AAA studios close practically every week because their game sold "only" a million copies

exactly my point - they will be forced to rethink and stop generating asset-heavy and entertainment-light boredom-ware

This is getting off-topic, but there ought to be room for all kinds of experiences. Its not very reasonable to characterize an entire industry as making too much money too easily because a handful of games you don't personally care for tend to dominate earnings. Its even less reasonable to assume they're just being lazy and that consumers are suffering as a result -- You don't earn a billion dollars in this industry without 10-20 million satisfied customers. Its not a zero-sum game either; it's not as if that billion dollars would seed a new generation of innovative studios if Battlefield 3 never happened -- even if no Battlefield ever happened, even if no Battlefield, Halo, and Madden never happened -- that money would for the most part simply leave the industry entirely.

The games industry needs big games just like the amusement park industry needs big rides -- You can build a park and fill it with small, fresh, fun little rides, games, and booths of all kinds, but no one's going to be around to enjoy them if you park doesn't have the baddest roller-coaster in 500 miles. Just the same, the Battlefields of the world bring in the audience on which lower-profile titles hope to sustain themselves.

It's usually the mid budget risky million seller that loses money. The asset-heavy games you're complaining about are the profit centers.

The last thing the video game industry needs is MORE money!
The harder they have to fight for money, the better video games will become
And even failures are making profits ...

No, failures often cause the bankruptcy of a developer, who's profit margins are so low that every project is an all-in bet.

When fighting for money, developers are often forced into pitching unrealistic project plans/budgets to the sources of said money, and end up producing rushed games at a loss (spending more to create them than the budget they received), so that they only lose money slowly instead of completely folding. That's not good for anyone. It's unsustainable for business and it isn't a good environment for making great games.

This issue is about the share of the pie that's directed towards developers though, not the whole industry.

In the past 5 years, a ridiculous amount of developers have closed down from a shortage of money. Have some respect.
I have hundreds of friends and colleagues who lost their jobs in this time.

Right now they have it easy, games like BF3 make well over $1,000,000,000 over their lifetime

EA DICE is not at all typical of the whole industry... Next time, direct your sophomoric rant at EA instead of "the industry".


Back on topic...

[media]http:

Well I guess my mom and dad are the target market for the Xbox One more than me... too bad they own a DVR and iPads.

Seriously, as much as I've tried to give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt, I think they're damaging their core consumers more than they need to in trying to push out into new markets. So far it just seems like a big, stupid, poorly executed gamble- at least so far.

Well I guess my mom and dad are the target market for the Xbox One more than me... too bad they own a DVR and iPads.

Seriously, as much as I've tried to give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt, I think they're damaging their core consumers more than they need to in trying to push out into new markets. So far it just seems like a big, stupid, poorly executed gamble- at least so far.

The thing is, they aren't really pushing out into a new market. The Xbox 360 is already used more to watch movies and tv than it is to play games. Not much of a gamble when more and more people are ditching cable and streaming content from internet services like Hulu, Netflix and Amazon. We haven't had cable TV for about six months now and all of our TV viewing happens on the Xbox. From what I've seen, the biggest problem so far is the price point. I'll still buy one on launch day, but I'd like to see them match the PS4 launch price.

I was really impressed with the new XBox, I have been looking for a media center, it's much better than anything I can currently buy. And I'll unlock some exclusive titles. Bonus! I was really impressed with Tom Clancy's Division, which looks like it's going to be console only. Since we got a HD-TV, my computer has been permanently tethered to he TV for gaming and internet. So thinking about having an XBox One sitting in my living room is pretty easy.

I think it's a good move to shutdown the second hand market. Developers should receive payment from every sale, and that's something we can do in a digital world. I guess an alternative would be for all those people selling second hand games to give a percentage back to the developers. But I haven't heard anyone volunteering. At any point, Gamestop or JB or EB or who-ever could have made arrangements to channel some profits back to developers, but they never did. So Microsoft have to step in to force the issue. Buying / selling second-hand games is just like piracy, I see no difference. The piece of plastic that it's delivered on means nothing, you pay for the experience.

People make all sorts of comparisons with current products, ie I bought the car so i can sell the car. But that argument is only valid because of the physical nature of the product, and also that the product immediately begins devaluing. It makes no sense for Toyota to ask for money from the resale. But take another example, I go to the cinema or to lazertag or to a theme-park, after Ive had the experience can i resell the experience to the next person to recoup my cost. Of course not. The disc that you buy a game on is just a piece of plastic, it's a delivery mechanism, it's not the game. It makes sense that developers and publishers get a cut on every sale, shutting down second hand is one way that can be done.

As for always online, I want my devices to be always online anyway, so i have no problem with that.

Edit : I guess I am the target audience for XBox One, because it's the first console I will own.

So if I give my friend Doom CD, I (or my friend) should have to pay iD for doing so? That's nuts.

Someone buys a game and sells that game to Gamestop. That developer/publisher still has that money. Now someone else buys the game from Gamestop. Why should anyone pay the developer/publisher twice for the same disc? Plus, when that person buys the used game, they still have to pay for downloadable content, online access. It's not like I sell my game to Gamestop and suddenly 5 used copies appear out of thin air.

So if I give my friend Doom CD, I (or my friend) should have to pay iD for doing so? That's nuts.

Someone buys a game and sells that game to Gamestop. That developer/publisher still has that money. Now someone else buys the game from Gamestop. Why should anyone pay the developer/publisher twice for the same disc? Plus, when that person buys the used game, they still have to pay for downloadable content, online access. It's not like I sell my game to Gamestop and suddenly 5 used copies appear out of thin air.

Good point. I bought an album on iTunes. Then my GF said she wanted that album. So I emailed a copy to her. Then a couple of my friends mentioned they would also like to hear it. So I setup a local ftp repository and point everyone there to download it. I don't see what the big deal is, iTunes still has my money. So what if ten people ended up with it from one original sale, right?

Why should anyone pay the developer/publisher twice for the same disc?

Well, why should anyone pay gamestop (twice for the same disc) ?

It's not like I sell my game to Gamestop and suddenly 5 used copies appear out of thin air.

But that is exactly what happens when a game enters the second hand market, an extra used copy suddenly appears out of thin air, and if it's sold again, another used copy, each time being played by somebody who could have just bought the game through a channel that supports the development of that product.

Why should anyone pay the developer/publisher twice for the same disc?

Well, why should anyone pay gamestop (twice for the same disc) ?

It's not like I sell my game to Gamestop and suddenly 5 used copies appear out of thin air.

But that is exactly what happens when a game enters the second hand market, an extra used copy suddenly appears out of thin air, and if it's sold again, another used copy, each time being played by somebody who could have just bought the game through a channel that supports the development of that product.

Gamestop doesn't make copies out of thin air, they buy used games and resell them. It's perfectly normal and legal to be able to do that. A game that you buy off the shelves is a product, not a service. Going to the theater is a service. The game developper and publisher should not get anything for second-hand games. The only difference between the game industry and any other industry is that they have the means to try and prevent second-hand, which in my opinion should be illegal.

Please tell me again why I can sell my movies in VHS / DVD form, but games in DVD should be forbidden ?