Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

This Generation's Console life is killing the game companies?


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Kingroy

Kingroy

    Knight

  • Knight
  • 1,916 posts

Posted 23 July 2012 - 11:13 AM

So companies are expressing their fear of the life cycle of this generation's consoles. Without mucking it up and putting my very bias words down I'm just going to hand you guys the link. From their words the long life cycles are hindering the consoles by pushing developers to more casual technology like iPods.

Ubisoft: Industry "Penalised" by Long Console Cycle - IGN

Square Enix: Current Console Generation Has Lasted "Way Too Long" - IGN

--------

I believe it's crap. I mean okay I don't want to bash them anymore than I already have BUT I'm hoping that one day the consoles can last a good while before the need for a new one comes along. I don't want to pay for a new console, which I don't, every five years. I know technology rapidly adapts but at the same time you're selling to the players who in one way or the other usually don't have the money up front to pay for these expensive ass consoles. So again the cycle will continue where overtime the sells reach what the developers want, which then leads to the next console and so on. This generation the PS3 and Xbox 360 have been really pushing their performance by adding in innovative things like Playstation Plus, and bringing in third party Apps, and Xbox, who I don't follow enough to remember what they do, are really doing innovative stuff as well with this console. I want both them and us to get as much as they can squeeze out of this generation's console.

[Today 07:02 PM] Kingroy: <.<
[Today 07:02 PM] Crimson Jazz: I know right!?!
[Today 07:02 PM] Kingroy: >.>
[Today 07:02 PM] Tengo Cash: Beiber is the man


Screw You ↑ You ↖ You ↗ You ↙ You → You ↓ You ↩ You ↪ You ↬ You ↫ You ↪ You ↩ You ↲ You ↯ You ↱ You ↰ You ↷ You ↳ You ↶ You ↴ You ↵ & You ↺

#2 Dexel Hydagara

Dexel Hydagara

    Knight

  • Knight
  • 1,310 posts
  • Arcade Adept

Posted 23 July 2012 - 11:22 AM

All about the money, Roy. When sales start dropping because everyone having "great" ideas on what to do with their next masterpiece, they'll be crying for a new console to be able to implement the ideas. Which is fine and all, if they're not completely obsolete or unnoticeable features...or are just barely different. Look at the FFVII remake that would have nothing added on besides accomplishments.

They're pretty much just after your money - or rather, dem rich motherfluffer's money. Get the consoles for their prime, move on when they're done. Then again, that's my bias. I believe they're in it shetloads more for the money than anything. Which is just all kinds of assholery.

2j87ib.jpg


#3 Kingroy

Kingroy

    Knight

  • Knight
  • 1,916 posts

Posted 23 July 2012 - 11:26 AM

Sooooooo from what Val, Zal, and Ig are saying and along with my own thoughts on this I believe that really the whole dynamic needs fixing. Whether it's the lowering of prices for release, or some way to really support new, non-sequel games, or indie developers.

[Today 07:02 PM] Kingroy: <.<
[Today 07:02 PM] Crimson Jazz: I know right!?!
[Today 07:02 PM] Kingroy: >.>
[Today 07:02 PM] Tengo Cash: Beiber is the man


Screw You ↑ You ↖ You ↗ You ↙ You → You ↓ You ↩ You ↪ You ↬ You ↫ You ↪ You ↩ You ↲ You ↯ You ↱ You ↰ You ↷ You ↳ You ↶ You ↴ You ↵ & You ↺

#4 Valor

Valor

    Valorous

  • Monarch
  • 3,874 posts
  • This is My Design

User's Awards

     

Posted 23 July 2012 - 02:26 PM

Developers need to make money. Sequels make money because they are, essentially, guaranteed sales. A good percentage of your user base for your first game will buy into the sequel and you may have some new customers with it as well.

Look at Assassin's Creed. It was one of the biggest risks at the time and one of the most innovative games we had seen in a while. It was repetitive as hell and didn't live up to the hype.

Assassin's Creed 2, however, brought this series out of the niche fanbase and made it more liked by people who didn't enjoy the first one. Ever since, this is easy money and turned into a franchise.

Game Companies need franchises so that they can make money to fund other IPs.

This goes with every single game company you can think of. Squeenix makes money on Final Fantasy to make other IPs. Thats when companies can take risks on titles like The World Ends with You.

The only other way to make new IPs is if you're first party. If you're a first party company then you'll get heaps of cash thrown at you. Naughty Dog with The Last of Us. and then Beyond 2 Souls or whatever they're calling it. These are first person titles.

Look at Bungie, for example. They've done a ton of Halo games because that was their contract with Microsoft. They didn't HAVE A CHOICE but to make as many Halo games as they did. Now they left Microsoft and went to Activision where they're working on a new IP.

I think consumers like long lifecycles for systems because I don't like spending 300 bucks on a console every five years. I can see how for developers this gets old and stale after a while.

Once Final Fantasy XII hit the PS2, I knew the console was definitely done because there was nowhere else for a PS2 title to go. It was tapped out. We could have the PS3 and the Xbox tapped out as well. The Wii was tapped out at launch (this is a joke.)

So with nowhere to go up, developers are pretty happy just cashing in on a userbase and waiting for specs of the next gen to pop up. It's going to happen sooner or later and why would you develop for the 360 for a game that'll be out in two years when there's another console on the way?

Sequels have a bigger dedicated staff working on them -> CoD, Halo, AssCreed, etc. Some even have two full teams at work on their titles (CoD, AssCreed, Final Fantasy) to keep the turnaround at a minimum. Newer IPs generally would have less people working on it because they can't afford to drop (let's just say) five million dollars into a game that might not ever break even with that investment.

I don't know if it's a lack of creativity or motivation, but it could be a lack of funds and willingness to take risks. The new consoles are on the horizon, and I think many companies are waiting for them to be announced and get devkits before they start opening the field to new IPs. Happens every generation of consoles, I feel.

147.png


#5 Kingroy

Kingroy

    Knight

  • Knight
  • 1,916 posts

Posted 24 July 2012 - 12:34 PM

I would also like to add that the PS3 will stay in competition even when a new console is release. With games like Dust 514 being free and continuously going, and it also being cheaper(see the new specs for the new slimmer designs of the PS3) even reaching to what I would believe to be around $100. @_@ So sure developers might want to add their games to the newer console BUT it's definitely not like they'll be losing a shet load of money because those who do not have the money to go after $500-$600 consoles (which is honestly how much it will cost, right?) will either buy the cheaper ones or continue to use the ones they have.

:I As much as the hype for the new tech brings eyes to view creative games...it doesn't mean they will sell. Look at the Wii. It was an eye opener and everyone had one BUT sells weren't that well either for games.

[Today 07:02 PM] Kingroy: <.<
[Today 07:02 PM] Crimson Jazz: I know right!?!
[Today 07:02 PM] Kingroy: >.>
[Today 07:02 PM] Tengo Cash: Beiber is the man


Screw You ↑ You ↖ You ↗ You ↙ You → You ↓ You ↩ You ↪ You ↬ You ↫ You ↪ You ↩ You ↲ You ↯ You ↱ You ↰ You ↷ You ↳ You ↶ You ↴ You ↵ & You ↺

#6 Valor

Valor

    Valorous

  • Monarch
  • 3,874 posts
  • This is My Design

User's Awards

     

Posted 24 July 2012 - 01:31 PM

I read rumors about price points hitting less than or around 100 dollars for the next generation of gaming as companies will pull back on looking high tech and doing high tech things and go to a more traditional format like Sony having a disc tray like the PS1. Saves on some costs. Plus the idea that consoles may just stream processing power from elsewhere would bring the costs of gaming down.

All rumors, but food for thought.

147.png


#7 Kingroy

Kingroy

    Knight

  • Knight
  • 1,916 posts

Posted 24 July 2012 - 02:10 PM

@_@ That would be awesome in a way but also bad. Gamestores would quickly go out of business...that would eliminate some of their issues that they have with them but new ones would arise off the bat. Unless game stores start selling the Hell outta digital credit which honestly sounds silly to me.

[Today 07:02 PM] Kingroy: <.<
[Today 07:02 PM] Crimson Jazz: I know right!?!
[Today 07:02 PM] Kingroy: >.>
[Today 07:02 PM] Tengo Cash: Beiber is the man


Screw You ↑ You ↖ You ↗ You ↙ You → You ↓ You ↩ You ↪ You ↬ You ↫ You ↪ You ↩ You ↲ You ↯ You ↱ You ↰ You ↷ You ↳ You ↶ You ↴ You ↵ & You ↺