After watching krip stream ROS

"

Spysong192 wrote:

This is a commonly used argument that is contructed by fear. The same argument politics made about tax reforms and that companies would go away. End of story was they didn´t and some could even focus on that by focusing on their first intention ... a niche product with a target audience.

But there´s no point to argue with someone about gamedesign when he´s acting like he´s working in the marketing department and only have sales and money in focus.

Also right there, this attitude is why AAA titles and companies are more and more in doubt. Because people arguing like you are in position where they tell how a game should be whilst they only have money in mind.

Because producing content at a net loss for a company is great for its long term viability?

Because non AAA developers don't need to pay back their investors?

Because they don't need to pay rent, food, utilities, server costs, daily expenses, health care, etc?

Because niche games have no intent to become bigger or more stable?

Because those indie developers should never grow enough to become AAA developer houses?





Like it or not, money is the basis on why the game can even exist and they need to produce content that earns them back more money then it costs them to make regardless of how we feel about it.


They need to develop content that enough people enjoy that it recoups their costs and maybe earns some profit, and making sure that profits are taken care of does NOT exclude making good content.....


Cheap money grabbing trash content production isn't the same as making good content with maximized profits, that is a skill and ethics based concern and not a business related one.
And dev houses with neither skill nor ethics would not of produced anything good even if they were doing it for free anyway.... but a skilled ethical dev house would produce quality content and deserves those profits for their work.

"

Spysong192 wrote:

This is a commonly used argument that is contructed by fear. The same argument politics made about tax reforms and that companies would go away. End of story was they didn´t and some could even focus on that by focusing on their first intention ... a niche product with a target audience.

But there´s no point to argue with someone about gamedesign when he´s acting like he´s working in the marketing department and only have sales and money in focus.

Also right there, this attitude is why AAA titles and companies are more and more in doubt. Because people arguing like you are in position where they tell how a game should be whilst they only have money in mind.

what?

you seem to forget that poe is 'always-on' game with team that recently crossed 50-man mark. these are SERIOUS fixed costs that cannot be deferred ad infinitum because ggg members are pouring their own private money into it for 7 years already.

and you cannot pay serious collocation bills with nice words. you need money.

they are no longer in position to cater to small audience because their costs generated by huge exposure are no longer small. coount for yourself how much company has to earn to pay one developer salary - but count everything, like office cost, licenses, trips, cost of recruitment etc. these add up and in practice company needs 2-3times the gross salary to make even.

the companies selling niche products, you are probably thinking about 'for-the-rich' apple and their phones - guess what - using apple phone (nor any other device of that sort) does not require having 10 hours to spare. there are only few demographics that can spare 10+ hours a day without seriously impacting their daily life. and most of these are on the sorter end of the financial stick

Why are you talking about GGG not having money to pay their bills? Do you have some inside info? Or are you just pulling shit out of your ass?

"

Alhoon wrote:

Why are you talking about GGG not having money to pay their bills? Do you have some inside info? Or are you just pulling shit out of your ass?

It has nothing to do with their current finances. It has to do with the value of making content exclusionary and only for a small target audience versus making it so that more players can experience that content in a weaker form with the ability to scale that content into stronger iterations of itself for the elite few.... and the impact of how much content costs to create versus how much revenue that work can generate for a target small audience compared to a larger general audience.

What was said is continually making content that produces less revenue then it cost to create is always a bad idea for a game developer in the long term.

ARPG's are by definition casual friendly.

I can't believe people are arguing that GGG is making a niche game.

"

Jiero wrote:

What was said is continually making content that produces less revenue then it cost to create is always a bad idea for a game developer in the long term.

Again, who are you quoting here? Who said they're making less money than they're producing?

Even if that were true (and I'm not saying it is unless you provide some evidence), we're talking about two completely different companies here. Activision Blizzard has huge amount of stockholders they need to report and pay dividends regularly, and if they're not producing sizable profit, their stock value and the value of their company goes down. This is not the case with GGG. They are not part of the stock market, they have nobody else to answer to other than themselves. And if you've read their philosophy, they're more than happy to make less profit if that means they're able to produce the games they want to play themselves.