Hacker News Reader

Comment by qwery | Hacker News Reader

Other than the explanation in the article (big businesses work with big sums, for one thing) -- game publishers (particularly at the big end of town) are notorious for being dead wrong about what customers want and have consistently demonstrated that they decide what the market wants and then try to make that the case. See: single-player games are dead, the only type of game in the future will be live services, Sonic, etc.

View on HN

I'm not sure that's right. Video game customers are wrong (or dishonest) about what they think they want. They want to see themselves as intellectual gourmets, only in research of exotic gameplay and rich stories but still spend the great majority of their money on blockbusters with decade old recipe and ip (while being vocal about their price or their lack of originality). No problem with that in fact, video game are leisure time activities.

Where the big producers ARE totally not listening is monetization. But here again 'globally that work' and most (not all) customers see themselves as more 'moraly right' than they really are. Everyone is happy to bash f2p immoral economic system, but are glad to enjoy free games. They will all speak about how possessing your games is important, but will take gamepass anytime because it's less costly. (here again they are just pragmatic and nothing is wring with that).

A funny thing when you discuss and do post mortems with little game development studio, is that each time they try to avoid a notoriously 'shady' practice, first critics will be about them missing (mainly gamble/casino mechanics and timesink/grinding features) ^^

When you say 'listening' you're talking about listening to what customers are saying and I don't disagree with your characterisation of that relationship, but this is different to being attuned to the market. One could argue that in the case of abusive monetisation tactics, the publishers are very much "listening" to the market (and ignoring the complaints) and profitting immensely because of it.

Yeah but I don't think a indie studio has the marketing budget to convince consumers that this is what they want.

No, I was responding to your questions, specifically:

> is there really all that much demand for the size of game advocated for?

Yes, people do buy and play small games.

> Aren't those publishers asking for bigger games because that's what the market is looking for?

Obviously, there is demand for big games because big games sell. But the publishers focusing on big games doesn't mean that there is only demand for big games. There are multiple reasons why publishers would not be interested in small games or small studios.

Sonic? Sonic is barely relevant IP any more.

The new Sonic films grossed $700M and they are selling millions of copies of new Sonic games. It's still popular and printing money for Sega.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com