Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9768286" data-attributes="member: 6790260">It's a no-man's-land problem.The absolute titans of the industry, like Microsoft or Square Enix, can bite the bullet and pay for the enormous cost of a maximum-budget game, knowing that as long as it's at least pretty decent they'll make their money back eventually. And then, as you say, the nimble and probably midnight-oil-fuelled small companies can get away with a bit of a fly-by-night approach, because their fanbase is targeted and tends to be pretty loyal and more patient than the mass market would be.It's the space between, the mid-size "live service" games, where only the best of the best can survive, and everything else either crumples as a wreck, or fades into F2P obscurity. Because they're having to compete for mainstream market share, without having the titans' budget for soaking up the trials and tribulations that will inevitably arise along the way. They can't do "nimble", and midnight oil alone ceases to be adequate for the size of the task. But they also can't do "$20M is an acceptable up-front cost".I find a lot of social things end up in a situation like this. The extremes are, ironically, the most stable positions, while the transition between is extraordinarily unstable, and tends to result in implosion rather than settling down somewhere comfortable. There are, of course, exceptions! But they really are exceptions, deviations from the pretty solid norm.</blockquote>

Verification