| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (97)

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:04PM AutobotIronhide said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Honestly, with games like Modern Warfare 2 and Halo 3 I think they're the games to raise the sales.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 10:50PM Magetto1 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@AutobotIronhide
Exactly, having good multiplayer I'd imagine helps raise a game's sales. Even then, it's not like single player games are hurting either. I heard Mass Effect 2 and Super Mario Galaxy sold quite well. So the reason game sales have declined is because of people just playing a single multiplayer game? It couldn't possible be the RECESSION we're in right now?
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 11:56PM Verrier said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Magetto1

Mass Effect 2 sold decently considering that it was released in the worst month of the year to release games, January. (right after people have spent all their money on Christmas and likely purchased plenty of new games)

Probably would have sold twice as much if released last December as opposed to this January. But of course Bioware thought that Dragon Age wouldn't be able to compete if ME2 came out last year, probably rightly seeing as how superior ME2 was.
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2010 12:42AM Themoreyouknow said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@AutobotIronhide
I only buy multiplayer games. It adds a lot more fun and replay value than facing off against artificial "intelligence" enemies. Artificial intelligence? Seriously? How many times have you seen an AI Bot standing still, looking at a wall and watching paint dry?
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2010 2:50AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@AutobotIronhide

It's absolutly devistating for the publishers. I mean how dreadful must they be feeling that they only sold 12 million copies of a game and now everyones playing it online. I mean that must suck that everyone who already owns 2 copies of the game isn't going out and buying a 3rd.

We must charge them to play those 12 million copies or else we aren't going to make any money.
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2010 9:05AM zigie said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@AutobotIronhide honestly, i would rather see more coop online games then anything else, im pro coop then standard multiplayer VS. Don't get me wrong, i love both.

@ Patcher the hyena: WTF!!! usually, i play multiplayer when i have a few minutes to burn. Lets be honest, MW2, BC2 and all crap like that are basically only good for multiplayer in the long run. Start making games that are good in the long run and you'll see the market shift. When ppl start saying that online is more important the single play think of metal gear, demon's souls and all those games that focused on single player.
Reply

Posted: Jul 23rd 2010 12:52AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@zigie

Their different genre though. You can't compare Demon Souls to BFBC2.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:05PM b2trumpet said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Say we did buy every game, they would complain that we aren't playing the older games enough that they worked so hard on. You can't win.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:14PM Mach2 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@b2trumpet

Because it's not the money they care about, it's the appreciation of their art?
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:49PM sigma8 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@b2trumpet lol wut? no shareholder has ever complained about that. Ditto megaman.
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2010 2:52AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Mach2

"devastating for publishers and shareholders, who are seeing sales and profits decline."

I can smell the appreciation for the art right there.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:05PM Copland said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Online multiplayer games might be it, like Patcher says.

I actually still do buy games.
But I recently addicted to multiplayer for BFBC2,
so theres tones of games which I haven't even opened yet...
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:20PM Wiizer said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Copland

Dude, you just proved that his point is WRONG:

"so theres tones of games which I HAVEN'T EVEN OPENED YET... "
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:24PM Copland said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Wiizer
I was just talking about majority of users.

I think I'm a minority. (Continue buying games even though I know I don't have enough time to play them all.)
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:35PM AutobotIronhide said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have to agree with Wiizer. Besides, the first thing you should do after you get a game from the store is open it and play it.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:43PM Copland said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@AutobotIronhide

Well, to give an example.

I was really addicted to BFBC1 when I bought PS3 and than Tales of Vesperia was released and was planning on getting, so I just bought it on the release date. But still haven't opened it.

I know I may sound stupid, but for games I plan on getting eventually,
I just buy them on the release date, because I want to support the developers for really good games. Since these days, a lot of people buy pre-owned games or rent them, instead of buying them new.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:52PM sigma8 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Copland If it makes you feel any better, I agree you are probably not the norm. When I used to buy lots of games, there'd inevitably be titles that would sit and collect dust for a while. I still haven't played the first Super Mario Galaxy, despite getting it pretty soon after launch.

However, the biggest game-purchase-canceling force I ever encountered was World of Warcraft. That was almost two solid years that I basically didn't buy any other game--way differen than my prior habits. And it's too easy to believe that there are a lot of people who only play Counterstrike, or only play Halo, or only play the latest Call of Duty. They're not buying a new game every month.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:58PM Copland said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@sigma8

Thank you for your thoughtful comment.
I know I'm a minority :)

And about the WoW example,
my friend has the same experience.
He was SO addicted to Final Fantasy XI, he didn't by any other games.
He started to buy PS3 games recently for the PS3,
but I guess he'll stop again when Final Fantasy XIV is released on September.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:08PM Osnaz said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
The day that all good multiplayer is pay-to-play, is the day that gaming dies.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:19PM bioadam said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Osnaz Putting you statement into effect, gaming died when Microsoft started charging for Xbox Live Gold Status. Before that, gaming died when when Ultima Online charged for on-line play. A long, long time ago, gaming died when Sierra On-Line charged for on-line play.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:22PM Wiizer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@bioadam

To be fair, that's one of the reasons I chose PS3 over the 360.

At some point, publishers are going to find a line that they can't cross with the consumer...

And that line starts with APB!
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:39PM AutobotIronhide said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Wiizer

I forgot, what's your PSN?
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:13PM benheck said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
About to start another evening of BFBC2 myself. A friend of mine on there buys maybe 1 game per year, tops, usually an online FPS.

It's probably an accurate metric. People still play Halo 3, Counter-Strike, Team Fortress 2, etc. Hell, even World of Warcraft alone probably accounts for millions in "lost" sales of new games WoW players don't care about.

Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:25PM Wiizer said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@benheck

What Pcheter is saying is the equivalent of "I bought one FPS so I don't want to buy any more and keep this one".

Yet, you've purchased TF2 and Halo AND BFBC2!

How is he right when consumers are buying tons of different games in the SAME genre with the SAME type of multiplayer?
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:28PM SpaceFox said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wiizer, that's just one example. One or 2 examples don't prove him wrong.

It makes sense, I havent bought a new game since BC2 other than Soul Silver, and that was in March.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:31PM Wiizer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@SpaceFox


And that's because you haven't been interested in Alan Wake, or Red Dead Redemption OR Blur/Split Second/Modnation Racers?

I think that's unlikely...
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 10:12PM sigma8 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Wiizer

If I had only MW2, I would probably not hesitate to also pick up Alan Wake. But if I had MW2, BC2, and RDR.. I might feel entertained enough that I can wait for Alan Wake to reach "Greatest Hits" status, and then I can pick it up for $30. MP games simply slow down people's ability to consume games. I mean, not for everyone. Some people ignore MP altogether. But the "average" gamer probably plays it to at least some degree, and the net effect is that the gaming populace at large slows its purchase rate.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:14PM mau64 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Why is it that I don't care too much for Michael Patchet says. Anybody else like that?
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:19PM ShadowXIII said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Shadow: Being broke is to blame for game sales decline.

Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:56PM golobulus said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@mau64 this old man is such a joke. but i ain't laughing. so you ain't alone in not caring.
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2010 3:05AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@mau64

Pachter: Hello fellow babies, the feeling is mutual.

PACH ATTACK!
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2010 5:00PM Roto13 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@mau64 He's right more than any other video game industry analyst.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:16PM Mach2 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I still play Halo: Custom Edition online with my friends, and don't generally buy new FPS's. But then again, running a friend over with a Warthog on Rainbow Road never gets old.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:17PM jxc said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
thank you dr obvious..i cant believe people get paid to be ANALysts
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:20PM The Tim said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This could cause publishers to shy away from the strictly single player games. Which would be a terrible blow to those of us who prefer those to the multiplayer games. Or it could result in more single player games with a 'tacked on' multiplayer experience.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:24PM Faenix said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@The Tim

That would piss me off, I still believe Multiplayer ruins Single player - cause MP becomes the bigger focus. :/
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:24PM jsx92 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@The Tim Actually it stands to reason that the opposite would occur. Single player games would be made without multiplayer, and multiplayer games would be their own entities and charged subscription fees.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:27PM Wiizer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@The Tim

I think we've already seen an example of that with Bioshock 2.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:31PM The Tim said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@The Tim

I won't lie, I kinda had Bioshock 2 in mind as I was typing my post. Loved the game, played the multiplayer once or twice and I was done. May have been fine for some, but seemed really kind of 'Me Too'
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2010 8:03PM delicatessen lama said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@The Tim :: Bioshock 2 multiplayer 2 is friggen awesome. But when I was reading your statement that came to my mind for some reason... Even though it was tacked on it was really good in my opinion and you get to spend more time on the game. It is also the only online multiplayer game I have played that didn't have connection issues and horrendous lag.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:23PM Quayle said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
So they're blaming consumers for liking their previous products way to much and getting much more hours out of the game then expected...but they keep releasing download content for us on these games...
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2010 4:02AM Milky1985 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Quayle

Bingo, think you have hit the nail on the head, why are they complaining that the consumor (not me btw, got bored of the game i'm about to mention) MW2 for so long when they have in the last monht or so, released a bunch of new maps for it!

It also couldn't have anything to do with the fact hat people have less disposable income now, and the publishers are doing there best to stop and drive down the value of trade ins, which people would use to get money to put towards new games.....
Reply

Posted: Jul 26th 2010 5:41PM UnityIsPower said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Quayle I believe the game makers are loveing the time being spent on their games, it's the shareholders that cause conflict of interest. I also buy new games from developers that have gained my seal of quality whether I play them on the day of purchase of not. Example-I play halo more than anything but being that the first splinter cell up to Chaos Theory(my fav game of all time) were quality games which gameplay strongly match the character and plot, I have purchased all splinter cell games to show support and thanks to the developer even if I'm really going to still be playing halo. Sadly the new titles drifted to far away from the original and I no longer buy them, after I played conviction I observed their drift away from original game and canceled my limited addition pre-order. They want more money(shareholders) make even better games... As they say however, it's hard to follow up on something that is original and quality made.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:23PM Red Dragon said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Its true. I only buy games like Halo and BFBC2. Games I know I will be playing for months and months due to a long and high quality single player component and/or extremely polished multiplayer. I rent just about everything else, or buy used.

You want me to buy more games? You want to kill off the used market? Then do away with this bullsh*t standard of releasing all games at $60, as if they are all equal. Its horribly unhealthy for the industry because it makes core gamers very selective of their purchases, and it prohibits industry growth, because casual gamers don't want to invest that much money into a game when gaming is only mildly important to them.

If you only put 9 months of work into your game and its short and unpolished and reuses 90% of its assets from its predecessor as in Crackdown 2, then price it appropriately. Dont release it at $60 and complain about sales declining.

Your game doesnt NEED multiplayer to sell copies. It doesnt NEED to be 30 hours long. It just needs to priced appropriately for what it is.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:27PM Faenix said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Red Dragon

I go on a $2.50 per hour model, usually. The closer to the number I get out of the game, the happier I am with it.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:35PM Mazrael said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Faenix Fallout 3 would be rediculously priced.. 120 hours?
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:36PM Draco84 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Faenix

I have a very similar system, except I base it on $5 an hour, roughly the same cost as going to a movie. so I usually get my moneys worth at the 14 hour mark.
Reply

Posted: Jul 20th 2010 12:17AM Bahamett said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Red Dragon

Totally agree'd. When you say all that, one game in particular comes to mind.

3D Dot Game heroes. Game is f'n great.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:29PM Wiizer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report

I was just thinking how quiet it's been without Pachter articles popping up all the time on Joystiq...

If you want a good laugh, you can always watch him on GT when he's on The Bonus Round.
Reply

Posted: Jul 19th 2010 9:43PM angelkin said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Mr. Pachter, you are wise--but file this under "obvious".
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW