Video Games Game Consoles Are Already Dead — And Developers Know It - Page 6

Mr. Laz · 03-04-2013, 04:03 PM

Game Consoles Are Already Dead — And Developers Know It
Mark Hachman posted 11 hours ago
Share on Google+ Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Like on Facebook

Still blasting away Halo's Covenant hordes on your Xbox 360, or ripping out guts as God of War's Kratos on your PS3? Your days are numbered — and I'm not talking about how far you're going to make it in these games.

Game developers, it turns out, are abandoning the venerable video-game console even faster than gamers themselves. The Game Developers Conference, which opens next month in San Francisco, recently asked 2,500 developers about their plans for next-generation consoles. The results were, shall we say, not encouraging for the likes of Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo.

Survey Says...

Specifically, the GDC asked developers which platforms they had last developed for, which platforms they were developing for now, and on which platforms they planned their next game. To no big surprise, tablets and phones are increasingly winning over developers: 38 percent wrote their last game for mobile devices, 55 percent moved to mobile for their latest game, and 58 percent plan their next game there.

Compare that to Sony's PS3. Thirteen percent of respondants called themselves current PS3 developers, and just 12.4 percent planned their next game for the PS3. The Xbox 360 only does slightly better: 13.2 percent for now, and 14 percent for the future. (Eleven percent of the devs polled said they're making games for the next-generation PlayStation 4 and the "Xbox 720," or whatever Microsoft ends up calling the 360's successor.)

And don't even think about Nintendo's Wii or dedicated handheld game devices. Just 4.6 percent of developers are actively making a Wii game, although 6.4 percent say they'll do so in the future. A mere 4.2 percent are working PlayStation Vita games, with about 5 percent saying they have future plans. Barely 2.8 percent say they're developing future games for the Nintendo DS.

And Then There's The PC

More than half of the surveyed developers, or 53%, self-identified as "indie" developers — i.e., they're not associated with megacorps like Electronic Arts that are solely devoted to turning out the next blockbuster. Which may help explain one of the survey's more surprising findings, which is that many of these developers are actually once again warming to PCs and Macs.

Those stats don't lie: 34.6 percent of developers say they've developed PC/Mac games in the past, 48 percent are doing so now, and 49 percent plan future games.

Of course, you could reasonably ask what choice they have. It's incredibly difficult to eke out a living selling 99-cent games through Apple's App Store or Google Play. And sales of video-game consoles are in precipitous decline. In 2012, sales of video game consoles, software, and peripherals fell 22 percent to $13.3 billion, according to retail tracker NPD.

By contrast, mobile games are upending the traditional "mobile console" handheld devices such as the Vita and the Nintendo DS, according to a report (PDF) co-authored by IDC and app analyst firm App Annie. Combined game sales on the iOS and Android app stores are now higher than revenues generated by the mobile consoles — even though games on the Vita can be ten to fifty times more expensive. And that's not even counting ad revenue generated by free and nearly free game apps.

Why mobile? Chris Akhavan, senior vice president of partnerships for mobile game monetization services provider Tapjoy, explains that the reach of mobile games — 207 million iOS and Android devices combined, compared to the 70 million PS3s in the market, is the first driver. And mobile hardware is constantly, iteratively improving, while consoles only refresh every seven years or so.

"The second is a lower barrier to entry," Akhavan told me in an email. He went on:

Mobile platforms are much more open than a console, and don’t have the restrictions of a working with a publisher. Console game development comes with a much bigger price: big title console game studios maintain budgets around $80 - $100 million, while most small to mid-size mobile gaming studios have budget closer to $200,000 - $400,000.

However, mobile game development budgets are growing because of the final contributing factor: earnings potential. Supercell reports earnings around $1 million per day for its games, and Gungho’s Puzzles and Dragons game is bringing in around $2 million daily. The monetization potential on mobile is much higher, and coupled with a lower development cost, there’s a huge opportunity to earn significant revenue.

Why Consoles Suck

What's the most telling sign of the demise of the traditional video game? Sequelitis. Each of 2012's top-ten bestselling games — every single one — has been done before: Call of Duty: Black Ops II, Madden NFL 13, Halo 4, even Just Dance 4 and Borderlands 2.

Compare that to the vast array of indie games being developed for the PC, Mac, and tablets. Sure, you've probably never heard of many of those. But for just a dollar or two a pop, you can afford to try them out. Who needs top-tier review sites? A collection of four- and five-star reviews (along with a careful parsing of the review scores, to ensure that the developer is not "paying" for good reviews through in-game currency or other goodies) can fill the bill.

Let's face it: for those with less and less time to game, episodic and casual games fill the bill, especially while riding trains and during "downtime" with no access to a console. Gamers can be online and playing in seconds. One of the most interesting tests will be platforms like the Ouya, which features a traditional console that plays mobile games.

That's not to say that any given mobile game is a guaranteed winner; Mark Fidelman makes the case that most game developers are chasing imaginary profits. Still, how long can it be before the conservative mindset of console game developers drives more and more gamers away from the console and back onto their phones? Sure, for those who have never played a Call of Duty game, the experience can be, well, cinematic. But for those who detest being handheld along from checkpoint to checkpoint, the experience, is well, cinematic. (Ugh.)

And when you do it again, and again, and again... well, maybe it's time to take a break with some Angry Birds.

candyman · 03-06-2013, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandusksuna

Yes that's true. But I am talking about the top tier, the high end of high end. But with a console they can't offer such a thing and gouge you with pricing. My point is, there is so much crap to build a gaming PC and so many types and competitors and prices to choose from. You could easily be fooled and waste money. With a console, what you see is what you get. You save more money is the bottom line and NO ONE can argue that.

Only if you're a dumbass that doesn't know how to do a little research. So you basically have no point.

KILLER_CLOWN · 03-06-2013, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candyman

Only if you're a dumbass that doesn't know how to do a little research. So you basically have no point.

Yup, all you really need is Microcenter and a friend with decent knowledge on how to build the system. It really is so much easier than it used to be. Research a little and save a lot.

DaveNull · 03-06-2013, 05:36 PM

**QuikSsurfer** · 03-06-2013, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandusksuna

Would it? Well dang then.

Especially if you started going crazy with the cooling that you need in order to keep it together... I mean, if we're talking best of the best. You would go well over that, sir!

lcarus · 03-07-2013, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN

I certainly hope so, PC is so much better than the crap consoles.

As someone who used to be a strictly console guy, I've turned more to the PC for a few reasons. I have my PC hooked HDMI to my HDTV now. Most games on PC have gamepad support. So it's exactly the same as playing on a PS3 or 360, only...the graphics are a ton better. Now I'm not a big graphics guy, but when I have a choice, why NOT go with the way better graphics? My PC basically IS a console now. And a console is a computer that pretty much only allows you to play games and do a few other things. The line between a PC and console grows thinner all the time.

lcarus · 03-07-2013, 11:32 AM

Also, if it weren't for exclusive games to the Xbox, PS, and Nintendo...it would be rather stupid to purchase a console when you could spend a little bit more and get a PC, which you can upgrade as years go by, and of course it's a PC which allows you to do so much more than gaming. I'm thinkin about bypassing consoles altogether next gen and just build me a good PC.

Deberg_1990 · 03-07-2013, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lcarus

Also, if it weren't for exclusive games to the Xbox, PS, and Nintendo...it would be rather stupid to purchase a console when you could spend a little bit more and get a PC, which you can upgrade as years go by, and of course it's a PC which allows you to do so much more than gaming. I'm thinkin about bypassing consoles altogether next gen and just build me a good PC.

How many people just keep upgrading their PCs for 7 or 8 years? (The amount of time these consoles systems have lasted) Maybe for 3-5 years...but after that, usually people start talking about buying a whole new system.

lcarus · 03-07-2013, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

How many people just keep upgrading their PCs for 7 or 8 years? (The amount of time these consoles systems have lasted) Maybe for 3-5 years...but after that, usually people start talking about buying a whole new system.

That's true, but I have a relatively old PC with relatively old graphics card (in technology years I guess), but games still look incredible compared to consoles. Plus you know...I can do so many other things on my PC. I still own a PS3, 360, and Wii, but for most titles I'm trying to get them on PC. For instance, Arkham City, a great game on all consoles and systems, is just stunning on PC.

KILLER_CLOWN · 03-07-2013, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lcarus

That's true, but I have a relatively old PC with relatively old graphics card (in technology years I guess), but games still look incredible compared to consoles. Plus you know...I can do so many other things on my PC. I still own a PS3, 360, and Wii, but for most titles I'm trying to get them on PC. For instance, Arkham City, a great game on all consoles and systems, is just stunning on PC.

I own a 360, PS3 and Wii and WII-U and I play them never..PC is the shiznitz!

Deberg_1990 · 03-08-2013, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN

I own a 360, PS3 and Wii and WII-U and I play them never

Then why did you buy them then?

**Guru** · 03-08-2013, 06:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Then why did you buy them then?

Because he is a Chiefs fan.

Dayze · 03-08-2013, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guru

Because he is a Chiefs fan.

Dayze · 03-09-2013, 09:33 PM

Did some looking to weekend at a dedicated gaming computer.
I was also able to get my hands on a throttle/yoke/pitch combo and switch panel for my flight sim.

I took a picture of the specs of the computer.

AMD A10 quad core
3.4Ghz
MS 8 64 bit
8GB DDR3'-1600 RAM
2TB 7,200 RPM Serial ATA hard drive
DVD etc
AMD 4G video memory
Wireless etc

I cleaned up my laptop and re-installed MS Flight Sim. My laptop is a 2MB and like a 1.7GHZ. It runs the sim pretty well, though I can't get the level of scenery and detail I'd like. Otherwise it gets really iffy.

Would a desktop like the one above run the sim a lot more smoothly? Allow me to run more detail etc?

hometeam · 03-09-2013, 09:46 PM

I wouldn't put any AMD in a gaming rig when I could pick an intel processor. I am also willing to spend money for the performance I want.

Also, when you say amd 4gb graphics that doesn't tell us a lot.

edit : a10 is an APU. Please dont.

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i...-AMD-A10-5800K

Dayze · 03-09-2013, 10:20 PM

Thanks. I really wanted to just get a rough ballpark since I know jack shit.
Definitely gonna hit you up when I'm ready.

03-04-2013, 04:03 PM
Mr. Laz Don't Tease Me Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: KS Casino cash: $392790	Game Consoles Are Already Dead — And Developers Know It Game Consoles Are Already Dead — And Developers Know It Mark Hachman posted 11 hours ago Share on Google+ Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Like on Facebook Still blasting away Halo's Covenant hordes on your Xbox 360, or ripping out guts as God of War's Kratos on your PS3? Your days are numbered — and I'm not talking about how far you're going to make it in these games. Game developers, it turns out, are abandoning the venerable video-game console even faster than gamers themselves. The Game Developers Conference, which opens next month in San Francisco, recently asked 2,500 developers about their plans for next-generation consoles. The results were, shall we say, not encouraging for the likes of Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo. Survey Says... Specifically, the GDC asked developers which platforms they had last developed for, which platforms they were developing for now, and on which platforms they planned their next game. To no big surprise, tablets and phones are increasingly winning over developers: 38 percent wrote their last game for mobile devices, 55 percent moved to mobile for their latest game, and 58 percent plan their next game there. Compare that to Sony's PS3. Thirteen percent of respondants called themselves current PS3 developers, and just 12.4 percent planned their next game for the PS3. The Xbox 360 only does slightly better: 13.2 percent for now, and 14 percent for the future. (Eleven percent of the devs polled said they're making games for the next-generation PlayStation 4 and the "Xbox 720," or whatever Microsoft ends up calling the 360's successor.) And don't even think about Nintendo's Wii or dedicated handheld game devices. Just 4.6 percent of developers are actively making a Wii game, although 6.4 percent say they'll do so in the future. A mere 4.2 percent are working PlayStation Vita games, with about 5 percent saying they have future plans. Barely 2.8 percent say they're developing future games for the Nintendo DS. And Then There's The PC More than half of the surveyed developers, or 53%, self-identified as "indie" developers — i.e., they're not associated with megacorps like Electronic Arts that are solely devoted to turning out the next blockbuster. Which may help explain one of the survey's more surprising findings, which is that many of these developers are actually once again warming to PCs and Macs. Those stats don't lie: 34.6 percent of developers say they've developed PC/Mac games in the past, 48 percent are doing so now, and 49 percent plan future games. Of course, you could reasonably ask what choice they have. It's incredibly difficult to eke out a living selling 99-cent games through Apple's App Store or Google Play. And sales of video-game consoles are in precipitous decline. In 2012, sales of video game consoles, software, and peripherals fell 22 percent to $13.3 billion, according to retail tracker NPD. By contrast, mobile games are upending the traditional "mobile console" handheld devices such as the Vita and the Nintendo DS, according to a report (PDF) co-authored by IDC and app analyst firm App Annie. Combined game sales on the iOS and Android app stores are now higher than revenues generated by the mobile consoles — even though games on the Vita can be ten to fifty times more expensive. And that's not even counting ad revenue generated by free and nearly free game apps. Why mobile? Chris Akhavan, senior vice president of partnerships for mobile game monetization services provider Tapjoy, explains that the reach of mobile games — 207 million iOS and Android devices combined, compared to the 70 million PS3s in the market, is the first driver. And mobile hardware is constantly, iteratively improving, while consoles only refresh every seven years or so. "The second is a lower barrier to entry," Akhavan told me in an email. He went on: Mobile platforms are much more open than a console, and don’t have the restrictions of a working with a publisher. Console game development comes with a much bigger price: big title console game studios maintain budgets around $80 - $100 million, while most small to mid-size mobile gaming studios have budget closer to $200,000 - $400,000. However, mobile game development budgets are growing because of the final contributing factor: earnings potential. Supercell reports earnings around $1 million per day for its games, and Gungho’s Puzzles and Dragons game is bringing in around $2 million daily. The monetization potential on mobile is much higher, and coupled with a lower development cost, there’s a huge opportunity to earn significant revenue. Why Consoles Suck What's the most telling sign of the demise of the traditional video game? Sequelitis. Each of 2012's top-ten bestselling games — every single one — has been done before: Call of Duty: Black Ops II, Madden NFL 13, Halo 4, even Just Dance 4 and Borderlands 2. Compare that to the vast array of indie games being developed for the PC, Mac, and tablets. Sure, you've probably never heard of many of those. But for just a dollar or two a pop, you can afford to try them out. Who needs top-tier review sites? A collection of four- and five-star reviews (along with a careful parsing of the review scores, to ensure that the developer is not "paying" for good reviews through in-game currency or other goodies) can fill the bill. Let's face it: for those with less and less time to game, episodic and casual games fill the bill, especially while riding trains and during "downtime" with no access to a console. Gamers can be online and playing in seconds. One of the most interesting tests will be platforms like the Ouya, which features a traditional console that plays mobile games. That's not to say that any given mobile game is a guaranteed winner; Mark Fidelman makes the case that most game developers are chasing imaginary profits. Still, how long can it be before the conservative mindset of console game developers drives more and more gamers away from the console and back onto their phones? Sure, for those who have never played a Call of Duty game, the experience can be, well, cinematic. But for those who detest being handheld along from checkpoint to checkpoint, the experience, is well, cinematic. (Ugh.) And when you do it again, and again, and again... well, maybe it's time to take a break with some Angry Birds.
Posts: 73,888

03-06-2013, 05:36 PM	#78
DaveNull Starter Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Villa Straylight Casino cash: $7872
Posts: 532

03-07-2013, 11:32 AM	#81
lcarus Everybody Lies. Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: 22 Acacia Avenue Casino cash: $55609	Also, if it weren't for exclusive games to the Xbox, PS, and Nintendo...it would be rather stupid to purchase a console when you could spend a little bit more and get a PC, which you can upgrade as years go by, and of course it's a PC which allows you to do so much more than gaming. I'm thinkin about bypassing consoles altogether next gen and just build me a good PC.
Posts: 7,085

03-09-2013, 09:33 PM	#88
Dayze Poop Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Overland Park Casino cash: $1177511	Did some looking to weekend at a dedicated gaming computer. I was also able to get my hands on a throttle/yoke/pitch combo and switch panel for my flight sim. I took a picture of the specs of the computer. AMD A10 quad core 3.4Ghz MS 8 64 bit 8GB DDR3'-1600 RAM 2TB 7,200 RPM Serial ATA hard drive DVD etc AMD 4G video memory Wireless etc I cleaned up my laptop and re-installed MS Flight Sim. My laptop is a 2MB and like a 1.7GHZ. It runs the sim pretty well, though I can't get the level of scenery and detail I'd like. Otherwise it gets really iffy. Would a desktop like the one above run the sim a lot more smoothly? Allow me to run more detail etc? __________________ Life is 99% inspiration, 1% Perspiration, and 1% Attention to Detial.
Posts: 15,408

03-09-2013, 09:46 PM	#89
hometeam Veteran Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Jefferson City Casino cash: $2021265	I wouldn't put any AMD in a gaming rig when I could pick an intel processor. I am also willing to spend money for the performance I want. Also, when you say amd 4gb graphics that doesn't tell us a lot. edit : a10 is an APU. Please dont. http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i...-AMD-A10-5800K Last edited by hometeam; 03-09-2013 at 10:01 PM..
Posts: 2,056

03-09-2013, 10:20 PM	#90
Dayze Poop Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Overland Park Casino cash: $1177511	Thanks. I really wanted to just get a rough ballpark since I know jack shit. Definitely gonna hit you up when I'm ready. __________________ Life is 99% inspiration, 1% Perspiration, and 1% Attention to Detial.
Posts: 15,408

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode