Most active commenters
  • willis936(4)
  • BlueTemplar(3)
  • account42(3)

←back to thread

573 points Philpax | 15 comments | | HN request time: 1.438s | source | bottom
Show context
eknkc ◴[] No.42152405[source]
20-25 years ago a handful of companies had a weird hold on me. I’d jump on anything Google made back then. Blizzard could sell me any game they came up with. If it was from Blizzard, it was gonna be great.

Lost all of it obviously. Not a single company has my loyalty anymore.

Except if valve were to release a mystery black box with faint lambda symbol on it. I’d pay whatever they asked for it.

replies(10): >>42152458 #>>42152534 #>>42152573 #>>42152579 #>>42152930 #>>42153066 #>>42153166 #>>42153282 #>>42153685 #>>42153713 #
keyringlight ◴[] No.42152534[source]
My theory is that there's a period when a studio has huge early success (plus in the case of Valve, they started with huge amounts of money from being former MS employees) that lets them devote themselves to their mission of making games, before either mission creep or dilution with new hires occurs over time either from staff naturally changing over time or expanding. Another factor is that when aiming to 'go big' and realize what they can do with lots of resources, they need to partner/join with others that don't work the same way and will influence them.
replies(2): >>42152589 #>>42152915 #
ramesh31 ◴[] No.42152589[source]
Valve is still a top tier org, but they simply make too much money in the publishing business to bother with game development anymore. Any sales would be peanuts to what they are making through developer fees and the marketplace. This is why all of their releases in the last decade have been F2P.
replies(2): >>42152778 #>>42152923 #
1. willis936 ◴[] No.42152923[source]
Sounds like a perfect environment to make games. No budget or schedule pressure, virtually limitless resources so the staff can strive to make art with love and without the corruption of chasing a bottom line.

The entire media industry on almost every format is chasing nostalgia because they refuse to recreate the environment that made endearing stories and experiences in the first place.

replies(5): >>42154578 #>>42154836 #>>42156530 #>>42157816 #>>42171958 #
2. chii ◴[] No.42154578[source]
> virtually limitless resources so the staff can strive to make art with love and without the corruption of chasing a bottom line.

which means they have no obligation to ship. And so it is with the valve-time, they never shipped.

Some pressure (monetary usually) is required. Not to mention that "strive to make art" is not a commercially viable objective - the owners of steam will basically be operating a charity for these artists.

replies(2): >>42154703 #>>42155878 #
3. justinrubek ◴[] No.42154703[source]
Obligation to ship is overrated. Not everything has to be made in a crunch time marathon. There are lots of avenues to be explored without the constant pressure to perform. I think it's a good thing if they take their time crafting things.
replies(1): >>42171980 #
4. Ekaros ◴[] No.42154836[source]
Look at Star Citizen on other end... Too much resources can lead to endless scope creep, moving targets and potentially never actually shipping anything.

Right constraints make things happen.

replies(1): >>42157594 #
5. willis936 ◴[] No.42155878[source]
>the owners of steam will basically be operating a charity for these artists

If that's what it takes to make something worth playing, then so be it.

Was Bungie in its day a charity? Or did they just get it? 20 years later the magic is gone and Microsoft is desperately trying to figure out how to make the goose lay an egg. As long as they're optimizing quarterly reports they'll never get there.

replies(1): >>42171970 #
6. BlueTemplar ◴[] No.42156530[source]
That's only the case if you are so blinded by advertising that you don't see the innovations happening in the low(er) budget media.
replies(1): >>42158416 #
7. ascagnel_ ◴[] No.42157594[source]
I think that's on the game's director, Chris Roberts, because it's not the only time it happened.

Roberts was the lead on Digital Anvil's "Freelancer", until the publisher (Microsoft), frustrated at the scope creep and protracted dev cycle, bought out the studio, demoted Roberts, and cut features so they could ship the thing.

8. pxoe ◴[] No.42157816[source]
Valve has demonstrated that it is not a perfect environment to make games because they just hardly made any. Perhaps it's precisely because there's no pressure, as well as their "flat structure" (which also results in a lack of pressure) that got blamed by their own employees for their lack of releases. (https://www.pcgamer.com/valves-unusual-corporate-structure-c...)
9. willis936 ◴[] No.42158416[source]
Not at all. Where are the low and mid budget movies? Where are the games publishers on low budget games? Art as a business has transitioned to investor gambling rather than having any thought for the quality of the product. That's what I take issue with.

Sure single person self-funded passion projects exist. They always have and they always will. And sure what one person can do is more than they ever could in the past. It's still not the same as something that's forged by a team of visionaries each with unique backgrounds and skillsets.

Frost makes the point more well spoken and stylish than me often.

https://youtu.be/gZffFoQekcc

replies(1): >>42158571 #
10. BlueTemplar ◴[] No.42158571{3}[source]
> Where are the low and mid budget movies?

At Cannes and your local 'art' cinema ? To be fair, I don't watch movies much, but I do still go to these sometimes.

> Where are the games publishers on low budget games?

Who said anything about publishers ? (And Valve dumped theirs as soon as they could.)

> Sure single person self-funded passion projects exist. They always have and they always will. And sure what one person can do is more than they ever could in the past. It's still not the same as something that's forged by a team of visionaries each with unique backgrounds and skillsets.

Ok, I have no idea what you're talking about, are you "no-true-scotsmanning" here ?

We have a great recent example : "Factorio (: Space Age)", which started as a one-person idea, took form as a 3-person company, got after release a 20k€ Indiegogo funding, then blazed a trail of success over the next 12 years, now with something like 5 million sales for the base game and a 30 person company.

How is that not "a team of visionaries each with unique backgrounds and skillset" ?!

Or the amateurs at Spring-Recoil / Zero-K / BAR, which show how you can do that even better than the professional, commercial RTS.

Or indeed one person projects like Shadow Empire (with some publisher support), which show how you can make a brilliant 4X/Wargame on what I assume is a tiny budget...

And there are probably many other examples here...

replies(1): >>42158892 #
11. willis936 ◴[] No.42158892{4}[source]
Your examples account for less than 1% of the industry. Why are you cherry picking examples when discussing media industry trends? Are you saying "it isn't happening because of these few examples"?

I get that you're trying to discredit the argument by claiming fallacies, but these aren't just my views. Industry insiders (Frost in games and RedLetterMedia in movies) have been talking about this for nearly a decade.

replies(1): >>42159214 #
12. BlueTemplar ◴[] No.42159214{5}[source]
Because "cherry picking" is what everyone does when what they are interested in is great media, and the more time-limited they are, the more this matters.

"Industry" insiders' opinions are irrelevant, they are just too bogged in the day to day details, they tend to forget that 99% of everything is crap and that's fine (and they do that because they have to make a living there, their incentives are different).

And you cannot predict greatness (you are the one that talked about 'visionaries', remember ?) - specifically of new teams you've never heard about before (of course once they did something great it's another thing, even with reversion to the mean they can have a lot of other successes).

13. account42 ◴[] No.42171958[source]
Except the employees are still evaluated (by their peers) based on how they contribute to the company's bottom line.

It could be a decent environment for making great games if Gabe wantet it to be. It isn't one right now, Gabe is still a businessman first.

14. account42 ◴[] No.42171970{3}[source]
Too bad for you (and me) that it's not us deciding this but Gabe and he prefers micro transactions, loot boxes and other profit schemes over art.
15. account42 ◴[] No.42171980{3}[source]
Sounds good in theory but doesn't usually work out in practice. In the real world, art benefits from restrictions.