Game Industry Bigger Than Hollywood

Ant writes "This SF Gate story says stacks of new releases for hungry video game enthusiasts mean it's boom time for an industry now even bigger than Hollywood. The $10 billion video game industry, which generates more revenue than Hollywood, has never released so many highly anticipated blockbuster titles in a single season. It started in August with the game title Doom 3, followed by The Sims 2 in September, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas in October, then Halo 2, Metroid Prime 2: Echoes and Half-Life 2 last month. In November, sales of video games rose to $849 million, an 11 percent increase from the same month last year and up 77 percent from October, according to the industry research firm NPD Funworld. The industry set a milestone last month when Microsoft's Halo 2 -- a sequel to a futuristic game with an elaborate plot that pits humans against invading aliens -- surpassed Hollywood's opening-weekend movie box office record in just one day of sales."

Comments

Apples and Oranges

[Anonymous Coward]

People don't buy movie tickets months in advance for an opening weekend, so that's really not a fair comparison. This also doesn't take into account Hollywood's DVD sales which are quite impressive.

Re:Apples and Oranges

[emjoi_gently]

People don't buy movie tickets months in advance for an opening weekend

"Normal" people don't buy the video games that way either.
However the more Fanatical bought tickets weeks ahead for movies like Lord of the Rings, The Matrix, and the Star Wars Prequels.

Re:Apples and Oranges

[loid_void]

I think if we threw in the fact that so many movies are looking like video games then the comparison might be apples to apples and the scales would most definitely tip in favor of the gaming industry. Hollywood is chasing the gaming industry, it sees the numbers; Matrix looked like a game, and how many movies spin off games and the games sell more than the movie?

Re:Apples and Oranges

[Zaphod_Beebleburp]

Since the article doesn't say, are we to assume that this includes DVD sales, rentals, and box office income? I think Hollywood makes more than that but then again I could be wrong. Of course, declared income and actual income are two entirely different things.

Re:Apples and Oranges

[frankthechicken]

And don't forget that people tend to have to find time to sit down and watch a movie, at one of the designated times set by the theatre. Whereas, with a game you just have to buy a copy, and then find time at your leisure to play it.

I know that is why I tend to watch movies on DVD nowadays, I have an appropriate set up to gain a reasonable theatre experience, and thus I can watch the things at my leisure, in comfort, and with the ability to make neccesary drink/food/toilet breaks at any time, and with no kids/packet rustling/general annoyances.

Re:Apples and Oranges

[bigman2003]

Houses cost about $300,000, and can-openers are about $4. More can-openers are sold than houses.

But the real estate market is still bigger than the can-opener market.

Re:Apples and Oranges

[Red Pointy Tail]

I think the head-count do matter, especially when it is the movie industry vs the game industry. It is much easier to reach a saturation point for games - and since the business is so good, we will probably see a proliferation of titles coming soon, and possibly not enough new hardcore gamers to play them.

Another related factor on why head-count matters is that movies occupy a much shorter attention time that a game - after 3 hours max you're done with the movie, but game can take days or weeks. Revenue for movies can grow by encouraging people to go to the cinemas more often, but this will be harder for games since a game already will take up much of your time - unless completion times are shortened and the games made more stupid so that most can whizz through it in a day.

Re:Apples and Oranges

[sam_handelman]

Only 20% of the population goes to the movies EACH MONTH. Movie viewing is much more evenly distributed among the population generally - with many people going to the movies 1/year.

Relatively few people buy one video game a year, on the other hand. The average among people who buy any at all is probably somwhere north of 3.

So the portion of the population that goes to movies - ever - is more than 3 times as great as the portion of the population that buys a video-game - ever.

Think about your own sphere of acquantances - how many people do you know who've never gone to see a movie? Even the Amish neighbors of the family farm in the midwest had gone to see a movie at least once in their lives, for christ's sake.

On the other hand, many of the people I know have never bought a video-game for themselves, but my little brother owns dozens and (counting the ones I bought when I was a kid) so do I; and the people I know are far more likely to be gamers than the general population.

Re:Apples and Oranges

[Socrates Demise]

no kids/packet rustling/general annoyances

I just imagned someone in a cowboy hat stealing network traffic.

Bleh

[Lord_Dweomer]

I know I speak for many here when I say that while I'm glad that the creators of my favorite games are making money, I'm dying inside when I think of what this ultimately means for the future of the games industry.

Re:Bleh

[Lisandro]

Mod parent up, please.

The problem is that when a new entertainment market starts creating serious money it becomes bastardized. Happened to music, happened to TV, happened to movies and rest assured, it will happen to games.

Hell, you could argue that it has already happened. A sign? All of the games in the list are sequels; which almost guarantees a base of sales. Some of them are good, some of them aren't, but there's hardly anything new or fresh offered in games nowadays; since seen genres with newer graphics are easy to sell we still see FPS, MMORPGs, GTA (which WAS fun, but i don't want to play the same game for the third time), sport simulations and so. Publishers simply go for the quick buck. I died a bit when Lucasarts canned the sequels for Sam & Max and Full Throttle to concentrate on Star Wars licences.

The only innovative thing i've seen from a major games publisher was Nintendo with it's DS; i haven't tried one yet but it looks good on paper and the touch screen and onboard WiFi are potentially great gaming aids. That could be a gateway to some interesting games, which knowing Nintendo, won't be too far away.

Re:Bleh

[MilenCent]

Hell, you could argue that it has already happened. A sign? All of the games in the list are sequels; which almost guarantees a base of sales. Some of them are good, some of them aren't, but there's hardly anything new or fresh offered in games nowadays; since seen genres with newer graphics are easy to sell we still see FPS, MMORPGs, GTA (which WAS fun, but i don't want to play the same game for the third time), sport simulations and so. Publishers simply go for the quick buck.

Well some of us have been saying this for years. If the game industry were, overall, as creative as they were back in the golden age, you can be there'd be a lot fewer Nintendo fanatics, myself included, these days.

But even my admiration for Nintendo has limits. Do you know what the most original company ever to produce video games was? The (in my opinion) answer may not be what you expect.

It was Atari Games, an entity that, in my mind, encompasses their early arcade output pre-split-up, and their later, post-split arcade games. So many of their hits were created out of whole braincloth, because there was absolutely nothing like them before. Atari was the most original not just because they were first, but because even as late as the early 90s they were still making incredibly different, fun games. Midway Arcade Treasures (1) has a good handful of them, including Rampart, which I've already bored far too many people discussing, some of them here.

But we can all see where that got them. They made Toobin', KLAX, Gauntlet, Marble Madness and (whimper!) Rampart, but gamers, more and more, became drawn to things like Street Fighter 2, a game that was admittedly well-designed, but inspired way, way too many sequels and knock-offs. It's not like Nintendo's sequels, where they'll throw out all but the core concepts and design a new game around them (example: Yoshi's Island is a direct sequel to Super Mario World!), but more like the same game, with new characters and modestly different rules.

Fighting games, depending on who you ask, are what saved or ruined arcades. My money's on "ruined." This is something of a digression, but it's worth noting that the fighting game boom was one of the contributing factors to the atmosphere of genrefication that are both what's enabled video and computer gaming to become big business, and what's sapped so much of the creativity out of the field.

Re:Bleh

[Cryp2Nite]

Please pick one side of the argument, you're making my head spin.

The problem is that when a new entertainment market starts creating serious money it becomes bastardized.

<snip>

All of the games in the list are sequels; which almost guarantees a base of sales. Some of them are good, some of them aren't, but there's hardly anything new or fresh offered in games nowadays...

<snip>

I died a bit when Lucasarts canned the sequels for Sam & Max and Full Throttle...

Re:Bleh

[danila]

The reason for that are the moronic sheeps that permeate all spheres of human life including (first and foremost) Slashdot. :) Remember the stories about Half-Life 2 and Doom 3. Remember how everyone here wet their pants and secretly masturbated over promo screenshots? Remember how excited every masochistic slashdotter was about having to upgrade his computer to play Doom 3?

People are idiots. 3 "next-gen" FPS games were released in 2004. Half-Life 2 turned out to be the most popular, despite the fact that it has ordinary graphics, horrible story and 10 hours of gameplay. Doom 3 was the second in popularity, with an engine that looked like a dog, horrible gameplay and boring levels. And one truly innovative game with the most stunning graphics and released on schedule and without as much hype, Far Cry by Crytek, was quickly forgotten. I exaggerated a bit, but the point still stands - as long as people are willing to pay for the name, publishers would develop sequels (and licensed titles) to deliver what the public (including the public here) wants.

Re:Bleh

[Lightwarrior]

> I exaggerated a bit...

A bit? I hate to break it to you, but there was *nothing* groundbreaking about FarCry. It was your standard Soldier of Fortune 2-esque FPS knockoff. The story was your typical "nazi scientist" drivel, the main character was, again, your typical no-nonsense hardcore spec-ops/government agent, the weapons were exceedingly average and typical, and finally, the much lauded AI was seriously wanting.

I played the game without reading the hype. I didn't experience anything special from the AI, so I started it up again on ultraextrahard (or whatever), and wandered around for a bit. As expected, the "tactic" of sniping one guy off and then gunning down his buddies worked flawlessly. Hell, after shooting one guy right next to a friend of his, his friend crept cautiously forward - no diving for cover, no wigging out and running, no going for reinforcements.

From my experiences, FarCry gets the award for "Most Overrated Game" this year. Sure, it was a decent FPS... but that was it. Doom 3, for all its linearity, at least had *suspense*.

And, simply put, you're either blind or running these games on a machine that an Xbox would put to shame. FarCry has "stunning" graphics while Half-Life 2's are "ordinary"? I'd suggest a trip to the optometrist or psychiatrist.

-lw

All sequels

[RedWizzard]

It started in August with the game title Doom 3, followed by The Sims 2 in September, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas in October, then Halo 2, Metroid Prime 2: Echoes and Half-Life 2 last month.

Every one of these "blockbuster" titles are sequels. Is anyone doing anything new and exciting?

Re:All sequels

[thenextpresident]

Yes. Releasing sequels that are actually as good, or better, than the originals.

Something Hollywood finds next to impossible.

Re:All sequels

[hunterx11]

While it's true there's too much sequelism, it's different for video games than it is for films. Doom 3, for example, isn't even a sequel--it's a remake--but even if you hate it, you can't say it's just a rehash of the original Doom in terms of gameplay. I think a lot of it is just people wanting to cash in on established names. Hell, Super Mario Bros. 2 was an existing game they rebranded.

Re:All sequels

[Khuffie]

What's wrong with sequels? There's a difference between sequels churned out every year (ala EA), and sequels that really added some new cool things. Doom 2 was released years ago. So was the original Half-Life. Halo 2's been in the making for over 2 years. The original Sims been out for a while. The only games in that list that didn't fundementally change the gameplay were GTA:SA and MP2. In fact, all of those games, sequels or not, were in fact friggin' good games.

There's a difference between good sequels, and shoddy sequels which were just designed as quick cash machines. The Splinter Cell series and the latest Prince of Persia game are both guilty as charged, and basically any EA sports game.

Re:All sequels

[fafaforza]

Ditto. I just saw Ocean's 12. What a God-aweful movie.

Re:All sequels

[T-Ranger]

I saw it last Monday. Im still waiting for something to happen.

Re:All sequels

[shigelojoe]

To make the American version of Super Mario Brothers 2, Nintendo basically took a preexisting Japan-only game called Doki Doki Panic and switched some sprites around.

The Japanese Super Mario Brothers 2 was eventually released on Super Mario All-Stars for the SNES as "The Lost Levels".

Re:All sequels

[timster]

I'm tired of people saying this, because there is a fundamental difference between a movie sequel and a video game "sequel".

The thing with a movie is that the experience is always the same. You sit, and the movie goes for a while. Innovation in movies has to come in the form of new plot ideas and new characters and so forth. So sequels in movies are not usually very much appreciated because in many ways we have seen the movie already.

Video games provide a much more diverse range of experiences. "The Sims 2", for instance, will not be "The Sims" again. It could in many ways be a completely different game, and you can bet there will be new things for a player to learn. They could call it something completely different -- the fact that they re-use a well-known brand doesn't mean that they are making the same game again. There's no new plot or characters simply because there wasn't any plot or characters in the first place.

If you want an example of a Hollywood-style sequel in the video game world, consider the ".hack" series. All four games are basically the same, it's just a somewhat long game that is really expensive.

Gaming Industry Rise

[Fruvous]

Is it that suprising? A video game can offer so much more than an hour and a half movie. Not only that but the "sequal factor" really starts piling up. Look ever single game up there has been a sequal.

Re:Gaming Industry Rise

[datafr0g]

I'm suprised as not everyone has a game console but anyone can walk into a movie theatre. As for the PC games, very few (reletivly speaking) have a PC capable of playing these games the way they are intended to be played. And for those who do, I would have thought that the prices for games are too high. Still, if they can make this much money at this stage, there must be a huge potential in the years to come. As a side note, I'd be interested to know how much the game industry spent on marketing compared to previous years!!

Re:Gaming Industry Rise

[gad_zuki!]

Its really about interaction isnt it? Movies are passive, the theater experience is mixed at best, etc. While I was playing Doom3 and Half Life 2 I would seldomly tell myself "Wow, this is pretty cinematic, its like a movie I'm controlling."

People like two way media. Look at us, we're posting on a big geeky weblog. Why? That's the question Hollywood can't address with its movies, celebrity star system, over-used CGI, and "safe/non-controversial" movies. I'm sure Joe and Jane Sixpack don't really care, but as people divest from Hollywood, the more Hollywood will cater strictly to the LCD. Arguably, they've reached that point long ago.

I see maybe three or four movies a year now. Hollywood can have me and my money, but they need to release some better content. Something original or something that challenges me. They need to step up to the persistant angry religious letter writers. They need to fix the theaters so if a movie claims to start at 8, it will start at 8, not 8:22. 15 minutes of trailers (which should be coming after the movie before the credits as far as I'm concered) and 8 minutes of commercials/trivia is a good way to lose my 9 dollars.

Ahem...

[googleaseerch]

What about UT2004. I'm sorry, that was a blockbuster game too, if anything is.

Oooh, so piracy DOESN'T hurt sales..

[DroopyStonx]

That's what I thought...

Re:Oooh, so piracy DOESN'T hurt sales..

[oGMo]

No, clearly, gamers are pirates, stealing money from the pockets and food from the plates of Hollywood executives!!

Re:Oooh, so piracy DOESN'T hurt sales..

[DroopyStonx]

You're responsible with it, at least.

I can't say the same for myself and a few others I know. I downloaded Doom 3 and GTA, but haven't actually purchased them yet. I will, I just haven't.

I think the only game I purchased from these blockbusters was Metroid Prime 2.

I'm not gonna try to justify it. I knew it was wrong, I did it anyway, but it's interesting to point out that GTA, Halo 2, Doom 3, and HL2 were ALL heavily pirated and available weeks ahead of time. Thousands upon thousands of people downloaded and played them.

The question is, how many purchased, how many didn't? Even still, they performed quite well and no one's losing sleep for their lack of performance.

Just goes to show how people can make a mountain out of a mole hill when it comes to piracy. They make it seem like much more than it really is.. "If you download this game, how can I put braces on my kid's teeth?"

"Uh hm... well, considering your ONE game sold more than the best movie of all time, I think you'll do just fine with those braces."

Re:Contrinutions

[iocat]

Not enough... The game industry is bigger than Hollywood, if you only count US boxoffice receipts. But these "game industry is bigger than Hollywood" claims always leave out the rental and DVD sales market.

A new form of entertainment taking over

[Faust7]

The rich, detailed, immersive settings for what used to be entirely passive entertainment can now, with the current technology, be used for interactive entertainment.

All those wonderful spy-drama, fantasy, and sci-fi worlds that used to be the exclusive domain of movies? Now their realism is being delivered to you in a way that you can actually be in - if you're open to the experience.

R-E-S-P-E-C-T

[joshdick]

Now if only the industry could receive the recognition it deserves, the recognition the movie, TV and music industries receive.

There ought to be video game awards much better than those Spike recently gave out.

Pitty the partners

[ricewind]

Somewhere, EA_Spouse is crying.

Recurring revenue, too...

[arashiakari]

MMORPG games such as World of Warcraft get a hit of cash up front and then involve monthly revenue. Hollywood has nothing like that.

Most games cost between $30 and $50, no-matter what platform you're buying for. How much is a movie ticket? $8 to $10 for tickets or $20 to $30 for DVDs. How much do games cost to make vs. the revenue they bring in?

Re:Contrinutions

[caspper69]

Very true, and I was thinking the same thing when I read the blurb. Further, they don't include sales of DVD players themselves either, whereas the games industry most certainly includes the hardware sales dollars from dedicated consoles. Then you can also talk about international distribution and other market's native films, etc., etc.. Hollywood (and television in general) still makes many, many times what the videogame industry does.

1999 called...

[Billy the Mountain]

they want their headline back!

BTM

Re:Humm.

[Scorpion265]

STOP TALKING!!! Don't give them anymore ideas! I have to pay close to 10 bucks to see s movie as it is!

In Other news...

[muntumbomoklik]

the MPAA and RIAA decide to sue game companies, citinglost revenue.

Piracy comparisons?

[Tzarius]

Doesn't it seem odd that an industry that would take more losses from piracy (i.e. a much higher percentage of users that already have the means and ability to pirate the products, and where the individual products are priced higher, providing further incentive for piracy) is making more money than the film industry, which should have a much larger customer base?

Or is it that the barrier-to-piracy on movies is a lot lower?

Re:Piracy comparisons?

[lachlan76]

Video games have a much higher cost per unit.

Also, it's been established fairly well that piracy isn't hurting the movie industry.

Not quite

[Smerity]

As I heard at the AEAF (Australian Effects and Animation Festival), games sales may be higher, but the rights for Hollywood are much more flexible, for example.

Mainly, Hollywood can release a movie, get box office, sell the DVD, license the movie to networks, and sell other rights (for a TV show based on it, sequels), while a game sells and if it doesn't sell well, it's dead in the water

Re:Not so fast, geekboys

[civman2]

A family of five goes to see Spider-Man 2. A family of five buys Spider-Man 2 for the [insert favorite platform here] Where is that division again?

Re:I still have games that I have not played...

[KingAdrock]

I'm curious. In NHL 2005 do you just sit there and watch an empty ice surface?

Book Industry: $23.4 Billion in 2003

[meehawl]

The Book Industry garnered $23.4 billion in 2003 - and that was a flat recession year. When video games pass books in dollar volume, then we will know the end of civilisation is at hand.

Re:Book Industry: $23.4 Billion in 2003

[CaptainPinko]

it already has come. how much of those book sales were educated or artistically signifant? I bet the majority of them were pulp. In the words of Harvey Danger "The cretins are cloning breeding"... and apparently they are addicted to twitch-style video games.

Re:Book Industry: $23.4 Billion in 2003

[WIAKywbfatw]

But how many of those books were game guides and walkthroughs?

Re:Book Industry: $23.4 Billion in 2003

[pHatidic]

How many of these games are educated or artistically significant? The best game on the market is still nethack and it's been out for 20 years already.

Another leveling factor

[SuperKendall]

Lots of people go to see movies they like multiple times. But how many people buy multiple copies of a game they like?

Re:Another leveling factor

[System.out.println()]

Lots of people go to see movies they like multiple times. But how many people buy multiple copies of a game they like?

While we're on the subject, how many people buy ONE copy of a game they like? ;-)

Re:Another leveling factor

[Ambassador Kosh]

Ask the people that play everquest that question. :) Many people that play MMOs have 2+ copies of the game. I have met some people that have 8 copies of the game, 8 copies of every expansion etc. It is pretty sick but people do it.

Re:Not so fast, geekboys

[St. Arbirix]

First figure out how many people would buy a movie at $50/unit. If that price reduces movie sales by more than 4/5ths then there's no need to talk. I think it would too.

Re:Not so fast, geekboys

[Anonymous Coward]

A movie is $10/unit

Which is about $5/hour...

A video game is $50/unit

Which could be as little as $1/hour.

I don't have a point either.

$10 billion

[fafaforza]

Wow.

I remember the time when the size of the gaming industry hovered around $5-$6 billion, as recently as year 2000. Anyone have a monthly or yearly chart that would show when the jumps occured?

EAbrace, EAtend, EAxtinguish

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

This industry is ours. It's profits and technology will become one with our own. It's programmers will be hired and worked into mindless drones. Resistance is Futile. Surrender you IP and prepare to be bought out. Resistance is futile. People will buy our crappy games as long as we continue to pay retailers to promote them. Lower your morals and prepare to watch us take all of the billions that could have been yours. The comglomerate will prevail. Challenge Everything(TM), except our margins.

Time well spent

[ObscureKaffine]

I honestly don't mind spending the money on a game that i can play for sometimes nearly 100 hours or more... (i'm an RPG fanatic) It sure beats paying 10 bucks for a movie that chances are sucks... most hollywood movies these days are putting so much money into FX and advertising, that they are forgetting the fundementals... (story, acting... etc...), something that the video game industry is deffinately kicking hollywood's butt at.... so i don't mind giving them the cash for a far superior form of entertainment

That's because...

[RiffRafff]

...game companies don't sue their customers.

I would much rather give a game for Christmas than a CD or DVD, knowing that my money is not helping to finance corporate lawsuits against thirteen year-old girls living with her single mom in HUD housing.

Re:Not so fast, geekboys

[tepples]

First figure out how many people would buy a movie at $50/unit.

G/PG movie, family of five, $7 per ticket plus monopoly popcorn/candy, do the math.

Re:I still have games that I have not played...

[geoffspear]

As a team owner in a video game, you get to do things that way you wish the idiot owners in the real world would do them. In most sports games, this involves not making or not making the trades that your favorite team made. Maybe in NHL 2005 it involves getting together with the other owners to fire the stupid commissioner and replace him with someone who knows more about hockey than basketball.

Re:Three worlds

[veltyen]

You are confusing the economic with the biological.

Biologically there is the new world (the americas) and the old world (eurasia and africa). Old world monkeys vs new world monkeys. Old world Bison vs new world Bison, and so on.

Then there is the economic terms
1st world: Modern Capitalism
2nd world: Modern Communism
3rd world: not developed enough to count as either.

Japan is very much 1st world. China is 2nd world. India is 3rd world (though could also be put in the 1st world bin). The terms are becoming antiquated with the fall of Russian Communism, and changes to world economics since the 1960/70's.

Well, I think there's a cap to this market.

[skids]

I know I personally will not be needing to buy any more games for about a year, now that I have San Adreas. :-)

The better the games get, the less the appeal for the newer games. Movies wear out much faster.

Re:Well, I think there's a cap to this market.

[wheany]

That's only because San Andreas takes about 10 months to finish. And I don't mean 100% completion, I mean playing through the plot of the game. At which point the completion percentage will be about 13.

Re:Contrinutions

[fireman sam]

"Imagine how much the porn industry is worth...."

About $300+ per hour, it just depends on what you want them to do

Nah. It's not bigger.

[Animats]

Not even close.

• World Console Software + PC Software, worldwide, 2003: US$18.5 bn
• Film industry revenues, worldwide, 2003: $180bn.
• Music (audio & video) recordings, worldwide, 2003: US$32 bn

Hollywood films alone account for about $63 billion.

By comparison, IBM has revenues of about $80 billion per year.

The Smaller Screen

[Doc Ruby]

What exactly is this "Hollywood" that Matthew Yi claims is smaller than the $10B "Game Industry" in TFA? Maybe it doesn't include the $14B US ($32B global) record industry: a business run out of LA, mostly, and NYC, even if it's 80% owned in Tokyo/Sony, Berlin/BMG and Paris/Vivendi-Universal. Is it just movies (not TV, either)? The actual scale of "filmed entertainment" revenue (not including music videos, part of the "recorded music" industry) was $75.3B globally, before the predicted 7.5% growth rate for 2004 (ie. $81B). Porn movies and website subscriptions alone have a global revenue of $8-10B. Maybe video games are bigger than Hollywood the same way that John Lennon was bigger than Jesus.

Ignore This

[SJS]

Arg.

Ignore this post.

Moderating. Using pageup/pagedown to move. Didn't realize that this was also changing the settings from something positive (insightful/interesting/funny) to negative (overrated/etc.)

So, a post. This will, as I understand it, undo those moderations I have made. Oh, well. Better none than a false down. Hope this works.

Count Me Out

[Master of Transhuman]

After twenty years of swearing never to play computer games because of the wasted time and frustration (when you lose, of course), I broke down and bought Hitman on sale for $10 at CompUSA.

And proceeded to waste hours and days of time, just like I knew I would.

And I never could figure out how to both kill the drug lord in Colombia AND blow up the drug lab.

So I trashed the game and went back to my old ways.

Meanwhile, I've seen Blade:Trinity twice and probably would see it a third time - except I'm broke for the next couple weeks.

Fuck computer games.

ahh

[nomadic]

The industry set a milestone last month when Microsoft's Halo 2 -- a sequel to a futuristic game with an elaborate plot that pits humans against invading aliens

Thanks for the explanation, always a good idea to explain obscure references like "Halo".

poor programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

With so much money changing hands in the game industry, why is it that the programmers who actually MAKE the games have to accept far-below-industry-standard pay and have to work in excess of 50 hours a week standard (more in crunch time, of course, which is most of the time)?

Not that this is much different from the music industry, where most of the artists that actually produce the music wind up hopelessly in debt and without ownership of their own work.

Or the book authorship industry, where it is just understood that nobody can earn a living as an author, even if their books sell well nationwide.

Or the farming industry...where the concept of a "family farm" is a quaint oddity...and the majority of farmers are little more than slave labor...

I could go on...

There is a very, very disturbing trend that has been at work since the 1940's or so...with the demise of the small business, those who actually produce anything of value get paid just enough to live on (or less), while someone who contributes nothing to the process rakes it in.

This is NOT a free market. :|

Re:poor programmers

[Anonymous Coward]

The poor programmers could always band together and form their own gaming company.

Sure, and a few engineers can always start their own car company. I wish them luck against the entrenched power of Detroit.

The original poster's point is that we are living in a second Gilded Age, a second age of robber barons. This age will end eventually, but the serfs will have to suffer a bit more before they start rebelling.

Re:poor programmers

[ggy]

Yes, and where is GOD today?

(GOD as in Gathering Of Developers, not as in God)

Day-of sales or preorders? It's a mess. . .

[Nomihn0]

For the comparison to be equitable, day-of videogame sales must exclude preorders. That, or the sales and rental markets should be included for both media.

The rental market for PC games is difficult to gauge. Almost nowhere are computer games rented. Instead, cybercafes rent access to machines on which the games are all full-installed with site licenses (to avoid piracy). To accurately measure the secondary market value of PC games, one must include the cost of using a cybercafe with deductions for the operating cost of the facility. Good luck finding concrete data on this.

Re:Contrinutions

[maddskillz]

Actully, according to This Article the porn industry brings in between 4 and 10 billion. I heard on the news the other day a figure of 9 billion, which they said we more then the big 3 networks combined

Not just Apples and Oranges, just plain wrong!

[PenguinOpus]

Movies gross more than Games... always have, maybe always will. The stupid comparison made here is one that the game industry loves to make when trying to get mindshare... Compare movie box office versus game software/hardware sales.

If you include DVD/media sales of movies, movies win. If you don't include console hardware sales, movies win.

The movie industry (worldwide) grosses $180B. US movie industry grosses 63B. Box office only accounts for 26% of revenue.

reference: http://www.factbook.net/wbglobal_rev.htm

When you think about it though

[phorm]

The lines between the media themselves are blurring. Games become like books with complex interweaving stories, and like movies in terms of realistic graphics or cinematics. Movies became more like games with the popularity of 3d... much of the techniques for 3d rendering can be applies between both - and in the future graphic cards may be able to render realtime that which is currently rendered by farms. MMORPG's can add on content like your weekly episodes or even - blah - sometimes like an online soap opera.

Seriously, I predict that smart companies in the future will merge the mediums (and hopefully produce some decent product). Think games with believeable characters, cinematic cutscenes/play, studio recorded music and more.

Inevitably ending in a wave of shit of course, but there are bound to be some real gems that shine through it all.

So where is the research, and the mature games?

[LarsWestergren]

Even if the headline is wrong (as many claim), with the influence gaming have on society today why aren't there more people in academia researching this?

Why aren't there more university courses teaching it?

One reason why games isn't accepted by the mainstream as culture or art is of course the immaturity of the industry. And I don't mean it hasn't existed long, I am talking about the age of the developers and the attitude of the industry. Again and again polls show that the averge gamer is in fact somewhere between 25 and 30 years old, and there are are a lot more female gamers than people think. However, average age of the people working in the gaming industry is actually much lower (I know several), and the games created and the ways they are sold seem to mostly cater to the segment "early teenage American male".

And in this segment, violence sells, nude women sells. One of the few things I dislike about Planescape:Torment for instance is the rampant "big tit-itis" in the artwork.

So anyway, I would like to see more mature games, and not mature as "full of sex". The number one thing for me when buying a game is a well thought out plot with interesting characters. Then it doesn't matter if it is a shooter (Half-Life, Thief3, Deus Ex) or a role-playing game (anything from Bioware/Black Isle basically). These games are no nobel prize winners in literature of course, but still good enough for me.

I want more good writers in the gaming industry, and less graphics engine geeks. More Warren Specter, Greg Zeschuk, Ray Muzyka, less John Carmack.

Re:Contrinutions

[Teddy Beartuzzi]

I don't contribute at all, I get all my games from suprnova...

Aw crap.

Manny the Fat Stuntman says "Don't do it"

[gelfling]

The MPAA announced today that because fewer and fewer people actually watch their shitty movies, they've decided to sue people for doing anything else.

Very important point!

[Scorchio]

Parent hit it on the head... the state of the industry from an outsider's point of view is significantly different to those working (or attempting to work) in the industry. The picture is painted that everything is rosy, and record sales are being made, but where on earth is all the money going? Everything seems to be sliding downhill at the moment, as it has been over the past three or four years, with development studios going under all the time. Even Microsoft have been laying off teams.