Infinite business wisdom

[MadDjinn]

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.

it was definitely their PC sales lionshare.

http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/brow...nre=&boxart=Both&results=50&order=Total+Sales

but a single NBA2K* game beats all of them combined.

of course, Civ 5 then also beats combined sales for Duke Nukem Forever (their latest FPS try) so... the logic isn't really working there.

 

[Misterboy]

If you read my post you'll see I was talking about the PC revenues.

To recap, I was arguing that when the only platform that has seen an increase in revenue got that increase in revenue from a strategy game, it doesn't make a lot of sense to poo-poo strategy games.

The fact that PC sales are dwarfed by their console sales is relevant to the discussion, but not my argument.

Yeah, given the DNF situation, it's clear that Christoph Hartmann was talking out of his ass in an attempt to legitimize the X-Com move.

Also germane to my earlier argument is the game someone else pointed out which is essentially a modern remake of X-Com. Only time will tell, but my guess is that developer will turn a nice profit once it's released.

 

[MadDjinn]

If you read my post you'll see I was talking about the PC revenues.

To recap, I was arguing that when the only platform that has seen an increase in revenue got that increase in revenue from a strategy game, it doesn't make a lot of sense to poo-poo strategy games.

The fact that PC sales are dwarfed by their console sales is relevant to the discussion, but not my argument.

Yeah, given the DNF situation, it's clear that Christoph Hartmann was talking out of his ass in an attempt to legitimize the X-Com move.

Also germane to my earlier argument is the game someone else pointed out which is essentially a modern remake of X-Com. Only time will tell, but my guess is that developer will turn a nice profit once it's released.

ah yeah, ok. Might have misread the earlier comment.

though, as a random aside to prior comments, my YouTube demographics (not a fair sample, and definitely not a relevant statistic) are pretty much the '25-55' age range, with maybe 25% or so outside of that range. Ie, the people with disposable income. (35-55 make up 50%, so you know, those 'old' '90's gamers)

well, I'm not sure XCOM will make the money they're looking for anyways. Of course, with the likelihood that they spent more on advertising for DNF than they're going to take in, I can see why they aren't advertising XCOM very much. That alone will limit their sales, never mind the hordes of XCOM (original) players that will help shape the critical online view of the game, which will have a knock on effect to their sales. Pretty much every game, aside from Rockstar/2K sports, that they've released in the last year has done worse than expected; primarily due to poor management choices (Mafia II missing key story parts in the core game that turned into DLC) and development. (releasing too early)

So it'll be fun to see their numbers for the 2012 year. Given the failures this past year, they're likely looking at losing even more market cap, and maybe hitting a loss again, paving the way to a buy out by Activision or EA again.

 

[Aristos]

A corporation exists to make money, not to make people happy.

Right. Only that sometimes, a brainless "executive" or two fail to make the connection between the two facts, and worse, fail to see the true cause-effect direction.

I love the free market. In the long term, it usually tells the "truth". Today, I think it was a huge mistake to appeal to a mass market and literally scratch the "veterans" out with the new release. A strong base built up in 20 years of making the concept better everytime cannot be disregarded without long term consequences.

Then again, time is the only implacable judge. Time will tell.

I just hope that if time proves me right, and KK pays the price of "vissions" like the one reflected in that article, the franchise survives.

One thing is sure though (to me, at least): poor little Jony will always be tied to the fate of this version, no matter what his friends and fans say.

 

[Magma_Dragoon]

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.

I feel I need to step in an put a stop to this. First off, cnc95 sucked ass. The CnC franchise got alot BETTER after EA bought them. Proof: RA2, cnc3. cnc4 was terrible, though. Second, Activision and Blizzard are both owned by Vivendi.

Finally, of course corporations only care about making money, they are financial instruments designed for that purpose. Making something people want to buy is a means to that end. As long as there are people who demand turn based strategy games, there will be someone making them for some

 

[Misterboy]

Given the failures this past year, they're likely looking at losing even more market cap, and maybe hitting a loss again, paving the way to a buy out by Activision or EA again.

God fobid EA or Activision gets their hands on the Civilization series.

I imagine Sid/Firaxis are pretty much screwed. Too bad they can't go the way of Stardock and stay independent. Too late for that

Which reminds me, I wonder how things are going with Elemental. That one dropped off my radar.

 

[MadDjinn]

I feel I need to step in an put a stop to this. First off, cnc95 sucked ass. The CnC franchise got alot BETTER after EA bought them. Proof: RA2, cnc3. cnc4 was terrible, though. Second, Activision and Blizzard are both owned by Vivendi.

Finally, of course corporations only care about making money, they are financial instruments designed for that purpose. Making something people want to buy is a means to that end. As long as there are people who demand turn based strategy games, there will be someone making them for some

well, to be fair, the CnC franchise was better before EA got full ownership of it. (they had stakes in it before converting it) CnC got 'horrible' at CnC Generals. The AI sucked arse there, and the triggers were so obvious it was stupid. (start scenario. move left, X happens. Move right, y happens. consistently) The overall story line was more interesting than the gameplay though, once EA picked it up.

To also be accurate, (from Vivendi's own website)

Vivendi Games merged with a wholly owned subsidiary of Activision

Vivendi does own the majority stock share of the subsidiary, but Activision is the one in control. (Hence it's not Vivendi games or such anymore)

and yeah, as long as there's a market, someone will build a game for it. Just don't expect a major publisher to back it with any real cash or innovation. We'll have to wait for an indie to 'reinvent' TBS games, and have high sales figures, before the major publishers will move again.

 

[MadDjinn]

God fobid EA or Activision gets their hands on the Civilization series.

I imagine Sid/Firaxis are pretty much screwed. Too bad they can't go the way of Stardock and stay independent. Too late for that

Which reminds me, I wonder how things are going with Elemental. That one dropped off my radar.

With the way EA is changing it's structure re: external developer studios, it might not be a bad thing. Activision getting control of it means they might hand it to Blizzard for a little while.

If 2K gets bought, they can always spin off studios like Firaxis. Stardock could even pick them up. (as a publisher) Most likely though, EA would want Rockstar and maybe merge some of 2K sports, likely deciding on a case by case basis on the rest of the IP. Studios would be shut down though (sports side since EAC is far more efficient for producing sports games all the time).

Activision would want both Rockstar and 2K Sports. (to compete with EA) but then it'd be all 'call of duty' spam with GTA and Borderlands every few months.

 

[Martin Alvito]

Right. Only that sometimes, a brainless "executive" or two fail to make the connection between the two facts, and worse, fail to see the true cause-effect direction.

Actually, a lot of bad management decisions are made by capable executives whose incentives don't mesh with those of the shareholders.

Consider a hypothetical banking executive in 2003 or 2004. Competing executives were making huge paper profits on high risk consumer mortgages. If you, as CEO, cannot produce results that are competitive with those at other banks, you will be fired and replaced by someone that can.

You know that the paper is bad. You also know your business better than your shareholders. Convincing uneducated investors that high-risk paper is a bad idea is easier said than done in the current market you face; investors had a historic appetite for risk, and they paid for it.

You can:

a) do what is in the best interest of the corporation, avoid the paper, get fired, and get replaced by someone who will assume the risk the investors demand
b) do what is not in the best interest of the corporation, take on the paper, keep your job, the salary and the options, sell your present holdings and hope that you get lucky and beat the odds

Easy choice, right?

That sort of stuff happens all the time at all levels of corporations. Most executives I met during my corporate days were intelligent, capable people. They also made decisions that were bad for the health of the corporation due to survival and advancement incentives.

There are certainly bad executives out there, but executives that reach their level of incompetence tend not to last. They're memorable, but they're also not the norm in a healthy organization.

 

[Misterboy]

Activision getting control of it means they might hand it to Blizzard for a little while.

World of Civilization?

 

[MadDjinn]

World of Civilization?

It might mean that MP would be playable!

 

[Thormodr]

God fobid EA or Activision gets their hands on the Civilization series.

I imagine Sid/Firaxis are pretty much screwed. Too bad they can't go the way of Stardock and stay independent. Too late for that

Which reminds me, I wonder how things are going with Elemental. That one dropped off my radar.

They are in a way rebooting Elemental with Elemental: Fallen Enchantress. Kael is in charge and it looks promising. It's also free for whoever bought EWOM. Stardock admits they screwed up and are making it up to their fans. The beta should be released in about a month or so.

The thought about EA/Activision is truly horrific. If you thought 2K Games was bad...

Just look at Diablo III. Thankfully, Torchlight II is coming out. Runic Games is much more fan friendly.

It's a shame that Firaxis couldn't become Indie again. Indie companies are where it's at these days. Stardock, Paradox, Runic Games, etc. Being able to call your own shots helps these companies stay more in tune with their fans.

Kind of makes me wish I were a billionaire. I wouldn't forget my roots and I'd set this franchise straight again, even if I lost money. I'd think of it as a sports team.

 

[MadDjinn]

That sort of stuff happens all the time at all levels of corporations. Most executives I met during my corporate days were intelligent, capable people. They also made decisions that were bad for the health of the corporation due to survival and advancement incentives.

There are certainly bad executives out there, but executives that reach their level of incompetence tend not to last. They're memorable, but they're also not the norm in a healthy organization.

yeah, but it's rare to find a fully 'healthy' organization. There's always people politicing their way into incompetent positions.

And I'm not sure of using the banking industry as a example with correlations to gaming executives. It's apples and oranges really. Big balloon golden parachutes and destroying the company from the inside by handing the corporate revenue to the leadership/non stockholders as incentives for 'doing the wrong thing' corporate health wise, is not quite the same. All of that management 'leadership' gets to walk away with massive cash and the stockholders got left holding the now empty bag.

Gaming executives haven't quite gotten there yet, considering the timeline from investment to revenue is a few years longer than the banking industry, so there's a lot less pressure for 'now' risks/bad decisions.

 

[Martin Alvito]

And I'm not sure of using the banking industry as a example with correlations to gaming executives. It's apples and oranges really.

It's the industry I lived, so my corporate examples tend to be disproportionately drawn from there.

The general point being that the OP has identified a pointy-haired boss, but that most bad management decisions have organizational reasons behind why they happen. The expected survival time for pointy-haired bosses rarely is good, so they can't explain all or even most bad corporate decisions.

The typical failing of gaming executives is that they don't understand the finances, and so a single bad gamble can wipe out companies that regularly produce quality products.

 

[Misterboy]

They are in a way rebooting Elemental with Elemental: Fallen Enchantress. Kael is in charge and it looks promising. It's also free for whoever bought EWOM. Stardock admits they screwed up and are making it up to their fans. The beta should be released in about a month or so.

Yeah, did some research... it looks promising!

I know there is a lot of hate for Jon Schafer out there on these forums, but personally I trust the guy. So with Derek Paxton and Jon Schafer on board, I find myself rather excited!

EDIT: Link: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/06/01/spell-it-out-stardock-on-fallen-enchantress/

 

[Misterboy]

It might mean that MP would be playable!

"There is a barbarian uprising to the south. Go kill 20 brutes and return to me."

... ... ...

"It appears some barbarians have escaped. Destroy 10 of their triremes and report back."

... ... ...

...Ad nauseam...

 

[Grimberht]

They only make UFO into a shooter because its the easiest way to rush up a big name title into the market...

The previews are plain stupid. 2K is the worst thing to ever happen to gaming... I really hope gamers start to wake up a little and stop buying into their marketing machine with no substance to force them to change or even better to bankrupt.

 

[Grimberht]

The massive commercial failure that was Starcraft 2 proves strategy games are just not viable to develop anymore in this contemporary era of gaming.

Starcraft 2 is a major success and it will be there for a long time... a decade maybe!

Blizzard still focuses on milking on WOW for a bit... but when they'll put SC2 on high gear watch out. My guess is by the time the 3rd expansion comes out, SC2 will have impact the gaming industry has much, if not more, then WOW did with the MMO experience! It will bring Pro Gaming to reality!

I've watch NASL last weekend and eventho it was sketchy at times this event proved to me all the potential of the game and that soon it is going to be huge!!

When we're talking about blizzard, we're talking about a company not without any fault, but a company with a vision... who try to push the boundaries and cash in big time by doing so.

2K is the used car saleman of gaming. Taking old and rusty models, paint them anew and selling it to nostalgic people who got caught into the hype!

 

[ghoultek]

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

The man has a point but let me adjust the above for you... Corporations exist to only make money for their investors which makes their investors happy. The customer is considered happy enough if they buy the product/subscription. Customer complaints = emotional attachment to the product, which = the revenue stream can be controlled. The executive leadership of publicly traded companies do NOT serve their customers. The investors are their masters.

"evolve or die"...
As the greedy corps. grow larger and more disconnected from their customers, they create an opportunity for the smaller guys and start-ups to bring something innovative to the market that gamers really want. As others have said investors don't really understand or care about gaming. Investors only really care about return on their investment (ROI), but they fully understand profit, revenue, and loss of profit and revenue. Let the innovators live and evolve and let the greedy and sloppy die off. Sometimes you have to let a product rot on store shelves so investors understand.

It's a shame that the younger gamers are so easily lulled by eye candy. They will buy games with diluted features, unimaginative story lines, and shoddy game balance as long as the product has hot graphics. If gamers really want games with more depth and creativity, then gamers need to band together. Its called solidarity. If gamers provide a common loud voice backed up with action and their money, then they can reach both the small guys/start-ups and the corporate investors. Until we stop supporting publishers who produce lower quality products for a quick buck, they will continue because hey... it's working. Now I know the gut response from most who read this will be "solidarity... yeah good luck with that crap".

FPS games are easy to make and are easily ported to multiple platforms (PC <--> Console) considering they have a small set of inputs and commands. Turn based and real time strategy games have vastly more complex and numerous commands/inputs making portability (PC -> Console) a gargantuan or impossible task. Lack of portability to consoles is seen as impeding a revenue stream by Corp. and investor types.

 

[ghoultek]

What can we (dinosaurs) do?
Get involved with:
- your friends,
- your kids and their friends,
- nephews/nieces and their friends,
- younger cousins and their friends,
- and other parents.

Can you elaborate on "get involved"?
Organize old school LAN parties with games that support LAN game play. Teach the younger gamers about solidarity and why it matters to them. Get younger gamers involved in other forms of entertainment to broaden and better shape their view of the world. Use games as both an entertainment and education vehicle. Galvanize and mobilize parent groups to control the money. As this expands it starts to looks like communities. Kids + Parents + Young adults demanding better quality products will get the businesses moving in the intended direction.

Can you give some additional examples?
- get younger gamers involved in writing stories and stage plays
- get them involved in acting in stage plays
- play games that don't involve PCs/Macs/Consoles/Cell phones/T.V. such as chess, checkers, old school Dungeons and Dragons, card games and other board games
- get them involved in playing sports (baseball, basketball, soccer, football, tennis, gymnastics, martial arts)
- get them involved in drawing, painting, sculpting, playing musical instruments
- science projects and science fairs
- building and racing model airplanes, cars, and boats
- talent fairs
- Politics (local, national, and international)
- teach them about economics and investing (maybe investors will one day have a conscience)

Those examples have nothing to do playing Civ 1/2/3/4/5/6!
Video game playing should be done in moderation. This community is one of the best features of every Civ release that the publisher doesn't control.

Don't let the CEO's comments rattle your cage and do nothing about it. Put that negative energy to use.