Infinite business wisdom

[Becephalus]

Publishers in general don't care about anything except money. And that douchebag is thinking with money and not with his brain. The same with EA and Activision-blizzard. But 2K is really small compared to those two. Reminds me about a little greedy and spoiled child that needs to get slapped across the face a few times.
Look at The Witcher 2. Namco only cares about itself and not about its customers.
http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/07/08/c...action-after-dropping-drm-from-the-witcher-2/

I am so confused as to why gamers feel their sector of the economy is somehow special? Of course all the executives care about is money! That is what they are paid to care about. They don't care about you at all as long as you open your wallet. That is the way the world works.

If you want to criticize 2k for not doing a good job making money by all means do so. But don't say "They don't care about me" or "They don't care about Civ" and expect anyone to care. It just makes you sound like you are 16 and have never had a real job.

 

[Fabiano79]

I am so confused as to why gamers feel their sector of the economy is somehow special? Of course all the executives care about is money! That is what they are paid to care about. They don't care about you at all as long as you open your wallet. That is the way the world works.

If you want to criticize 2k for not doing a good job making money by all means do so. But don't say "They don't care about me" or "They don't care about Civ" and expect anyone to care. It just makes you sound like you are 16 and have never had a real job.

But thats my complain, we (born in the 70s early 80s) have more money them the young audience, and we are not just a few people, theres literally millions of 30 years old gamers.

If a company cant see this, they deserve to be out business.

Theres a pretty good market in selling complex strategy games (Even a small studio like Paradox can be profitable). When you have a name like Civilization, you can expect a good profit always, even if you release a lame game (ciV).

If they invest more time and money and deliver a good game, the profits are going to be very good. Theres no reason to complain about strategy games. Make good ones and we will buy. We'll spent our money not only in the game itself, but also in DLCs, expansions etc. Even the software piracy is lower for strategic games. Just stupid to ignore us.

 

[Misterboy]

http://investing.businessweek.com/r...wFiling.asp?formType=10-K#A2204277Z10-K_HTM_8

It's from their 10-K filing to the SEC.

That link just brought me to Bloomberg's company search site. I couldn't find anything there. 2K Games is a private company according to Bloomberg. Am I missing something?

A google search for 2K Games' 10K SEC filings came up empty too. All I could find were links to Take Two's SEC filings. A privately held company wouldn't be beholden to the SEC would it? Searching the SEC website for 2K Games came up with nothing.

In any case, I'd love to see where those numbers come from, so any help is appreciated.

I'm going to be passing by 2K Games' office on Saturday. Maybe I'll stop in and tell them how dumb their CEO is

 

[starrywisdom]

But thats my complain, we (born in the 70s early 80s) have more money them the young audience, and we are not just a few people, theres literally millions of 30 years old gamers.

If a company cant see this, they deserve to be out business.

Theres a pretty good market in selling complex strategy games (Even a small studio like Paradox can be profitable). When you have a name like Civilization, you can expect a good profit always, even if you release a lame game (ciV).

If they invest more time and money and deliver a good game, the profits are going to be very good. Theres no reason to complain about strategy games. Make good ones and we will buy. We'll spent our money not only in the game itself, but also in DLCs, expansions etc. .

On the other side of the point, those 'older' gamers also buy less games on average and log less time then the 'younger gamers'. So theres a counter balance to just having more money(on average).

Even the software piracy is lower for strategic games

Source on this? I've read quite a bit of articles on piracy(did a presentation a few years back on piracy in multiple media formats) but I don't think I've ever come across anywhere stating what genres are pirated more. Honestly, if anything you would think strategy/rts games would be pirated /more/ as you can easily play them in single player / offline and not be bothered by lack of multiplayer. Where as other genres have a very very large bias to multiplayer(such as FPS').

 

[Sonereal]

I would play a Civilization FPS provided they don't call it Civilization VI.

As for strategy game piracy being lower than others, OBJECTION! Shogun 2, Civilization V, Starcraft 2 just to name a few.

 

[MadDjinn]

That link just brought me to Bloomberg's company search site. I couldn't find anything there. 2K Games is a private company according to Bloomberg. Am I missing something?

A google search for 2K Games' 10K SEC filings came up empty too. All I could find were links to Take Two's SEC filings. A privately held company wouldn't be beholden to the SEC would it? Searching the SEC website for 2K Games came up with nothing.

In any case, I'd love to see where those numbers come from, so any help is appreciated.

I'm going to be passing by 2K Games' office on Saturday. Maybe I'll stop in and tell them how dumb their CEO is

It's actually Take-Two Interactive Software. The real company name of the publisher. the rest is divisions or spin offs for their dev side.

http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?ticker=TTWO:US

scroll down a little on this one and you'll see a 'latest 10-K' link right under the TTWO details section.

Not sure why the first link doesn't work anymore. It worked the first few times for me...
(my search parameters were - 2K games stock - then I just dug in a little)

 

[BobDole]

It's disappointing that the the head of 2K isn't a big fan of strategy games, but at least he's not the only decision maker at the company, nor does him bashing strategy games mean Civ is doomed. Civ V just came out, so unless he just changed his mind on them a few months ago, he was fine with that apparently. I don't see Civ deviating much from turn-based strategy, ever.

Plus, at least Civ is the LAST game you can make a genre spin-off of .....I think.

 

[MadDjinn]

It's disappointing that the the head of 2K isn't a big fan of strategy games, but at least he's not the only decision maker at the company, nor does him bashing strategy games mean Civ is doomed. Civ V just came out, so unless he just changed his mind on them a few months ago, he was fine with that apparently. I don't see Civ deviating much from turn-based strategy, ever.

Plus, at least Civ is the LAST game you can make a genre spin-off of .....I think.

Civ RTS style. '

a few times later...

Civ FPS stylle.

a few times later.. (and a couple more dumbed down generations)

Civ - press a button and win!

 

[Sonereal]

Civ RTS style. '

a few times later...

Civ FPS stylle.

a few times later.. (and a couple more dumbed down generations)

Civ - press a button and win!

It's really easy to be right when you set up strawmen to attack.

In any case, evolve or die is the name of the game. A corporation exists to make money, not to make people happy.

 

[starrywisdom]

In any case, evolve or die is the name of the game. A corporation exists to make money, not to make people happy.

This is kinda incorrect in some industries - especially the video game industry. It's one of the only industries that can't be set out just to make 'bookoooooo buckssss' as they have to balance the consumers wants/needs/etc with their investors/execs/etc. While it's true that thsoe execs are going to what they can to make the extra buck - they also have multiple levels of people whom tell them what they can and can't do. If you aren't making your consumers happy in this industry you aren't going to make that money you so desire.

 

[Sonereal]

This is kinda incorrect in some industries - especially the video game industry. It's one of the only industries that can't be set out just to make 'bookoooooo buckssss' as they have to balance the consumers wants/needs/etc with their investors/execs/etc. While it's true that thsoe execs are going to what they can to make the extra buck - they also have multiple levels of people whom tell them what they can and can't do. If you aren't making your consumers happy in this industry you aren't going to make that money you so desire.

Maybe I should've expanded and say happiness is only secondary then, because happiness is secondary. EA is still floating and they have a lot of people unhappy with them. After all, there is a reason why first-person shooters flood the shelves yearly. It's because they make money and they make people happy. Therefore, making X-com into a FPS, despite making some people unhappy, is good enough to make a short-term profit. Long-term if it creates a new fan base.

 

[BobDole]

Civ RTS style. '

a few times later...

Civ FPS stylle.

a few times later.. (and a couple more dumbed down generations)

Civ - press a button and win!

I remember the RTS-style attempt in PTW, and well.....it was bad. And an FPS? Not sure how you'd pull that off.

Again, I'm glad that Civ is such a "unique" (best word I can think of right now) series that it'd be hard to spin off, unlike X-COM.

 

[Sonereal]

I remember the RTS-style attempt in PTW, and well.....it was bad. And an FPS? Not sure how you'd pull that off.

Again, I'm glad that Civ is such a "unique" (best word I can think of right now) series that it'd be hard to spin off, unlike X-COM.

Actually, it wouldn't be that hard to spin-off into a FPS. Give me a half hour and I could probably even figure out how to turn the game into a MMOFPS familiar enough to still slap Civilization onto it (though, not Civilization VI)

 

[Misterboy]

It's actually Take-Two Interactive Software. The real company name of the publisher. the rest is divisions or spin offs for their dev side.

http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?ticker=TTWO:US

scroll down a little on this one and you'll see a 'latest 10-K' link right under the TTWO details section.

Not sure why the first link doesn't work anymore. It worked the first few times for me...
(my search parameters were - 2K games stock - then I just dug in a little)

Thanks MadDjinn. I wasn't aware that 2K was a subsidiary of Take Two. Yeah, not sure about that first link either...the Internet Gods can be fickle.

 

[MadDjinn]

Thanks MadDjinn. I wasn't aware that 2K was a subsidiary of Take Two. Yeah, not sure about that first link either...the Internet Gods can be fickle.

maybe too many people clicked on it and then they dropped it from direct linkage

but yeah, subsidiaries are the way of business in gaming, due to the publisher-studio relationships. (some minor exceptions, such as EA making most acquisitions 'studios' in their main corporate structure, but then wanting nothing to do with them)

and well, then there's activision...

 

[Wombleburger]

I personally couldn't care less about the upcoming X-com FPS.

I'm hoping that Xenonauts re-creates the real X-com feeling.

I also have high hopes for Dead State. Seems like it could be "X-com with zombies":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_State

...if it ever gets released.

 

[Misterboy]

In any case, evolve or die is the name of the game. A corporation exists to make money, not to make people happy.

Exactly, except the quote that started this thread shows that they might not be evolving in the right direction. MadDjinn posted the financials of Take Two Interactive with a breakdown of their profits by platform. What is critical here is that every platform has seen a decrease in profits since 2009 (EDIT: 2008 actually), EXCEPT the PC platform.

Now granted, I think the lion's share of that profit in 2011 is due to Civilization V...but oops.... Civ 5 is a strategy game. Doh!

I've been around for a long time and I have a bit of perspective. It's clear that we've entered a second golden age of PC gaming. I don't think I've ever had a backlog of games as long as I have now, and it's due to Steam, and it's due in large part to smaller developers ("indie" or otherwise). And what do a large portion of the games sold on steam entail?... that's right, they're strategy games. Granted, many of them are rehashes, or slight modifications on older concepts, or they mash strategy genres with other genres. But they are strategy games and a whole new generation is being exposed to them, and they are being gobbled up, left right and center.

A have a wishful thinking pet theory that goes something like this: the big boom in the gaming industry happened mostly on the backs of those who were relatively new to gaming. These are the young adults who grew up "teasing" the kids that played games in years past. Now these guys and gals were buying games, and for the first time were having experiences that others had had a decade earlier. The problem is games have been dumbed down in various ways to accommodate these masses. The good news is that people aren't static, and while they started out late to the party, they're catching up fast. I think this newest generation are discovering games with depth because the grey and brown FPSs aren't cutting it anymore.

Ignore the vast majority of thinking adults who want to play games, at your peril. They have the money, and they aren't easily distracted by things that ONLY go "boom".

/EssayOver

 

[MadDjinn]

It's really easy to be right when you set up strawmen to attack.

In any case, evolve or die is the name of the game. A corporation exists to make money, not to make people happy.

of course it is, but that's a simple example of the progression.

It's not hard to fathom switching Turn to Real Time. (plenty of those in the build an empire genre) After that, it's down to what they want to do to still 'believe' in the IP but make it work for the 'masses'.

Yes, I know quite a bit about corporate life. I also know plenty of corporations that look for new opportunities without killing a successful part of their business.

I fully understand how he got to the point where he made the statements. 80+% revenue from consoles, and FPSs are the biggest share of games on consoles.

So he's not creative, innovative or a risk taker. Just wants to maximize profits in a way that investors will understand. (investors rarely understand gaming, but understand the above stated logic) He is of course, very bad at explaining why they were doing it, which is the main point.

Of course, when some small studio makes a break out hit that's not FPS, all publishers will try to clone it; badly, usually.

 

[MadDjinn]

Now granted, I think the lion's share of that profit in 2011 is due to Civilization V...but oops.... Civ 5 is a strategy game. Doh!


/EssayOver

well...

not likely. Rockstar and 2K Sports are their core revenue generators, as far as I can tell.

Though, NBA being bust this year, they'll take a big hit there.

 

[Misterboy]

well...

not likely. Rockstar and 2K Sports are their core revenue generators, as far as I can tell.

Though, NBA being bust this year, they'll take a big hit there.

Uh... you don't think Civ 5 was the lion's share of their PC revenues for 2010, 2011?

In any case, Civ 5 has done very well for them and is certainly a large percentage of those spikes in profits for 2010 and 2011 as listed in the PC revenue column. Rockstar released LA Noir, which I believe was pretty successfull (on the consoles), but there's no GTA spikes for 2011. I don't know much about 2K sports.

So maybe not the "lion's share", but a significant portion that is probably directly attributed to those 2010-2011 PC revenues they posted.