• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Take-Two: "Strategy games are just not contemporary."

Wait, it's actually releasing the same DAY as Mass Effect 3?

Jesus how can you be so stupid/incompetent?

Seriously??????????
 
Somewhere in the development this game took a wrong turn and they are desperately trying to shift the games perception with dimwitted marketing. Maybe they genuinely thought calling a FPS XCOM would appeal to hardcore shooter fans and hit that nostalgic bone in old fans and they would sell COD numbers. But from everything seen so far, it's a below average shooter and all all X-Com fans hate it with a passion.

I wouldn't be surprised if this game was quietly shelved at some point.
 
lol same day as Mass Effect 3 when their excuse for there more well known franchise underperforming was being within 2 weeks of Mass Effect 2.

lololol
 
Thanks for the info, that indeed dents his claims.

Another aspect of his rationale I'm not too sure of is the rentability of shooters as a genre.

It seems to me, and it's only an intuition without serious data, that shooters are a high-risk/high payoff genre.
What I mean is that there's a crapload of shooters being released, the most successful are very successful and very profitable but there's also a lot of big budget projects that just don't meet expectations and lead to losses. It seems to me the genre is not very robust to mediocre/lackluster sales. Once again, that's only an intuition at this point. Another adverse effect, harder to quantify, is that in the long run releasing too many mediocre games in a given genre will lead to genre fatigue.

To confirm this, I'd really like to see the returns / budgets for the shooters released in the last two years and how they're distributed.

Anyway, all of this is moot considering the demographics that think strategy has become irrelevant and recognize X-Com as a brand don't seem to intersect that much, if at all.
 
Yeah, just look at Starcraft 2, another niche game that had no sales. Or Dragon Age: Origins, that was a complete flop as well, way too niche...
best selling Bioware game to date...

Seriously, someone needs to start firing these schmucks, what the hell do they know about what gamers really want. Like X-COMs original fanbase just stopped existing? It's not like there are a lot of games out there for the cyberpunk/sci-fi lovers...


Nirolak said:

So if it bombs it's the window again, damn window, who sets these dates anyway...

fucksake
 
It does make sense from a business standpoint. Only Blizzard strategy games sell a significant amount these days. If they were to release a true Xcom sequel in the same turn-based, isometric vein as the original, it would be a guaranteed flop sales-wise. You'd have to be crazy to greenlight a $20-30 million investment for a game like that in present time. That's just the way the market crumbles in its current state.

koji said:
Yeah, just look at Starcraft 2, another niche game that had no sales. Or Dragon Age: Origins, that was a complete flop as well, way too niche...
best selling Bioware game to date...

Seriously, someone needs to start firing these schmucks, what the hell do they know about what gamers really want. Like X-COMs original fanbase just stopped existing? It's not like there are a lot of games out there for the cyberpunk/sci-fi lovers...
Seriously, guy? You're using SC2 as your example? Shouldn't have to explain why that's not an accurate assessment of the strategy market as a whole.
 
The logic behind x-com's direction fill me with such rage.
I guess I will just have to satisfy myself with continuing to play the old x-com games off steam.
 
I guess it's fitting that two of the most egregious examples of how our industry is getting dumbed down with each passing release are coming out on the same day.
 
Heavy said:
It does make sense from a business standpoint. Only Blizzard strategy games sell a significant amount these days. If they were to release a true Xcom sequel in the same turn-based, isometric vein as the original, it would be a guaranteed flop sales-wise. You'd have to be crazy to greenlight a $20-30 million investment for a game like that in present time. That's just the way the market crumbles in its current state.

Completely false, see several p. 2 posts
 
koji said:
Yeah, just look at Starcraft 2, another niche game that had no sales. Or Dragon Age: Origins, that was a complete flop as well, way too niche...
best selling Bioware game to date...
Close, I believe that's still Baldur's Gate with 5 million copies: http://www.vg247.com/2010/07/14/interview-biowares-dr-greg-on-dragon-age-2-and-the-triple-a-trap/

VG247 said:
VG247: STWOR is said to be one of the highest budget titles ever made by EA, and, obviously it’s a Star Wars game too. Are you feeling pressure from both EA and the fans to get it right?

Greg Zeschuk: We have always worked under a lot of pressure.

We made games such as Baldur’s Gate early in our career, which is still one of our biggest-sellers having sold 5 million copies, maybe more than that.
 
Heavy said:
It does make sense from a business standpoint. Only Blizzard strategy games sell a significant amount these days. If they were to release a true Xcom sequel in the same turn-based, isometric vein as the original, it would be a guaranteed flop sales-wise. You'd have to be crazy to greenlight a $20-30 million investment for a game like that in present time. That's just the way the market crumbles in its current state.

Total War, Dawn of War, etc.

BTW, you don't have to greenlight a $30 million investment to create a video game.
 
To whom is this game supposed to appeal? Mr. Joe Call of Duty Player Public? The people who, if you were to say to them, "Hey, remember X-Com?" would likely just stare blankly at you as if you had asked them where they keep their poetry collection?
 
Heavy said:
It does make sense from a business standpoint. Only Blizzard strategy games sell a significant amount these days. If they were to release a true Xcom sequel in the same turn-based, isometric vein as the original, it would be a guaranteed flop sales-wise. You'd have to be crazy to greenlight a $20-30 million investment for a game like that in present time. That's just the way the market crumbles in its current state.


Seriously, guy? You're using SC2 as your example? Shouldn't have to explain why that's not an accurate assessment of the strategy market as a whole.


Beyond your completely ignorant statement that only Blizzard strategy games sell, why do you need to invest 20-30 million in a strategy game? That's the problem right there; not matching your budget to the market. Especially considering that genuine strategy players aren't picky about graphics as long as they're polished, consistent, and preferably have a unique art style. Have you ever even seen Europa Universalis, Hearts of Iron, or Victoria?? You actually think those games cost 20million to make?????
 
Heavy said:
It does make sense from a business standpoint. Only Blizzard strategy games sell a significant amount these days. If they were to release a true Xcom sequel in the same turn-based, isometric vein as the original, it would be a guaranteed flop sales-wise. You'd have to be crazy to greenlight a $20-30 million investment for a game like that in present time. That's just the way the market crumbles in its current state.


Seriously, guy? You're using SC2 as your example? Shouldn't have to explain why that's not an accurate assessment of the strategy market as a whole.

I'm curious, why does this game have to have a budget of $20-$30 million?
 
We totally need more FPS games. I hope the next Total War game is an FPS game. Valkyrie Chronicles will also work well as an FPS. Tetris could also be revived with an FPS.
 
Cow Mengde said:
We totally need more FPS games. I hope the next Total War game is an FPS game. Valkyrie Chronicles will also work well as an FPS. Tetris could also be revived with an FPS.

Tropico 4 is going to be a cover based third person shooter. El Presidente!!!
 
Heavy said:
Seriously, guy? You're using SC2 as your example? Shouldn't have to explain why that's not an accurate assessment of the strategy market as a whole.
Actually, it is. While SC2 is pretty much top dog, every strategy game that's received decent marketing has sold around or well over a million copies. Even the more obscure ones sell pretty well, especially in Europe. All of them have had modest budgets, even Halo Wars.

Instead, they made another FPS that'll be lucky to do Duke Nukem Forever numbers. There is no way XCOM will make its budget unless there's a lot more to it than has been shown so far.
 
HAHAHAHAHAHA

damn, just damn.

Well, we can't blame them. In 2007 strategies weren't so hot, but shooters were. Now they need to defend it in some way. I bet he forgot about his comment on Bioshock 2 perfomance.
 
I don't really have any emotional ties to this franchise, but the quotes alone just speak plainly the difference between creators and business men.

Real artists make the art and have it find fans vs. business men who make the art for the fans. Big difference, that's why one feels unique and one is built by focus group. I guess we know which direction this game is going now.
 
and when everyone laughed when Iwata said he doesn't want every game to be a shooter, Sid, poor Sid, was somewhere in a corner, crying in a closet. Poor Sid...
 
Goddamnit I hate this console generation.

If I were T2 I would at least make a compromise and make it some kind of turn-based strategy/shooter mix like Valkyria Chronicles.
 
John Harker said:
I don't really have any emotional ties to this franchise, but the quotes alone just speak plainly the difference between creators and business men.

Real artists make the art and have it find fans vs. business men who make the art for the fans. Big difference, that's why one feels unique and one is built by focus group. I guess we know which direction this game is going now.

What's troubling to me is it shows how narrow the top execs view are of the gaming industry. It's gotta have a huge budget and it's gotta be chasing the FPS genre. Did they ever once stop and think maybe they could lower the budget and make a really good niche strategy game that could potentially garner a big audience? And if it didn't their losses aren't so severe that it leads to layoffs?

How many more studios have to close before they get this?
 
They probably expect to make most of their money on consoles so then a strategy game would really have a hard time to be a succes.

I also seem to remember Bioshock 2 having a reasonable first month in the NPD. Like around 700 000 units. So, worldwide it must have done at least ok. Don't know what the first one did though.
 
Interfectum said:
What's troubling to me is it shows how narrow the top execs view are of the gaming industry. It's gotta have a huge budget and it's gotta be chasing the FPS genre. Did they ever once stop and think maybe they could lower the budget and make a really good niche strategy game that could potentially garner a big audience? And if it didn't their losses aren't so severe that it leads to layoffs?

How many more studios have to close before they get this?
Sometimes even the people who seem to get it don't actually go and change: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/bioware-triple-a-is-the-wrong-thing-to-chase

GamesIndustry.biz said:
BioWare: Triple-A is the wrong thing to chase

BioWare co-founder Greg Zeshuk has said that triple-A console game development is the wrong thing for developers to pursue, as only the top ten companies can do it successfully.

The creator of Mass Effect and Dragon Age said there are better opportunities developing, and that boxed game sales for traditional retail is declining year-on-year.

"It's more competitive than it's ever been, it's more dangerous than it's ever been," Zeschuk told attendees of the Develop Conference in Brighton. "Right now it's precisely the wrong thing to chase."

Publishers are being increasingly conservative as only the best titles break through sales barriers, said Zeschuk, with costs continuing to rise.

"The risk taking is disappearing on the publisher side," he said. "There's exceptions but it costs a lot of money and you've got to set the right goals."

Zeschuk said he was encouraged by moves by veteran developers opting out of big blockbuster development and start-up smaller teams, which are able to build a tight business with a positive working culture.

"I've enjoyed seeing the elder developers retrench to smaller teams. They're building a stronger culture, they're building microgroups that are quite successful," said Zeschuk, adding that going direct to consumers rather than through bricks and mortar was also a huge opportunity for developers.

"Retail still works but it's not a panacea," he added.

BioWare itself would continue to work on consoles, but Zeschuk made a point of saying the business would be "aggressively experimenting" with other opportunities as it has with recent Facebook and iPhone projects.
It's been a year and we still haven't seen anything.
 
I know we don't need any more reasons to pick on him, but does anyone else find it a teensy bit offensive that he claims Ray Charles' work would be more like Kanye West's if he were alive today despite the fact that they work(ed) in completely different genres? It's not like blues or jazz are dead. Black isn't a genre.
 
Add Take 2 to my list of never buying new full price games from. As far as I'm concerned it's more contemporary to buy used and wait for deep discounts.
 
subversus said:
Spacesims need flightsticks.

eh? Gamepads are fine. If Freelancer and/or X3 count then kb/m is fine. If decoupling space sims from joysticks is what they need to do to bring them back then I say let's do it.
 
How about making strategy games contemporary? Try a new approach to the genre, design it so it feels fresh but familiar and market it right. Now good luck selling another average shooter on the same day as ME3.
 
echoshifting said:
I know we don't need any more reasons to pick on him, but does anyone else find it a teensy bit offensive that he claims Ray Charles' work would be more like Kanye West's if he were alive today despite the fact that they work(ed) in completely different genres? It's not like blues or jazz are dead.
Actually, his analogy is good: it proves he doesn't understand shit about either medium for pretty much the same reasons.
 
echoshifting said:
I know we don't need any more reasons to pick on him, but does anyone else find it a teensy bit offensive that he claims Ray Charles' work would be more like Kanye West's if he were alive today despite the fact that they work(ed) in completely different genres? It's not like blues or jazz are dead.

Yup, and the fans are still there, waiting for something good... + a whole bunch of untapped audience you could reach. I mean, if folk music can be hip again, so can turn-based squad RTS games!
 
Top Bottom