Live data from Hacker News

Major Games Publishers Are Feeling the Impact of Peaking Attention

midiaresearch.com

101–110 of 110 posts

Re: Major Games Publishers Are Feeling the Impact of Peaking Attention

#101
post #53
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it might have something to do with a combination of free to play and no matchmaking. Once a BR has saturated the market, the percentage of new to experienced players starts to drop. I think most players will reach a skill peak and the game starts to get harder faster than they are improving. This can be frustrating, and since newer BRs have a higher percentage of less skill players they feel easier. With no m…

That makes a lot of sense. And even matchmaking, if implemented badly, won't help much: when matchmaking is based on monotonic point accumulation, players with sub-average skill growth will be pushed out. Likewise, if the matchmaking rank decays slower (or not at all) than actual skill, players who took a break will leave when they try to return.

> even matchmaking, if implemented badly, won't help much: when matchmaking is based on monotonic point accumulation

Do any (modern, popular) games implement this kind of matchmaking? I believe there's often a monotonically increasing 'rank' or 'level' displayed to the player, but I'd be surprised if any major games used this kind of score as the sole foundation for matchmaking.

Re: Major Games Publishers Are Feeling the Impact of Peaking Attention

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but nothing in the battle royale genre that is quickly growing and a threat to both Call of Duty and Overwatch That's not really how games work though. Games are mainly emotional purchases of mass-produced art, not commodities like Corn or Oil. Games are not fungible like this. Telling Activision "you must make a battle royale game because Fortnite" is a quick way to watch them burn a lot of money on something that…

I agree with all that (I try not to think about how we’ll never get a lovingly made, non-F2P Warcraft IV.) I just think that even if their growth strategy is bad or callous, it’s still a strategy and the restructuring/layoffs aren’t only to cut costs.

They are releasing Warcraft 3 remastered - maybe if it does really well they would do a Warcraft 4...

Re: Major Games Publishers Are Feeling the Impact of Peaking Attention

#103
post #79
post #9

I'd love to spend money on games. Most games seem to be optimized for younger audience (==dumbed down) or monetized in really dumb ways. So no buy.

Here are some worth your time and money. Look to indie games, mostly. Lots of great stuff in that space. - Spelunky - Don't Starve - Factorio - Oxygen Not Included - All Zachtronic's games - Stephen's Sausage Roll - Stardew Valley - Faster than Light - Kerbal Space Program - Dungeon Warfare (if you're a TD fan) - Return of Obra Dinn - Prison Architect - Mini Metro - Cities: Skylines - Frostpunk - RimWorld - Darkest D…

+1 for Obra Dinn

I'd also add strategy games like Civilisation VI etc.

Re: Major Games Publishers Are Feeling the Impact of Peaking Attention

#104
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t have a ton of direct insight into gaming, but in general when a business that’s dependent on development is facing headwinds and doubles down on hitting the numbers, that’s a bad sign. It’s often a signal that the firm is not investing in the business. IMO, modern business models for gaming (ie casinos for elementary school kids) are problematic and are turning kids off. There will be a harsh reckoning as mor…

Or even accelerating the rate at which players age out of their target market. There's only so many games you can be subjected to the loot box marketing spree before you start turning away from major publishers all together. I like to sit down and enjoy my video games, not have carrots dangled to open my wallet after every chunk of gameplay.

Amen. I just got a Switch and Zelda: Breath of the Wild, and it's really nice to just sit down and play, knowing that since I have already payed everything upfront, the next 100 hours of gameplay are mine to enjoy without any business transactions interrupting it.

Re: Major Games Publishers Are Feeling the Impact of Peaking Attention

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much input did they have into Titanfall 1&2? Those weren't exactly gangbusters.

Titanfall 2 had one of the best singleplayer campaigns for an FPS over the past 5 years. Really fun and unique. It's multiplayer was good too, but it was launched in a really bad spot that was 100% EA's fault.

Whilst the launch window for Titanfall 2 was pretty bad, I have a feeling that the multiplayer and longevity of the game would have suffered regardless. The skill ceiling is too high for most players, and I feel that without the casual audience the playerbase would drop off as it has even without competition from the other shooters.

Re: Major Games Publishers Are Feeling the Impact of Peaking Attention

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but nothing in the battle royale genre that is quickly growing and a threat to both Call of Duty and Overwatch That's not really how games work though. Games are mainly emotional purchases of mass-produced art, not commodities like Corn or Oil. Games are not fungible like this. Telling Activision "you must make a battle royale game because Fortnite" is a quick way to watch them burn a lot of money on something that…

> It's like saying, "Hey Warner Brothers. Disney just made a bunch of money making this 'Frozen' film, so you need to also make a movie about Magical Sisters in some sort of Medieval European Ice Palace". Technically, they can execute on this, but the result is unlikely to be successful. Maybe a more apt example is "Hey WB, Marvel just made a huge amount of money making a 'Shared Superhero Movie Universe'. You should…

I feel that the structural components of these large gaming publishers are actively working against them creating an environment to discover any new thing, let alone a new game genre. For instance I just do not believe that these large companies have the logistical bandwidth/incentive to not chase a 100MM hit, and these larger publishers have clearly learned from the post-MMO, post-Kickstarter, F2P/DLC landscape. It was quite a few years ago when I heard the anecdote that all new proposals should have a DLC/loot box hook for projects, and it just makes so much sense. Valve and others trailblazed the concept that you could convince people to part with their money for a chance of getting something of perceived value. Everything they have been doing is to create ecosystems of engagement to create those long relationship/impulse opportunities. To me, this is optimizing for the fact that most consumers in the market seem to have less free money for the traditional model that they are used to, but are willing to leak out a few dollars here and there en masse. From the platform side the console churn/complexity that was there in the 90's is lessened, slowed, and standardized.

The organizations themselves feel like they can't handle 100 1MM projects compared to a single 100MM project just from leadership and management but that's not something I blame wholly on these companies, it's a structural thing in most public companies right now. From a simple analysis it is so much less risky for them to just acquire a new development firm with a sure thing/hit that can be shoved down their sales funnel. You gain the best parts of the corpse too: the employees, the IP, the proven product, and the future and recurring sales. Sure they'll lose the employees, but the rest of it will carry weight until the IP is forgotten. Even right now the IP for both EA/Activision is probably still worth a ton if they had to part it out.

In a more theory kind of sense I just feel like this is one of the problems with how public companies work right now. Once you are of a certain size and exist primarily in the B2C space, the mindset becomes optimize, reduce costs, and make GAAP profits. While I feel like historically this may have been a healthy transition from companies at (today's dollars) 50MM-150MM AR to take them to 500MM+ AR it doesn't translate as well when a 100MM revenue increase is the only way to even move the needle when the majority of the company's revenue steals the attention.

Re: Major Games Publishers Are Feeling the Impact of Peaking Attention

#107
post #77

While we're all complaining about the state of current games, what I really want is for games (especially RTS games, but really any game) to come with an API so I can build and test AIs. For example, I love the game Planetary Annihilation (I played its predecessor Total Annihilation a ton as a kid). But after a few dozen games, I began to think 'I wonder if I could just encode my strategy as a policy' - not even deep…

If you're into RTS, Starcraft 2 is basis for a bunch of research and has an API available - see https://github.com/deepmind/pysc2 or a tutorial for getting started https://njustesen.com/2018/01/16/getting-started-with-the-st...

DOTA had also decent API links as far as I recall.

Also, there's a lot of research on older games, see https://github.com/openai/retro for interfacing with NES/SNES/GBA/etc games.

Re: Major Games Publishers Are Feeling the Impact of Peaking Attention

#108
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you build a well designed, well crafted product Not a strong suit for triple-a developers.

I'm not sure developers are really the problem. It seems like over the past 10-15 years the video game publishing industry has adopted Hollywood turd-polishing tactics (late review embargo dates, extremely frontloaded marketing blitzes with almost no useful/accurate information) to try to sell troubled productions as-is instead of overhauling them. Anthem absolutely reeks of this, for example.

Developers aren't the root cause but when you're making a AAA game the required team size alone pretty much means you're not going to have an all-star team of devs.

Re: Major Games Publishers Are Feeling the Impact of Peaking Attention

#109
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Titanfall 2 had one of the best singleplayer campaigns for an FPS over the past 5 years. Really fun and unique. It's multiplayer was good too, but it was launched in a really bad spot that was 100% EA's fault.

Whilst the launch window for Titanfall 2 was pretty bad, I have a feeling that the multiplayer and longevity of the game would have suffered regardless. The skill ceiling is too high for most players, and I feel that without the casual audience the playerbase would drop off as it has even without competition from the other shooters.

I started playing maybe 2 weeks after launch on pc, there weren't that many players. And I'd be running around looking for a titan and some solo pilot would be flying through the air parkouring and one shot no scope me. I wouldn't even see them. After about 30 minutes of getting murdered like that I just stopped playing. Luckily I didn't pay for the game. So yeah no real onboarding, people were way too good.

Re: Major Games Publishers Are Feeling the Impact of Peaking Attention

#110
post #79
post #9

I'd love to spend money on games. Most games seem to be optimized for younger audience (==dumbed down) or monetized in really dumb ways. So no buy.

Here are some worth your time and money. Look to indie games, mostly. Lots of great stuff in that space. - Spelunky - Don't Starve - Factorio - Oxygen Not Included - All Zachtronic's games - Stephen's Sausage Roll - Stardew Valley - Faster than Light - Kerbal Space Program - Dungeon Warfare (if you're a TD fan) - Return of Obra Dinn - Prison Architect - Mini Metro - Cities: Skylines - Frostpunk - RimWorld - Darkest D…

Oxygen Not Included, probably my favorite game of all time, and it's not even finished yet. Quite amazing, I think.
Post reply on HN