Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Games Industry Downturn is a Myth 68

Posted by Zonk from the things-are-looking-up dept.
Gamers with Jobs has a piece on the supposed industry downturn, stating plainly that any problems are figments in the minds of analysts. From the article: "I concede, things are not bright sunshine and frolicking puppies for the gaming industry at the moment. There's a less-than-stellar Xbox 360 launch, a lot of very proficient people pocketing pale pink slips, a disappointing sales sheet from the most recent holiday season, and a lot of industry insiders wailing and gnashing their teeth. Now is the winter of our discombobulation. In short, gaming seems to be at its own throat lately, and from the cheap seats, watching happily, cackle the pundits, cheering the bloodletting ... It's baloney. What isn't being talked about is the fact that consumers are buying more games than they ever have. They are just spreading the money out a bit more, putting dollars into the used market, into handheld devices, into services like Live Arcade, and into direct downloads. The handheld market alone, which just cracked into the billion dollar range in 2004, soared 62% to 1.6 billion for 2005 on the backs of the ever sturdy GBA, the largely successful launch of the PSP, and the coming of age of the DS."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Games Industry Downturn is a Myth More

Games Industry Downturn is a Myth

Comments Filter:

  • Not that grim after all (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Apparently frolicking puppies are paying off [gamasutra.com] for at least one company.

  • It's not a downturn... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Schmendr1ck ( 658453 ) on Thursday February 16, 2006 @12:51PM (#14734599)
    It's just that game publishers can no longer push out "Successful Game XII - the Crappy Sequel" and expect gamers to buy it.

    Times are tight for many people, including gamers, and we are more discriminating with our money. When you consider that many outstanding game titles get little or no marketing (two of my favorite examples are Psychonauts and Beyond Good and Evil for the XBOX) while the tired sequels get the lion's share of advertising dollars, it's not surprising that gamers are spending less.

    My general impression in the GBA market is that they have a solid install base, a wider variety of titles, development costs are lower, and retail pricing is lower. These factors may explain why there has been a strong upswing in GBA game sales while console & PC gaming seems rather lackluster.

    • Other than the the fact that there have been 0 amazing PC releases since Half Life 2 came out. The industry is ripe for another revolution.
      • Yeah, after such growth overall in the industry, there has to be a slow-down. Of course, that is not acceptable in this knee-jerk, 'must always be growing' society.

        I must disagree though with the p.c. comment(s). To me, GT Legends is an amazing PC release.

        • Re:It's not a downturn... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Pxtl ( 151020 ) on Thursday February 16, 2006 @01:38PM (#14735073) Homepage
          Yep. Growth has it's limits. Eventually you hit all the people who just aren't gamers and haven't played a 3d game ever - I don't think anybody will be reaching them until the Revolution comes out.

          Plus, WoW is really hurting the PC gaming industry. I know a lot of gamers who've just stopped playing any game that isn't WoW.

          Finally, Half-Life was a great game. The first time. The second time someone made an "immersive FPS adventure - like playing a movie!" it was pretty cool. But now they've all but pushed out half the industry, and the gameplay in those titles is pretty tired. Conversely, the online multiplayer FPS and RTS games are getting increasingly ferrocious learning curves that block anybody but hardcore teens from playing.

          Plus, there is a real, massive demand for educational titles for young kids (not toddlers) that just isn't being exploited. I know tons of parents who're wondering where the next "The Incredible Machine", "Carmen Sandiego" or "Sim Earth" is.

          But as long as everybody's trying to make the next Half-Life AAA blockbuster, they're stuck.

          Console games are pretty much still mainly aimed at university/teenaged/preadolescent guys. The heavy focus on T/M titles (adults don't need blood, tits, and heavy metal to buy games) demonstrates this. Eventually, you hit the point where you've got every teenaged boy in your market - and then what? I think they hit that point and are still trying to grow, not realising that they've fully exploited the target market.

          Every game that breaks out of that market and gets a little momentum going becomes an unparalleled success. The trick is (a) getting out of the market that all your developers fit into, and (b) getting that momementum outside of that market when all your marketting people think like teenaged boys.
          • adults don't need blood, tits, and heavy metal to buy games

            There was no blood or tits, but the heavy metal was the main reason I got Guitar Hero.

            /Just sayin'

          • This isn't a flame, I agree with everything that you said, except:

            Plus, WoW is really hurting the PC gaming industry. I know a lot of gamers who've just stopped playing any game that isn't WoW.

            To the PC Gaming Industry: Cry me a fucking river. Wait, I got a better one. Cry more, noobs.

            I fail to see how one company with a track record of making awesome games making their most awesome game yet hurts the industry. Should their be government restrictions in place to prevent them from making a game that

      • Half-Life 2 was just -another- example of the shovelware sequel industry if you ask me.

        Now, that's not to say it isn't a decent game - but the entire point of the game, of making it, and of playing it, is that it is a sequel to Half-Life. Am I the only one that sees something wrong in that? We should play games because they are quality, engaging games, not because they are part of the latest fad :/

        ~ Wizardy Dragon
        • It doesn't matter if a game is a sequel or not--Half-Life 2 was a lot more fun, detailed, engaging, and innovative than plenty of non-sequels. In fact, I'd argue that it was the most innovative game of 2005.
          • If that was the most innovative, I'd pray you don't show me the least. HL2 was a glorified graphics engine with some nice physics attached. The story was lukewarm - even Doom3 delved deeper into the story then HL2, and Doom doesnt exactly have a reputation for deep stories. And the multiplayer was a complete rehash of the Steam thingy.

            ~ Wizardry Dragon
            • To your earlier comment: Did you ever play Half Life? Do you remember the end of the game? It was made to have a sequel.

              Also, the Source Engine is a bit more than glorified graphics and some physics. Look at all the mods that people are making using it. I don't think there is any point in arguing with you about the story, so I won't even try.

      • Re:It's not a downturn... (Score:4, Funny)

        by Clover_Kicker ( 20761 ) <clover_kicker@yahoo.com> on Thursday February 16, 2006 @01:36PM (#14735058)
        Civ 4 has kept me too busy to be amazed...
    • and they want their hand-wringing over economic depression back.

      Times are tight for many people, including gamers, and we are more discriminating with our money

      Unemployment is waaaay below 5% nation-wide, and interest and inflation rates are still low. Average income is up. Average disposable income is up.

      BTW: The only economic bad news you can point at right now (apart from dirt-poor people from New Orleans getting dirt-poorer after the hurricane wiped out their shanties), is that gas and oil prices are
    • It's just that game publishers can no longer push out "Successful Game XII - the Crappy Sequel" and expect gamers to buy it.

      Really? Let's check out the top 50 PS2 games of 2005...

      1. Madden NFL 06
      2. Gran Turismo 4
      3. NCAA Football 06
      4. Star Wars Battlefront II
      5. MVP Baseball 2005
      6. Star Wars Episode III
      7. NBA Live 06
      8. LEGO Star Wars
      9. SmackDown vs. RAW '06
      10. God of War
      11. Midnight Club 3: DUB Edition
      12. Star Wars Battlefront
      13. Need for Speed Most Wanted
      14. SO

    • Sequals are popular with the industry because it is often significantly cheaper to produce a sequal than it is to produce a new game (especially true of sports games)

  • Sunshine and Puppies (Score:3, Funny)

    by Gavin Scott ( 15916 ) * on Thursday February 16, 2006 @12:56PM (#14734647)
    I concede, things are not bright sunshine and frolicking puppies for the gaming industry at the moment.

    Nintendo seems to be doing quite well with the frolicking puppies, and it's always a sunny day in World of Warcraft (at least until the next patch that adds weather effects).

    G.
  • Over the last six months, I been playing (in no particular order): Neverwinter Nights, Half-Life 2, Doom 3, Quake 4, and Return to Castle Wolfenstein (Mac). I think F.E.A.R. and Starcraft Battlechest (Mac) is probably on my soon-to-buy list, with Star Wars: Empire At War a distinct possibly. As a gamer with a limited amount of money for games, DVD and books, I'm a bit more choosier than in previous years. However, since I been out of the gaming industry for almost two years now, I can now at least enjoy bei

  • Not a downturn? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AKAImBatman ( 238306 ) <<moc.liamg> <ta> <namtabmiaka>> on Thursday February 16, 2006 @01:02PM (#14734714) Homepage Journal
    What isn't being talked about is the fact that consumers are buying more games than they ever have. They are just spreading the money out a bit more, putting dollars into the used market, into handheld devices, into services like Live Arcade, and into direct downloads.

    So there's no downturn because consumers aren't really abandoning games, they're turning to older , more nastolgic games and don't buy the new stuff? Hmm... I think there's a flaw in the logic there.

    In my mind, if gamers aren't paying for new games to be developed, that means the industry is experiencing a downturn. The fact that gamers are buying older and used games only signifies that they don't want the new stuff that's being produced.

    • Re:Not a downturn? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by thaerin ( 937575 )
      The fact that gamers are buying older and used games only signifies that they don't want the new stuff that's being produced.

      I fall right smack into that catergory. I haven't bought a new PC game since WoW launched and looking at what's in the pipeline, don't see that changing anytime soon. I refuse to buy anything shipped under the EA flag because I've gotten burned far too many times on poorly launched titles that never got properly supported. I miss the days of Lemmings where I could spend hours on end
    • By those 4 markets (used, handheld, live, and direct), I think the article elaborates on a very important point - diversity. Afterall, I cannot play (or purchase) every single game product out there.

      I didn't even get around to playing Doom3 until almost a year after it's release, and purchased it for almost half it's original cost. In that year interim, I had purchased other game titles at full price (and played them). So, I believe that diversity actually shows the strength of the gaming industry at p

    • I would say you have your ideas confused. A market collapse would be more along the lines of people no longer buying any games and the market would be shrinking. However, more people played games this year than last.

      What it comes down to is a market shift. Of the current style of games they really haven't improved much of anything in the past 3 years. So, what is happening is gamers are not willing to pay a premium price for games that are exactly the same as the ones 3 years ago except with enhanced g

    • The fact that gamers are buying older and used games only signifies that they don't want the new stuff that's being produced.

      I don't think buying used games is indication that you don't want the new stuff. I think the only thing it means is:

      • You don't necessarily want the new stuff right away.
      • You realize that used games are practically indistinguishable from new ones (w.r.t. the condition of the DVD, packaging, etc)

      I can't remember the last time I paid the regular retail price for a game, and I've h

      • The problem is that the used game market has existed for many, many years now, yet we're supposed to believe that it's just having an impact now? Watching my own buying habits as well as the habits of others, I have noticed that they tend to always buy the old stuff. Why?
        • Price - It's cheaper to purchase old stuff, and you aren't as disappointed if it sucks.
        • Nostalgia - Players just had more fun with older games. The new games don't seem to offer anything they must have, so they purchase the old game instead.
      • I agree. I believe the last game I payed full price for was HL2 (and I bought the collectors edition) and, it is currently one of my favorite games. Now, I'm intending to buy The Elder Scroll's VI: Oblivion when it comes out, because it is not the same old same old, granted the graphics are exteremly polished, but it also has the brand new AI and also the proven ingenuity of Bethesda behind it. It is a game I am truly looking forward to playing.

  • My Prediction (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Perseid ( 660451 ) on Thursday February 16, 2006 @01:02PM (#14734724)
    I do see another video game market crash, but this isn't it. Either this next generation of consoles, or the one after, will make video games so expensive to make that most companies will drop off or consolidate. We've been seeing this happen already. This will leave only a few very large video game companies that will not need or want to take any risks. We'll see a slew of bad sequels and movie tie-ins worse than that which we see now. This will cause gamers to lose interest in video games, thus a market crash.

    This is only my prediction, of course, but I don't think I'm the only one that sees it. Nintendo, for example, seems desperate to innovate or die.

  • Why the holiday season sucked: (Score:5, Informative)

    by RyoShin ( 610051 ) <tukaro@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Thursday February 16, 2006 @01:07PM (#14734771) Homepage Journal
    I can tell you exactly why the holiday season 'sucked':

    1) XBox 360 is crap and was hard-to-stock

    Despite how much I dislike it, I worked on the retail side during the 360 launch, and the demand was there. I don't know if it was a large demand, in terms of other launches, but it certainly exceeded the units we received (which only happened twice while I worked there, and both times they were small shipments.) As most know, the story was similar just about everywhere.

    I think Microsoft is mainly to blame for this: while something may have gone wrong with their manufacturer, they seemed to know the demand the system would elicit, but neglected to consider that when comensing production. I think they should have known that the capacity they had wouldn't meet demands (and I think they even said as such,) and increased production in some fashion. Certainly, there would have been a far larger number of 360s available under Christmas trees had their been sufficient inventory.

    Also, problems that ran around the social circles soon afterwards probably turned off some of those who hadn't yet got one but were still interested, until that point. (Look, I can boil an egg on my power unit!)

    2) Lack of new hit games

    While I'm certain there were some gems, there were no "must have AAA games" that I can think of that were released around the time (and, again, I worked in electronics retail at the time, so I had an idea of what was "must have".) So there was no rush to get this game or that game.

    The only game I can think of that would have been THE title of the season is Twilight Princess, and we know they moved that back to [April|June|November] (depending on where you get your information.) (Curse you, Nintendo!)

    3) New Systems

    We've already touched that the XBox 360 lacked the quantity to fill demand, but the demand for two yet-produceds system also slowed sales. People who already knew about the PS3 and Revolution (and, now, DS Lite) but didn't have a PS2 or Gamecube (or DS), respectively, most likely decided to save their money for the "new system right around the corner". With waivering release dates, most people were thinking mid-year. A six month wait to get the latest and greatest as opposed to getting now what will by then be old beans? They could wait.

    Also, the release of Twilight Princess would have created a large surge of new Gamecube owners. I've talked to many who said they would get a GCN when Twilight Princess came out; now most are saying that they'll wait for the Revolution.

    So, yes, the game industry is indeed throttling itself. Sequals of the Day and Cookie Cutter FPSes aren't helping, either.
    • I worked on the retail side during the 360 launch, and the demand was there. I don't know if it was a large demand, in terms of other launches, but it certainly exceeded the units we received (which only happened twice while I worked there, and both times they were small shipments.) As most know, the story was similar just about everywhere.
      I think Microsoft is mainly to blame for this:

      They did it on purpose, for the free publicity of every news outlet running a story titled "Xbox 360 Sells out on first day"
      • True, but then they turn right around and talk about dismal sales numbers, skirting the fact that they caused the problem in the first place.

        Of course, I guess that could just be more free press, though that seems kind of like it would backfire.
      • I used to believe that too. But after 3 months and we still get "Xbox 360 is short supply" and "Xbox 360 won't meet demand until April" and other such stuff people start to realize that the problem is really the manufacturer's fault. And that looks bad for them. This isn't about generating buzz about being sold out. It's about not being able to make enough because they were too stupid to do so. Not that I necessarily agree with the limited supplies. Maybe in some places, but not where I am. I can wal

        • Re:Why the holiday season sucked: (Score:4, Insightful)

          by slashdot_commentator ( 444053 ) on Thursday February 16, 2006 @02:30PM (#14735689) Journal
          The strategy is a little more sophisticated than you appear to believe. Currently, the bottom line is Microsoft loses money on the hardware. Every time they sell Xbox 360, they take a loss. They recoup the loss when Xbox owners buy their game software.

          Microsoft cannot afford a casual game buyer. A parent that buys an Xbox and then purchases one software title means Microsoft bleeds red. (A guy who buys the Xbox and pirates the software is worse.) They are "gaming" their production numbers so that the guy who actually buys an Xbox is more a bit more rabid enough to be more likely to buy software titles.

          Why not jack up the price of each Xbox? Because they've cracked out their mini-max programs and figured that at a certain price, it will discourage parents from purchasing the xbox based on the initial cost investment. Lets say those parents make up 80% of the purchasing market. They're not going to raise the purchase price of the box by $50, and chase off 80% of their purchasers.

          Does it mean they will lose maximal potential market buy introducing early scarcity? Yes. But these guys do this for their living. They better know what they're doing. Too bad for the "poverty" stricken console gamer junkie.
          • MS wanted first mover advantage. Nintendo isn't releasing until later this year and many doubt Sony will be out the gates even by Christmas. So they could have had first mover advantage even this spring and been stockpiling so that they'd have enough.

            That's fine if they want to sell at a loss and depend on people buying software for revenue. So they exclude the casual market. I suspect though that the casual market has more disposable income as a whole than the relatively few hardcore. So if they wan

  • Games just aren't as fun as it used to be.
    • Games just aren't as fun as it used to be.

      I just realized why... I think it is time to grow up and have a real job, maybe get a girlfriend...

      (*thinks about the future*)

      Nah... It can wait PS3 [ps3land.com] and Nintendo Revolution [ign.com]...

    • Games just aren't as fun as it used to be.

      Do you remember back in the day, when we used to have to walk uphill, both ways in the snow, just to get to the arcade? And games back then only cost a quarter to play, we didn't have no stinkin' home consoles to play all we wanted! We took our money from working in the factory (we didn't have no schools back then, I tells ya) and decided if we wanted to play Pong or get moon pies! Kids these days, I tells ya, you have it too easy!
    • Yea, and remeber when TV, music and radio used to be good as well?

      Nastalgia does wonders for perception.
      Games of yester year were good, mediocre and bad. The same as we have today. I don't know if the ratios are changing. If the expansion of the industry is diluting the overall quality, leaving us with few outstanding, inovative and 'special' games to hold onto, but top notch games are out there if you want to look.
      • However, it IS true that today, games tend to be very similar, and there are much fewer games with new ideas. Also, there are less genres, for example there are no point-and-click adventures anymore, which is very sad since they were prime examples of gameplay over technology.

        • I disagree- there are PLENTY of great new ideas out there. They just usually don't have the marketing dollars of Madden 200x, Half Life2, Or The next Final Fantasy.

          Just off the top of my head- upcoming and recently released titles that are new and great ideas- Psychonauts, Guitar Hero, Shadow of the Colossus, Trauma Center: Under the Knife, Exit, Geometry Wars, Lumines, Okami (AWESOME Concept!)...and these are just in the last couple of months. And I didn't even mention Katamari, because that seems to be

          • Psychonauts is a very well made platformer. Guitar Hero is a sequal of sorts to Frequency and Amplitude. Shadow of the Colossus is a rather vapid platformer. Tramua Center is Operation:The Video Game, Exit..there was a very similar SNES game I remember. Gemoetry Wars is a Robotron clone. Lumines is a block dropper (I.E Tetris), Okami is Zelda-like.

            All of those things are based on existing games and genres. Sure, most are great (yeah..even SotC is great. I just think that design them makes games that are be

            • I agree that all great ideas are built on the backs of giants, so to speak- but you're oversimplifying more than just a little bit.

              Shadow of the colossus as "a vapid platformer?" That game is only a platformer in the VERY loosest sense of the word. Its more of an adventure game. You'd be hard pressed to find anything remotely like it on any system. It may not be your cup of tea but it WAS definitely an original concept done well.

              Guitar hero is not a sequel to frequency or amplitude, and plays nothing l

              • No, what I'm saying is that in the OP, the games mentioned are NOT what you consider to be "innovation" either. Like I mentioned. I just didn't enjoy SotC, or Ico for that matter..they're great games. Just not my taste. (As well is Final Fantasy Tactics, or the various stealth games. Not my cup of tea)

                Exit? How about Sink or Swim [mobygames.com] actually originally a DOS/Amiga game apparently, or S.O.S, also for the SNES. Both feature puzzle-platforming gameplay where the goal is to rescure a group of people. Exit without

                • Re:Today games suck (Score:2, Informative)

                  by KDR_11k ( 778916 )
                  You abstract the games too much. At that level of abstraction Bridge is just a Poker clone (or the other way around).

                  Genres are a way of summing up certain traits of a game in order to classify it and understand it better (because the mind can handle categorized data much better). Demanding a new genre to be created is pretty hard when we've got genres as broad as "3d Action".
  • if one third [slashdot.org] of all Americans are just using their computer for fun. Myth indeed
    • I'd bet dollars to donuts that an overwhelming majority of those Internet users are part of the so-called Casual Gaming Market [wired.com]. Which means that hardcore games just won't appeal to them. (Never have, never will.) Many of them may not even have a console system, either.

      Nintendo is betting a lot of money on the idea that their DS and Revolution systems will reach that market. Given how busy the current adult generation is (not much time for consoles and hardcore computer games), Nintendo may just hit paydirt.

  • The problem with today's gaming (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I'd speculate that the MMO scene is partially ruining game sales. Sure, some MMOs are truly amazing (World of Warcraft), but many gamers are paying $15/month for this. Then there are the gamers who have multiple accounts in one MMO, or multiple accounts across many MMOs. This adds up, and becomes a sizable portion of the gaming budget. More money to MMOs means less money to new games.

    Not only do MMOs suck up more money, but they also suck up more time. How long does it take to do a high-level raid in W
    • It's not so much the $15 a month stopping me from buying more games, but the fact that for that $15, I'm getting about as much decent gameplay for the month as I get if I buy a new game for $50. Most of the games I've bought have had a fun life of a month, two months on the outside for long RPGs. Since I usually buy new games as I finish the last one, that can run anywhere from $25 a month up to $100 a month (Doom 3 lasted about two weeks, and was followed by two lousy games at $20 to $25 each that lasted
  • "I concede, things are not bright sunshine and frolicking puppies for the gaming industry at the moment."

    Now, excuse me, I've bought two Nintendogs games this year alone for the DS.

    It is - in fact - bright sunshine (just ask Mario) and frolicking puppies (see massive Nintendog sales) in the gaming industry at the moment.

    Now, if you're trying to push tin - or FPS - right now, yeah, noone wants to buy your product, but that's because it's Yet-Another-FPS syndrome.

    Try being innovative and create something new.
  • This proclaimed downturn was just a period in which the games industry was churning out substandard games and people were getting more into the internet and other past times, especially stuff like MMORPGs. Once good games started coming out and the hype of new consoles returned, of course the old days of console gaming would return. I like how the industry sometimes blames everything but themselves for the downturn in sales.

  • I'll admit it: I'm a bottom-feeder. (Score:4, Informative)

    by xxxJonBoyxxx ( 565205 ) on Thursday February 16, 2006 @02:25PM (#14735624)
    I'll admit it: I'm a bottom-feeder.

    I typically only buy one game a year. I would buy more, but I have a wife, kids, part-time school, a nice job, dogs, a house, a family and I use most of my remaining "free time" tinkering with code and other creations. In other words, I more-or-less grew out of the "new game" market.

    I can usually pick up a two-year-old, highly-replayable hit for about $15 new. (I still haven't opened the box for WC3:TFT.) I'm sure that doesn't make any money for anyone, but it does kill off any remaining desire to purchase any new game.

    MMORGS look interesting but I did enough of that more than a decade ago when MUDS were popular. Furthermore, the monthly charges are a no-go. (I took a quick look at "Minions of Might" because it doesn't have monthly charges, but I got plenty of play time just doing the demo.)

    I guess I do most of my game-playing in between flights at airports. Even there, I'm drawn to MAME emulators because you don't exactly want to put on headphones in an airport (think flight changes) and old arcade games lend themselves well to the high levels of background noise in the terminals.

  • Inflation (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, 2006 @02:53PM (#14735926)
    There's this bit in Alice Through the Looking Glass where one of the characters talks about having to run as fast as you can just to stay in the same place.

    Imagine that a company said "we're doing better, we made more money this year than last!" and then pointed out that their "profit" column this year has more dollars in it than their profit column last year-- but, they don't mention that the dollar is worth slightly less this year than last year, and the profit column isn't as large as last year's if you count in last year's dollars. By not taking inflation into account, this hypothetical company made a loss look like a gain.

    Or imagine that a congressman stands up and says "our federal budget increases the size of medicare", and points out that the number of medicare patients they've allocated funding for is bigger than the number last year-- but, they don't mention that since people are being born all the time, the number of people demanding access to medicare is rising, and so you have to increase the number of medicare patients by a certain amount just to keep the same level of coverage. By not taking into account the inherent need to constantly expand the program to accomodate the growing population, this hypothetical congressman made a reduction in the size of medicare look like an increase.

    This editorial here stands up and says "the game industry is doing better", and points out that the industry sold more games than last year-- but, he doesn't mention that since people are being born all the time, the number of potential game buyers is increasing. It's quite possible for gaming to simultaneously be doing badly and reducing in popularity, while the absolute number of games sales is increasing, so long as the number of new customers is rising slower than the population of potential new customers. The appearance of new potential customers can mask a decrease in the percentage of customers who want to buy, and this is something that Nintendo, one of the main "zomg gaming sucks now" soothsayers of doom, has been in particular harping on-- pointing out the number of households that exist is vastly larger than it is in 1982 but the number of households with video game systems has stayed pretty much constant. By not taking this into account this article has made a downturn look like an upturn.

    Of course, it all depends on what we're measuring here. Why do we care if there's a "downturn"? Well, if we're gauging whether it makes sense for EA and Activision and whatnot to be laying off people, then aw hell no. The game sales went down last year but they're going up over longer periods of time, EA's dip in fortunes is just a result of mismanagement and misallocated resources. But if you're looking at things in terms of "do video games have a problem?" or "does something fundamental about video games need to change?", then absolutely yes, the gaming industry has a problem and a number of things about it need to reform. The game industry is running as fast as it can and it's barely staying in place.

    • Re:Inflation (Score:3, Insightful)

      by kniLnamiJ-neB ( 754894 )
      You just *had* to go and post this AC... You'd probably get modded through the roof for this, man... I know you'd have 1 from me.

      They're trying to accomplish with quantity what they lack in quality. If they'd devote time to quality games, they wouldn't have to worry about the quantity. As it stands, we get Tired Sequel XLVIII: The next-to-the-next-to-the-next-to-the-Last of the $VIDEOGAMEHEROES. Why? Because they're not allowing their people to get creative.

      Don't work harder, work smarter.
    • I agree with 99% of your post- if I was able to I'd mod you up. The only thing I take exception with is that the US, like most of the industrialized world has a NEGATIVE birthrate. It's recently at an all time low with 13.9 births per 1000 people, the lowest since such statistics have been kept, and has been in constant decline since 1991. Japan is even worse. So the generation of gamers being born NOW is actually SMALLER than the generation of gamers born 20 years ago. So as time goes on, the gaming indus
  • putting dollars into the used market

    err isn't this something that the games industry has been bitching about?


    also, can we please shoot the next person to make a puppies and sunshine joke/pun. guys, there is a reason you're posting on slashdot and not out on the comedy circuit. stop. please.
  • This is the single most stupid article I have ever read. So all of these companies massive losses, stock price plummets, cutting back, laying off, and being swallowed up like plankton means that shit is rosy and perfectly fine?!?

    Put down the crack pipe, put on the reality glasses, and wake the hell up. First they blamed it on everyone waiting so hotly for the "next gen" consoles, then the Xbox 360 has come and basically gone with quickly dropping sales numbers... and the whopping two or three guys standing
  • Didn't i hear something like this around January or february 2000.... what happened next? oh ya POP!

Slashdot Top Deals

"The great question... which I have not been able to answer... is, `What does woman want?'" -- Sigmund Freud

Close