471 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

imbs wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

Dunno, don't take advice from imbs or imbecils. But my MBA and EE went fine, even though it had lots of stats on it.

lol

I'd be offended but I don't take people who think gaming statistics that include the wii/angry birds/handhelds are relevant to Bioware or other Console/PC developers seriously.

Also, the percentage quote was for boys under the age of 17. Which is a much smaller demographic than what is usually classified as "young males," which are usually classified as being from late teens to early 30's in nearly all common usages of the term.

Also, the ESA's numbers fail to take into account spending habits. You can develop a mobile phone app for 14 year old females that is free and will be downloaded like crazy... and not make you any money. Assuming the buying habits of every to be the same and equating that with an "untapped market" is a huge statistical fallacy.

[Renmiri1]

M25105 wrote...

Are you guys just as passionate on the gameplay as you are about romance and sex scenes? Just asking.

Not really, in my case at least, I play single player games to relax and enjoy the story, hence I mostly play RPGs. Before playing Bioware stuff my fix was JRPG (Final Fantasy, Zelda, Chrono...).

In terms of gameplay, if you mean combat, I do enjoy it but there is no singleplayer game that is good enough (and here comes imbs pretending I'm saying MP is bad combat.. she/ he always tries that little trick). There simply is no AI currently that can compete with having a live person shooting at you, attacking your base or having you and 20+ people in combat against a wave / raid boss / etc... 

So no, combat is not what singleplayers are good at. And I don't play them for it. Story ? Yup singleplayer games are good at it particularly RPGs and I play them for that. Not necessarily romance, in fact of all games I have played I have only played Bioware games with romance available to the PC. (I did play the witcher 1 but dropped it before finishing it. FOV made me dizzy and was too much of a male perspective).

So what else do you define as gameplay ? Graphics and music ? Like both but most games nowadays are very good on both so there isn't much to discuss passionately about it. Anything else ?

Oh puzzles. UGH, hate them. I'm humiliated by Glados every time i try to play Portal. My 12 year old can run circles around me there. Is embarassing.

[Ridwan]

Renmiri1 wrote...

M25105 wrote...

Are you guys just as passionate on the gameplay as you are about romance and sex scenes? Just asking.

Not really, in my case at least, I play single player games to relax and enjoy the story, hence I mostly play RPGs. Before playing Bioware stuff my fix was JRPG (Final Fantasy, Zelda, Chrono...).

In terms of gameplay, if you mean combat, I do enjoy it but there is no singleplayer game that is good enough (and here comes imbs pretending I'm saying MP is bad combat.. she/ he always tries that little trick). There simply is no AI currently that can compete with having a live person shooting at you, attacking your base or having you and 20+ people in combat against a wave / raid boss / etc... 

So no, combat is not what singleplayers are good at. And I don't play them for it. Story ? Yup singleplayer games are good at it particularly RPGs and I play them for that. Not necessarily romance, in fact of all games I have played I have only played Bioware games with romance available to the PC. (I did play the witcher 1 but dropped it before finishing it. FOV made me dizzy and was too much of a male perspective).

So what else do you define as gameplay ? Graphics and music ? Like both but most games nowadays are very good on both so there isn't much to discuss passionately about it. Anything else ?

Oh puzzles. UGH, hate them. I'm humiliated by Glados every time i try to play Portal. My 12 year old can run circles around me there. Is embarassing.

Combat, controls, AI, game mechanics, smoothness and so on is what I define by gameplay to make it clear.

[Renmiri1]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

imbs wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

Dunno, don't take advice from imbs or imbecils. But my MBA and EE went fine, even though it had lots of stats on it.

lol

I'd be offended but I don't take people who think gaming statistics that include the wii/angry birds/handhelds are relevant to Bioware or other Console/PC developers seriously.

Also, the percentage quote was for boys under the age of 17. Which is a much smaller demographic than what is usually classified as "young males," which are usually classified as being from late teens to early 30's in nearly all common usages of the term.

Also, the ESA's numbers fail to take into account spending habits. You can develop a mobile phone app for 14 year old females that is free and will be downloaded like crazy... and not make you any money. Assuming the buying habits of every to be the same and equating that with an "untapped market" is a huge statistical fallacy.

See this is where you lose me

17+ spending habits is vastly different from under 17.

Namely, parents buy most of the under 17 games, kid has imput but mostly is the parent doing the heavy lifting.

So when you say "young males" is under 30 and then in the next paragraph you say spending habits is key... Doesn't compute.

Also, the free to play model has been highly sucessfull at generating money, with pay to win and other little tricks they add to it. So a free downloadable game is not by any means an instant loss leader.

Again, huge contradictions, and little attention to revenue models. 

I suggest downloading the full study PDF, there is a link there. It may provide better details for you if you want to explore the statistical "fallacies" and what not.

I have been following this market for a while since I worked with Docomo Japan in the late 90s and they had more users than AOL at the time, downloading "free" games and generating gobs of cash for themselves and others. There was even some stats work involved, believe it or not 

[imbs]

and here comes imbs pretending I'm saying MP is bad combat

I never said you said MP is bad combat. Or maybe it'd be more accurate to say I never meant to say that. My only criticism of your usual combat spiel is how you big up MMO-raiding skill/difficulty-wise.

On the contrary you are one of the few posters on this board whose stance on gameplay I can mostly understand.

[DragonMage95]

imbs wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

Dunno, don't take advice from imbs or imbecils. But my MBA and EE went fine, even though it had lots of stats on it.

lol

I'd be offended but I don't take people who think gaming statistics that include the wii/angry birds/handhelds are relevant to Bioware or other Console/PC developers seriously.

Why can't Wii, Angry Birds,and Handhelds be part of the statistics?

[Renmiri1]

M25105 wrote...
Combat, controls, AI, game mechanics, smoothness and so on is what I define by gameplay to make it clear.

combat ? AI ?
Single players are weak on it, so i see no point in discussing it. I just like them to be fast enough to not make me want to throw the controller through the window (I'm looking at you DAO)

controls, smoothness ?
Being "not annoying" is mostly enough for me. Like air really. If it is there in sufficint quantity I hardly notice it, if it isn't i can't live without it.

game mechanics ?
You mean moving your PC, click to move, and such ? Talent trees ? UI ? Not terribly sexy to me. Just want them bearably fast. Building / mining / smithing / crafting / survival ? Art ?   Minecraft building and exploring is oodles of fun and game has basically no story. But also there isn't much to discuss and debate about it, is there ?

Again, IMHO, to me, single players are to relax and enjoy an interactive good story. Or do something fun. So I discuss what makes singleplayers fun to me, which is mostly story related. Though crafting and stealth are also tons of fun, and Skyrim is pretty good at both.

What about you, what makes you passionate about  singleplayer games ?

Modifié par Renmiri1, 04 avril 2013 - 10:45 .

[imbs]

DomRod95 wrote...

imbs wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

Dunno, don't take advice from imbs or imbecils. But my MBA and EE went fine, even though it had lots of stats on it.

lol

I'd be offended but I don't take people who think gaming statistics that include the wii/angry birds/handhelds are relevant to Bioware or other Console/PC developers seriously.

Why can't Wii, Angry Birds,and Handhelds be part of the statistics?

different demographics and all that jazz. Statistics that include those things are not very relevant to Bioware.

I think you'll find that the demographic for Wii for example is 80+% females. That is off the top of my head so don't quote me on that. Point is the demographic for AAA games in general is still majority young males afaik.  Saying it is 18% is entirely misleading.

Modifié par imbs, 04 avril 2013 - 10:43 .

[DragonMage95]

imbs wrote...

DomRod95 wrote...

imbs wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

Dunno, don't take advice from imbs or imbecils. But my MBA and EE went fine, even though it had lots of stats on it.

lol

I'd be offended but I don't take people who think gaming statistics that include the wii/angry birds/handhelds are relevant to Bioware or other Console/PC developers seriously.

Why can't Wii, Angry Birds,and Handhelds be part of the statistics?

different demographics and all that jazz. Statistics that include those things are not very relevant to Bioware.

I think you'll find that the demographic for Wii for example is 80+% females. That is off the top of my head so don't quote me on that. Point is the demographics for AAA games in general is still majority young males afaik.  Saying it is 18% is entirely misleading.

Ah, I see. I thought for second you meant something else.

[Ridwan]

Renmiri1 wrote...

M25105 wrote...
Combat, controls, AI, game mechanics, smoothness and so on is what I define by gameplay to make it clear.

combat ? AI ?
Single players are weak on it, so i see no point in discussing it. I just like them to be fast enough to not make me want to throw the controller through the window (I'm looking at you DAO)

controls, smoothness ?
Being "not annoying" is mostly enough for me. Like air really. If it is there in sufficint quantity I hardly notice it, if it isn't i can't live without it.

game mechanics ?
You mean moving your PC, click to move, and such ? Talent trees ? UI ? Not terribly sexy to me. Just want them bearably fast. Building / mining / smithing / crafting / survival ? Art ?   Minecraft building and exploring is oodles of fun and game has basically no story. But also there isn't much to dicuss and debate about it, is there ?

Again, IMHO, to me, single players are to relax and enjoy an interactive good story. Or do something fun. So I discuss what makes singleplayers fun to me, which is mostly story related. Though crafting and stealth are also tons of fun, and Skyrim is pretty good at both.

What about you, what makes you passionate about  singleplayer games ?

Good controls, good ui, easy to get into, yet difficult to completely master, a nice story to support the game, but also the option to skip if it bores me, excellent sound, user friendly, the option to tinker with and over all combat.
And most of all, to feel like I'm in control.

I enjoy SP games cause I can play at my own pace.

[sabasebatyne]

Hmm. Been away from the forums for several months, simply to find a discussion about pixelated nudity. Damn, it's good to be back.

In all seriousness, glad to see a discussion that provokes a look at larger issues, such as the role and importance of romance and sex (or lack thereof) in games.

[Fiacre]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

imbs wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

Dunno, don't take advice from imbs or imbecils. But my MBA and EE went fine, even though it had lots of stats on it.

lol

I'd be offended but I don't take people who think gaming statistics that include the wii/angry birds/handhelds are relevant to Bioware or other Console/PC developers seriously.

Also, the percentage quote was for boys under the age of 17. Which is a much smaller demographic than what is usually classified as "young males," which are usually classified as being from late teens to early 30's in nearly all common usages of the term.

Also, the ESA's numbers fail to take into account spending habits. You can develop a mobile phone app for 14 year old females that is free and will be downloaded like crazy... and not make you any money. Assuming the buying habits of every to be the same and equating that with an "untapped market" is a huge statistical fallacy.

See this is where you lose me

17+ spending habits is vastly different from under 17.

Namely, parents buy most of the under 17 games, kid has imput but mostly is the parent doing the heavy lifting.

Seriously? I can honestly say that I don't/didn't know a single person where that was the case. Weird... (I would be rich if my parents had done that! Had to spend all my money on the games I wanted...)

[Fast Jimmy]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Also, the percentage quote was for boys under the age of 17. Which is a much smaller demographic than what is usually classified as "young males," which are usually classified as being from late teens to early 30's in nearly all common usages of the term.

Also, the ESA's numbers fail to take into account spending habits. You can develop a mobile phone app for 14 year old females that is free and will be downloaded like crazy... and not make you any money. Assuming the buying habits of every to be the same and equating that with an "untapped market" is a huge statistical fallacy.

See this is where you lose me

17+ spending habits is vastly different from under 17.

Namely, parents buy most of the under 17 games, kid has imput but mostly is the parent doing the heavy lifting.

So when you say "young males" is under 30 and then in the next paragraph you say spending habits is key... Doesn't compute.

Also, the free to play model has been highly sucessfull at generating money, with pay to win and other little tricks they add to it. So a free downloadable game is not by any means an instant loss leader.

Again, huge contradictions, and little attention to revenue models. 

I suggest downloading the full study PDF, there is a link there. It may provide better details for you if you want to explore the statistical "fallacies" and what not.

I have been following this market for a while since I worked with Docomo Japan in the late 90s and they had more users than AOL at the time, downloading "free" games and generating gobs of cash for themselves and others. There was even some stats work involved, believe it or not 

Free to Play models are not the revenue generators people make them out to be. Even when they were spiking in 2010 and 2011, they still paled in comparison to AAA game development revenue cycles. And they have taken huge nosedives in the past 18 months (see Zynga and EA's mobile sales becoming nearly defunct).

And I did not say males under 17 had the same buying habits as males 18-30. You said games were being made for "young males" that fell into this 18% range. But that is not the case. A game like Skyrim, or Farcry, or Call of Duty, or Dragon Age or Mass Effect... all of these games have Mature ratings -as in over the range for the group you are quoting. 

Males 18-30 are still the largest group of AAA game consumers. By and large. Is there a market for other groups? Absolutely. But to say it is silly for game companies to chase this demographic when they have been shown to spend the most money and engage in the most video game playing of AAA games (the product you are trying to sell) shows that they are being far from stupid or short-sighted.

Marketing a AAA budget game to 40+ women just because there aren't many other games that fit that model doesn't mean you will make any money.

[Ridwan]

Made a poll.

Modifié par M25105, 04 avril 2013 - 10:55 .

[Renmiri1]

imbs wrote...

DomRod95 wrote...

Why can't Wii, Angry Birds,and Handhelds be part of the statistics?


different demographics and all that jazz. Statistics that include those things are not very relevant to Bioware.

I think you'll find that the demographic for Wii for example is 80+% females. That is off the top of my head so don't quote me on that. Point is the demographic for AAA games in general is still majority young males afaik.  Saying it is 18% is entirely misleading.

But this turns into a self fulfilling prophecy. I think Gaider mentioned something about it on his last talk 

Do we really know that AAA games draw young males in or is it that AAA games are not made for anyone else and hence don't draw anyone else into their base ? When a AAA game fails and has a woman protagonist, knee-jerk analysis is "it's the woman. young males dislike playing women PC" but when a AAA game fails and doesn't have a woman protagonist no one bats an eye.

Going back to an earlier post of mine, I believe the AAA gaming industry is being very myopic. They use a "conventional wisdom" about a player base that was - maybe - true 10-20 years ago and then when games don't sell they don't get why.

Sequel mania is endemic and Hollywood already had gone down this rabbit hole and found no profit there. 100% of the market going for the same demographic ? Yup, the young male is king. Except it isn't anynmore. There are whole untapped markets of gamers on both ends of the spectrum. Kiddie gamers need more family friendly games.  Mature gamers are screaming (for the last 20 pages at least  ) for more mature games. Crafting / building / fans ? Only had Second Life until a crazy guy made something on a shoestring and sold 1 million copies right under everyone's nose. 

I think that ESA survey is right on the money and very consistent with I myself have seen in Japan, Korea and other places. But meh, I'm just a statistics addled BSN forum dweller 

Modifié par Renmiri1, 04 avril 2013 - 10:58 .

[Renmiri1]

Fiacre wrote...

Seriously? I can honestly say that I don't/didn't know a single person where that was the case. Weird... (I would be rich if my parents had done that! Had to spend all my money on the games I wanted...)

You mean your discretionary income, left after you paid rent, food, gas, light.. Oh wait... 

Yup, your own hard earned money. Sponsored by two people who love you very much and made you able to use it on entertainment instead of basic household expenses.

Ya my kids think they pay for their own games too 

[daaaav]

Renmiri1 wrote...

M25105 wrote...
Combat, controls, AI, game mechanics, smoothness and so on is what I define by gameplay to make it clear.

combat ? AI ?
Single players are weak on it, so i see no point in discussing it. I just like them to be fast enough to not make me want to throw the controller through the window (I'm looking at you DAO)

controls, smoothness ?
Being "not annoying" is mostly enough for me. Like air really. If it is there in sufficint quantity I hardly notice it, if it isn't i can't live without it.

game mechanics ?
You mean moving your PC, click to move, and such ? Talent trees ? UI ? Not terribly sexy to me. Just want them bearably fast. Building / mining / smithing / crafting / survival ? Art ?   Minecraft building and exploring is oodles of fun and game has basically no story. But also there isn't much to discuss and debate about it, is there ?

Again, IMHO, to me, single players are to relax and enjoy an interactive good story. Or do something fun. So I discuss what makes singleplayers fun to me, which is mostly story related. Though crafting and stealth are also tons of fun, and Skyrim is pretty good at both.

What about you, what makes you passionate about  singleplayer games ?

As I mentioned earlier, I believe that games came dangerously close to stagnating as the majority of the creative effort has almost exclusively been put  updating graphics and combat mechanics.

I am encouraged by the world building elements introduced by games like mine craft and Skyrim. Combat should not be the only major method by which the character experiences the setting.... I enjoy anything that connects me to the world, be it conversation, lore, survivalist elements, whatever.

Interaction between characters is as important as combat mechanics, and I would urge Bioware to look to the advances made by LA Noir and Deus Ex: HR for inspiration. Intimacy is just one facet of the story telling potential of exploring these methods.

[Degs29]

I've found similar statistics to Renmiri, but as others have pointed out, those stats are misleading. Who defined what a video game player is in these studies? A person who has once in their life picked up a video game? Someone who plays once or twice a year? A month? Consistently? Are we talking about traditional consoles, or free-to-play games on the iphone/ipad?

When you define a video game player as being anywhere from an extremely casual player to a hardcore player, is it really a surprise females make up 40 - 47% of the demographic? Is it really a surprise >65% of the demographic is 18 years or older? Such statistics are very misleading.

[Fiacre]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Fiacre wrote...

Seriously? I can honestly say that I don't/didn't know a single person where that was the case. Weird... (I would be rich if my parents had done that! Had to spend all my money on the games I wanted...)

You mean your discretionary income, left after you paid rent, food, gas, light.. Oh wait... 

Yup, your own hard earned money. Sponsored by two people who love you very much and made you able to use it on entertainment instead of basic household expenses.

Ya my kids think they pay for their own games too 

Actually, I have to help in the household for it.

...And they took the money I got from pretty much everyone but them for being confirmed when I was kid :c. (They keep saying I'll get it back but I doubt it... And that was a lot of money.)

I also know a lot of people who don't get any pocket money/barely get any and have/had a side job to afford anything.

Modifié par Fiacre, 04 avril 2013 - 11:56 .

[Bayonet Hipshot]

daaaav wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

M25105 wrote...
Combat, controls, AI, game mechanics, smoothness and so on is what I define by gameplay to make it clear.

combat ? AI ?
Single players are weak on it, so i see no point in discussing it. I just like them to be fast enough to not make me want to throw the controller through the window (I'm looking at you DAO)

controls, smoothness ?
Being "not annoying" is mostly enough for me. Like air really. If it is there in sufficint quantity I hardly notice it, if it isn't i can't live without it.

game mechanics ?
You mean moving your PC, click to move, and such ? Talent trees ? UI ? Not terribly sexy to me. Just want them bearably fast. Building / mining / smithing / crafting / survival ? Art ?   Minecraft building and exploring is oodles of fun and game has basically no story. But also there isn't much to discuss and debate about it, is there ?

Again, IMHO, to me, single players are to relax and enjoy an interactive good story. Or do something fun. So I discuss what makes singleplayers fun to me, which is mostly story related. Though crafting and stealth are also tons of fun, and Skyrim is pretty good at both.

What about you, what makes you passionate about  singleplayer games ?

As I mentioned earlier, I believe that games came dangerously close to stagnating as the majority of the creative effort has almost exclusively been put  updating graphics and combat mechanics.

I am encouraged by the world building elements introduced by games like mine craft and Skyrim. Combat should not be the only major method by which the character experiences the setting.... I enjoy anything that connects me to the world, be it conversation, lore, survivalist elements, whatever.

Interaction between characters is as important as combat mechanics, and I would urge Bioware to look to the advances made by LA Noir and Deus Ex: HR for inspiration. Intimacy is just one facet of the story telling potential of exploring these methods.

Good combat does not have to be fast. A good combat in RPG is supposed to make you think. That is whay DAO did 

[Renmiri1]

Well, ya, DAO allowed you to think strategically and play combat like a chess game. Not my cup of tea but some people really like it.

I still believe DAO or any single player is much inferior to RTS or Starcraft or raiding though.

I know little about RTS, in spite of classing at #7 in one back in the day.. But I basically paid my way into an unbeatable army, to avenge a guildie who was kicked out of the ranks by a jerk doing pay to win. 

But in a raid, like in DAO, I  - or a raid leader - position my players, plan for the boss's attacks, etc but when the fireballs start flying all hell breaks lose. Instead of having an AI following my leader instructions EXACTLY, I have a scrub who decides to heal in the middle of a puddle of poison spit. Or an Off Tank who is picking buggers instead of taunting the boss away from while I already have 9 stacks of "death curse #15" which in theory kill at 8 stacks. My poor tank healer is going OOM fast and the raid healer just died on the poison puddle. I combat rezz the ****** and he stands right in front of the boss cleaving me and the other OT. Dying again and wasting our 1 combat rezz per fight. Then the tank healer uses his druid innervate, gulps a huge mana potion and saves the day...

Dunno, to me even strategic, chess like combat gets much more fun, and much harder, when you introduce human stupidity - and human brilliancy - in your party, instead of a bunch of little AI soldiers doing your dance against a boss AI. Even RTS and such, having a person on the other side of the attack, with human cunning and reaction times seems to me much more rewarding.

Modifié par Renmiri1, 05 avril 2013 - 07:46 .

[Stigweird85]

imbs wrote...

M25105 wrote...

Are you guys just as passionate on the gameplay as you are about romance and sex scenes? Just asking.

do you not know where you are? This is the BSN m8. The home of those who want romance simulators but are too stupid to just go download a random VN that accomplishes the same thing. Have you seen this forum at all seriously? For every gameplay thread there are 20 romance/lore/story/character threads.

Said the guy in the why aren't there nudes in a game thread,  I'm not looking for hardcore porn scenes and I doubt many are but the reason sex scenes keep bring brough up is what other reason is there really to have a nude model.

Myself I don't see the problem with nudity, as I said in a previous post I think they way it was handled in Mass Effect was very tasteful and well done. 

There are two distinct points going on in this thread. Discussion about full 3D CGI sex scences which is understandably not feasible due to the reasons mentioned. Production animation etc. The other is about nude models vs Models in their underwear even in unrealistic settings. Going from a model in underwear to a nude model would take much much less effort than creating a scene and if the speed of nude hacks being released is any indication are much easier to implement. Especially if you have the right toolset.

Can we try and keep both points separate and not confuse people wanting realistic scenarios vs those that want fully animated CGI sexscences.

RPGs are all about immersion and in that context seeing character seemingly shower in undies (Mass Effect 3) or wake up the next morning in underwear(DA:O) it kind of shatters the illusion. 

Adding a nude mode shouldn't be impossible and again I mentioned in my previous post having it included in game isn't unfeasible either - The Sims shipped with a skins editor on disk IIRC which could be used to make clothes or for those so inclined nude patches. 



 

Modifié par bigstig, 05 avril 2013 - 12:11 .