware [and didn't play Tribes]). These two were copied and sometimes improved upon to create the titles we have now like LOL, DOTA 2, CS:GO, CoD:BO2, BF3, etc.

So, I'm rather confident that a lot of new genre development and innovation is going to come from indie development, and then brought into the AAA realm by a major publisher. I mean, it's been done before.

I mean, yeah there's always going to be guys just doing all the copying because they have no real vision or they just want to be the next "whatever" without really changing anything to the status quo. It's just the nature of the "cash cow" mentality and people not really understanding or respecting the medium. There are people who only see the $$$, and only care about the $$$. For every John Carmack and Gabe Newell there's going to be a Robert Kotick. Is it fair? No, but when your medium surpasses other mediums in terms of revenue, you're likely to get the greedy ones in there.

Is it going to change? Not while there's a gross amount of profit to be made. Basically, I'm trying to say industry giants are slow to move, there's a lot of "I wanna do this too because they made a lot of money!" and just plain greed. The little guys are who we are probably going to need to look out for in the future in terms of innovation and birthing new genres. And I do recommend supporting them with your praise and cash!

[Kale]

Let me remind you..... Game companies exist to make money. It also is the other way around, but why do people usually make a company? To make money for themselves.

That said, I don't use that excuse to excuse them screwing players over. But it does make sense in some decisions... most of the "bad" decision can't be defended that way though. Like exclusives, sure they probably got extra money from a company to do so, but I sort of doubt it is worth losing a fan base or potential sales.

[Shiroi Koumori]

It isn't just the game companies that are bowing down to mediocrity just to make sales.
Look at the movie industry: sequels, threequels, prequels, spin offs, edited versions of existing stories, remakes, etc.
If you offer something new to the market, it is either people like your innovation or most likely, you will be shoved to the side to make way for the works of the big companies.

[Abnormal Freak]

It isn't just the game companies that are bowing down to mediocrity just to make sales.
Look at the movie industry: sequels, threequels, prequels, spin offs, edited versions of existing stories, remakes, etc.

And the same thing applies there: consumers will continue to throw money at mediocrity.

I'm a horror movie fan and I always hear horror fans complain about all the remakes instead of new properties; but the thing is, they go to see the latest Nightmare on Elm Street anyway, which is usually out of loyalty to the brand ("I've seen the rest, what the hell, guess I'll see this one, too") and/or they're starved for ANYTHING new in theaters in the horror field. I'll admit, I've done the latter once or twice. I saw the mediocre Fright Night remake simply because I was itching to see a horror movie in a theater. Brand loyalty I understand less, but I'm sometimes guilty there as well. Hey! I recently made a thread asking if I should play a recent Silent Hill!

In general, though, I try to only pay for things that will (hopefully) be really good; if something's a turd or not very worth my while, I won't bother. I kinda wish more people were like that...

[Kale]

Even if that's the case, the media companies already have a set explanation if they do bad anyway. Piracy. Regardless if it's true or not, it's their back up explanation. And many many many people eat it up.

[DragonSlayr81]

Is it going to change? Not while there's a gross amount of profit to be made. Basically, I'm trying to say industry giants are slow to move, there's a lot of "I wanna do this too because they made a lot of money!" and just plain greed. The little guys are who we are probably going to need to look out for in the future in terms of innovation and birthing new genres. And I do recommend supporting them with your praise and cash!

Oh, I found myself supporting indie games far more this generation than big-studio games. I find it interesting that my joy in this past generation has Indie projects which, I personally feel, encompass the spirit of what it means to be a "gamer" and what it means to "innovate gaming" in general.

It isn't just the game companies that are bowing down to mediocrity just to make sales.
Look at the movie industry: sequels, threequels, prequels, spin offs, edited versions of existing stories, remakes, etc.
If you offer something new to the market, it is either people like your innovation or most likely, you will be shoved to the side to make way for the works of the big companies.

It IS kinda strange because people kinda make it a point that innovation is really a gamble. Every choice one makes is a gamble, and let's not try to pretend that every sequel, prequel or reboot has done well. I would say the gamble is as fair as it is with a new project, 50/50. Either it's going to do well or it's going to bomb, franchise name or no-name aside. I would even say, in some cases, it would harm the franchise name. If you release a movie or game as a reboot of a classic franchise, then it does poorly, where does all that hope of reinvigorating a long dead property by breathing new life into it to(hopefully, propel it back into the mainstream spotlight) go? It's dead. If people hated the reboot, no chance they are going to want a sequel to the reboot. There goes all that planning, and because the new audience will associate the reboot's failure to the franchise as a whole, better open the vault and toss the property back in, because it's not going to be a while until we revisit it again.

Also, is it really any more risky NOW than it was, say, 20 years ago, 30 years ago, hell, even 100 years ago. The progression of our culture is marked on the innovations and failures of people. The risk has always been there, people are ALWAYS going to take chances and bankrupt companies if their innovative products fail. That never stopped people from going ahead and reaching for the stars. You can also say most of the staple franchise that are being milked and reboots, all were products of this "take a chance on innovation, let's do something different" back in the day, and when it hits, it HITS. That's probably what people don't see. They are all afraid of the negative side of it, but don't realize, if it becomes a hit, it has the chance of not only being big, but culturally significant(for it could very well be something new that changes the game, and people will be looking back on it for years to come, praising it for doing what it did).

As far as failures are concerned, one shouldn't be afraid of failure, because it's inevitable. You're going to fail in something, you are going to LOOSE something in your life. The safe route, and I say this about the current way of thinking, can only go on for so long. It was never meant to be the status quo. It's like being a boy in a plastic bubble in a world of sharp pointy things. That's actually more companies should preach to their employees. I feel, in the past decade or so, everybody's suddenly gotten more soft-skinned and afraid of everything. It's like we've entered the "over-protective mother" era.

[Kingshango]

Unfortunatly ambition no longer applies in the industry anymore. It's all about low risk high reward now and all companies want a piece of that pie. This is now a sink or swim time where one mistake could put you out of business and we lost wayyyy to many good developers over the of course of 7 years and the death toll continues to rise ( R.I.P Vigil ). There's a reason why im bowing out of next gen and settling on my current consoles and PC ( I might get a Wii U at a later date tho). The "AAA blockbuster" trend is not going to stop anytime soon. If anything next gen will by far be the safest gen we'll ever see and if the rumors about the Durango and Orbis ( Microsoft's and Sony's console successors) are true, it's not gonna be a pretty sight.

It's sad that ambition has been tossed aside and mediocrity is the new standard and I wish companies could just realise that it's possible to have an ambitious product that sell's, The Walking Dead and Journey are the best examples of this. Two indie games sweeped GOTY's in various media outlets beating out AAA games that were usually winners. Maybe the big companies will come to their senses one day and will start taking risks and making a profit without treating us like we're idiots.

Sorry if my ramble didn't make any sense.

[Shiroi Koumori]

I feel, in the past decade or so, everybody's suddenly gotten more soft-skinned and afraid of everything. It's like we've entered the "over-protective mother" era.

We are in that era. Society now fears failure. Innovations even in other industries are fewer compared to several decades ago.

[Ratty]

Well if the the rumors about the mostly outdated and stagnant tech (barely if at all improved from this gen if rumors are to be believed) are true then there's a reason. AAA developers have become comfortable developing on this level, and it already takes millions of dollars and untold man hours to produce most of these $60 games. Games have to be big and expensive to catch the eye of the newly minted wider gaming audience.

I don't think stagnant tech in the new consoles is a good move though, if you're not going to innovate in gameplay or graphics well... it's been shown time and a again once the novelty of the tech wears off game sales slip because people start to realize they're playing the same game over and over again.

Speaking broadly, people before the 1983 game crash started to realize that almost every game coming out was a Space Invaders/Pac Man/Asteroids clone and sales sunk. In the 8bit era people started to realize that most games were just clones of Mario and a handful of other successful games, so the 16bit era had to roll in. And as the new of the graphics wears off even the bro gamers are starting to realize most big games coming out are just clones of Halo or Modern Warfare, and losing interest.

I understand being risk averse with such a huge investment, but the industry may be shooting itself in the foot or even inviting another crash here.

I don't think you get it, TheCruelAngel. It's all about The Big, Evil Corporation. The Big, Evil Corporation. Remember that.

There are no people; it's only fat-cat swindlers.

Well yeah that's basically the purpose of a corporation, to make as much money as possible by any means necessary while limiting the liability of individual investors or employees.

[Kingshango]

I don't think we're gonna see a crash like the one in 83, but I do see a crash in creativity. I have no doubt in my mind that both the rising development costs for HD gaming and the economic downturn are big factors of it.  Companies are piss scared that their next project could very well be their last and choose to either make a AAA blockbuster game that's basic and generic, or a iOS game that also basic and generic. People are anticipating that the next Sony and Microsoft consoles are going to be different and make gaming great again. But in reality, it's going to be the exact same shit only prettier with more particle effects. The games will still be the same AAA blockbuster nonsense with a QTE even before the game starts but people won't complain because the graphics look prettier.

Meanwhile there are developers who do want to make creative and fun games but they get tossed aside and either closed down or forced to migrate to mobile games.

[Abnormal Freak]

grasshopper manufacture just got acquired by another company so I'm kinda scared. SUDA51's one of the last bastions of true creativity in the gaming world and I'd hate to see his vision compromised to try and cater to dumbass gamers.

If nothing else, hopefully Killer Is Dead will be one last hurrah...

[X]

Nice roster of evil corporations TheCurelAngel. But Cyberdyne Systems wasn't evil like the others. It was simply a victim of an unknowable set of circumstances and a time causality loop.

We are in that era. Society now fears failure. Innovations even in other industries are fewer compared to several decades ago.

Undoubtedly true. Back in the day people weren't afraid of failure because everyone knew that in order to succeed you need to fail first. Our civilization wasn't built on success, it was built on failure. As humans we have no choice but to fail before we can succeed. It's the only real way we can learn from our mistakes. And sadly the 'big corporations' do not understand this let alone except it. If we're going to get back into the age of progress and discovery then we need to put our habitual greed of monetary consumption on the back burner for good.

[Sonic_Reaper]

Just a couple side notes before I get into a recent case study;

---

New IPs can be profitable.  Ultimately consumers are looking for quality.  This has never really changed.  Inception, for example, was a new movie IP and it did incredibly well.  It was simple, just a well told story, and the movie looked great, which of course helped.  People also seem to forget that at one point, every game was a new IP.  You have to start somewhere.  Beating an IP into the ground will only result in stagnation.

---

Ultimately, yes, business has degraded into a profit-loss/profit-gained venture.  There are example where a turd is a turd, but the company keeps trying.  Case in point, the Hulk and Superman movies.  Two Hulk reboots (for all intents and purposes) released closely together, because it wouldn't be possible to create avengers otherwise.  Superman is in the same boat.  And for those reasons I pray and hope it fails miserably (again).  The game industry can't necessarily operate in this fashion, because even the largest game houses don't have this amount of money to throw around.  A game has to recoup it's costs, at least, with little wiggle room.  This has had the latent effect of increasing the rise to stagnation and mediocrity.

---

A big problem in the industry is simply the emphasis on visual technology.  At what point do we say, enough is enough?  When is it TOO HD?  When are there TOO many polygons?  Because investment and development of this visual technology comes with astronomical associated costs.  I wouldn't be surprised if within the next couple decades we see a crash of sorts, with a resurface of major game developers creating games in style to 16, 32, 64 etc. consoles.

---

Piracy does not hurt the industry.  A person who would not have bought the product in the first place, whether because they had the money or otherwise, is not a potential loss of profit.  Those potential profits didn't exist in the first place.  Who are the primary pirates?  Poor ass people, yo.  People with money tend to spend it (I know there are exceptions, but they are a grave minority).  I want to add that I think at some point, old technology should naturally enter the realm of the public domain.  How many times should Square be "allowed" to release and profit from Chrono Trigger?  There's obviously no answer, but in other media, such as literature, work does eventually enter the public domain, free for all to enjoy.  I believe that games should be handled in the same manner.  This forces companies, up to a point, to foster and develop newer ideas, instead of constantly treading back to old ones.

---

The only way to stop corporate greed:  boycott.  We live in a free democracy.  Don't like something.  Boycott.  What happened after Rosa Parks refused to move to the back of the bus?  Society, largely white, was unmoved by this solemn act of defiance.  The true change came when large numbers of working black people (and possible other minorities) boycotted the bus service.  She made a stand, and there was an identifiable action that affected the offending parties.  If you don't like a game, or game company because of their practices, boycott.  Companies will always do whatever they want.  Don't delude yourself into thinking otherwise.  Hit them where it hurts.

---

Which brings me to a recent case study.  FF:  All the Bravest.  What is this I don't even?  Even though I stopped being a fan around the Parasite Eve era (and hated any FF post VI), I at least thought they were a company that cared about their fans and were held in high regard.  But this game, proves to me (as did FFXIV to an extent), that they, like many others, no longer care about honesty, respect or accountability.  It's sickening, really.  Arrogant, even.  It occurs to me that Square largely feels they can "get away" with this kind of abhorrent penny-pinching under the guise of a quick and easy on-the-go hand held product.  But that doesn't excuse it.  If you're unfamiliar with the game, please read one (of many) scathing review(s), and I urge you all to boycott the shit out of FF: ATB.

http://ca.ign.com/articles/2013/01/18/final-fantasy-all-the-bravest-review