this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2024
469 points (98.6% liked)

PC Gaming

8311 readers
739 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 117 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Building games that are actually fun is going to make you the most money, that's it.

Absolute nonsense! The old rich fucks who probably haven't played a game since the Atari 2600 told me that nonstop MTX and creating value for shareholders is the only way to have fun games!

[–] iAmTheTot@kbin.social 56 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I wish it were true but it's just not. Free mobile games with mtx make way more money than bg3 did.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 54 points 7 months ago (2 children)

People should look at mobile revenue. Its disgusting. It does not make that much money because it is fun. They use predatory practices to prey upon people's psychology to get them to spend money. Whether thats paying just to hurry up a building or dropping 400-4000 bucks to become a god. Its an unethical market built on manipulation.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 27 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I know someone who was spending $1000 per month on Candy Crush several years ago. I was absolutely, and completely shocked when she shared that revelation with me. All of the sudden her Facebook posts about needing to quit candy crush made a lot more sense. She talked like an addict, which was very confusing to me for a little Bejeweled game, but she was in fact addicted, and addicted very hard.

[–] yamanii@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

They know, it's their objective, whales exist but they are normal people with gambling addiction, not millionaires rolling for gacha.

[–] c0mbatbag3l@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Depends, building good games that establish goodwill and a strong franchise will make you more money in the end than the quick pump and dump mobile game candy crush bullshit.

The difference is that the mobile game model can exist perpetually in a state of pump and dump because the platform of mobile is essentially purpose built to be a time waster. Consoles and PC games are intended to be an activity in themselves instead of a way to take a smoke break, the ramifications of attempting to convert the standard videogame model to the pump and dump model has been successful depending on your definition.

Sure we've established that whales exist in every market and some people will buy every MTX they can even if it's CoD or whatever, but we've also seen people who used to spend a considerable amount of money on games stop doing so, because the market doesn't cater to their preferences. That's the point Larian is making, you can create a true fan base with their model, you can only create addicts with the pump and dump model.

[–] iAmTheTot@kbin.social 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

will make you more money in the end than the quick pump and dump mobile game candy crush bullshit

Weird example, Candy Crush makes a billion dollars every year.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago

Here's the thing, though, people are saying "mobile games", but what they really mean is "a small handful of market leaders in the mobile gaming space".

I've worked in mobile games. Most of them do t make their development budget back, just like PC and console games. They're a lottery ticket for publishers, which is why most of the big ones were made by independent studios that were later bought by the big players once they were proven winners.

[–] TommySalami@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

we've also seen people who used to spend a considerable amount of money on games stop doing so, because the market doesn't cater to their preferences.

I have to wonder how significant this is. Anecdotally I agree with it, but I wonder how many people are like me. I used to buy at least a few new/full-price games a year, but now I might buy 1 if the stars align (last two were BG3 and Elden Ring, prior to that I can't even remember...maybe Deep Rock?). I have more expendable income than I've ever had these days and still love to play games as a pastime, but I'm buying fewer games. I 100% attribute that to the shitty practices the industry has picked up, because 9/10 that's what turns me off from buying a game until it's 5 bucks on Steam or free on Humble.

[–] Neato@ttrpg.network 26 points 7 months ago (3 children)

It's probably not true as making your the most money. To do that you need to be morally bankrupt and engage in predatory practices and exploit mental illness.

But it will make you a lot of money and win you the love of fans through the ages. Which I prefer and will continue to spend money on.

[–] metaStatic@kbin.social 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)

through the ages

let me just check in with Blizzard and ... oh no

[–] Neato@ttrpg.network 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah. They started as Larian but they lived long enough to become...them.

[–] Kbin_space_program@kbin.social 11 points 7 months ago

Blizzard ceased being Blizzard roughly in the span of the dev of the 1st and 2nd expansions to Wow. That's when the core of the original Blizzard left.

And then remade Diablo 1 and 2 as Torchlight 1 and 2.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

To do that you need to be morally bankrupt and engage in predatory practices and exploit mental illness.

You just described 99% of all successful corporations.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

If the goal is to make money and also make fun games, everybody wins. If it's just to make as much money as possible, we get how things are today.

Yeah sure that's great if you're making a game, but what if you're a useless parasite with lots of money, looking for cartoonish returns on your investments!

Hardly seems fair that the money goes to the people engaged in the production of material goods...

/s

[–] psvrh@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 months ago

To be fair, if you grew up playing games on the 2600, you probably remember an era without MTX at all and really liked buying carts or floppies without worrying about subscriptions or DLC or microtransactions.

/old man mode=on: I remember when "microtransactions" meant sending a certified cheque away for a copy of the hint book