Jameson Durall, a design director over at Volition, published an opinion piece on Gamasutra that was found and sent to us by our own Surly Badger. And it needs commenting on because it reveals the somewhat antagonistic relationship that lies between gamers and game companies, especially over used games.
The entire editorial can really be summed up in one line:
People often don’t understand the cost that goes into creating these huge experiences that we put on the shelves for only $60 (emphasis added by Gamma Squad).
If you find that enraging, don’t read the rest of the piece: Durall is in favor of the next XBox not playing used games, and thinks the current “online pass” system doesn’t go far enough. Leaving aside the value of used games or the fact that abridging our rights as consumers is not a good thing, it’s very much about shoving the blame onto everybody except the games industry.
It’s not that the sentiment is misplaced, per se. Volition’s latest title, “Saints Row The Third”, cost tens of millions; some AAA titles have budgets of $100 million or more. And money is on his brain: it has to be, as his publisher THQ is in danger of folding. But it’s that “only $60″ comment that I think illustrates the problem here.
It’s not that we here at Gamma Squad are opposed to developers making their money back: witness our Tim Shafer lovefest yesterday. Nor is it deniable that GameStop is oriented towards selling you used games and keeping you away from the new ones; that’s what makes them money, and developers have a right to be frustrated over it. And we know the economics of the game industry are rough, and only going to get rougher; a game studio only makes money once the publisher makes its money back, and it only sees a very small portion of the proceeds.
On the flipside, though, it’s not “only $60″. $60 is a lot of money to be entertained, period. When we write our game reviews, that $60 is foremost in our minds. $60 buys a lot of entertainment in other media, and frankly, pieces like this smack of blaming the consumer for the indulgences of developers and publishers. To put in in perspective, $60 would buy four copies of Double Fine’s adventure game, which is part of the reason it’s breaking Kickstarter records: they essentially asked customers to pre-order the game to make it happen, and they did. In droves.
That’s part of the reason we’re so hard on games here, including Volition’s: quite frankly, about what 90 to 95% of what the games industry puts out isn’t worth sixty bucks. Sorry, but it’s true. Repetitive level design, bad writing, sloppy mechanics, the fact that the people who buy the game when it first comes out are now largely expected to be unpaid beta testers until you patch the damn game…most of it isn’t even worth $30. Part of the reason so many new games go out the door new and come back used within a week is that they stink for some reason: if you don’t like multiplayer, and you finish an FPS campaign in a few days of playing, why not turn it in for the credit and get something else?
Secondly, there’s no effort on the part of the games industry to cut costs or be innovative. For every “Catherine” or “Portal”, there are a dozen “Call of Duty with Honor and Medals On the Battlefield”. EA got the license to the beloved action/strategy franchise “Syndicate” and decided “This would make an awesome ‘Deus Ex’ clone!”.
If the games industry were making a sincere effort across the spectrum to make all sorts of games for all sorts of gamers, and better games, we’d be more charitably inclined. But they aren’t. Where are the space sims, or the flight simulators, or the side-scrolling beat-em-ups, or the puzzle games? Why is it more exciting to see Konami releasing a port of an arcade game that came out nearly two decades ago than it is to see their major releases? Why is a game like “I Am Alive” more exciting than most of what Ubisoft puts out in a year?
And it’s becoming more and more important because the pressure to lower prices, and quality of games, is only going to go up. The entire games industry seems to be in very severe denial that the iPad and mobile gaming is about to breach into the console gaming sector in a big way, but realistically, there’s an OnLive app and wireless controller for every major platform, and the iPad can already handle PS2 games. The iPad 3 is going to be much faster. Apple has a TV ready, and Lenovo has already built a television with Snapdragon mobile processors.
The tech industry breaching into the console gaming sector is only a matter of time. And if the games industry thinks they’re NOT going to undercut them on price, they’re delusional. Gamers are conditioned to pay $60 occasionally: the wider market isn’t, and they’re not going to read op-ed pieces like this and decide suddenly that they are.
In short, if you think gamers are ungrateful, Mr. Durall, that’s fine. You’re entitled to your opinion. In fact, to some degree it might even be true. But don’t act like the problem lies solely with gamers or the used game industry, because it doesn’t. And both developers and publishers need to learn these lessons quick, before their audience disappears.
image courtesy Volition, Inc.




/Stands and claps
Well said sir…its a fascinating case where lots of smart, smart people are doing things the way they’ve always been, despite the fact that the business model is rapidly changing. You’d think that they would’ve seen everything that’s happened with the RIAA and MPAA and would’ve adjusted, but apparently they’re determined to do their own take on it because they’re different, right? My brother has worked for a development studio for years and could see this coming, but of course management was and still is content to keep things the way they are.
It’s worth remembering that the management of any business is inherently conservative, in the dictionary sense: if something keeps working, that’s viewed as safer and more reliable than something new and unproven because, well, it’s true. Their job is to take calculated risks, not wild ones.
Looking for someone special for Valentine’s Day? Welcome to—casualchats.c/0/m—, a place for people who wanna start a short-term relationship.And also for finding soul mates. Tens of thousands honest members with real photos and detailed profiles are active there. Come in and give it a shot, you will find your saucy match there. Have fun! *_*
We, as gamers, have some culpability in this — we continue to pay $60 for rehashed shit with new box art (Madden & every sports game ever, CoD once a year, etc. etc. etc.). Until we leave the developers with 100,000 copies of Madden 13 or Call of Duty 9 to bury in the desert, they will continue to think this way.
I question that, though, that mentality of “This sold a lot, so we should clone the everloving crap out of it”. For that we probably owe the publishers, but you’d think the repeated signs that gamers are a diverse lot would have sunk in ten years ago.
I love Volition but that “only $60″ line is a pretty head-up-ass sort of thing to say. I understand that modern games, if you want them to look and sound modern, cost an assload of money to make, and so charging a lot for them is pretty much required, but maybe that’s your problem. Maybe you shouldn’t be spending so many millions to make your games when the truth is that the average gamer doesn’t have the funds to buy every $60 game that catches their eyes. That’s why the used game market exists.
Games that cost $60 = $9 movie tickets
That’s not to say that cutting prices in half (or by two thirds) would entice so many more consumers that they’d always end up making more money–though that’s a plausible argument–but it is saying that the very reason there is resentment and even criminal aversion to paying for content is because consumers earn their money and don’t want to spend big chunks of it on crap.
Someone has to come up with a new model. To this day, I still fire up Civ 2–I’ve played that game so much that my cost per hour of play-time is probably in fractions of a penny–and there are plenty of movies & CDs that I’ve gotten ridiculous bang-for-my-buck out of. But for each one of those, I’ve got a half-dozen others that were instant regrets. Which all leads me to resent the prices charged and not want to buy new content–unless I’m assured it’s awesome and will give me my money’s worth.
I’d don’t plunk down a Ulysses Grant on dinner at some dive, and I won’t do the same for a game that might suck. But if I know the meal/game/movie/music will be fantastic and I’ll get hundreds of hours of enjoyment out of it (OK, meal analogy breaks down here), then $100 would be a bargain.
Not that I think it would be a solution, but maybe moving more games to a subscription model would be a good idea.
Subscription model, or even just developing more than just the enormous blockbusters. Why aren’t we seeing more experimentation with digital downloadable games? Why is it taking Double Fine to explore this territory?
Batman arkham city is great example of my problem with dlc. I know thisplenty makes sound like a cranky old guy but does anyone remember when you could unlock costumes and skins and weapons and armor by JUST PLAYING DAMN THE GAME? I loved the crap outta that game but getting charged extra cash for costumes and characters that 7 years ago would’ve just been an included reward, seriously annoyed me. And now this is considered standard practice for a game. Its this kind of bleed em dry mentality that will give Indie games even more traction.
I couldn’t believe the sheer lack of perspective of Mr. Durall. I know plenty of gamers that when asked why didn’t they pick up this title or that title, the response is always “can’t afford to play them all man”.
That bothers me deeply when I see industry guys bad mouthing used games. I have new for Jameson, I wouldn’t have even bought Saints Row if I hadn’t borrowed it from a friend first! And now they want to take that basic fundamental aspect of being a gamer away?
I call major bullshit on that. We’ve been getting nickel and dimed on dlc for years now and this misguided dev has the nuts to call us ungrateful. Sorry but when you want to charge 60$ for 5 hours of mediocre gameplay (The Darkness 2 anyone?) and copy/paste level design (MW3 anyone?) and THEN you want me to commit to some dlc subscription package?
Talk about shitting on the hand that feeds you. Great article Dan.
Just re-read my posts… DAMN YOU AUTO SPELL!!!