Quote:

Original post by Trapper Zoid QuantifyFun, you seriously need to chill out a little in your posts. You're coming across very heated.

Oh, but rage is the spice of life! Seriously, though - there's a rhyme and reason for my blunt edge. Look for a new topic that explains everything...

Quote:

Original post by Trapper Zoid I'm not sure what your definition of "loss leader" is here. To me, a loss leader is when items are sold at a loss in order to stimulate sales of some other products. Obviously they are part of a plan for an overall profit. Probably a more apt analogy is the "razor and blades" model, where something is given away or sold very cheaply in order to sell accessories.

Right. It's not my definition of a loss-leader that I'm arguing, it's his. *shrugs*

Quote:

Oh, but rage is the spice of life!

I think you'll find it is variety, my friend, but perhaps you are being ironic ;)

Back on topic: I believe that games designers need a wakeup call; pandering to the masses was never what games design was about and it is driving its long time fans away. This is what I am concerned about. We seem to have lost touch with this. When Cliffy B recently stated that the industry does not value its visionaries, it would appear to be further evidence of this in action. If the money men are pulling the creative strings then this whole thing will collapse. This is beginning to happen *as never before*.

Quote:

Original post by kingy Quote: Oh, but rage is the spice of life! I think you'll find it is variety, my friend, but perhaps you are being ironic ;) Back on topic: I believe that games designers need a wakeup call; pandering to the masses was never what games design was about and it is driving its long time fans away. This is what I am concerned about. We seem to have lost touch with this. When Cliffy B recently stated that the industry does not value its visionaries, it would appear to be further evidence of this in action. If the money men are pulling the creative strings then this whole thing will collapse. This is beginning to happen *as never before*.

When I read this response, I can't help but feel that you've missed the thrust of everybody that's responded to you.

Game designers aren't the problem. Game designers give people what they want. The kind of games you're talking about are games that aren't in high demand. I'm not sure how much more plain the issue could be.

If the industry doesn't appreciate visionaries, it's because consumers aren't buying the visionary games.

Quote:

Original post by QuantifyFun I never mentioned Battlefield specifically. But no, the game itself is not a loss-leader. It's not a loss-leader because they've already figured out how they're doing to make a profit, how big they imagine that profit margin will be, and the cost of developing that game is a part of that calculation. It's supported by the money they intend to earn in micro-transactions.

For someone who otherwise seems to be relatively well informed, you seem to be remarkably unclear about what a loss leader is.

Quote:

Quote: Original post by Sandman I'd like you to quote an example. There are too many. But my favorite is this one... Quote: Original post by Sandman ...if that means turning out a couple mid budget shooters that you can be reasonably assured will ship 2.5 million world wide, so be it. That's the kind of comment that just makes me want to smack you in the face with a giant fish. It tells me everything I need to know about the position of knowledge you're speaking from, which is very little - and there's nothing wrong with that except that you're trying to speak with authority and you're just beyond wrong. Again, what is a mid-budget shooter? What's a low budget? What's a high budget? Name specific examples. You can't answer any of these questions, can you?

Let's play a game of Spot The Difference. Look at the name above this post, and compare it with the name above the post you just quoted. How many differences can you find? [grin]

Quote:

Original post by Sandman Let's play a game of Spot The Difference. Look at the name above this post, and compare it with the name above the post you just quoted. How many differences can you find? [grin]

Oh wow... just... WOW. Did I really make that mistake? I did. Wow.

Okay, I get to wear the retard hat :-)

Quote:

Original post by QuantifyFun What you're describing is Batman, not a business or an industry and especially not the gaming industry. Eccentric billionaires that have time and money to waste on making toys to suit their lifestyle is generally a lesson in economic failure.

Who said anything about billionaires? I'm talking about having enough money to survive, not having so much cash that I can swim in it. My point is that I'm not in this for the money. I just happen to need money to live, so it makes sense to use my obsession to my advantage. Like I said, I doubt I'm the only one that lives this way.

Quote:

Hello Bruce Wayne, nice to meet you.

What is this? Are you extremely high, or just too young to know any better?

Quote:

The happiest game developers are people that have found a way to satisfy their creative urges while making money, but the baseline is still the economic reality - we're in business to create profit and growth. There's no real arguing it.

Well, then it's not "all about the money", is it? There are other concerns. And for some developers, money isn't the largest issue.

Quote:

Original post by Trapper Zoid QuantifyFun, you seriously need to chill out a little in your posts. You're coming across very heated.

I wouldn't say heated. I'd say pompous, malicious, graceless, invidious, odious, etc. Not toward me, but in general.

Sorry to interrupt, but shouldn't all these industry, making it into the industry, industry tendencies, market and business related threads belong to some other part of the forums instead of stacking here on Game Design?

When I come here, I would normally expect to find threads like the ones Wavinator or Kest usually make, which is specifically about design and mechanics and most of the time are actually interesting and inspirational to read.

Oh, and just one thing:

Quote:

Originally posted by kingy "That is the future of video games.. They will all be dumbed down arcades for idiots.. In 10 years your chances of seeing a real game will be near zero."

This is plainly wrong.

That's like looking at the MTV Top 20 and saying "All the music here is dumbed down for idiots, the chance of finding a real song I like these days is near zero".

If nothing in the top 10 AAA titles that come out yearly appeals to you (which is normal, I find most of them horrendous as well), other games actually do exist. And with the game development tools being ever more accessible and easier to pick up, you'll actually be more likely to find a quality game that you like in 10 years - and quite possibly for free.

If not for daily fixes of Football Manager, my regular gaming routine would almost exclusively include freeware and occasionally shareware titles (Dwarf Fortress, Battle for Wesnoth, Continuum, NSS, etc.)

Kest, I'm not going to argue this point with you any further. Either you get it or you don't. If you ever do manage to work in the games industry, you may one day come to understand the point I've made. Until then, I wish you the best.

Quote:

you'll actually be more likely to find a quality game that you like in 10 years

...only if you like the same thing as everyone else and your yardstick for quality doesn't involve innovation.

Theres only one way to settle this.