Supply and demand, or worship a brand?

[miguk miguk]

Piracy tends to boost sales down the line which is ironic.

This is why enough people outside of Japan knew what Shin Megami Tensei was to make it sell without translating the series' name anymore. Same goes for a game with as inane of a title as Live A Live selling perfectly fine. Piracy is the lifeblood of multiple series and remakes/remasters having any chance of selling in the West, as there wouldn't be much of any demand for them otherwise.

 

[SolemnlyDoc]

Greed is like a fire. When left unchecked, it consumes all in its path.

Game companies begin with passion, a small flame carefully tended by those who create. But as success grows, so too does the hunger of those who do not see games as art, but as numbers on a ledger. They forget that a good game, like a fine cup of tea, is meant to be savored and shared. Instead they seek to sell the cup, then the tea, then even the steam that rises from it. They don't see players as kindred spirits, but as coins to be collected.

Why do they do it? Because like a river forced into unnatural banks, they have been led away from their purpose. They chase short-term gold, forgetting that true wealth lies in the love of those who play.

 

[miguk miguk]

Greed is like a fire. When left unchecked, it consumes all in its path.

Game companies begin with passion, a small flame carefully tended by those who create. But as success grows, so too does the hunger of those who do not see games as art, but as numbers on a ledger. They forget that a good game, like a fine cup of tea, is meant to be savored and shared. Instead they seek to sell the cup, then the tea, then even the steam that rises from it. They don't see players as kindred spirits, but as coins to be collected.

Why do they do it? Because like a river forced into unnatural banks, they have been led away from their purpose. They chase short-term gold, forgetting that true wealth lies in the love of those who play.

It has nothing to do with greed. The publicly traded for-profit model makes it so they must act as if they are greedy regardless of how any individual in the company feels. They are legally required to do whatever it takes to increase shareholder value even if that means unethical behavior or even breaking other laws.

We don't see as much corruption from companies like Steam that are privately owned. Granted, they can be corrupted, but only when the owners' themselves choose to be corrupt. There's nobody forcing their hand to act as such.

 

[moonbits]

Their corruption is that 30% from every sale, damn that's a kick in the balls for developers but who cares about those lowlifes.

 

[Raziya The Seeker]

Greed is like a fire. When left unchecked, it consumes all in its path.

Sadly, I can't even think of greed being the kind of fire I like. Warmth turned into an all-devouring, all-destroying wildfire, as you said.

As for gaming companies at the very least, it's endemic the bigger they get. Nintendo and Activision being the answers to Atari's supersaturation and collapse of the gaming industry. Sega and Sony being answers to Nintendo. Midway Games selling out once they got big, let alone to be resurrected into Netherrealm Studios. Bethesda. Square-Enix. Konami. The list goes on and on.

Though, I'd argue some of those who flew too close to the sun are as bad as others. If anything, I had a recent revelation that Sega doesn't give a damn about piracy, even technically allowing it with their now-defunct Sega & Mega Drive Classics or whatever on Steam. While Nintendo cracks down on piracy and kills fan projects, Sega embraces them. Perhaps their old grudge with Nintendo carries on to this day... but Sega's just changed the tactics.

And if there's any truth to Sega's rumored ties to the actual yakuza? Bad vs evil, just like a proper mafia. Mobsters vs Nazis. If you ask me? Take a guess which rival of the console wars is, at this point.

 

[SolemnlyDoc]

It has nothing to do with greed. The publicly traded for-profit model makes it so they must act as if they are greedy regardless of how any individual in the company feels. They are legally required to do whatever it takes to increase shareholder value even if that means unethical behavior or even breaking other laws.

We don't see as much corruption from companies like Steam that are privately owned. Granted, they can be corrupted, but only when the owners' themselves choose to be corrupt. There's nobody forcing their hand to act as such.

Game studio heads making over $5,000,000,000 in a year is greed. No one needs that much money. (That's just what Adam Badowski, the co-CEO of CD Projekt Red made 3 years ago.)

 

[cjl8336]

$68 billion dollars Microsoft spent to get Activision and Blizzard
The market should regulate itself, but I find it hard to believe that demand continues despite consistent complaints of "muh greed"

 

[Clippy]

Their corruption is that 30% from every sale, damn that's a kick in the balls for developers but who cares about those lowlifes.

Well, it's not like their servers and the storefront run and maintain themselves for free. Devs CAN sell their games online without giving Gaben a cut if they're so offended by Steam's demands.

 

[miguk miguk]

Game studio heads making over $5,000,000,000 in a year is greed. No one needs that much money. (That's just what Adam Badowski, the co-CEO of CD Projekt Red made 3 years ago.)

Yes, there are people who act greedy within the publicly traded model, but that doesn't mean that one individual is the whole problem. Get rid of the greedy CEO, and a new one will take their place. The new one might not be as greedy, but they will continue to seek shareholder value first just like the last one regardless of what their pay is like.

 

[moonbits]

Well, it's not like their servers and the storefront run and maintain themselves for free. Devs CAN sell their games online without giving Gaben a cut if they're so offended by Steam's demands.

yeah they can, but pc gamers don't come out of their steam cave so they have to suck it up

 

[Clippy]

Yes, there are people who act greedy within the publicly traded model, but that doesn't mean that one individual is the whole problem. Get rid of the greedy CEO, and a new one will take their place. The new one might not be as greedy, but they will continue to seek shareholder value first just like the last one regardless of what their pay is like.

Iirc there's a legal precedent in the US which dictates that a CEO is beholden to the shareholders first and foremost so even if they wanted to 'do the right thing' they can't. I could be wrong about this.

 

[SolemnlyDoc]

Yes, there are people who act greedy within the publicly traded model, but that doesn't mean that one individual is the whole problem. Get rid of the greedy CEO, and a new one will take their place. The new one might not be as greedy, but they will continue to seek shareholder value first just like the last one regardless of what their pay is like.

Yet they only seek shareholder value to satisfy their own greed. Remove greed from the gaming industry and instead of chasing money for shareholders, game developers are allowed to make games solely to please the players, not to appeal to some 3rd party shareholder.

 

[miguk miguk]

Iirc there's a legal precedent in the US which dictates that a CEO is beholden to the shareholders first and foremost so even if they wanted to 'do the right thing' they can't. I could be wrong about this.

Yes, this is exactly what I was referring to. There's no removing "greed" from the equation when the system is built to make "greed" the required attitude.

Yet they only seek shareholder value to satisfy their own greed. Remove greed from the gaming industry and instead of chasing money for shareholders, game developers are allowed to make games solely to please the players, not to appeal to some 3rd party shareholder.

You still don't get it. There's no greed in this; no human emotion whatsoever. This is cold machine logic. The system is set up by law to force publicly traded corporations to work on one thing only: increase shareholder value or be found guilty of the ultimate business crime: not making a strong enough effort to increase shareholder value. That's not even an exaggeration; that's what the law says. There's no removing "greed" without making the corporations privately owned, and once they've gone through their IPO, that's near impossible to turn back. Ben & Jerry's have been trying to do that for some time, and they haven't succeeded yet (and that's one of the more ethical publicly traded corporations).

Granted, there is the option to switch to a public-benefit corporation, but that is a hard sell for already established publicly traded corporations and isn't even legal in all 50 US states for some odd reason.

 

[SolemnlyDoc]

Yes, this is exactly what I was referring to. There's no removing "greed" from the equation when the system is built to make "greed" the required attitude.


You still don't get it. There's no greed in this; no human emotion whatsoever. This is cold machine logic. The system is set up by law to force publicly traded corporations to work on one thing only: increase shareholder value or be found guilty of the ultimate business crime: not making a strong enough effort to increase shareholder value. That's not even an exaggeration; that's what the law says. There's no removing "greed" without making the corporations privately owned, and once they've gone through their IPO, that's near impossible to turn back. Ben & Jerry's have been trying to do that for some time, and they haven't succeeded yet (and that's one of the more ethical publicly traded corporations).

Granted, there is the option to switch to a public-benefit corporation, but that is a hard sell for already established publicly traded corporations and isn't even legal in all 50 US states for some odd reason.

Never said it wouldn't be difficult to make the switch. Pretending that greed isn't the driving force behind CEOs making decisions that benefit shareholders over consumers is counterproductive. Yes the system itself is flawed, but the system is set up that way because of greed. It's really simple, greed is the root of the issue. Obviously you can't just remove it, though the world would benefit greatly if we could, but I was answering the question of why companies do this. The clear answer at the core of the issue is greed.

We can look at more surface level answers like the laws requiring companies to act this way, but looking into the issue in depth leads back to the founding issue - greed.

 

[E0N]

-Capcom (recent days, in the past even they have taken the p*ss (on disk dlc you pay for))

Dude Capcom is definitely taking us PC players for granted and abusing our trust. More than 50% of their revenue comes from PC but the last 2 AAA games (DD2 and MHW) runs like absolute dogshit on PC. It's been a year now and they still haven't fixed DD2 and the main reason why I haven't bought MHW yet. They have lost trust from me after the horrible experience I had with DD2 so I can't agree with this take. Sorry.

 

[miguk miguk]

Never said it wouldn't be difficult to make the switch. Pretending that greed isn't the driving force behind CEOs making decisions that benefit shareholders over consumers is counterproductive. Yes the system itself is flawed, but the system is set up that way because of greed. It's really simple, greed is the root of the issue. Obviously you can't just remove it, though the world would benefit greatly if we could, but I was answering the question of why companies do this. The clear answer at the core of the issue is greed.

We can look at more surface level answers like the laws requiring companies to act this way, but looking into the issue in depth leads back to the founding issue - greed.

My claim is far from surface level. In all likelihood, you didn't even know the law requires shareholders to be put first, or what a public-benefit corporation is before I mentioned them; most people don't, including some anti-corporate activists. Saying "it's just greed" is a massive oversimplification that lacks depth or understanding of why people who are not personally greedy are still acting as if infinite growth is not only possible, but the only thing to work towards.

Complex problems don't have simple causes or origins. You solve nothing by oversimplify things to the point that you can just blame some unsolvable abstract instead of a system that can be potentially dismantled.

You've said nothing to support your argument beyond restating it over and over and using circular reasoning (a logical fallacy) to support it. (Basically, you are saying "greed is the problem because greed is the problem.") This is not proof of your claim nor are you going to convince anyone with that method.

 

[Amag0k1]

My claim is far from surface level. In all likelihood, you didn't even know the law requires shareholders to be put first, or what a public-benefit corporation is before I mentioned them; most people don't, including some anti-corporate activists. Saying "it's just greed" is a massive oversimplification that lacks depth or understanding of why people who are not personally greedy are still acting as if infinite growth is not only possible, but the only thing to work towards.

Complex problems don't have simple causes or origins. You solve nothing by oversimplify things to the point that you can just blame some unsolvable abstract instead of a system that can be potentially dismantled.

You've said nothing to support your argument beyond restating it over and over and using circular reasoning (a logical fallacy) to support it. (Basically, you are saying "greed is the problem because greed is the problem.") This is not proof of your claim nor are you going to convince anyone with that method.

Oh i am failure of this, but it seems to me that this is a chicken and egg scenario, as they need to garner sales to provide the return to the investors. And these investors will not invest unless the company can demonstrate growth, which is done for the majority in sales.

So, balance may be needs to be the key to this?

 

[moonbits]

Dude Capcom is definitely taking us PC players for granted and abusing our trust. More than 50% of their revenue comes from PC but the last 2 AAA games (DD2 and MHW) runs like absolute dogshit on PC. It's been a year now and they still haven't fixed DD2 and the main reason why I haven't bought MHW yet. They have lost trust from me after the horrible experience I had with DD2 so I can't agree with this take. Sorry.

Ah speaking of greed and abusing the consumer. Its frankly terrifying how many PC games come out like trash. Nvidia certainly fucking it up royally with their RTX shenanigans

 

[GardeniaSky's icon GardeniaSky GardeniaSky]

It's the same issue as scalping, yeah? If people stopped buying the shit, people wouldn't be able to do it. And yet here we are.

 

[WarpKaiser]

It's the same issue as scalping, yeah? If people stopped buying the shit, people wouldn't be able to do it. And yet here we are.

That was in old days. Now big companies receive free money from (((THEY))) and don't need the costumer anymore.
I frankly don't care anymore. I pirate everything anyway.

 

[Amag0k1]

That was in old days. Now big companies receive free money from (((THEY))) and don't need the costumer anymore.
I frankly don't care anymore. I pirate everything anyway.

But then why the practice, are you saying the act of supply and demand, and share holder investment is a performance?

 

[Den MDM Den MDM]

@Amag0k1 out of topic but your pfp is SOOOOOOOOO DAMN CUTE

 

[Amag0k1]

@Amag0k1 out of topic but your pfp is SOOOOOOOOO DAMN CUTE

Thank you!
Regarding topic, may have goofed as cross over with another post i have.

 

[WarpKaiser]

But then why the practice, are you saying this is a performance?

Yes. But also some companies like EA aren't playing the new game as of yet. You can tell which are by looking which ones have consultant companies hired.

Though, I'd argue some of those who flew too close to the sun are as bad as others. If anything, I had a recent revelation that Sega doesn't give a damn about piracy, even technically allowing it with their now-defunct Sega & Mega Drive Classics or whatever on Steam. While Nintendo cracks down on piracy and kills fan projects, Sega embraces them. Perhaps their old grudge with Nintendo carries on to this day... but Sega's just changed the tactics.

I'm sorry to brake it to you. But Sega Sammy, Sega (an others like Atlus) parent company shutdowns any fan projects that aren't Sonic. The reason that Sonic is the exception is because they don't see it as a profitable brand anymore. And that could change with the success of the movies.

They also care about piracy.

 

[Amag0k1]

Yes. But also some companies like EA aren't playing the new game as of yet. You can tell which are by looking which ones have consultant companies hired.


I'm sorry to brake it to you. But Sega Sammy, Sega (an others like Atlus) parent company shutdowns any fan projects that aren't Sonic. The reason that Sonic is the exception is because they don't see it as a profitable brand anymore. And that could change with the success of the movies.
View attachment 42770
They also care about piracy.

Well if they care about the piracy, then this could be an indication of protecting reputation, which in essence could be related to investor confidence. As they have a judiciary responsibility to make sure the company is profitable for said investor confidence and investment.