Only 80 games per year to be profitable

Maybe if the publishers/devs got royalties on used game sales and rental this would not be an issue....

With the PS3's huge dev costs, this could play right into the 360's and Rev's hands.

Same thing happens for movies. I'm not surprised by this at all.

As the technology grows and games increase in size how will the consumer be able to afford games? Companies will lose 3rd party devs and money. There could be a market crash.

Perhaps this will disuade companies from making shitty games

If people would stop pirating and buy the games they enjoy playing, this would be less of an issue. It is not such a big problem here in the U.S., but most people I know back in Europe and in Asia have never bought a single title for their Xbox/PS2. And these morons don't even understand that it'll hurt them in the long run.

funny no one said: "maybe if most of the games didn't suck, they would sell better"

Let me be the first, then.

This is why the game comapanies are merging or taking over one another over. The smaller guys are disappearing. And you'll likely see less exclusive titles for only one system.

And this is exactly why I think Nintendo made a good choice (or at least, a defendable one) about not having HD support in the Revolution.

There number one goal is value: for the players *and* the developers. By keeping costs down, smaller companies can afford to develop for them, and maybe even *gasp* take some risks. I'm looking forward to their library.

A big misconception about HD, though, is that by supporting it games will look good. This is patently false. The revolution will be able to output at DVD level qualities. I've yet to see a game that convinces me I'm watchign a DVD and not playing a game. All HD does, is output more pixels so you can see your crap visuals more sharply. A theoretical game for some system in the future that outputs at 480p and convinces me I'm just watching a movie on my player will blow away your average viewing public more than Call of Duty 2 for the 360 does.

So, keep it cheap, and focus on making convincing textures, lighting, and physics (the things that really matter), and not just spewing out more pixels. The Revolution is where it's at!

That number isn't surprising. It's the same for the music industry. About 20,000 albums come out per year and only about 113 of them are successful and really turn a profit.

"funny no one said: "maybe if most of the games didn't suck, they would sell better"

Let me be the first, then."

Here! Here!

Score one for Nintendo...they're still gonna have the lowest development costs.

Yep, Nintendo's been kicin 360 and ps3 ass hopefully it shoould stay that way lol.

What I really want to see is devs taking risks making smaller scale affordable titles. In the console world I have to wait for a title to be out for a few months before I see a possible price break. Same thing in the PC world. I would like to see cheap, simple games that have high replay value. I don't need movie budgets and extensive in-game cinematics to have fun. Then you might see more than 80 sucessful titles in a year.