“It was not really a conscious decision, it’s just what happened.”
That’s a quote from Rockstar’s Imran Sarwar when asked if it was hard to make the decision not to create single-player DLC, and instead focus on GTA Online.
I’m sorry, but at some point someone had to have made a conscious decision, right? I mean, game developers don’t just go into work and wander around the office aimlessly until stuff ‘just happens,’ right?
Somewhere along the line, they realized what they had with GTAO, that the Shark Cards were bringing in half a billion dollars, and decided that was more lucrative than a few single player DLCs.
It is a conscious decision, and it’s the kind of decision happening all across the industry lately.
I don’t see companies going where the money is as inherently bad; after all, making money is literally the purpose of companies. That is their prime directive (though I think we can all agree that there is a spectrum of sleaziness these companies can fall on in the pursuit of that goal).
Unfortunately, where the money is right now is online. The hard truth of it is, the limited profits of linear, single player titles are quickly being outpaced by rising development and maintenance costs on these AAA games. Which unfortunately means we’re now seeing big single-player titles that are three years into development suddenly “pivoted” towards more easily monetized platforms.
I know that it’s really easy to imagine the only reason loot boxes and DLC exist are because a bunch of fat, rich guys in a boardroom somewhere like rolling around naked in huge piles of cash, smoking their expensive cigars and laughing about how gullible gamers are. And that desire for larger profit margins is certainly a part of it all. But there are also underlying economic reasons why the $60 cover price isn’t cutting it anymore that we shouldn’t just brush aside when having this conversation.
As gamers we tend to demand a lot from our games. With so many titles to choose from, we gauge our spending based on how many hours of entertainment a game will provide; the more the better. We question when a game doesn’t have both a single-player campaign and a multiplayer component. We desire games that look better than ever before.
Those things have costs associated with them.
You kind of have to ask yourself, if it were your company, and you were going to spend 3 years and hundreds of millions making a game… would you settle for someone paying you $60 once, or would you rather have the guy dropping $15,000?
Again: I’m the oddball who really doesn’t want 4K, and was actually perfectly happy with standard def. Despite playing both, I can’t tell the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS, and the difference between 720p and 1080p seem trivial. And in general, I don’t -want- multiplayer in my games. Couch co-op is fine, but that’s about it. The current production costs of the modern video game is destroying good games. If in this brave new world of bleeding edge video games, if our only choices are games with prices inflated up to $90 – $100 per game, or games which sandwich… Read more »
Glad to know I’m not the only one saying “oh, look, something else we can blame on the ‘graphics before all else’ crowd”. Fortunately there are a lot of good indie titles, and more upcoming. I’m glad so many are finding a happy home on the Switch. Wargroove is looking great. Stardew Valley is still fantastic. I actually had talked to a coworker today about my belief that a new ET is coming, and a massive crash in the mainstream development system for these games. The further this boundary gets pushed, the thinner and thinner customer patience will wear. And… Read more »
Much like a prediction made on this comments section a few comics back, Nintendo EXCELS at first-to-the-market stuff most of the time. Gamecube and Wii U both sucked in comparison to what was avalible. But the GBA, DS, 3DS, Wii, N64 and Switch all were/are magnificent successes. Fortunately, for once Nintedo’s sticking head in sand style treatment of multiplayer and microtransactions has a good shot at paying off. I say fortunately not just for Nintendo but for all those who are slowly getting tired of a promised amazing single-player game turning into a horrid mess of microtransactions and MMO level… Read more »
What’s funny is that i thought we had already almost HAD the “next ET” with no mans sky. If hello games hadn’t been so receptive of the games criticism and be SUPER respectable in patching and attempting to fix the issues the game launched with, i have no doubt in my mind they would have been met with “landfill” capabilities.
No Man’s Sky couldn’t fit the bill, because it sold almost entirely on pre-orders and people who bought before they knew anything about it. The thing about ET was that it just DIDN’T SELL. So, No Man’s Sky would be a trigger or buildup, but it has to result in a game that doesn’t sell out of the gate.
30 and 60 fps I care about; I’d rather my cutscene take 1 minute instead of lagging to 4. 720 v 1080? I don’t care; both work. I’m actually in the middle of replaying the Finest Fantasy for Advance set and I am having a lot of fun. (Beaten Zeromus EG, wiped the floor with Kaiser Dragon, not masochistic enough to fight Enuo, smashed Aurburoth in two, working on the FF1 bonus stuff) Goes to show that even though the games don’t have particularly good graphics, if they’re GOOD ENOUGH to portray your game’s story/visuals, than someone can have just… Read more »
30 and 60 frames will not make a cutscene any longer unless its a 60 frame playing at 30 and its not dropping the extra frames like it should same with a game set at 30 playing at 60 it will just hold the frame for 2 rames not the one the run time will be the same
Its heartening to see a graphics snob who doesn’t understand how FPS works.
Sorry, sorry not heartening. Absolutely, devastatingly annoying.
Hm? Oh I understand how FPS works. And I just said that the majority of the time I DON’T care much about the graphics. I’m not a graphics snob.
Maybe you’re just really bad at expressing your thoughts in a cogent and literate way. Either that, or you have no idea what frames are.
A bit late but I think the point was how the author didn’t care and was trying to make a sarcastic joke out of graphic snobs. Or something.
These days, I rarely see a multiplayer mode I haven’t played dozens of other times already or they’re often made so that it won’t become repetitive after a handful of matches because it’s blatantly trying to pander to microtransactions. Photo-realistic graphics also don’t impress me at all anymore, because it often means that the developer scanned something and then put it into their engine. It’s far more impressive to see them develop something with a more aesthetics, like Cuphead, for example. A lot of people went all googly-eyes because it looked like a 1930’s cartoon. If the developers can put… Read more »
“And in general, I don’t -want- multiplayer in my games.” This. I’m so sick of people complaining about perfectly good games not having multiplayer, and also games with a really nice idea, a lot of potential, being multiplayer only. To be clear, I don’t mind online games that you can play alone or in groups, such as Elite Dangerous, most MMORPGs, etc, but forcing you to play with other people, and making the game be about that only, really is a world-killer to me. I tried playing DOTA, LoL, Overwatch… Couldn’t play for more than an hour. Now give me… Read more »
I mean, the chinese have already figured out how to do microtransactions with their writing. At least it’s not a loot box where you get a chapter of a random webnovel though.
You need a 60Hz display to fix your “I can’t tell the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS” problem, but otherwise absolutely. Who asked for this shit? Who asked for PS4 Pro and Xbox One X? Who asked for graphics to keep getting better and better, even at the expense of performance? I don’t care how nice Uncharted 4 looks in screenshots, the game plays like shit because it keeps dropping to 20 FPS whenever anything happens. There wasn’t anything wrong with the graphics we saw in the first three Uncharted games. But hey, enough about graphics. Who asked… Read more »
Agree to this, I can’t detect 30fps vs 60 fps difference on my TV, but I can detect 40fps vs 60 fps difference on my comp screen, much to that goes to 60hz computer screen vs 30fps optimised tv screen. Also I belong to group that actually doesnt give jacks shit about 4k, heck I still call graphics of xenoblade chronicles on wii gorgeous because they kinda were (even with obvious limitations to graphical engine, lack of high detail etc … you dont need high detail to have fine detail) As for lootboxes … I have atm Activision (yes, this… Read more »
Oh, I’ve got a 60hz display, and can kinda-sorta see something. Just like when I went back in Breath of the Wild and revisited the Korok Forest and Kakariko Village, I could sort of detect a few skips here and there. But I refuse to believe that the difference between 30fps and 60fps is worth inflating the production value of a game an extra 50%. Especially when people use words like ‘notice’ and ‘detect’ to describe these brand new graphics. You’d laugh in the face of anyone who says “Yes, I could detect the graphical increase between my old PS1… Read more »
You know, 15k on a hundred million dollar game means a much higher profit margin. With exactly a 100 million dollar budget, 15k means you only need 6667 (technically it’s 6666.66…but it should be a ceiling function). people to spend that much. How many people buy these games? MILLIONS. And how many of them spend an obscene amount on them? NO CLUE, but it’s enough. Eventually you wonder if companies REALLY need that much more money so that they freely risk jeopardizing their fanbases. Microtransactions can work nicely and not be forced to be the epicenter of a game. This… Read more »
The point is, they clearly aren’t jeopardizing their fanbase all that much though, because as much as the vocal contingent complains about microtransactions, enough people clearly still purchase them for it to be very, very lucrative for the companies involved.
You need a way to do some +1 or Like or something in your commenting section. Because I’d +1 this comment right now.
Hey Tim, any chance we can get that feature? I’d love a way to agree with others without having to type up a big message.
I will look into what’s available.
JUST FOR .10$ YOU CAN GET A +1 BUTTON FOR A DOLLAR YOU CAN HAVE A +11 BUTTON – SHORT TIME OFFER! TAKE ADVANTAGE NOW!!!!!11!!1!
And a way to -1 as well, because that deserves a downvote for sure. That’s the same shortsighted attitude that will cause problems for everyone later. Activision clearly wasn’t jeopardizing their Guitar Hero fanbase all that much either. They kept pushing a little more and a little more, with fans defending it all at every turn, until they eventually pushed so far that everyone pretty much said “fuck it” at the same time and the market fell out nearly instantly. And now an entire genre is basically dead; even the more recent reboots of Guitar Hero and Rock Band did… Read more »
I’m completely ok with MP games going away for a few years. Let the squeakers grow up a little.
The point that the interview made that was most important was that the publishers do not care what players want. They just care what they will spend money on.
Why is there a disconnect between what we will spend money on and what players want? That would be a fundamental issue is it not?
Or just says that maybe what people want isn’t necessarily what you want.
Actually effect I think is more like sheep will follow the herd…kinda like its with apple, same principles apply to microtransactions within game
Yes, there are people that purchase that much and still support the microtransaction business but I’d be curious to look at the types of people that are the ones contributing that much. I don’t know how popular he is here, but Jim Sterling touches upon it frequently and comes up with a good point from observations and his own behavior. The people who are spending this much could be regular joes, but they could also be people with gambling addictions that this practice preys upon or people who are obsessive/compulsive completionists which this practice feeds on. I do understand that… Read more »
‘Whales’
The term you’re looking for is ‘whale’
The few people who play a game, but make up the majority of microtransaction purchases.
A lot of games cater to these whales, because they’re all that mater. They are where the money is at. You lose them, you lose your golden goose.
I grew up playing a Sega Genesis. I still have it and it still works great. I’ve bought an Xbox, PS3, and Xbox360 as well but I’ve never connected to the internet on any of them aside from maybe one or two updates. For me, t’s really sad to see gaming head in the direction it’s going. I’d happily purchase a quality game with a great story driving a solo or co-op (same device, don’t even get me started on the idiocy of removing true co-op from Halo 5) campaign but those get fewer and farther in between each year… Read more »
You sir, are a whale. You’re not a dolphin, nor whatever I’m called, (minnow? Whatever….) you’re a whale. People like you are what’s wrong with the gaming industry. Yeah, I don’t blame developers, either! Because if gamers are this stupid, THIS easily manipulated (and by your own admission, this obsessed with their games looking shiny, something which adds NOTHING to the experience [sure as cuck didn’t bother anyone back when games DIDN’T look this good!]) then I’d take advantage of us, too! Screw “artistic integrity”! When you have a population of idiots who are SO easily manipulated into throwing money… Read more »
People could have voted with their wallets for YEARS now. And they did. They voted to be mugged for more cash by paywalls, and for “early access” titles. What, you think ME Andromeda was UNUSUAL? You’ve been playing that quality title for over a DECADE! But as long as the animations work, the glitches are perfectly fine! The completely unfinished nature of the title is acceptable to the gaming public, BUT ONLY IF THE ANIMATIONS LOOK PRETTY! Look! Look at me jangle my keys! You love it, don’t you! It’s so shiny!
So I don’t get the argument people make about the $60 price tag not having changed in years. You look at any AAA game that comes out now and it has multiple tiers of pricing that include various in-game and real-world content. While it’s true that you can still pay $60 for the absolute base game, it’s also pretty clear that this isn’t what the companies want you to do – and isn’t what a lot of people do – in order to get a complete package. The price of games isn’t $60 anymore, that’s just the entry fee. And… Read more »
A developer who left a studio working under EA games admit the only thing EA cares about is milking their properties as much as possible, regardless of push back.
Anyone who bought a shark card on GTA 5 is the problem.
For me, multiplayer gaming is how I get to spend time with friends who live all across the country. Gaming isn’t a singular experience for me, so unless it’s something several of us can do together, odds are I’m not picking it up unless it’s pretty heavily discounted and I can beat it in a weekend when my buddies are busy. As for micro transactions, I have no problem with them, especially when, like Destiny 2, they’re purely cosmetic and easily a quotable without paying. I like giving money to companies who make things I love and use. I’m not… Read more »
“[W]e gauge our spending based on how many hours of entertainment a game will provide; the more the better.”
I have a wife, child, and a career. It is hard for me to find time to dedicate to gaming these days. I would love to be able to spend $60 on single-player console games that I can beat in 10 hours.
I know for a fact that I am far from alone in this. There are millions of late 20-somethings to early 40-somethings out there that want a SHORT satisfying gaming experience.
Well online content is also much harder to pirate. Where there is a HUGE uproar over DRM in single player titles, it’s an integral and unavoidable part of online content so it’s a hell of a lot easier to protect from piracy.
Maybe, not spending millions in marketing would do the trick.
Good games don’t need that anyway.
I never played ME3 multiplayer but WTF??? 15.000$ for what? What did this multiplayer have to be even able to invest that much money? I have seen kickstarter campaigns where you would get your own race or monsters or something like that and already thought that’s a bit much ok but whatever if someone wants this. But for a shooter that was just attached to a game for no reason (except money as I learned now)?
I do not question when a game does not have a multiplayer component. Indeed, in most cases, not having a multiplayer component actually makes me MORE interested in a game, as it means the team was totally focused on perfecting the single player experience, and creating a more in depth and engaging story.
With that statement, there are two possibilities. Either they’re lying through their teeth to the consumer, or… they’re such a slipshod and badly run company that shit just happens and no one there actually knows why. They’ve painted themselves into the dunce corner when the only options are they’re liars or idiots.
They make millions of $ pretty sure it’s the liar thing 😉
It’s just showing that the games industry becomes more and more like the movie industry. Everything is becoming more and more expensive and “needs” to make a lot of money, just to recoup the triple digit million costs.
Though the “alternative monetarization” schemes available in games are (possibly) a way to not go the way of Hollywood mainly making “safe movies” that are (mainly) each as bland as the next one…
At least I hope so…
Look at Hellblade: Senua’s Sacrifice as an example. It’s only $29.99, pretty much rivals most AAA games in the graphics department, granted, it only has about 10-12 hours of content, and some of it a bit stranger than the usual content – but hey, do we really need more “Fetch me X of Y” or “Kill XYZ Monster” quests? And there’s plenty of AAA games that are $49,99 or even $59,99 that doesn’t offer more content. It’s a fantastic experience, and brings something new to the gaming scene. Extra added bonus for daring to explore mental health issues as a… Read more »
I just hope they don’t try the same thing with RDR2… people wouldn’t spend thousands of dollars on cooler looking horses or later era weaponry… right?
I wonder if they’ll add a DeLorean?
I like the Wolfenstein New Order approach: “We aren’t going to sacrifice the single player campaign’s story to create multiplayer” You know what you’re going for. You know what the game *is about* You realize that, at this point in time, its going to be weird to have a campaign beating the Nazis out of America and then turn around and have a multiplayer where people are *going to be allowed to play Nazis* I also like the Overwatch approach This is a competitive game. We want it to be a league game. We aren’t going to slap on some… Read more »
Honestly you *could* have mutliplayer in Wolfenstien if you have the players teaming up against Nazis. However, this is strictly co op and you can have PvP because otherwise you have the issue you brought up with the whole People-playing-as-Nazis.
I am also terrible for game publishers since I play a single 4X game for hundreds of hours on PC. I have 800+ hours into Civ 5 and probably spent 20$ on the original game on steam sale and 30$ on expansions and DLC. And have roughly the same in civ 4, civ 3 and 2. I looked at steam achievements only 87% have ever upgraded a unit and only 80% founded a second city, so i am balanced by 20% of all players that never gave the game more then an hour.
We just need more companies/developers like CD Projekt Red. The Witcher 3 was amazing, i’m not even done with all the content for that game.
“But there are also underlying economic reasons why the $60 cover price isn’t cutting it anymore that we shouldn’t just brush aside when having this conversation.” No there aren’t. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHSso2vufPM Enough of the $60 myth already. Enough of the corporate apologism. This is only about how much money they can leech in the short term before people get fed up and finally turn on them. There’s no logical defense for any of these. None of these publishers (and it is the publishers getting all this money, not the actual game developers) need all of this money. They want all of… Read more »
The video you linked makes a great number of good points, but it doesn’t actually support your argument that there aren’t increased costs to development that might have led to publishers first seeking income above and beyond the $60 price point. Nobody is making the argument that publishers, once the door was opened, didn’t just keep going well overboard with it. And nobody is making the argument that publishers are struggling to make ends meet. But you can only hold the publishers responsible for just so much; they can cook up all the sleazy tactics they want, but they wouldn’t… Read more »
The amazing thing about… yanno, fuck calling it “microtransactions” when they’re pushing the “best deal” currency exchange at $40-50 for these things. Let’s… how about if we call it “whale hunting”? Something we can all agree sounds about as disgusting as getting some sad sack to spend a car’s worth of currency on your blinking lights. That guy ain’t getting his money’s worth, unless he’s enjoying keeping the lights on for the rest. (I’ve known people like that. They’re aware their business model for lazer tag or whatnot is a burn-rate equation, and they sigh and run out the clock… Read more »
Multiplayer is bad. It’s basically just a game company substituting other players instead of an AI to run their games so of that $60 you’re paying if it’s a multiplayer title It’s not worth half that if there is no good single player mode.
Ironically, many of the best Single Player games from oh so long ago needed multi player to be better. It’s not multiplayer that is bad; it is how multiplayer is executed.
…
BOTH definitions of Executed
Now, saying *all* Multiplayer is bad is . . . a bit much. Games can be fun when played with others – you just have to have the right games and/or the right people. Now, if you take a game meant to be single player and slap a multiplayer tag on it? Fuck that. That’s not a good way to implement multiplayer. But it’s the easiest, unfortunately. Now, if you make a game, and plan for it to be multiplayer from the beginning? That’ll be much better. Overwatch is a good example – they did that, and a lot of… Read more »
The advent of multiplayer I took as the beginning of the end for good games. For the most part, excepting a few gems, I was right.
Monster Hunter
BAM
As someone who worked at rockstar during the development cycle of GTA4 til the start of the GTA5 cycle; I can say that of course the company didn’t accidentally not make single player DLC. DLC was always purely about money and how to keep revenue streams coming in and to be frank GTAO was the proverbial golden goose. This trend for DLC being solely profit orientated started before GTA5 though. One of my most notable memories about this, occurred when we were working on LA Noire. We got a message down the line to choose the 5 most fun missions… Read more »
Well that is a pretty damning anecdote.
And wasn’t the base game of LA Noire priced higher too? Like $70 instead of $60? For some reason I recall that being the case….
To be honest LA Noire was a bit of a pain in the arse in general. Weld only purchased it from the original development team because its facial recognition stuff was proprietary and we wanted it for other projects. However by the time we got it, the market had moved on as did the software. So we just had to develop it best we could. (Honestly some of the innane crap that went on in that game originally) Anyway near the end of the product cycle, that’s when we got news that they wanted feedback on which missions were most… Read more »
Money quote (pun intended): “They don’t actually care about what the players want, they care about what the players will pay for.”
Once upon a time in economics theory we learned those two things were the same. I guess people go off and spend $15,000 on stuff they don’t want now, because someone is forcing them.
If you prefere single player games, play single player games and don’t pay for the multiplayer. It’s not rocket surgery
To be fair to Rockstar, GTA V’s single player is pretty much a complete experience and is pretty massive. I wouldn’t mind if a game company gives me a complete single player experience like that and then release nothing but multiplayer DLC to keep the game alive longer. I do think Shark Cards are complete shit system though.
I totally understand the arguments of going where the money is and the economics of how expensive it is to make high quality games. The issue I have is that it feels like they are blatantly lying when they say that they “love single player more than anything”. Also, when they say, “we did not feel single player expansions were either possible or necessary, but we MAY well do them for future projects…” (emphasis mine) it just sounds like PR spin so in the future they don’t HAVE to make single player expansions. My biggest concern about games that rely… Read more »
Love the comic, Tim. Been following around for looong time… One question out of curiosity, do you own all the console games, like ps4, xbox, switch, or the company send you the items for you to review it. It would be very cool to see if you are willing of course share a bit of your creative process, how do you work, what do you do before writing a comic on certain game…. I been reding your comic and seriously you can see how gradually your drawings are evolving. Really like all that. And please keep the good work Cheers,… Read more »
I purchase all of my own games. Aside from a handful of times over the past fifteen years, I do not receive games from companies. I do make it a point to own all platforms, because I obviously need to have the opportunity to play any games that come out in the course of looking for material. The process for writing a gaming one-shot varies, but boils down to either examining whatever game I’m into at the moment, or whatever gaming news is recent. Then it’s either drawing parallels between two concepts, or finding a way to visually convey a… Read more »
Yes games have stuck at $60 with development costs going up but the player base available for them to sell to has also hugely expanded. This is something people seem to forget when even mildly defending the presence of gambling loot boxes. Gaming isn’t a niche hobby anymore, it’s a mainstream pastime. Of course we have base editions of games, the deluxe edition, the super-duper digital deluxe, the Collector’s edition with awesome figurines. Season passes and pre-order bonuses. People are already paying more than $60 for their games. Publishers don’t want free to play mechanics in their games because they… Read more »
How can anyone buy shark cards when every time i enter the game, theres a cheater throwing millions of dollars at me?
All I know is this PS1 I have about 30 games tops PS2 got well over 150 of those Xbox about 20 PS3 4 Xbox 360 30 Xbox1 4 See the trend the more the games went online and transaction based, the less I bought them! Add this fact to above–I have 5 times more money now in earned wages than I did when PS2 was out and the game companies of today seem not to want a cent of it? Hey rockstar? you make all that online crap into single player and I have 100$ waiting for you? till… Read more »
This is part of why Nintendo is doing so well; they are fueled by nostalgia and a single player emphasis. (Most don’t have strong multiplayer, though some like Splatoon excel in that area). If they could get remakes of the ‘Finest of the Fantasy” (FF 1,2,4-6) for the switch (and throw in 3) in like two sets (either have each one include copies of ALL THE VERSIONS or have it be 1-3 and 4-6) they could make so much money. Actually, just from selling 4 and 6 they could make a ludicrous amount