Who Killed Videogames? 401
jjp9999 writes "Video game developer and novelist Tim Rogers exposes the underbelly of free-to-play games that use real-world currency. They're not trying to entertain you — they're trying to get you hooked. Every minute you play is being analyzed by men in suits reeling you into a cycle of addiction so they can keep you coming for more, and hopefully opening your wallet to buy premium points here and there. To do this, they intentionally give you an hour's worth of gameplay dragged out over the course of a week to keep it on your mind, dropping coins here and there for you to pick up, and playing on your own sense of work and profit to keep you coming back."
same as with everything else (Score:2, Interesting)
capitalism
I haven't read the article, but hear me out here.. (Score:5, Interesting)
This summary quite literally illustrates exactly what is driving away gamers, and which nothing to do with the games but instead the various companies behind it and their various little pay-as-you-go niches (map packs, songs, excessive subscriptions, etc.). It's all about the various companies involved in the development and marketing of a game, who nearly always turn out to be greedy little pigs. Take, for instance, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 and their Double XP Promotion [pcgamer.com]. This really pisses off real gamers (the ones who play a lot and get better through time and practice), and especially pisses off those who had to work hard for their last prestige. One mere example, but, regardless, they really need to knock it off.
Well...yeah. (Score:4, Interesting)
They're not trying to entertain you — they're trying to get you hooked.
From my perspective as a consumer, what's the difference? It's all the same to me as long as I'm satisfied.
Re:I haven't read the article, but hear me out her (Score:4, Interesting)
You don't have to buy their games. Fortunately the games market - at least for PC's and smart phones - is fairly easy to get into. Yeah ok if you want to talk retail distribution then it's harder if you're not doing it online - getting your game into brick and mortar stores around the world is next to impossible unless you sign with a major publisher. But even the major publishers are moving to online distribution, so the independent has no excuse. The market is coming to expect to be able to download games and apps now. And many, many independent games have achieved surprising success.
Therefore there will always be some game genres that don't follow the mainstream trend - if everyone is monetizing, at some point they are not going to be getting new customers because everyone will be busy playing the non-monetized games. Apart from the occasional idiot who never learns, you can only take people for a ride so often. Eventually people are going to get a feel for these cash-sucking parasites, just like people get a feel for telemarketers or infomercials and instantly switch off, and this "industry" will extinguish itself. I think good games are never going to die because human creativity is never going to die.
Re:Silly. (Score:5, Interesting)
I was watching a old computer chronicles from 88? anyway there was a game designer talking about arcade games
"Its almost like inventing a drug, and finding that balance between letting people play forever and not frustrating them so they keep dropping the quarters in, is the key, just give them a big enough dose that they cant stop"
This has nothing to do with piracy. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not like these "social" games would go away if someone invented effective, unobtrusive copy protection tomorrow.
As a former Facebook game addict, I can tell you that the "social" games speak to the completion/builder/collector in many people. What's really the difference between building a model replica ship and building a model farm? Or collecting something as meaningless as beanie babies vs. collecting something as meaningless as digital tokens? Or needing to finish, well, any task, and needing to master all your character's jobs?
The social games offer a very powerful thing: Constant progress. No matter what you do, you will progress, but you will never win. There are lots and lots of people who want constant progress. There's also people who feel compelled to complete things (I was one of them).
The other problem with blaming this on piracy is that you can absolutely pirate these games! Most of where the publisher gets their money is getting you to pay to remove obstacles to your progress, like timers or "X friends must "help" you" stuff where X is more people than you want to annoy. So you can "pirate" by simply making fake accounts or finding a group of people who are die-hard players like you are but who you don't actually know to add as fake friends, effectively "robbing" the publisher of their revenue. So just like traditional games, you can, with some effort, get the stuff for free, but many people will still pay for it for the convenience. Actually, were piracy the issue, MMORPGs are the solution, as it's pretty much impossible to pirate a monthly subscription.
The problem with the social games though, like any drug dealer, is these game publishers have gotten too greedy. They have cut the product too many times so it is no longer any good. I USED to mostly have fun playing, but then the bean counters got too much control over the game development and it became impossible to progress without either annoying the piss out of my friends (or finding a pile of fake friends) or paying cash. And if you're trying to play for "free", you wouldn't be able to get most things unless you're devoting lots of time to the effort (complete task now, 8-hour timer starts. Are you going to be near a computer in 8 hours? Well, if not, you can accelerate the timer for only XX tokens!
Anyway, they've made it not fun. People don't pay for not fun. I suspect Zynga will ultimately go the way of Groupon.
Re:same as with everything else (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes there is.
Capitalism is a economic process designed to keep civilization working smoothly. It rewards people more for making goods and services that are rare (jobs that people don't want to do) but are in demand (people want it or society needs it). And to get better productivity people who choose these jobs do these jobs. Maximizing profit is a good thing, if you price too low you create overselling your product and create a shortage situation, where people who need the product cannot get it because they cannot make enough widgets or enough resorces to keep up with the services and you don't have the capital to expand. If you price too high you loose more customers and you loose money.
Greed is a personal vice where you want to take everything for yourself and not give back. Greed are the thiefs and con-men who take things without giving you the agreed services.
The problem is many of us have our priorities messed up. Where video games is our life and food clothing and shelter is just those annoying extra expenses that we need to pay for, work is gap in our living just so we get more games and entertainment. So game companies are profiting because people want the crap they produce. If it is greed the greed of the consumer is much more of a factor then the greed of the producer.
It is not that greed isn't a component in capitalism however everyone's greed is canceled out.
Re:same as with everything else (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes. But capitalism has a better historical track record.
Why do you think there was so much tension between capitalism and communism. Their end goals are the same just a different process.
Or was that a lame argument to make capitalism sound like a neferious system.
Re:same as with everything else (Score:5, Interesting)
You're both wrong.
Capitalism is the idea that whoever builds the means of production gets to have its output. If you own capital, you get to benefit from it. This means that people have an incentive to invest in capital, and build things which will make money for them. This results in a society with more capital to do useful things for it (factories, homes, restaurant espresso machines, satellites, server farms). It also means that people take better care of the capital.
Capitalism harnesses the inevitable human vice of Greed, and (when combined with free-market competition in an efficient market) can make this greed more productive to society at large, but reckless wonton greed is not a value it intrinsically promotes. It's not really a value system; it's merely an ownership system. (Notice also that only markets with low transaction costs and low barriers to entry are really efficient. This is important. Notice what a mess we see when neither is the case: health care, cell phone providers...)
Usually, competition with other greedy capitalists is enough to keep a capitalist in line, and not exploiting and abusing his fellow man too much. When this is no longer the case, it's entirely reasonable to pass moral judgement (or attempt to restrain) these people who are taking their reckless, wonton greed and exploiting their fellow man. Capitalism is not an excuse... but it's not the illness, either.