Quote Originally Posted by Bojay1997 View Post
I strongly disagree. In 1982, unless you had access to very expensive development hardware and a means of distribution, the chances of being able to release a commercially viable cartridge or disc based game was very minimal. In just the past five years, the widescale adoption of broadband, mobile devices and digital distribution has allowed thousands of new voices to enter the gaming industry to create niche games that can appeal to very narrowly targeted markets. There is not only a much larger variety of gameplay types available today than at any point in the past, but also a means for the creators of those games to benefit financially without risking much more than their time. As such, I think the video game industry is more healthy and vibrant than at any previous point in time.


In 1982, anyone with an 8-bit computer, an assembler, and descent programming skills could write a game. The old computer magazines are filled with ads selling games from smaller companies. Reasonably-sized project timelines and budgets made it viable. The notion that game development was largely unavailable to smaller developers until modern mobile devices came along is a fallacy. Sure, today we have digital distro. Back then they had mail-order.

There's a danger here of confusing number of games with number of gameplay types. In particular, I'm referring to the amount of variety offered from the major players in the industry. From what I can see, the actual types of gameplay are fewer each year than they were prior to the first crash. Think back to the arcades of the past and the variety of approaches to in-game mechanics and even the custom interfaces that went with them. What we're seeing now is a narrowing of types of gaming experiences due to the demand by investors to give them a proven product. And by that they're referring to something that has been proven to sell. Hence the same basic games with a change-up of characters and background scenery.

In other words, we could argue this point pretty much indefinitely (or until a truly comprehensive statistical report is compiled).


Quote Originally Posted by Bojay1997 View Post
It simply means that charging a consumer $60 for a new big budget game may not produce sufficient profit in and of itself to satisfy the investors and shareholders in big publishers.
Quote Originally Posted by Bojay1997 View Post
Heck, I've been paying between $30 and $60 for games since the early 1980s, so adjusted for inflation it really isn't that bad compared to other consumer goods.
Profit margin is the key thing to consider here. The profit margin on a game shipped on DVD is somewhat higher than one shipped on a diskette back in the day and is much higher than a cartridge-based game. Couple that with the increase in market size and I would hope that -- factoring in inflation -- it would be expected that the price of games be relatively lower than they were in the past. I'm not sure what other consumer goods you're using as a base for comparison, but it can be safely said that similar forms of entertainment like Blu-ray motion pictures are considerably less expensive than modern video games (as was mentioned in a previous post).