Analyst who says Gamers are "overreacting" works for EA and Comcast

[GennGreymane]

https://imgur.com/gallery/VpdEe

[ali725]

Well the price part about games make sense if they feel they need dlc to provide extra money for them they should just put.the dlc.into base game and raise.it another 20. Problem is some wont buy a game for.80. Hell i know people who dont want to pay 60 or even 40.

[unholytestament]

Hmm... Really makes you think. </Bart Simpson>

[GennGreymane]

Well the price part about games make sense if they feel they need dlc to provide extra money for them they should just put.the dlc.into base game and raise.it another 20. Problem is some wont buy a game for.80. Hell i know people who dont want to pay 60 or even 40.

We would need realistic figures. Publishers go all out on advertising, Destiny's budget was bloated beyond comprehension because of it. We also got devs who focus on dumb details like as Jim Sterling put it, "I never asked for a horse that shits realistically in MGSV or for every strand of Laura Crofts hair to be animated in Tomb raider"

[Aeluron Lightsong]

We would need realistic figures. Publishers go all out on advertising, Destiny's budget was bloated beyond comprehension because of it. We also got devs who focus on dumb details like as Jim Sterling put it, "I never asked for a horse that shits realistically in MGSV or for every strand of Laura Crofts hair to be animated in Tomb raider"

The shit detail is pretty hillarious, gotta feel bad for those devs that worked on it >.>

I can understand Lara Croft's hair being very detailed, I guess there's some nuance in what should happen. I guess what I want is, make it at least like it's high quality that we expect now a days. Also I still wonder what goes into marketing a video game.

[Video Games]

I wouldn't mind a gamergate 2. First one died out too soon.

[GennGreymane]

The shit detail is pretty hillarious, gotta feel bad for those devs that worked on it >.>

I can understand Lara Croft's hair being very detailed, I guess there's some nuance in what should happen. I guess what I want is, make it at least like it's high quality that we expect now a days. Also I still wonder what goes into marketing a video game.

Look at Destiny. We get celebrities, sports game commercials, giant billboards, etc. Constant advertisement, constant money spent. I mean it works, but its expensive, and more cost effective measures like a larger focus on viral marketing could do wonders for a budget.

[Pengalor]

I wouldn't mind a gamergate 2. First one died out too soon.

Problem is there's no story here. "Wall Street crony is fine with corrupt practices for the sake of more money. In other news, water is wet."

GG was about ethics in journalism, something that used to be held to a standard. Wall Street has never had an ethical standard except in the movies.

[Tiwack]

Corporate conglomerate looking to pull a fast one on consumers with hired puppet, hoping no-one would notice or bother looking behind the curtain of their theatrics.

[Video Games]

Problem is there's no story here. "Wall Street crony is fine with corrupt practices for the sake of more money. In other news, water is wet."

GG was about ethics in journalism, something that used to be held to a standard. Wall Street has never had an ethical standard except in the movies.

Well he's being unethical while writing about games. Just putting 2 and 2 together here.

[Doomchicken]

It's amazing that in 2017 EA hasn't figured out yet is there is a way to have your cake without fucking your customers at every turn and pissing them off. It's getting to the point that I'm starting to actively avoid games that I know I would enjoy just to avoid EA and their idiocy.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Look at Destiny. We get celebrities, sports game commercials, giant billboards, etc. Constant advertisement, constant money spent. I mean it works, but its expensive, and more cost effective measures like a larger focus on viral marketing could do wonders for a budget.

See some of those things I don't think are necessary but sound like typical EA/Activision like stuff.

[Pengalor]

Well he's being unethical while writing about games. Just putting 2 and 2 together here.

True, but he's not actually a journalist so there's nothing to hold him to. His little article then got spread by the MSM but we already know they're in the pocket of big corporations like EA so no surprise there. Plus, they love their 'gamers are entitled brats' moments, even if they have to misrepresent the facts to make those stories happen.

[Video Games]

True, but he's not actually a journalist so there's nothing to hold him to. His little article then got spread by the MSM but we already know they're in the pocket of big corporations like EA so no surprise there. Plus, they love their 'gamers are entitled brats' moments, even if they have to misrepresent the facts to make those stories happen.

It's ok cause gamers are dead now so the normie non gamer audience are the ones over reacting.

[Violent]

See some of those things I don't think are necessary but sound like typical EA/Activision like stuff.

It's not.. I mean, look at HUGE games that are going to have a huge player base no matter what.
They didn't *have* to spend "5mill." in advertising to get say, 67% of the market base to buy their product. Most would have already bought said product, without even seeing a commercial, just know it's coming.

Then they spend whatever money on Ads, and then try to justify that by sayin, "Oh, well we got 100K more people to buy our product!" Not really fathoming that, if they hadn't spent that Ad money, they still would have got 80% of "buyers" anyhow.

A good example? Look at EA and Sims 4... Sims 4, compared to Sims 3 in terms of content, is like Sims 1.
They advertized the HELL out of #4. But it sucks. Less content, more chopped up content packaged as "game-packs" or DLC.
Which they charge MORE for than if it was a Sims 3 "pack" or "expack", AND comes with LESS content.

In terms of Sims 4, we're over-charged for LESS effort and content.

[dope_danny]

It's not.. I mean, look at HUGE games that are going to have a huge player base no matter what.
They didn't *have* to spend "5mill." in advertising to get say, 67% of the market base to buy their product. Most would have already bought said product, without even seeing a commercial, just know it's coming.

Then they spend whatever money on Ads, and then try to justify that by sayin, "Oh, well we got 100K more people to buy our product!" Not really fathoming that, if they hadn't spent that Ad money, they still would have got 80% of "buyers" anyhow.

A good example? Look at EA and Sims 4... Sims 4, compared to Sims 3 in terms of content, is like Sims 1.
They advertized the HELL out of #4. But it sucks. Less content, more chopped up content packaged as "game-packs" or DLC.
Which they charge MORE for than if it was a Sims 3 "pack" or "expack", AND comes with LESS content.

In terms of Sims 4, we're over-charged for LESS effort and content.

Its the result of a compound problem. We logically know that big games dont need big marketing. Question then is "well why are we employing all these none developer roles?" which begins a snowball effect on bloated companies like EA or Activision that rocks too many boats. So people keep their job secure by keeping the trend going and letting the inevitable crash be someone elses problem in future.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Its the result of a compound problem. We logically know that big games dont need big marketing. Question then is "well why are we employing all these none developer roles?" which begins a snowball effect on bloated companies like EA or Activision that rocks too many boats. So people keep their job secure by keeping the trend going and letting the inevitable crash be someone elses problem in future.

I still believe marketing has it's place when making a game but as Genn mentioned, the 5 million for marketing is a tad absurd.

[GennGreymane]

I still believe marketing has it's place when making a game but as Genn mentioned, the 5 million for marketing is a tad absurd.

Its more than 5 million

https://venturebeat.com/2014/09/13/d...n-and-the-nfl/

Its over 5 million for specific ad times.

[dope_danny]

I still believe marketing has it's place when making a game but as Genn mentioned, the 5 million for marketing is a tad absurd.

It does but its a case of "why do we need 5 employees doing X instead of 2 or 3?" and that can quickly lead to risks of 'industry brain drain' where roles lack a replacement so they keep them in house because its better than competition having them on the payroll.

[Edge-]

We've got multiple threads on the lockbox/Battlefront 2 issues right now, we don't need even more. Especially calling out individuals with incorrect information (being an analyst who covers companies at a firm doesn't mean that they work for those companies), we don't need to paint targets on people, thanks.