Are Gamers Killing Video Games?

YOU GUYS LACK SELF CONTROL

that's why the game industry is DYING

:D
 
Imagine a world where video games were no longer made because nobody played them.
 
It feels like it.

I have not seen a game come out in the last decade with out the most vile verbal venom being injected in to any discussion related to it.

It is a good reason to avoid any form of media related to a release for at least a month afterwards, as it kills excitement and ruins the special feeling you get when you pick up something new.
 
Oh christ

Game Theory, the worst gaming video show on youtube, because it actually takes itself seriously when it deals all in FUD
 
Gamers want innovation, and the industry is ignoring it. Minecraft is an innovative game and yet nobody wants to evolve it. Lots of clones, but they all look like it. And yet Minecraft is one of the most sold games ever.

A lot of the examples given in the video are bad too. Mostly Nintendo, which went through a lot of cash grabs. When Nintendo went innovative, they also went kiddie. Went Nintendo stepped back, many people gave it a shot. Nintendo is a company that doesn't get what gamers want, cause they're always going for what they think will get them the most money.

Windwaker did bad cause nobody wants to play a game entirely as baby Link. Galaxy games did bad cause like Mario Sunshine they all look like kiddie games. Dead Space 3 did great cause everyone thought it would be like Dead Space 1, and you don't find out until you've progressed through the game. A lot of people are going to buy games thinking that it's going to be an evolved version of the previous game. Not doing a 360 and walk away.

Point is most of those games he listed are either intentionally tricking players, or trying a younger audience with older style games. Games intentionally tricking players will likely sell well, cause you won't find out until you've played through the game. Games like Super Mario for toddlers are pretty obvious and people won't buy it.

But the worst of all the games are farming games. Lately a lot of games have pointless farming that they introduce that do nothing but waste your time. This is what killed Diablo 3 and continues to murder it. The game sold well, cause again you don't find until you've played through the game, but check to see how the sales of Reaper of Souls are doing. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice then shame on me.

Minecraft-2_2799082b.jpg
 
I think there's waay too much money to make off gamers for it to be a big deal that they're always outraged over some missing feature they think should have been included or some random bug that shouldn't have made it into the retail product. I think developers and publishers will just shrug and publish another game, making money off the same people that continue to flip out online about stuff. Honestly, tons and tons of games have been crappy and people often totally forget how awful something was, remembering with weird fondness even though it sucked and then will also complain about something new that sucks, saying how much better it was playing the one they were upset with 5 years ago.
 
Corporatization and "IP" is killing gaming. Basically, greed, which has led to an unwillingness to take risks or innovate. Good games require good gameplay, this is so basic, yet many more recent games forget this and focus almost solely on graphics, time sinks, and DLC.

Is there a fix? Probably not. Not right away, anyway. Maybe in the future, but I'm not holding my breath.
 
Shantarr.Dalrae said:
It feels like it.

I have not seen a game come out in the last decade with out the most vile verbal venom being injected in to any discussion related to it.

It is a good reason to avoid any form of media related to a release for at least a month afterwards, as it kills excitement and ruins the special feeling you get when you pick up something new.
Click to expand...

This times a million. My favorite example is Crysis. Everybody raised hell cause the game was too demanding. Crysis 2 comes out with weaker graphics and everybody is raising hell cause the game isn't demanding enough! And remember that female developer for Assassin's Creed or something that was getting death threats because of the game?

As much as I hate to admit it considering I've been a gamer since the early 80's but gamers in general and PC gamers especially are the whiniest group of cry babies on earth.
 
killing the gaming industry perhaps, and good riddance

I am enjoying indy games more anyway
 
Games today are total shit and they only exist because the software industry has cultivated a "no returns" reality. Imagine any other $60 product you buy had the quality of a video game, it'd be returned at once.

The only reason publishers and "independent devs" can get away with robbing consumers blind is because the consumer has no recourse at all.
 
Meh, couldn't watch it all, "we don't know what we want" "we want innovation" "Nintendo making two really bold (and silly) choices for a console that failed is the gamers"

Doesn't understand we want innovation of shit that's tired, stuff that's still good it's ok for a sequel... as long as you fucking do it right.
 
MacLeod said:
This times a million. My favorite example is Crysis. Everybody raised hell cause the game was too demanding. Crysis 2 comes out with weaker graphics and everybody is raising hell cause the game isn't demanding enough!
Click to expand...

Huh? Consolitis is the disease that infected Crysis after the first one, not the developer heeding complaints about it being a demanding game.
 
The true response is yes and no. Annoying gamers get attention that they don't deserve and gaming at large is suffering from stagnation.

Laying the blame solely on gamers though? Poor theory.
 
It's because the core appeal of video games, interactivity, is now old news and no longer a novelty. In the past, the mere ability to control shit on a screen was compelling. Now you can experience that shit anytime, anywhere.
 
Ashbringer said:
Gamers want innovation, and the industry is ignoring it. Minecraft is an innovative game and yet nobody wants to evolve it. Lots of clones, but they all look like it. And yet Minecraft is one of the most sold games ever.

A lot of the examples given in the video are bad too. Mostly Nintendo, which went through a lot of cash grabs. When Nintendo went innovative, they also went kiddie. Went Nintendo stepped back, many people gave it a shot. Nintendo is a company that doesn't get what gamers want, cause they're always going for what they think will get them the most money.

Windwaker did bad cause nobody wants to play a game entirely as baby Link. Galaxy games did bad cause like Mario Sunshine they all look like kiddie games. Dead Space 3 did great cause everyone thought it would be like Dead Space 1, and you don't find out until you've progressed through the game. A lot of people are going to buy games thinking that it's going to be an evolved version of the previous game. Not doing a 360 and walk away.

Point is most of those games he listed are either intentionally tricking players, or trying a younger audience with older style games. Games intentionally tricking players will likely sell well, cause you won't find out until you've played through the game. Games like Super Mario for toddlers are pretty obvious and people won't buy it.

But the worst of all the games are farming games. Lately a lot of games have pointless farming that they introduce that do nothing but waste your time. This is what killed Diablo 3 and continues to murder it. The game sold well, cause again you don't find until you've played through the game, but check to see how the sales of Reaper of Souls are doing. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice then shame on me.
Click to expand...


Wow, I never thought about it like this. Great analysis; you may have swayed me.
 
Ashbringer said:
Gamers want innovation, and the industry is ignoring it. Minecraft is an innovative game and yet nobody wants to evolve it. Lots of clones, but they all look like it. And yet Minecraft is one of the most sold games ever.

A lot of the examples given in the video are bad too. Mostly Nintendo, which went through a lot of cash grabs. When Nintendo went innovative, they also went kiddie. Went Nintendo stepped back, many people gave it a shot. Nintendo is a company that doesn't get what gamers want, cause they're always going for what they think will get them the most money.

Windwaker did bad cause nobody wants to play a game entirely as baby Link. Galaxy games did bad cause like Mario Sunshine they all look like kiddie games. Dead Space 3 did great cause everyone thought it would be like Dead Space 1, and you don't find out until you've progressed through the game. A lot of people are going to buy games thinking that it's going to be an evolved version of the previous game. Not doing a 360 and walk away.

Point is most of those games he listed are either intentionally tricking players, or trying a younger audience with older style games. Games intentionally tricking players will likely sell well, cause you won't find out until you've played through the game. Games like Super Mario for toddlers are pretty obvious and people won't buy it.

But the worst of all the games are farming games. Lately a lot of games have pointless farming that they introduce that do nothing but waste your time. This is what killed Diablo 3 and continues to murder it. The game sold well, cause again you don't find until you've played through the game, but check to see how the sales of Reaper of Souls are doing. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice then shame on me.

Minecraft-2_2799082b.jpg
Click to expand...

This post reads like butthurt chronicles.
 
To a point i have to agree. Gamers are their own worst enemies at times. I think many gamers have unrealistic expectations at times. I think often expect a new title to reinvent the wheel do it bigger and better then before.

I don't know how many people I see say a new Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed its just the same as before nothing different they're not innovative.

Biggest thing thats killing the gaming industry is retarded fanboys that think they assimilate people to their cause.
 
if they keep buying the shit....companies will continue to put out the shit.
 
He's an idiot, the Virtual Boy is no metric. They sold basically no units, Wii U selling more than Virtual Boy is virtually assured. I also don't see people looking for "innovation" we want solid gameplay, story and colours in our games. Not stupid wavy controllers and 3D glasses.
 
That reminds me, the new Tomb Raider actually is a very sold game.

Mostly because the gameplay is great. Maybe I'm crazy but I haven't played most of those yearly sequels or even any of them. Final Fantasy takes way more than a year in between right?
 
You know, it would be nice to visit visit this website once without seeing a "gamers are assholes" thread under "news. How about 30 days with no more of these posts?
 
A little of this, a little of that. To be sure, publishers latched onto the CoD train and have kept their steely grip upon it in attempts to overtake its success. And, yeah, games like The Sims print money like nothing else. And, yeah, 'freemium' (oh, how I loathe that term) has infected far and beyond mobile games. Clearly, that people buy such things, and pay millions every year into them, shows the publishers made a good decision to get push developers into producing dreck. So, in a manner, yes. Many, many millions of people don't want an innovative game. They want something familiar, simple, that requires little thought, and is relatively easy to get into and will pay out every time to do so.

But, that hardly means innovation doesn't exist and doesn't do well. That games like Minecraft, Terraria (and its space clone Starbound) do so well is testament to that. That games even exist such as Goat Simulator and Bear Simulator shows gamers are fond of pushing for odd games and paying for them. But, many of those will never reach the numbers of the next CoD, BF, Madden or Mario Party if simply because they are completely different targets with completely different market sizes. People are more willing to shell out for a multiplayer experience that can be played together than for a singleplayer epic. And a large part of that is that families can play together with many of those, and in the case of CoD and BF they are the prime target audience of young males who want to do online gaming much in the same way that The Sims does exceedingly well with women.

It's a terribly complex issue and the games industry certainly does have faults. As do the people buying games, as does anyone. But, to say innovation is being hampered or stifled today is hilariously wrong. One need only look at the small name games by the hundreds on Steam to see innovation and creativity. And that's just one source. Even big name publishers will pump out something incredible and new such as Portal, or Mirror's Edge.
 
XvMMvX said:
This post reads like butthurt chronicles.
Click to expand...
I really need to proof read before I post here, but my points are still correct. How many people bought a game thinking that it was awesome like the previous game, only to find out they took out the best parts and shit all over it?

It amazes me that Diablo 3 sold so well, and yet everyone agrees it sucked. But why? It's like something nobody can point out in that game. I bought the game, and just as guilty as everyone else. I would think that with so much experience that I wouldn't get bought into the hype, but here I am with $60 missing.

Playing Dark Souls I realized what drove me in Diablo 2 and what was missing in Diablo 3, and that's Multipalyer. Sure there's multiplayer now but it wasn't when the game was released. Having some jack off come into your game and kill you off was jerk off thing to do, but now I suddenly want the best gear to kill these people off. Same thing happened in Dark Souls. I also liked the talent system that they threw away, which made me feel like I had control over my character. I also hate farming, and there's no reason in having it in any game.

Point is that the success of a game can't be measure based entirely on sales. Sure they made a butt load of sales from the previous game, but people won't make the mistake and buy it again. So when Nintendo makes more stupid kiddie games after Mario Sunshine, then people will go back to side scrolling Mario of course, even though Mario 64 was not side scrolling and very sucessful.
 
Ashbringer said:
But the worst of all the games are farming games. Lately a lot of games have pointless farming that they introduce that do nothing but waste your time. This is what killed Diablo 3 and continues to murder it. The game sold well, cause again you don't find until you've played through the game, but check to see how the sales of Reaper of Souls are doing. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice then shame on me.
Click to expand...
Totally agree with everything said, and especially this final paragraph. I often see people saying oh, I've spend hundreds of hours playing it so can't be that bad. One thing they do not tell you however is how many hours of those spent are actually fun, while the rest being painful grinding.

EXP grinding isn't what I enjoy in FPS, but so many multiplayer FPS out there involve exp and unlock grinding. When I was playing BF3, Metro 24/7 servers were always populated because everyone were grinding their exp and other stats.
 
This seems to be centered on the consoles primarily and we all know that the only "Real" gamers are on the PC :p
 
Ashbringer said:
Point is that the success of a game can't be measure based entirely on sales. Sure they made a butt load of sales from the previous game, but people won't make the mistake and buy it again. So when Nintendo makes more stupid kiddie games after Mario Sunshine, then people will go back to side scrolling Mario of course, even though Mario 64 was not side scrolling and very sucessful.
Click to expand...

Mario 64 was not nearly as successful as basically all of the side-scrolling 2D Mario games. That being said, it's easily my favourite out of the series. There's two problems in the video. The first is that just because you can find forum posts saying contradictory things doesn't mean that it's the same *individual people* saying those contradictory things. I can find forum posts from Americans that are both for and against strict gun control laws, but that doesn't indicate hypocrisy on the issue because different people are saying those things. The second problem is that it's actually completely reasonable for me to say both "I want something new." and "I enjoy what this game series has become, so don't change it too much". Maybe I just want an entirely new game or game series? That doesn't mean I want the developer to abandon the old one.

There are other problems as well. For example, Ocarina of Time is listed as a game that sold well(and it did). The problem with using that title in this particular video is that OoT was a pretty big change from previous Zelda games. The move to 3D changed the way the game felt in a really big way, it put the focus much more on combat than exploration, on controlling your character vs figuring out the world and how it worked. That didn't stop it from selling really, really well. Maybe gamers *do* want innovation, they just aren't going to buy up anything that happens to be innovative because they also want games that are fun? If you innovate and the result sucks, don't expect people to give you money just because you innovated.

The kicker is that if the video is going to base the "health" of the video-game industry on sales, then saying that anything is killing it makes no sense because revenue in the industry is higher now than it has been in the past.
 
"Experts" analyzing the "death" of gaming = Fatalist whiners with too much time on their hands

My message to the "experts" would be; Get a hobby you losers, life isn't about video games. Video games are a distraction, a means of entertainment.
 
I have stated, on this forum, that gamers are there own worst enemy. The extreme negativity coupled with a disconcerting sense of entitlement, where the most vocal want a game designed specifically to meet their needs and if it doesn't meet there needs (or isn't the specific genre they like) it is garbage.

Gaming is a hobby, if you cant find a way to enjoy it then you need to find a new hobby.
 
Draax said:
I have stated, on this forum, that gamers are there own worst enemy. The extreme negativity coupled with a disconcerting sense of entitlement, where the most vocal want a game designed specifically to meet their needs and if it doesn't meet there needs (or isn't the specific genre they like) it is garbage.

Gaming is a hobby, if you cant find a way to enjoy it then you need to find a new hobby.
Click to expand...

It's the internet. Without any face to face contact, developers who change games are worse than Hitler, and everyone who disagrees with you deserves the verbal equivalent of pounding someone's skull into the sidewalk with a sledgehammer.

You see the same thing on news comments, Youtube, etc. It isn't something exclusive to gamers, it's some magical negative property over the internet that allows for all the negative human behavior without any of the societal pressure (and potential shaming and/or ass whupping) that in-person interaction requires.
 
Spewn said:
There are other problems as well. For example, Ocarina of Time is listed as a game that sold well(and it did). The problem with using that title in this particular video is that OoT was a pretty big change from previous Zelda games. The move to 3D changed the way the game felt in a really big way, it put the focus much more on combat than exploration, on controlling your character vs figuring out the world and how it worked. That didn't stop it from selling really, really well. Maybe gamers *do* want innovation, they just aren't going to buy up anything that happens to be innovative because they also want games that are fun? If you innovate and the result sucks, don't expect people to give you money just because you innovated.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Change for the sake of change isn't always good. For example in Catlevania 4 a lot of things were changed for the sake of change without really giving a good reason for it. It wasn't a bad game, but it couldn't been so much more if more thought was put into it.
The kicker is that if the video is going to base the "health" of the video-game industry on sales, then saying that anything is killing it makes no sense because revenue in the industry is higher now than it has been in the past.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised the video didn't attack what everyone else attacks.

#1 DLC
#2 Micro-transactions
#3 No Demo's
#4 repetitive gameplay
#5 farming content
#6 Sequels and Prequels
#7 Monthly subscriptions
#8 Online requirement

The lack of innovation is really a minor issue, but it's like shit icing on the shit cake.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top