To be fair, the industry did this to themselves, and they kinda deserve it. The big push to digital and digital only means there is no reason to rush out and buy these games at launch unless you plan to play it on launch day. Even for someone that's physical or nothing like me, there is more than enough people that went digital that even a smaller run game, isn't going to sell out of physical copies at normal price. The other shot to the foot the industry did has been releasing game in an unfinished state for the past couple years. If you can't play the game via a demo before launch, you shouldn't buy it at launch. Wait till enough customers, have had their hands on the game, to know if it works or not, cause reviewers won't mention the bugs. They are told not to mention bugs, and that it will be fixed with a day one patch, and 9/10 times. it ain't.
Before I even watch: ludicrous take. There is too much of every media: games, movies, books... you just gotta filter what's best for you and don't let yourself drown into the fear of missing out.
Games being given for free are definitely not hurting gaming. Most people who gotten a game for free were probably not going to buy the game at full price usually because of a lack of interest in the game. Because of this, the devs don't really lose much for giving away their games for free. I'm sure most of us looked a game that free and "Oh hey, the game is free. It looks interesting enough, might as well get it." Sure, there are going to be people who get it and then forget about it later but other will surely play those games they got for free and if they like it, they might also look in to other games that the very same devs that made the free game has also made and/or look forward to any other game the devs may release in the future. The same thing could apply to games that go on sale. People might look at a game that's on sale and be like "Oh this game look interesting and it's on sale for about $5 so I might as get it."
Honestly, this is kind of a "nothing article". The author talks about how games being cheap/free causes people to buy them and never play them, but doesn't explain how that's actually a problem. Me, personally... I have a grand total of 1 game that I bought and never played, because after that one game, I learned my lesson and became more mindful of my purchases, despite the discounts. Especially now that I have a clearer idea of what I like. If somebody has a problem with impulse buying, that's a personal problem, not an industry-wide one. If anything, I'd argue the way Steam sales work benefits both developers and players. Games get progressively more discounted over time, allowing each player to pay what they're willing, while also letting developers earn the maximum amount from their potential player base. I agree that live service games are bad, and that open-world games tend to flop, but that has nothing to do with the rest of the article.
On one hand, yeah, it feels like a rant. On the other hand, it feels like the article's author is just trying their best to achieve completionist on the games & the backlogs in question, only to fall short, and it highlights a lot of the problems with careless consumption. It ultimately is on them that they chose to engage / play through the games instead of leaving a couple untouched and e.g. letting their kid explore them, but the market that made this a reality in the first place should also be considered.
Games still make most of their sales in their first few weeks while the hype is at their highest. If a game is good at launch and I'm excited enough for it, I'll buy it at full price. A good sale might get me to buy a game I had forgotten about or was not as interested in. Even with a never ending backlog, I'm still going to get a game right away if I'm excited enough for it. I'm sure there are people who largely wait for sales, but who is to say they would have otherwise gotten it at full price? The article doesn't really explain how anything is being ruined either. It's 95% talking about his personal circumstances and only mentioned a bit at the end about a fear of a market crash, which I think could happen eventually but would have waaaay more factors than just "too many" games. I do agree that live service and open world games can suck though (even good ones like Elden Ring can feel pretty shallow).
To be fair, the industry did this to themselves, and they kinda deserve it. The big push to digital and digital only means there is no reason to rush out and buy these games at launch unless you plan to play it on launch day. Even for someone that's physical or nothing like me, there is more than enough people that went digital that even a smaller run game, isn't going to sell out of physical copies at normal price.
The other shot to the foot the industry did has been releasing game in an unfinished state for the past couple years. If you can't play the game via a demo before launch, you shouldn't buy it at launch. Wait till enough customers, have had their hands on the game, to know if it works or not, cause reviewers won't mention the bugs. They are told not to mention bugs, and that it will be fixed with a day one patch, and 9/10 times. it ain't.
Before I even watch: ludicrous take. There is too much of every media: games, movies, books... you just gotta filter what's best for you and don't let yourself drown into the fear of missing out.
Games being given for free are definitely not hurting gaming. Most people who gotten a game for free were probably not going to buy the game at full price usually because of a lack of interest in the game. Because of this, the devs don't really lose much for giving away their games for free. I'm sure most of us looked a game that free and "Oh hey, the game is free. It looks interesting enough, might as well get it." Sure, there are going to be people who get it and then forget about it later but other will surely play those games they got for free and if they like it, they might also look in to other games that the very same devs that made the free game has also made and/or look forward to any other game the devs may release in the future. The same thing could apply to games that go on sale. People might look at a game that's on sale and be like "Oh this game look interesting and it's on sale for about $5 so I might as get it."
Honestly, this is kind of a "nothing article". The author talks about how games being cheap/free causes people to buy them and never play them, but doesn't explain how that's actually a problem. Me, personally... I have a grand total of 1 game that I bought and never played, because after that one game, I learned my lesson and became more mindful of my purchases, despite the discounts. Especially now that I have a clearer idea of what I like. If somebody has a problem with impulse buying, that's a personal problem, not an industry-wide one.
If anything, I'd argue the way Steam sales work benefits both developers and players. Games get progressively more discounted over time, allowing each player to pay what they're willing, while also letting developers earn the maximum amount from their potential player base.
I agree that live service games are bad, and that open-world games tend to flop, but that has nothing to do with the rest of the article.
On one hand, yeah, it feels like a rant. On the other hand, it feels like the article's author is just trying their best to achieve completionist on the games & the backlogs in question, only to fall short, and it highlights a lot of the problems with careless consumption.
It ultimately is on them that they chose to engage / play through the games instead of leaving a couple untouched and e.g. letting their kid explore them, but the market that made this a reality in the first place should also be considered.
Games still make most of their sales in their first few weeks while the hype is at their highest. If a game is good at launch and I'm excited enough for it, I'll buy it at full price. A good sale might get me to buy a game I had forgotten about or was not as interested in. Even with a never ending backlog, I'm still going to get a game right away if I'm excited enough for it. I'm sure there are people who largely wait for sales, but who is to say they would have otherwise gotten it at full price?
The article doesn't really explain how anything is being ruined either. It's 95% talking about his personal circumstances and only mentioned a bit at the end about a fear of a market crash, which I think could happen eventually but would have waaaay more factors than just "too many" games.
I do agree that live service and open world games can suck though (even good ones like Elden Ring can feel pretty shallow).