Support NeoGAF

[ThePinkServbot]

What exactly do you think constitutes the upper class?

Honestly? Six figure income across the whole of the household. Anything more is in excess when determining the social class of an individual.

People who understand the operation of the video game industry know that as a content provider you're almost certainly not going to get anyone to spend more money than they would otherwise,

So when Activision drops massive amounts of money on advertising, TV spots, etc., it's to... preach to the choir?

so the thing you really want to do is just to make sure that they spend all that money on you. If someone plays a game like Destiny or World of Warcraft that completely consumes their gaming time, that is meaty enough to serve as an entire hobby unto itself, then you have a customer who will dedicate pretty close to 100% of their budget for that hobby to buying your content. Activision has consistently been one of the most successful video game publishers in the world for so long specifically because they have this exact thing down to a science.

What do you personally think the venn diagram of Destiny and CoD players looks like?

 

[ThePinkServbot]

He probably compares this to 2nd or 3rd world countries, can't see any other way he thinks 50k-100k (+ another 100k - 200k if you bought a house) student loans on a yearly income of ~ $50k ($90k if both parents have a degree, but then you also have double the student loans) with two kids would in any way constitute an "upper-class".

No, I compare this to the way most Americans live. Going by my experience on here and certainly the responses to the OP in this thread, I do not expect most NeoGAFers to actually have an idea of that.

 

[george_us]

1-5: I honestly had no clue about these issues.

6: This is honestly something that I've been paying attention to more and more and has ultimately forced me to think about where my career is headed. It's one thing to read about all of the fuckery in the gaming industry as a wide-eyed 20-something still brimming with enthusiasm, thinking you'll somehow beat the system. It's another to actually experience that fuckery firsthand and see just how deep the rabbit hole goes. When you start seeing people far more talented than you give up the game out of sheer frustration or exhaustion, it really makes you wonder how long you yourself have. When you start seeing talented veterans with a decade of experience having trouble getting work, you start to question if there's a light at the end of the tunnel. Hell I've only been in the game for a little over 3 years and I'm already getting sick of this shit. It just doesn't seem worth it. There's literally no point in your career that you aren't fearing for your job unless you're God at what you do. I don't want to be in my damn 50s worrying about whether my ass is on the chopping block. There's other problems that bother me like the fact that industry is basically a Good Old Boys Network and the toxic shit regarding sexism/racism.

7: I don't see a problem with this personally but I haven't done much research into it.

8: I feel there are far more expensive hobbies than gaming.

9: Personally I believe the 'target audience' excuse the industry (and fans) like to throw out is bullshit personally. Many of the best selling games of all time don't even feature white male protagonist. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is the second best selling GTA game ever despite gamers everywhere claiming they 'can't relate' to CJ and 'gansta' culture. Lara Croft is one of the most famous gaming icons in the world yet developers still see female characters as risky. Mafia 3 is probably going to sell a kajillion copies if it turns out to be any good yet publishers are still going to see minority characters as risky. Meanwhile 37 games featuring straight white males are going to tank this upcoming fall yet the industry is going to continue falling all over themselves to create games starring straight white males. I wish developers would at least be honest and say they have no interest in making games starring minorities or women and quit blowing smoke up our asses.

Ugh. Anywho, that's how I deal with all this shit haha.

 

[Teeth]

What do you personally think the venn diagram of Destiny and CoD players looks like?

This would be sort of weird since, even if 100% of people who bought Destiny ALSO bought CoD, the amount of people who bought CoD but didn't buy Destiny would be larger. By almost 2 times.

 

[ThePinkServbot]

This would be sort of weird since, even if 100% of people who bought Destiny ALSO bought CoD, the amount of people who bought CoD but didn't buy Destiny would be larger. by almost 2 times.

The point is that it isn't even remotely the figure eight that charlequin seems convinced that Activision is after.

 

[Teeth]

The point is that it isn't even remotely the figure eight that charlequin seems convinced that Activision is after.

Activision is after any money they can get. They are also the least price flexible out of any non-Nintendo publisher. They found a formula that works for them.

Picking on CoD is weird too, since I would bet that the amount of female and minority people that play CoD dwarfs pretty much any game that would specifically target those groups in absolute numbers.

"Gender/ethnicity neutral" games would beat both though.

 

[ThePinkServbot]

Activision is after any money they can get.

Yes, exactly, thank you. And when you're after any money you can get, you go after the people who have the most and will give the most before you prioritize any other targets.

Picking on CoD is weird too, since I would bet that the amount of female and minority people that play CoD dwarfs pretty much any game that would specifically target those groups in absolute numbers.

I'm not really picking on CoD as much as games that have a single player or otherwise narrative-intensive emphasis (because there really isn't a forced perspective in multiplayer.) I wouldn't be surprised if less than 10% of CoD players never touched the single player campaigns.

 

[ThePinkServbot]

Ok. So this would be something like the top quintile of income in the US. This is not really in step at all with the common definition of upper class, which would be more like the top 1%, or maybe the top 3-4%, depending on who you're asking.

I think your "common definition" of upper class is very much an upper class perspective. I'm not saying you yourself are upper class as much as you're repeating their perspective.

Besides that I'm still not convinced that video games as a hobby are primarily enjoyed by the top quintile. I'd be interested to see what evidence you have for this.

I've been providing the only evidence anyone can provide in either direction. If you want a census, well, this is the wrong industry for that.

 

[Teeth]

Yes, exactly, thank you. And when you're after any money you can get, you go after the people who have the most and will give the most before you prioritize any other targets.

Or they find a way to get as many people as possible to buy the game since you basically can't get repeat purchases of the same product (by investment)?

I'm not really picking on CoD as much as games that have a single player or otherwise narrative-intensive emphasis (because there really isn't a forced perspective in multiplayer.) I wouldn't be surprised if less than 10% of CoD players never touched the single player campaigns.

For Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 on Steam, over 55% have COMPLETED the campaign, going by achievement data.

I think your "common definition" of upper class is very much an upper class perspective. I'm not saying you yourself are upper class as much as you're repeating their perspective.



I've been providing the only evidence anyone can provide in either direction. If you want a census, well, this is the wrong industry for that.

Quick survey digging around the internet cites various studies showing somewhere between $25,000- 49,000 per household being the largest purchasing group (on consoles and mobile). Exclusively PC gamers trend higher (at around $67,000) and older, but that's if they don't play on anything else. I have no idea the veracity of the studies. Just google "average income of gamer" and click around.

 

[Videoneon]

Rambly somewhat off topic answer....

Ignorance to me is not bliss anymore in the way that we generally understand the phrase.

I'm not happy like I used to be. I don't enjoy things like I used to. That's not entirely due to me learning about what's shitty in world affairs and the gaming industry, but it's definitely a part of who I am as I've grown up.

I don't feel like I need to recapture that happiness anymore. it's very much just a "you can't go home again" thing in my opinion. And I'm at a point where I don't feel like this is a loss, but rather the things I learn are a gain to me, a positive thing. That mode of associating my likes as a straight manifestation of my sense of ethics is a bit naive. Just gotta have some separation sometimes.

Contrary to the way I often post or talk, I'm not a dreary personality (unless you really hate my politics or something, in which case give yourself two good look-overs bruh) and I'm not "defeated" by the things I read or learn. I have fun in lots of new ways as a dude in my mid 20s. I think there are ethically consistent ways of pursuing video gaming as a hobby - of course, they'd at least be partially dependent on the person, but I think the spirit of my suggestion should be easily conveyed.

Like, a somewhat related note. I like Mega Man. I like to think I like games that are good with great music and such, but I'm heavily biased towards Mega Man 4 because I like the mood of the soundtrack even though the stages are a bit hit and miss and the weapon set has too many overlaps (forward projectiles). Or Valkyria Chronicles. I love Valkyria Chronicles, but some of the peripheral media like the figures and VC1 anime are so flagrant and pandering in their fanservice, I really wish the franchise were better represented because it could be done in a different way, and I'd have no interest in supporting a franchise I like if it means buying stuff I think is dumb.

Or even Love Live! I have a minor attachment to Love Live (for me it's mostly the characters), but really the anime is pretty average, I don't care for most of the songs, and typically I find idols and the industry (the real world, particularly) gross. I consider myself someone who likes things that aren't "stupid"...but there you have it, I don't hate Love Live. It sort of helps, IMO, that in some ways Love Live is a bit different as far as the anime is concerned (though it's still a mostly straightforward story)

Honestly I'm surprised OP is posting this because OP always struck me as a committed person and I respect your posts/some of the actions you've taken to maintain personal consistency. I don't feel like people need to change just cause they feel like they're fighting a losing battle. I feel we owe it to ourselves and to humanity to not avoid knowledge - we can't know everything, but to insist on one's ignorance is as low as it gets.

 

[Odrion]

I acknowledge these things and try to minimize my impact. Recycle, resell, reuse. Buy digital goods.

It's effect may be small and I'm still contributing to various problematic elements, but it's real easy to do and it's still better than the "willful ignorance" choice.

 

[KHlover]

I think your "common definition" of upper class is very much an upper class perspective. I'm not saying you yourself are upper class as much as you're repeating their perspective.



I've been providing the only evidence anyone can provide in either direction. If you want a census, well, this is the wrong industry for that.

http://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ESA-Essential-Facts-2015.pdf
http://www.isfe.eu/videogames-europe-2012-consumer-study

80% of US households own a device to play videogames on
50% own a dedicated console
40% of US citizens play videogames more than 3 hours per week

Sorry, you're just wrong.

 

[ThePinkServbot]

Or they find a way to get as many people as possible to buy the game since you basically can't get repeat purchases of the same product (by investment)?

Or put out products that specifically are tailored to that audience as frequently as you can.

For Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 on Steam, over 55% have COMPLETED the campaign.

What are PC sales of CoD:MW2 compared to 360 sales? That's still really surprisingly high, don't get me wrong, but I don't think a very large amount of CoD:MW2 sales were Steam-based.

 

[M1ch04c4n0]

I buy cheap and stick to Nintendo. Lesser of all evils? Who knows.

 

[Widge]

The responses I've noted in the past are either a lack of empathy, denial or - weirdly - a crazed need to actually fight to maintain the status quo as it exists. The rationale being that the core demographic of gamers are not directly impacted by any of the issues to their awareness.

A lot of friction going on in various enthusiast circles right now comes from non-core enthusiasts taking an activist stance and pushing these points to the fore, greatly irritating the core hornets nest.

 

[ThePinkServbot]

http://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ESA-Essential-Facts-2015.pdf

Oh, great. This back-patting piece by a trade organization has determined that there is no problem at all with the diversity of the targeted audience of the industry it represents. Thanks, this is very convincing.

edit: I mean fucking come on, look at how vague this shit is. What's a "game purchaser", exactly?

 

[SpinningBirdKick]

No one cares about how the sausage is made.

Including me.

 

[charlequin]

Honestly? Six figure income across the whole of the household.

This is both an incorrect definition of what constitutes "upper class" and still much too high a figure to cover the people who generate the vast majority of video game revenue.

What do you personally think the venn diagram of Destiny and CoD players looks like?

The overlap is much smaller than you think. Most people don't jump around between games, they find something they like and play it into the ground.

What are PC sales of CoD:MW2 compared to 360 sales?

4 million PC sales, with an average playtime of 160 hours and median playtime of 60.

 

[Teeth]

Or put out products that specifically are tailored to that audience as frequently as you can.

The audience that encompasses a large number of minority and women players?

What are PC sales of CoD:MW2 compared to 360 sales? That's still really surprisingly high, don't get me wrong, but I don't think a very large amount of CoD:MW2 sales were Steam-based.

Lesser, by a decent amount. That said, I'd be hard to convince that PC players are more likely to complete a CoD campaign than a console gamer. As in, what would be the reason that a PC player who would be invested enough to buy a CoD game would be MORE likely to complete a campaign than a console player with the same investment.

Oh, great. This back-patting piece by a trade organization has determined that there is no problem at all with the diversity of the targeted audience of the industry it represents. Thanks, this is very convincing.

edit: I mean fucking come on, look at how vague this shit is. What's a "game purchaser", exactly?

Why are you trying so hard to discredit the types of games that some people buy/play as not worth counting? It's either that or you don't classify people who play those games as "gamers" because those who would are so villainous. This is starting to look a lot like a No True Scotsman type of viewpoint.

 

[KHlover]

Oh, great. This back-patting piece by a trade organization has determined that there is no problem at all with the diversity of the targeted audience of the industry it represents. Thanks, this is very convincing.

And this is where I'll stop trying to have a conversation with you. You clearly have an agenda and nothing that's posted will convince you you're wrong.

 

[Sakujou]

First of all Kudos to Op. But i have to deny that. Iam interested in the problems in the gaming industry such as why only straight bald white guys are only the heroes in vidyagamez. But thinking why china or nigera is handling auch e-waste would be a next to impossible issue/task to handle. There dozens of people who rely on that. If you stop producing e-waste, would these people live in a better or worse condition? They wont have a job anymore on the other hand they wont live between piles of garbage. And even that isn't even a thought in the right way. You can make yourself depressed with things like that. Europe/USA have fucked up(and still fuck up) quite a lot of countries, so how as an end consumer do you want to tackle that? As a student with no real disposable income, there is no other solution than boycott those products.

 

[Earthpainting]

Gun licensing is the one that bugs me a little bit. I do not come from a gun-culture and so my only exposure to weaponry is from news reports of wars, domestic accidents and the recent police altercations. It makes me a bit uneasy that video games can indirectly fund that sort of thing. I do my best to avoid games with real weapon licensing, but being horribly ignorant on the matter, a lot slips through the cracks. I also find myself sometimes making rationalisations for some of the series that I still want to play, in spite of knowing they are involved in it. I fear my convictions are weak.

 

[Teeth]

I feel the need to correct myself on the CoD MW2 numbers:
A more valid statistic would be: Out of all of the owners, how many have played -

1) the campaign: 4.1 million played of 4.5 million owned
2) multiplayer: 4.0 million played of 4.5 million owned

So more people have PLAYED the campaign than have PLAYED the multi.

Out of those that played the campaign: 55+% BEAT the campaign on any difficulty.

So...errr...more people on PC play CoD for the campaign than those that play for the multi. And they play the campaign all the way through more often than not.

reference: http://steamspy.com/search.php?s=modern+warfare+2


EDIT: just checked the rest of the CoDs and they follow suit. More people play the campaign than the Multi for CoD on PC.

 

[duckroll]

I actually just had a discussion with a friend the other day about consumerism in general. I think the discussion came about because of the NYT piece on Amazon's work culture, but it quickly expanded beyond that. The conclusion I came to is that the reality is that human society is built upon the mentality of expanding far beyond our means. This is not something unique to any industry or culture, but it is probably something that is more exploitative in entertainment industries and where consumers bear more burden for the blame.

People living beyond their means is something we see everywhere. From the lowest classes to the highest ones. Everyone wants more than what they have. Individuals want more, companies want more, countries want more. The drive to better one's position in the world is also what causes (forces?) us to ignore the cost of that. Can advanced electronics be manufactured at the speed and quantity that society today demands it for the mainstream without relying on conflict materials and third world factory lines? How can we push people to enjoy greater comforts and conveniences without further harming the environment? Can developed countries keep up with the construction and maintenance of their infrastructures without exploiting the manual labor of poorer nearby nations where many are willing to work for less and in harsh conditions because those opportunities are still better than the ones they have at home? Since the answers to those questions are generally no, but yet they are what society demands anyway, we are simply accepting that we are living beyond our means and deferring the worst consequences to later generations.

It's fine to acknowledge that there is a problem and that everyone should probably care about it. But let's face it, talk is cheap. In the end it is easier to be aware of these problems at the back of our minds and just continue on enjoying what we have because it is there. As long as that happens, nothing will change, and at some point in the future if we have exhausted our means to exploit something somewhere to prop ourselves up, we either find a better solution, or everything goes to shit. But hey, that's tomorrow's problem, not today.

 

[ThePinkServbot]

This is both an incorrect definition of what constitutes "upper class"

Yeah, and Ann Romney doesn't even feel wealthy.

and still much too high a figure to cover the people who generate the vast majority of video game revenue.

I agree, but not by much. The vast majority of video game revenue is still generated by people who possess more income than the vast majority of the US.

The overlap is much smaller than you think. Most people don't jump around between games, they find something they like and play it into the ground.

Most people, sure, but I'm not talking about most people, I'm talking about the people who generate the most cash for this end of the video game industry (as in, not mobile.) That ain't most people. I also don't really believe that the overlap is as tiny as you're trying to represent.

4 million PC sales, with an average playtime of 160 hours and median playtime of 60.

That really only answers half of the question. And, it actually only represents half of the game, apparently.

The audience that encompasses a large number of minority and women players?

I guess they could have gone and played all of those female and minority targeted games instead. Which is a shame, I really liked Black Uncharted.

That said, I'd be hard to convince that PC players are more likely to complete a CoD campaign than a console gamer. As in, what would be the reason that a PC player who would be invested enough to buy a CoD game would be MORE likely to complete a campaign than a console player with the same investment.

Different dynamics. Most console players, if they're buying a game with a multiplayer component, are primarily buying a game that they can unwrap, load in, and get online to play with their buddies immediately. The PC gamer as a general rule is always going to be a little less "I just want my fucking fun with as minimal input on my part as possible please."

Why are you trying so hard to discredit the types of games that some people buy/play as not worth counting? It's either that or you don't classify people who play those games as "gamers" because those who would are so villainous.

Yeah, you got me, I'm doing some sort of "Gamer Pride" gatekeeping crap. Are you high? Look at the subjects raised by the OP; how much of that applies to mobile gaming?

And this is where I'll stop trying to have a conversation with you. You clearly have an agenda and nothing that's posted will convince you you're wrong.

I'll cry into my pillow all night, I assure you.

 

[Videoneon]

1. Conflict minerals in the consoles, mobile and PC hardware:Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Apple, Samsung, Intel (less so), PC hardware manufacturers, and many other companies are contributing to the conflict mineral industry.
2. Exhaustion of resources & lack of sustainability: Gaming consoles and PC hardware all rely on different natural resources in their production that unfortunately are limited.
3. Environmental pollution from high energy consumption: Gaming hardware utilize a lot of electricity. Given how most of our energy production stems from fossil fuels, playing games contribute to greenhouse gases and global warming.
4. Lack of recycling: Like technology culture, so does gaming culture propagate a consumer-driven environment where marketing and companies constantly tell you to buy the newest product. Unfortunately this means that the old needs to be replaced and thrown out, so a lot of old and dated hardware and consoles get shipped to countries like Nigeria or China as "e-waste", where low-income or poor citizens try to harvest the minerals out of these dated materials.
5. Exploitation of cheap labor in the production of consoles: E.g. your PS4 is produced by FOXCONN, who exploit their workers to an outrageous extent. Yet this is ignored by most outlets when reviewing the console or when enthusiasts talk about the merits of the product. This goes for all consoles.
6. Exploitation of the people who develop your video games: Most of your AAA games are produced as a result of exploitation of the developers who produce them. There is numerous evidence for how people don’t get paid overtime, working under the dreadful “crunch”, evidence of poor and even abhorrent management practices. Even worse, in the end, the faceless publisher or developer get all the recognition and name brand, whereas the individuals, from QA to Junior Designer to HR Manager to Lead Programmer don’t get any lick of attention or recognition. We often talk about “Blizzard”, “Valve”, or “DICE”, but rarely are the people actually responsible for your favorite games mentioned, despite the crazy amount of blood, sweat, and tears they have invested in those games.
7. Association with weapon industry and US military: Video game companies that want to develop military-themed games or games involving guns have the support and consultation of both the military and the gun industry.
8. Constructed as an upper class luxury hobby for people with sufficient disposable income: Gaming as a culture is a luxury hobby that only people with disposable income can afford. If you want the newest games (or the ones available at your nearest retailer), you have to have a new console or hardware – if you want to talk, report, or review games, you also have to have the latest stuff if you want to be part of the conversation in gaming culture.
9. Video games are mostly produced by Western companies (i.e. European and North American ) that often only center themselves/their perceived target audience within the games: This entails that often other countries and cultures are either made invisible or stereotyped to an eye-rolling degree. E.g. simplistic binary world-views are often levelled at countries in the Middle East, where a multi-million dollar project like Battlefield 3 can't even do the effort of spelling "hotel" in Arabic properly. More often than not, it is usually implicitly racist, sexist, heteronormative power structures that are propagated throughout mainstream video games with little to no characterizations of non-white, non-male, or non-straight groups of people. Combine this with a very hostile and toxic segment of the enthusiast gaming audience and you have a harmful cocktail that is not easily fixed any time soon. This is not exclusive to video games, but it is still part of gaming culture.

.

May as well respond

1. I'm considering a move towards buying used games. (it's cheaper, if a bit "tarnished") or digital. Digital is questionable for me as I may run out of space on things like my handhelds. I almost never buy more than one iteration of a console. I still have the original 3DS, old Wii, etc. Last expanded thing I got that I remember was a DS Lite.

2. is related to 1, at least as it relates to the agency of the consumer.

3. I mean I play for extended sessions at times, and there's a segment of gamers out there for whom there's no alternative to extended gameplay sessions. Consoles are powered off. I'm not sure there's much more I can do that isn't "play less." Our house does have solar panels...

4. I actually have a handful of old laptop batteries that I've been meaning to give to Apple (last time I went the local store said they wouldn't accept them, bleh). I'm not sure what else I can do though. We hold onto our consoles, personally, partially for posterity and also because it "would be the best platform to play a particular game on" even if the system ends up becoming not functional over time.

5. There's not much to be done here as an individual... As gaming becomes more mainstream (even more than it already is) there can be more pressure placed to get media outlets to write about these things. Media outlets of varying degrees of prominence already have gaming contributors like Forbes and Usatoday and such - as more generalized outlets, they could perhaps see the merit in bringing to attention things like labor conditions and environmental concerns. This can be bolstered by the advent of social media. I actually think that this will improve over time, from the ground zero on altblogs and tumblrs and such and further up

6. Well video game development is brutal even for most of the people who directly work on the game's development and not its manufacturing. One of the weird things about society nowadays is the idea of the rockstar CEO, or developer, but maybe that's just me. I do find things like celebrity cults around CEOs, tech companies, and rich people/people in finance totally weird though. Shocking to me how many clickbait headlines/pandering images I see for economic and finance related articles, when ostensibly it's the domain of homo economicus

7. It's an extension of tribal instincts and a testament to perverted political messaging in the US. The problem is about hierarchical conception of society - born to be heroes and born to be scum, etc. and it's propped up by current strength of economy/military relative to the world, and history etc

8. I sort of don't think it is, and the trajectory of gaming (if you're on the mobile train especially) suggest this will be less so than it has been. In the sense that its disproportionately felt by gamers who have less disposable income, yes, and that they can be more vulnerable to general messages about material excess and what not, sure, but there have been reasons for the less affluent to game, as far back as arcades

9. related to 7....everyone basically could vote Green Party :3

 

[Teeth]

That really only answers half of the question. And, it actually only represents half of the game, apparently.

Answered above. More people play the campaign than the multi and out of those that do, at least half finish it.

I guess they could have gone and played all of those female and minority targeted games instead. Which is a shame, I really liked Black Uncharted.

You don't like Uncharted or its ilk at all. I've read your posts here.

If we are going to claim that games are targeted at white men because they star white male avatars, then by the same association, we'd have to admit that games starring other ethnicities/genders hold the qualities, right? Or are we going to claim that things like violence or co operation or other qualities are defined by race/gender?

Different dynamics. Most console players, if they're buying a game with a multiplayer component, are primarily buying a game that they can unwrap, load in, and get online to play with their buddies immediately. The PC gamer as a general rule is always going to be a little less "I just want my fucking fun with as minimal input on my part as possible please."

This was pretty good. You almost convinced me.

Yeah, you got me, I'm doing some sort of "Gamer Pride" gatekeeping crap. Are you high? Look at the subjects raised by the OP; how much of that applies to mobile gaming?

All of them except maybe number 9. All of the manufacturing and energy ones. The recycling, exploitation of workers, licensing guns...it all happens on mobile. Plus you can add exploiting psychological weaknesses in humans with predatory pricing schemes if you want to cast a really wide net and go crazy.

I'll cry into my pillow all night, I assure you.

Why do you continue converse this way?

 

[Stevey]

I ignore it all.
Got enough to worry about in my life

 

[patapuf]

I agree, but not by much. The vast majority of video game revenue is still generated by people who possess more income than the vast majority of the US.

Most people, sure, but I'm not talking about most people, I'm talking about the people who generate the most cash for this end of the video game industry (as in, not mobile.) That ain't most people. I also don't really believe that the overlap is as tiny as you're trying to represent.

Dude the digital industry is bigger than the retail industry by now. "AAA games" are becoming less relevant to gaming as a whole. If you look at the big players in the industry and where they invest - everything is moving towards enganging as many people as possible for as long as possible. Your "hardcore gamer" that jumps from game to game is not the target demographic of modern gaming trends. And he hasn't been for a while.

Games like league of legend are so big and played for so many hours even popular console game look tiny in comparison. And - surprise the average income of league players is probably way below the poverty line in the US.

You view of gaming, who plays and how much it costs and the relative importance of segments seems miopic.

 

[The_Poet]

Jesus Christ OP, get a grip.

 

[the_batman]

on one hand, if enough people step up and do something, change will occur

on the other hand, keep churning out those AAA hits, baby!

 

[ThePinkServbot]

Answered above. More people play the campaign than the multi and out of those that do, at least half finish it.

Mmm, not quite. "Total players" would include people who loaded the game once. Compare people who have played the game for any measure of time (for instance, the 'in the past 2 weeks' measurement).

You don't like Uncharted or its ilk at all. I've read your posts here.

......

Some people don't have an ear for snark, I guess.

If we are going to claim that games are targeted at white men because they star white male avatars, then by the same association, we'd have to admit that games starring other ethnicities/genders hold the qualities, right?

Hold the qualities of... what, games white people want to play? Qualities that other ethnicities/genders want to play? What are you talking about?

This was pretty good. You almost convinced me.

I love the "tone policing" you engage in at the end of the post after this condescending comment. You're welcome to talk the talk, but don't bother talking out both sides of your mouth.

All of them except maybe number 9.

What was the point of KHFan posting that ridiculous trade propaganda? To counter questions re: diversity. In what section of the OP's post does that pertain to? Number 9. What is it that we were talking about, the reason why KHFan posted that? Number 9.

Why do you continue converse this way?

In a thread full of people who have cried bloody tears at the slightest bit of criticism towards their hobby, in a thread full of people who have denied that straight white dudes are the foremost targeted and thus tailored-to audience, and in a thread where "I don't fucking care" is the most common answer to the industry's ills, I must once again ask the question:

How is it to my benefit, in the very slightest, to dial back my tone for the purpose of sparing anyone's feelings?

 

[Dunan]

I had never thought about "conflict minerals" before; thanks for the food for thought. Where I live, old cell phones are recycled at no additional cost (that is, you pay the cost up front when you buy the phone), but other older electronics have disposal charges, so some people will dump them off the side of the road in the dead of night. I myself have always disposed of these things properly, paying the fee when necessary.

Regarding energy consumption: playing video games consumes very little energy compared to a lot of hobbies. My iMac runs at 135 watts; my PS3 at somewhat less (though slightly more with the monitor added). Handheld devices consume much less power. Any of these things is less power-intensive than even an artist painting on canvas in a room lit by two 70-watt incandescent bulbs. Someone whose hobby is automobiles is going to generate pollution; video games generate almost none.

I'm also struck by the number of people (at least five so far) who tout the fact they they buy digital. Which point does this address? The environmental impact of digital's lack of packaging is small, and when you buy digital, you cannot sell the product onward when you're finished with it. I almost always buy physical for that reason, particularly for games that I don't think I'll want to own forever: when I'm done, I sell it to someone else who will get lots of use out of it.

If you live out in the countryside and would be getting in a car (and polluting the air) just to go to the store to buy a game, then sure, but if you live in the city, you're going to the game shop on a train with a thousand other people, and buying something that was shipped to the store with thousands of other items. The marginal pollution of one more item is trivial, and that item can be used again and again -- for decades, if well-cared-for. A digital purchase, in contrast, has zero value if the buyer no longer has any desire to play it.

Or do you support digital because it allows the publisher to capture as much value as possible? I might support this position if we saw a correlation between digital-centric publishers and publishers who treat their employees right. But I haven't seen much evidence for that so far.

 

[SomTervo]

That's kind of my point. If I cared about the problematic things companies do, I'd have to become Amish. It goes the same for everyone. No one cares about the ethics of businesses if they make something or do something people want.

Can't disagree with you at all. I suppose it's the laissez faire tone of your posts I'm replying to mostly.

A lot of these things you mention aren't exclusive to video games. They generally go with owning computing devices like PCs and smartphones and whatnot.

Being a privileged decently off person living in the western world, there are too many endless and constant tragedies that happen in worse off parts of the world, literally all the time, and if I were to let that affect me, I would not be able to function. So some degree of desensitization/willful ignorance is necessary.

I'm not sure that's true. There will always be the company that's willing to race to the bottom and offer cheap products through exploitation, and they will flourish when no one else is willing to do so and thus stuck with high costs compared to the immoral company. Such is capitalism.

Very true.

Capitalism is a bitch.

 

[ThePinkServbot]

Dude the digital industry is bigger than the retail industry by now.

Outside of mobile, and in terms of dollars? Citation needed.

"AAA games" are becoming less relevant to gaming as a whole. If you look at the big players in the industry and where they invest - everything is moving towards enganging as many people as possible for as long as possible. Your "hardcore gamer" that jumps from game to game is not the target demographic of modern gaming trends. And he hasn't been for a while.

Then why has this most recent E3 seen the exact same glut of sequels for the exact same faces and series' that we see every other E3? I agree with you that as far as OVERALL VIDEO GAME AUDIENCES, in terms of sheer numbers of PEOPLE, these kinds of hardcore gamers do not represent the majority. But all you have to do is look at the AAA shit coming out to see that they are still VERY much targeted.

Games like league of legend are so big and played for so many hours even popular console game look tiny in comparison. And - surprise the average income of league players is probably way below the poverty line in the US.

And how many Leagues of Legend are there (well, there's DotA, but two games a "revolution" does not make)? How many Minecrafts are there?

You view of gaming, who plays and how much it costs and the relative importance of segments seems miopic.

And your view of gaming, as with the case of most people in this thread, is NeoGAF-centric.

 

[LordJim]

And how many Leagues of Legend are there (well, there's DotA, but two games a "revolution" does not make)?

There are tons of MOBAS, some being essentially clones. They are just nowhere near as successful.

 

[Teeth]

Mmm, not quite. "Total players" would include people who loaded the game once. Compare people who have played the game for any measure of time (for instance, the 'in the past 2 weeks' measurement).

People who have completed the first mission is above 85%. I have no idea how to gauge how many people did anything in multi. Still stands, more than half the people who buy the game complete the campaign.

Hold the qualities of... what, games white people want to play? Qualities that other ethnicities/genders want to play? What are you talking about?

If using a white protagonist classifies a game as targeting white people, does using a non-white protagonist classify as targeting a non-white audience?

Then why has this most recent E3 seen the exact same glut of sequels for the exact same faces and series' that we see every other E3? I agree with you that as far as OVERALL VIDEO GAME AUDIENCES, in terms of sheer numbers of PEOPLE, these kinds of hardcore gamers do not represent the majority. But all you have to do is look at the AAA shit coming out to see that they are still VERY much targeted.

See, this is what I'm talking about. If there are companies that are filling the need of wider audiences and making tons of money off of it, why are you looking at a segment of the market and saying that what 5 companies are doing is super problematic? Isn't it only problematic if no one is filling the need? If some people are and some people aren't, why do we have to point to a segment of the market and say they shouldn't target who they are targeting?
I'm not saying that those companies shouldn't diversify their narrative leads, I'm saying that the idea that GAMING as a whole only cares about rich people and the only people who are rich are white people and dude people so therefore all of gaming is only for the upper class.

The only part of this entire discussion that I've had a stake in is that I don't believe gaming is an upper-class only hobby.

I love the "tone policing" you engage in at the end of the post after this condescending comment. You're welcome to talk the talk, but don't bother talking out both sides of your mouth.

I only did it because I don't actually believe that you believe what you wrote.

What was the point of KHFan posting that ridiculous trade propaganda? To counter questions re: diversity. In what section of the OP's post does that pertain to? Number 9. What is it that we were talking about, the reason why KHFan posted that? Number 9.

He posted it to reference the income question. Which I also responded to. But you dodged the responses and got really angry.

You also said HOW MANY MOTHERFUCKER and the answer was all of them but one.

In a thread full of people who have cried bloody tears at the slightest bit of criticism towards their hobby, in a thread full of people who have denied that straight white dudes are the foremost targeted and thus tailored-to audience, and in a thread where "I don't fucking care" is the most common answer to the industry's ills, I must once again ask the question:

How is it to my benefit, in the very slightest, to dial back my tone for the purpose of sparing anyone's feelings?

No one's feelings are getting hurt. It doesn't make anyone feel bad when you question their sanity or lob insults. But it hurts your validity. It just seems like when you get backed into a corner you throw insults or deny the validity of any data being presented. You haven't given an inch. You just reframe your argument which gets countered or considered and then reframe it again.

 

[ThePinkServbot]

There are tons of MOBAS, some being essentially clones. They are just nowhere near as successful.

Yeah, that's actually my point. I'm aware there's a shitload of Minecraft clones also, but how many of them make even aaaaaaaa... hundred-thousandth(?) of Minecraft's dough?

 

[Teeth]

Yeah, that's actually my point. I'm aware there's a shitload of Minecraft clones also, but how many of them make even aaaaaaaa... hundred-thousandth(?) of Minecraft's dough?

EDIT - pointless now

 

[patapuf]

Outside of mobile, and in terms of dollars? Citation needed.

Of course i include mobile, but look at the yearly reports of EA and co, Digital revenue is becoming more and more important.

Then why has this most recent E3 seen the exact same glut of sequels for the exact same faces and series' that we see every other E3? I agree with you that as far as OVERALL VIDEO GAME AUDIENCES, in terms of sheer numbers of PEOPLE, these kinds of hardcore gamers do not represent the majority. But all you have to do is look at the AAA shit coming out to see that they are still VERY much targeted.

Because E3 is an event focused on retailers and that's what the AAA market targets. But even at E3 youd' be blind not to see the changes that are happening

And how many Leagues of Legend are there (well, there's DotA, but two games a "revolution" does not make)? How many Minecrafts are there?

Do you not know how big the F2P market is? i'm not just talking Mobas.

And your view of gaming, as with the case of most people in this thread, is NeoGAF-centric.

If you think mobile, league of legends etc. is "NeoGAF centric" i don't know what forum you are reading.

Edit: oh well.

 

[pantsonhead]

I make sure I support studio's that don't do these things, and if I can live without a game from a studio that does? I do.

 

[NewGame]

I'm pretty concerned with conflict materials, Nintendo had two different occasions where conflict materials were removed from their products.

I've also been pretty interested in how video games have strayed from being inclusive or accessible from large purchase requirements to a lack of handicapped options.

If you've ever been in a kids sick ward videogames are a pretty amazing escape for them to enjoy.

 

[Lime]

I've also been pretty interested in how video games have strayed from being inclusive or accessible from large purchase requirements to a lack of handicapped options.

If you've ever been in a kids sick ward videogames are a pretty amazing escape for them to enjoy.

This is such an important point, thanks for mentioning it. I can't believe it took this long until Sony implemented the configuration of the DS4 control scheme.

I know that Able Gamers Foundation is one organization that have this sort of physical/bodily accessibility as their agenda.

 

[The Technomancer]

1. 2, 4 and 5 are unfortunately problems much wider in scope than just the video game industry. As for how I try to deal with them? Buying less stuff generally, I suppose. I also retain and get use out of old systems and games, I don't like throwing things out if there's no good reason to.

On a similar note for 3 I just try to be very power conscious in general. I make use of natural lighting whenever I can, I unplug my computer or my consoles when I'm not using them for extended periods of time, I just do what I can.

6 is a bit trickier because, since a lot of it takes place in my country (US) dialogue I engage in might have an actual impact on that. So yeah, talking about it and forcing transparency where companies would like to downplay aspects of their working conditions.

7 is kind of icky and part of a much much larger conversation around that specific issue that could practically be a thread itself

As for 8 and 9...I agree that both of those are problems, but honestly the majority of games I play these days are indie games that are much much more accessible than the current AAA space

 

[Calcaneus]

I first really became aware of a lot of these issues a few years ago, and while I can't lie and say I've done much about it, it has made more weary of buying new things before I've gotten everything I can out of what I have. I don't plan on buying a 3DS until I've finished all the DS games I already have. Same with other consoles/hardware. I'm a lot more careful and am trying to get the most time out of the machines I currently own.

But if I'm being honest with myself, how many of those decisions are actually motivated by me wanting to save money? The real test will come when I actually have the money to be buying multiple consoles and handhelds a generation. Will I show the same restraint? I don't know . Until then its just talk. (not to say you're wrong or a bad person for owning multiple consoles or handhelds)

But also, like OP said, personal decisions are just one part of the solution. The companies need to be presssured into changing their ways, or at the very least need to be questioned on these issues more often.

 

[redcrayon]

Some of these issues are stuff like:

The first few points are pretty much relatable to modern tech industries in general.

Association with weapon industry and US military[/B]: Video game companies that want to develop military-themed games or games involving guns have the support and consultation of both the military and the gun industry.

I don't buy or play shooters, nor do I have any interest in real world military jingoism as fodder for computer games. The whole guns debate (and the promotion/export of military showpieces) is something the US is going to have to deal with on it's own, I'm not sure there's much I can contribute to it from overseas. The games are popular for a reason though.

Constructed as an upper class luxury hobby for people with sufficient disposable income. Gaming as a culture is a luxury hobby that only people with disposable income can affor[/URL]d. If you want the newest games (or the ones available at your nearest retailer), you have to have a new console or hardware – if you want to talk, report, or review games, you also have to have the latest stuff if you want to be part of the conversation in gaming culture.

'To be part of the conversation?' I haven't bought an AAA western game in years and spend loads of time talking about other types of games here, and watching stuff on youtube about them. I've spent about £130 this year, so well under £20 a month, which is distinctly less than I've spent on coffee and bottled water. AAA doesn't define the industry, it's just the most visable part of it. You absolutely don't have to be playing or talking about the newest, biggest multiplayer AAA game to take part in the hobby, I don't pick up big AAA games until the consoles and games are much older. Publishers and retailers have an interest in selling you the expensive new product, you don't have to buy it any more than you have to upgrade your phone every year.

[*]Video games are mostly produced by Western companies (i.e. European and North American ) that often only center themselves/their perceived target audience within the games: This entails that often other countries and cultures are either made invisible or stereotyped to an eye-rolling degree. E.g. simplistic binary world-views are often levelled at countries in the Middle East, where a multi-million dollar project like Battlefield 3 can't even do the effort of spelling "hotel" in Arabic properly. More often than not, it is usually implicitly racist, sexist, heteronormative power structures that are propagated throughout mainstream video games with little to no characterizations of non-white, non-male, or non-straight groups of people. Combine this with a very hostile and toxic segment of the enthusiast gaming audience and you have a harmful cocktail that is not easily fixed any time soon. This is not exclusive to video games, but it is still part of gaming culture.

This is the one I agree with the most (although to be honest I play more Japanese games). Just because the market is largely westerners, doesn't mean that ignorance is OK, but I think that sometimes it's hard to get everything right. It's reasonable enough if a game gets a couple of things wrong in an effort to be respectful, people make mistakes, but sure, a game that has made an awful lot of money out of portraying skirmishes in the Middle East should at least hire someone who can write Arabic to get the basics right.

AAA games do seem to be leaning more towards female characters in several major upcoming games though (Horizon, Recore etc etc), that'll be something to keep an eye on.

Toxic or disrespectful atmospheres in certain spheres of gaming are something that is specifically relevant to gaming. What's frustrating is that it's probably the easiest thing to oppose due to it involving actual gamers, and also the hardest thing to change because anonymous people being offensive pricks online isn't going away.

 

[lazygecko]

9: Personally I believe the 'target audience' excuse the industry (and fans) like to throw out is bullshit personally. Many of the best selling games of all time don't even feature white male protagonist. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is the second best selling GTA game ever despite gamers everywhere claiming they 'can't relate' to CJ and 'gansta' culture. Lara Croft is one of the most famous gaming icons in the world yet developers still see female characters as risky. Mafia 3 is probably going to sell a kajillion copies if it turns out to be any good yet publishers are still going to see minority characters as risky. Meanwhile 37 games featuring straight white males are going to tank this upcoming fall yet the industry is going to continue falling all over themselves to create games starring straight white males. I wish developers would at least be honest and say they have no interest in making games starring minorities or women and quit blowing smoke up our asses.

Ugh. Anywho, that's how I deal with all this shit haha.

It's just confirmation bias to a ridiculous degree. Whenever something with elements outside of the norm does not succeed financially, they're going to act 100% sure that this was the reason it failed. You see this in the film industry as well. If a movie starring a female lead flops, they're going to blame the failure on her. This kind of behavior does not happen nearly as much when a film starring a male lead flops.

 

[george_us]

It's just confirmation bias to a ridiculous degree. Whenever something with elements outside of the norm does not succeed financially, they're going to act 100% sure that this was the reason it failed. You see this in the film industry as well. If a movie starring a female lead flops, they're going to blame the failure on her. This kind of behavior does not happen nearly as much when a film starring a male lead flops.

Agreed. Like I said, I just wish studios would be honest and admit it. It's not like there's this massive wasteland filled with games/movies starring minority/female characters. We're lucky to even get a couple a year and we're even luckier if they turn out GOOD.

 

[Silvawuff]

Less focus on negatives, more focus on positives -- that's the key. That's not to say "ignore these issues," but take them in stride with the pros of gaming, industry, and the people who support this hobby.

 

[Lime]

Less focus on negatives, more focus on positives -- that's the key. That's not to say "ignore these issues," but take them in stride with the pros of gaming, industry, and the people who support this hobby.

I'm sorry, but what do you mean that focusing on the positives is the key?