There was an article from years back, I want to say around 2019 or so on then-Gamasutra, about how it was already too late to stop the bubble from bursting because all of these games are trying to get everyone's attention (I'm having trouble finding it now). Now the bubble is bursting, and big games these days have dev cycles of about 5 years, putting us right here in 2024. Get dev cycles to 3 years or less so that you can actually react to changing market conditions, and charge a fair price for a good product. Maybe sequel it or otherwise make regular old expansion DLC. That was sustainable. No one even makes a multiplayer game anymore unless it's intended to be rigorously competitively balanced or suck up all of your time and money through grinding.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Everyone wants WoW levels of income without WoW levels of effort.

I also don't think companies realized how competitive live services are, very few people will buy in to more than one live service at a time.

[–] VaultBoyNewVegas 16 points 4 months ago

It took WoW near a decade to make as much as it does though. MMO's aren't exactly profitable in the early years.

[–] ours 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You've described the AA/indie scene which took the chunk of the market big publishers abandoned including whole genres of games.

The problem is investors saw the line go way up, passing even Hollywood so to keep it riding forever they apply Hollywood-sized solutions.

Except you can't just shuffle live services a few weeks around another so you can milk the box office. They want us to spend all our time in their game services so people will pick one game for a time so they are cannibalizing each other and eroding trust as games fail and abandon the players that did buy into them.

[–] ampersandrew 7 points 4 months ago

And what you're describing is the economic realities of a bubble bursting, which means they have to pivot to making something sustainable that the market actually wants. That doesn't mean AA or indie exclusively. It does mean smaller scope. Halo and Gears of War could be created much faster when they were linear games, and now they're both open world and arguably worse off for it.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Get dev cycles to 3 years or less so that you can actually react to changing market conditions, and charge a fair price for a good product.

This industry's already killing people with overwork and stress. Increasing the time pressure isn't going to improve the quality or bring the price down.

We don't need faster game development, there are already more games out there than anyone could play. We (the market) need to encourage quality over quantity.

[–] ampersandrew 10 points 4 months ago

The industry kept making games bigger that would have been better off if they'd stayed smaller. I'm not saying to make the games they make now in less time. I'm saying stop making games that take 5 years to make and instead make games that take 3 years to make.

[–] billiam0202 2 points 4 months ago

We (the market) need to encourage quality over quantity.

But how will I get the dopamine hit and instant gratification the first time I start a new game?