r/gaming • u/CiabattaKatsuie Console • Oct 01 '24

The games industry is undergoing a 'generational change,' says Epic CEO Tim Sweeney: 'A lot of games are released with high budgets, and they're not selling'

https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry/the-games-industry-is-undergoing-a-generational-change-says-epic-ceo-tim-sweeney-a-lot-of-games-are-released-with-high-budgets-and-theyre-not-selling/

Tim Sweeney apparently thinks big budget games fail because... They aren't social enough? I personally feel that this is BS, but what do you guys think? Is there a trend to support his comments?

26.1k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

5.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

210

u/ThisNameDoesntCount Oct 01 '24

Probably shouldn’t have raised the prices and also have the games run like ass on release

33

u/Surfugo PlayStation Oct 02 '24

If they want to keep upping the prices of games, fine. But the quality better reflect that. I see no reason to spend X amount on a brand new release when it's going to be buggy as fuck and not playable until weeks, if not a month after release.

2

u/yonderbagel Oct 02 '24

A single month is optimistic.

They release them like 60-70% of the way through the development cycle or something, it feels like.

1

u/-Sa-Kage- Oct 02 '24

Looking at you CSL2...

3

u/BlastFX2 Oct 02 '24

This is the one. I don't buy alpha versions. If you want me to buy a game on release, release it when it's finished. Otherwise, I'll just wait a couple years and probably get it for 50% off, like I did with Cyberpunk.

1

u/Dragon124515 Oct 02 '24

I wouldn't even mind them raising the prices if they simply raised the prices in an honest way (namely, just raised the initial price). But no, it's microtransactions and battle passes to go a long with the increasing sticker prices.

1

u/bloxte Oct 02 '24

Would you like to buy the deluxe edition for an extra $40 where you get to play 3 days before everyone else?

-49

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24

[deleted]

11

u/DivineBloodline Oct 02 '24

Prices might not have but popularity has out paced it. Gaming media is bigger than ever, games 20 years ago reach the same number as people as today. Not to mention wages haven’t kept up with inflation, not even a bit.

More content, debatable in the first place. Definitely more quantity, less quality content than older games as well, if all things are equal.

4

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24

[deleted]

3

u/DivineBloodline Oct 02 '24

Super Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Majora’s Mask, are arguable still popular games today. Nostalgia maybe but still popular. Quality still? Yes.

Sorry but if your point is the majority of games that come out of old systems are forgotten and outdated, yeah… of course. It will happen to every generation, including the current gen, only a few will stand the test of time in every generation.

There are maybe 10-20 game every year worth playing. Only thing that has changed is now with the internet and social media it easily to crowd source out the bad and worthy games, and play only the good ones. That probably warped your perspective, and makes it seem like games are better now. Instead of buy/renting based off covers and hoping it’s a good game. Now you have 1000s of people talking online how good Elden Ring, or whatever.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24

[deleted]

2

u/DivineBloodline Oct 02 '24 edited Oct 02 '24

I meant for the general massive of gamers, obviously. Let’s just agree to disagree.

2

u/OneRandomVictory Oct 02 '24

Even if I were to agree with the notion that there is only 10-20 good games released every year, how many good games do you realistically need? That's more games than I had on many systems growing up. I don't think most gamers are playing 20 different games a year. And even still, with how accessible gaming is today, we have more access to pass generation games than ever before. Just about every hardcore gamer I know has a massive backlog of games.

1

u/DivineBloodline Oct 02 '24

This conversation is so off topic now, but first I don’t mean only 10-20 good games a year. There are plenty of good games every year. I meant there are maybe 10-20 new classics every year. Which was a mistake in my original phrasing. I meant ones you start to associate with that year like 2008, you got Classics like GTA:IV, Dead Space, Braid, Fallout 3, Left 4 Dead, etc. I don’t meant merely good games like Blitz 2, Web of Shadows, Viva Piñata: Trouble in Paradise, or whatever one can think of. Hopefully that is more clear now.

As to how many games a person needs every year is way too subjective to answer. Depends on life and the type of gamer. I got friends that play 1 or 2 and some that play 30+. This is probably on me, but to be honest not sure the point you making here.

Anyways like I said we’re off topic, you were defending price increases, and now we’re talking about something totally different.

2

u/RabidAbyss Xbox Oct 02 '24

Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga for the Wii was peak content. I still play it lol

8

u/SharkMilk44 Oct 02 '24 edited Oct 02 '24

We get 10x the content now for the price than we did 20 years ago.

I love open world games that take 70 hours to finish yet waste my time with the most boring side activities in a world that is barren.

24

u/Nuke_Dukum Joystick Oct 02 '24

You mean a million icons on a mini map that lead to thoughtless, rinse and repeat side quests? Or do you mean collect whatever leftover asset they copy/paste into the environment 1,000 times? Or maybe you’re talking about developing a game and launching it full of bugs, missing features, and micro transactions? My favorite is when they charge $70 for 40% of the game, and lock the rest behind season passes and DLC.

10

u/ThisNameDoesntCount Oct 02 '24

Nice try Ubisoft

9

u/polski8bit Oct 02 '24

The market is also like, infinitely bigger with many more ways of squeezing every last cent out of the customer. There's also the question about the quality of said content, because Ubisoft games today are undoubtedly much more massive than they've ever been in the past, yet I'd rather spend $60-$70 on Assassin's Creed 2 again than on something like Valhalla.

10

u/OriginalAmbition5598 Oct 02 '24

Neither have wages. I would love to buy more games but when I have bills to pay, luxury stuff gets dropped first.

Maybe if companies looked outside their echo chamber boardrooms they might understand that. But nope, shareholders profits are dipping, must be the customers fault

4

u/BuddaMuta Oct 02 '24

Those same CEO’s and shareholders are the ones who fund politicians to vote against raising the minimum wage. 

Just evil people

-4

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24

[deleted]

4

u/OriginalAmbition5598 Oct 02 '24

🤔

Am I missing something? A low wage means less money to spend, which means choosing between fun stuff and stuff to live. Not sure how that doesn't relate. But ok.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24

[deleted]

1

u/OriginalAmbition5598 Oct 02 '24

If I only have x amount to spend, it doesn't matter how expensive or cheap my "extras" are, I am going to be cutting back. I used to buy a new game pretty much every month. Now, I might by 2 a year. The difference? I went from spending $150 on groceries to $400 for the same amount. So that means I have $250 less to spend on fun stuff. Not to mention, all my other expenses went up as well.

So my point is, game companies(aka shareholders) need to curb their expectations on how well games will sell because the average customer (like me) just doesn't have the disposable income to buy as many games.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24

[deleted]

1

u/OriginalAmbition5598 Oct 02 '24

Yeah, that was the point I was trying to make, sorry if I was unclear

23

u/aov97 Oct 02 '24

It just kinda feels like a slap in the face that games are $70 now when they’re more than ever being shipped in a subpar state. People are just sick of ostensibly paying full price to play the beta version of the game (Example being the whole Early Access fiasco with Star Wars outlaws, Cyberpunk at launch). 99% of the time when you paid $60 in the 2000s, at least the game worked!

3

u/Dorago1991 Oct 02 '24

How can you see inflation in the world the way it is and say a 10 dollar increase in 20 years is unfair? Lmao

5

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24

[deleted]

5

u/aov97 Oct 02 '24

That’s moreso limitations of the technology than anything lmao. There’s a difference between fighting against the camera in Kingdom Hearts 1 and games just straight up not working in the 2020s. Is it wrong to have higher expectations for the medium than 20 years ago?

I’m not one of those people that think modern games blow or anything. I’m just critical of companies that release broken bullshit for full price while selling shit like early access and micro-transactions galore lmao

7

u/Golden_Hour1 Oct 02 '24

Lol no. They started charging for DLC on top. Prices HAVE gone up for the content

4

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24

[deleted]

1

u/klineshrike Oct 02 '24

20 years ago? No?

The games look better but the shit we get now probably has WAY LESS content than the early 2000s. Like you are fucking comparing this current trend of absolute slop to quite possibly the absolute golden age of gaming???

1

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '24

[deleted]

1

u/klineshrike Oct 02 '24

The thing about this is, like other people already pointed out, yall are equating empty time wasters as content.

No, the actual amount of enjoyable, not wandering to a bunch of empty randomly generated places to make some number go up, stuff in these games is just as much or less than before.

Regardless, it is not rose tinted glasses to look back on when games were the best they had ever been AND plentiful and realize comparing that to the shitstain of an environment AAA is right now is just ignorant, or trolling. But I am not shocked, people with that insane mindset are why we keep getting regurgitated bull shit shoved down our throats and everyone keeps shelling out money for it. Even these "failures" are selling many, many millions because so many gamers can't think for themselves and buy whatever the masses tell them to.