Are games really getting worse and worse?

[Eazy]

Hey everyone!
I just read this comics

And wanted to know what you guys are thinking about it?

I think it's really a shame that some game companies are releasing games which are not even finished(Diablo III I see you!).
There are plenty of games where you need to buy overpriced stuff etc. (I've heard that there are plenty of FPS where you need to pay real money for some maps etc. just to get full access to everything in the game)

I know it's "normal" because people are paying for them and that's not my business, but I'm playing games for a long, long time and whenever I came back from shop I could just get access to everything in the game and I could really finish it without any bugs, problems and without any extra payments.

I understand that there are games which are really developed by a big groups of people and their game can have malfunctions. But see Counter Strike 1.6 - graphic SUCKS and the game was really simply to learn, but the game-play was awesome, I could even say the best I've ever seen in any game.

[carnifex2005]

All that comic proves is that modern video games are horribly underpriced. They should start at $99 bucks at least.

[Santoryu]

Of course. Just look at WoW. Having to pay for items on the online store that really should be obtainable in-game.

[durrtygoodz]

Of course. Just look at WoW. Having to pay for items on the online store that really should be obtainable in-game.

Selling cosmetic mounts isn't really what this thread is about.

It sucks companies are using methods like dlc and p2w but just like the cartoon says, people get sucked in by it. So gaming companies are just gunna carry on.

[Tech614]

1) Video Games have not rose with inflation in almost a decade, and have only rose $10-20 since the late 90s.

2) Used game market exploded in the early 2000s with gamestop stores spreading like wild fire. Used games offer 0 profit to the publisher when they are sold.

Factor these 2 things together and I wonder why DLC has become what it is... Oh that's right to make money. In fact without DLC a large chunk of the AAA game industry wouldn't even be financially viable. We are talking about an industry that needs anywhere from 2-6 mil sales of the base games to even break even.

But to answer the question, no games haven't got worse and only nostalgia glasses wearing people think so. The funny part is when people are thinking back to their "glory days" being the late 90s, when I was around in those late 90s/early 00s reading people talking through their nostalgia glasses of the 8 and 16 bit eras.

[Ratyrel]

I've never understood why people consider DLC to be "chopped off". In my experience, most DLC is extra content that you won't miss. Older games simply had expansion packs, nobody complained about those costing money. A lot of this has to do with digital distribution, I suppose. The approach is different if you go to the store to buy another disc and box and manual for the extra content (think Age of Empires II addon or Diablo II addon).

Free to play is not a charity, it's a business model. Why people complain that game developers should earn money with their products I will never understand either.

Early Access was born because people want to get games early, many like being involved in the testing process, enjoy being the first to discover things, etc.

The comic makes game developers look like manipulating overlords that brainwash people into giving up their hard-earned money. Your money, your responsibility. You have to actively enter your credit card data, as the last panel shows. To use a far-fetched analogy: Just because ISIS welcomes fanatics with open arms doesn't mean you are being forced into picking up a rifle and going to Syria, does it.

[stellvia]

They need 2-6M copies sold to break even, because they focus on CG bullshit and lens flares instead of engaging gameplay and stories.

[Deleted]

I like subscription because that makes the game developers commit to their product. I do not like free-to-play games because that just gives us what we want instead of showing us what we really want through a process. And on top of that it is way more expensive. But we cannot control capitalism. GG.

[Tech614]

They need 2-6M copies sold to break even, because they focus on CG bullshit and lens flares instead of engaging gameplay and stories.

Who in this day and age is wasting a load of money on CG? FF13 and in the future FF15 are about the only modern games with loads of CG FMVs.

Most cutscenes are done in game or in engine these days.

[zealo]

Diablo 3 was a finished game on release day, there's a difference between being not done and having design flaws.

I don't mind dlc as long as its not on day one, it sucks that they seem to have replaced expansions but people are obviously buying them. Games are not getting worse accross the board but some IP's are not much more than cash cows at this point.

[stellvia]

Same difference. It's development time spent on in-game cinematics and turning everything into an interactive movie, rather than engaging gameplay. That's why the average length is so short these days.

[Zoaric]

I've never understood why people consider DLC to be "chopped off". In my experience, most DLC is extra content that you won't miss. Older games simply had expansion packs, nobody complained about those costing money. A lot of this has to do with digital distribution, I suppose. The approach is different if you go to the store to buy another disc and box and manual for the extra content (think Age of Empires II addon or Diablo II addon).

A big issue with it is that sometimes it is simply chopped off of the end, or it was
finished along with the rest of the game, but held back to make increased profits.

Personally, if the DLC is just an extra mode, weapons, cosmetics, etc, then I'm
fine with it and ignore it. Bu if it's furthering the story, then it kind of bugs me...
especially if it ends up being more enjoyable than the game itself.

[Tech614]

Same difference. It's development time spent on in-game cinematics and turning everything into an interactive movie, rather than engaging gameplay. That's why the average length is so short these days.

You're wrong though.

Bioshock Infnite has no cinematics, everything is done in gameplay. It also costed a ton to make.

Games don't cost a lot to make because they are "cinematic". In fact the most cinematic game out there yet Beyond Two Souls only costed a mere $34 mil to make which is chump change in the AAA market.

Games cost a lot to make based on the man power/hours needed to make them and marketing, not because they are making them more cinematic or not. That is a stylistic choice some of the industry have went with. It really has nothing to do with the final cost of a game.

[Aeula]

Nope, as for cutting out cinematics as some have suggested, I don't want that to happen, I enjoy cinematics and the ones in WoD are top notch.
As for DLC I think it can add to the game in a lot of interesting ways, just look at oblivious shivering isles expansion, and the dragon age DLC (Ignoring day1).

[Deleted]

Well two out of those three is in theory good for video games.

DLC. More content, where you don't have to go out and buy yet another 60 $ game and since the base engine and assets are already made it can be made much faster, brilliant idea. Unfortunately some DLC is cutting out content that really should have been in the base game, but there are also awesome DLC with loads of content. So really the premise is good, the business side less so.

Pay to win, or rather free to play. Honestly I think we are past some of the worst ones, when it comes to this. The start of it was insane, you could often buy weapons that were objectively better than others etc. etc., but right now we have LoL (I know that one is a little disputable) Dota 2, PS2, loadout, blacklight all of SOEs games etc., that of course can be discussed how much the are pay to win, but at least they sorta weeded that out to a reasonable degree. Also, the idea that you can play games of near to triple A quality for free, is mind boggling.
I know some people call it the cancer of the video game industry and some prefer subscription and such, which again is a discussion for another time.

Early access, I can not for the life of me defend this, other than saying it is crowdfunding for independent developers. I have never bought one myself, I likely never will, I find that sort of thing hard to trust. Once again, it is up to personal choice rather you want to fund such a thing.

In the end, we as the consumers really are the ones that feed the companies, and companies will try and squeeze every little penny out of us that they can. I for one, haven't felt any need to buy any DLC or F2P item to further my enjoyment of a ton of games.

[prwraith]

They're getting shorter and shorter, which pisses me off, so ergo personally yes, games are getting worse

[n7stormreaver]

They're getting shorter and shorter, which pisses me off, so ergo personally yes, games are getting worse

On other hand, most of them are incredibly stretched even now, so if developers tried to make games even longer, it would do no good to entertainment value.

[prwraith]

On other hand, most of them are incredibly stretched even now, so if developers tried to make games even longer, it would do no good to entertainment value.

I think stories can be long and entertaining. In the same way say, lord of the rings was a good read that I didn't put down for weeks when I first read it and a day or two now. I enjoy long well written games. I'd submit that a growing inability to pay attention for long periods is leading to their downfall more than them getting stale after a day or two

[Immitis]

theres ALWAYS been shitty games. ALWAYS.

its just way fucking cheaper to make games now and games are way cheaper to buy.

when i was younger i was lucky if i got a game once a month. that meant that when i went to buy a game i spent damn near 30 minutes or more in a store making sure i got a good fucking game.

these days i have like 200 unplayed games on my steam account, like 2 games i havent finished on my 3ds and a bunch of games i still havent finished for ps3 and wiiu.

- - - Updated - - -

also i hate it when people get butthurt about dlc.

DLC IS NOT THE PROBLEM. theres tons of games with good dlc.

you cant just lump in dlc with on disk dlc.

when you do that you end up doing the same thing as lumping in mario kart 8 with street fighter. mario kart 8's dlc is cheap and damn near doubles the amount of content in the game.

[Deleted]

They're getting shorter and shorter, which pisses me off, so ergo personally yes, games are getting worse

Not that I disagree that some games have become rather short, but it should also be said that length does not equal quality. I remember loads of old games, where you had to backtrack through areas with nothing in them, some RPGs you had to mindlessly grind levels to beat a boss, artificial difficulty to prevent progress etc..
As said I don't disagree on some games, but there certainly were some old games where cutting some of the content probably would have made it better entertainment per minute/hour.