Results to the ME3 Fiasco for the Industry

One of the biggest turning points coming up in the industry today is how Bioware and EA react to the outcry against the ending of ME3. I see a couple of possible ways they could do this, there's more than 3, but these are the basic break downs, so I think I'll just throw them out there in the format of the ending of ME3.

RENEGADE ENDING- EA releases a true ending to the game as a 15 dollar DLC, it's the last level, fighting harbinger, saving the galaxy. 

Result: If this isn't boycotted, then they turn a profit on this sleezy scheme. They do this again and again, and other publishers take it up. The worst possible use of DLC is attained rather than their original purpose of extra side content, bite sized expansion packs, and similar to pay for continued development by the Developer (Remember, developers rarely get royalties, instead they are paid by the milestone and this is why they have to fire so many employees after each project. DLC keeps the developer in cash while they're looking to move to their next project and also pays for any post-launch debugging, which is sometimes essential due to how hard publishers push developers to launch the projects at particular dates.). 

NEUTRAL ENDING- Bioware caves, and releases an entirely new ending for free. Losing both Bioware and EA so much money that Bioware inevitably liquidated and sold off by EA. 

 Result: Publisher Marketing groups have a field day. They get the biggest example for crushing the developer's ability to experiment and expand their game outside of normal player experiences they could have ever hoped for. Can you say Infinity + 1 FPS's for another decade? I can. 

PARAGON ENDING- Bioware sticks to their guns, they release a clarifying and expanding cut scenes and epilogue tracks that are reminiscent of DA1's ending in how they wrap up the lose ends and tell us how the game ends. No new interactive content, battles, or levels are added (they probably cannot afford to release something like that for free) They probably need to set aside the whole "is he indoctrinated or not" question and just outright answer it as "yes".

Result: Bioware still loses a fuck ton of money and user support. EA will still probably liquidate them unless the new baulder's gate is absolutely FANTASTIC and redeeming. But the Developer's right to control the narrative as they see it, to their vision, remains sacrosanct for the time being until something like this is pulled again. Considering Baulder's Gate is being handled by atari and not Bioware, this probably means they're still fucked, though considering they kinda got the credit for NWN2 and KotOR2, then if it does well who knows?

The Decline of Game Sales, but not of Games

Game sales have been steadily dropping over the past few years, or rather, it should be said that retail sales have been dropping. The social game and app markets are as strong, if not stronger, than they were when they first bloomed a little under half a decade ago now, but they are not directed at the hardcore gamer market. The lionshare of game making has always been the AAA title games, the 'God of War's the 'Grand Theft Auto's, the 'Warcraft's and 'Age of Empires' and 'Mario's of the game industry have always been the goal of all game makers. We want to tell stories and make vast sweeping games that give hours of enjoyment, not piddly little things that people play while on the bus or the toilet.

A rather interesting article came out yesterday from Daily Finance. The author gives some ideas on how one might produce results, and all of his ideas have pros and cons, but I think he's missing a fundamental point: The age of retail in video games has come and gone. It is a mockery, a false choice, an idiot's choice. Why would we ever want to pay for a physical object when the product is actually just bits of data that can be given to use over a line of copper and zinc and rubber. The online game market is where sales are happening now, where it is quick and easy and the purchase can be made right from the system you'll play it on, and a record is kept so that if you ever lose the data you can just download it again. You lose a disk? Your disk is lost, you have to buy a new one. Beyond this fact, he makes some very good points.

The game industry does need to lower it's prices, or more specifically, the retailers and publishers need to do so. So much of game sellers seem to forget that there are more poor people than rich people, and poor people are more likely to spend their money on things that will distract them from how hard life is, after all, their lives are usually harder than those of rich people, they need more distractions. I'm not saying drop the prices enormously, but dropping them to 30 or 40 dollars rather than 60 dollars is probably a good idea, you'll get more sales, and more sales means more investor confidence, and that'll help business all round, not to mention that you get yourself out there.

The next issue he brings up is a better kind of controller, and he might be right there, but at the same time putting in a new controller would alienate older players. I personally cannot stand many of the ways some games use touch screens, but there's no reason that they couldn't work. By using a small touch screen device that communicated with the game, one could alter the specifics of the control for the game.

The last point is the most important. Games need to change. They need to change and transform to be better for casual audiences, without losing their hardercore audiences. Games such as Mass Effect 3 with radically different player modes (narrative, rpg, shooter, plus the normal difficulty level system). Similar tactics will be necessary to keep games nice for both casual and hardcore players.

The point is that games are changing, our audience is changing, our methods of sale need to change. The way we think about and use and make games all need to change, but most of all, to change how we sell and distribute game. If we can handle that change, we will bounce back from this small dip in game sales and profits from retail.