Jim Sterling fights back against "corporate apologists"

Ok, hyperbole thread title aside, I smurfing love this guy. Even when I don't agree with him, he is still funny.

On this issue, he is spot on I think.

An industry that needs Xbox One DRM is a failed industry - Destructoid

Jimquisition: Xbox One No DRM Emergency Special - Destructoid

Jimquisition: PS4 - Doing Nothing, Meaning Everything - Destructoid

Used games and 'AAA' games are incompatible? Good! - Destructoid

I guess read the first one, and then the others if you are bothered/want a little more context.

What do you guys think?

I read the first article and I've already seen the Jimquisition episodes. Even when I don't always agree with the man, he almost always has a thoughtful point to make and a reasoned argument to support it. I've been in agreement with him on pretty much everything to do with the next gen consoles so far which helps, but even if I didn't, I'd still recommend checking out his arguments because the man is quite funny, and even if I thought he was wrong in the big picture he'd probably still have a reasonable argument to support why he feels a certain way about some aspect of a debate.

TLDR: Jim always does a nice job of explaining just why publishers and apologists are completely full of trout.

I only started listening to Jim this past year, but the dude is smart. He knows what the smurf he's talking about.

Even on points I disagree with him on, he's still very damn well informed on his opinions.

I just got around to reading that last article as well and while I've seen him make the same general arguments before on his show, I have to say I love the way he puts it. If you need to punish your customers to run a successful business then you deserve to fail. If you need to try and nickel and dime your customers to succeed then you deserve to fail.

He's made the point quite a few times that the problem is not one of used games and whatnot, but of game budgets and publisher expectations being wildly out of touch with reality. Some of his favourite examples have been Dark Souls and, in that article, Metro: Last Light as games with relatively low budgets which were downright amazing, looked great, and sold more than enough to earn a profit without needing to be the next Call of Duty. Same thing goes for games like Tomb Raider but in reverse. It was a great game, but why anyone thought it could sell five million copies is beyond me. You could say the same thing about Dead Space 3.

The problem is, AAA publishers and developers don't really know how to develop games that have a budget suited for realistic sales goals. Instead of figuring that a new Tomb Raider reboot might be able to sell 2-3 million copies and budgeting accordingly, they start with the budget and set sales goals based on what it needs to sell to make money. Any executive that can't see how ass backwards this is needs to hand in their business degree.

And I loved the way that he actually took what CliffyB said and turned it around to make his own point. I'd seen that statement before a few days ago or whenever but never really arrived at the same conclusion, despite feeling the same way and recognizing the statement itself as utter bulltrout at face value. I'm constantly impressed with Jim's ability to do things like that though. Where he finds some truth in a statement but explains why it works for his point rather than against.

And finally, because I apparently can't stop singing his praise, I agree with him completely on the idea that publishers have no real interest in lowering prices to the end consumer. As proof I offer up the entire country of Australia. If I'm not mistaken, the reason game prices used to be so high was because their currency was weaker many years ago. Then their currency strengthened considerably compared to the American dollar and publishers... didn't change a damn thing because people were used to paying really high prices there and they figured they could get away with it, despite making more money than ever on every sale they make there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vivi22

I just got around to reading that last article as well and while I've seen him make the same general arguments before on his show, I have to say I love the way he puts it. If you need to punish your customers to run a successful business then you deserve to fail. If you need to try and nickel and dime your customers to succeed then you deserve to fail.

He's made the point quite a few times that the problem is not one of used games and whatnot, but of game budgets and publisher expectations being wildly out of touch with reality. Some of his favourite examples have been Dark Souls and, in that article, Metro: Last Light as games with relatively low budgets which were downright amazing, looked great, and sold more than enough to earn a profit without needing to be the next Call of Duty. Same thing goes for games like Tomb Raider but in reverse. It was a great game, but why anyone thought it could sell five million copies is beyond me. You could say the same thing about Dead Space 3.

The problem is, AAA publishers and developers don't really know how to develop games that have a budget suited for realistic sales goals. Instead of figuring that a new Tomb Raider reboot might be able to sell 2-3 million copies and budgeting accordingly, they start with the budget and set sales goals based on what it needs to sell to make money. Any executive that can't see how ass backwards this is needs to hand in their business degree.

And I loved the way that he actually took what CliffyB said and turned it around to make his own point. I'd seen that statement before a few days ago or whenever but never really arrived at the same conclusion, despite feeling the same way and recognizing the statement itself as utter bulltrout at face value. I'm constantly impressed with Jim's ability to do things like that though. Where he finds some truth in a statement but explains why it works for his point rather than against.

And finally, because I apparently can't stop singing his praise, I agree with him completely on the idea that publishers have no real interest in lowering prices to the end consumer. As proof I offer up the entire country of Australia. If I'm not mistaken, the reason game prices used to be so high was because their currency was weaker many years ago. Then their currency strengthened considerably compared to the American dollar and publishers... didn't change a damn thing because people were used to paying really high prices there and they figured they could get away with it, despite making more money than ever on every sale they make there.

---

Well put.

Thank God for Jim.

What also resonates greatly with me is the idea that the gaming industry needs a NEW generation of console publishers, not a new generation of consoles. I love my Sony consoles, but it is time for others to step up so that these old industry dinosaurs either fall, or vastly adapt, and I'm not talking about Apple or Google here.

Maybe another gaming crash wouldn't be too bad? Obviously I am conflicted in that regard. I want to continue playing games, but if the industry really is as smurfed as these guys are making it out to be, we don't need draconian restrictions to correct it, but the whole industry to start from scratch. A clean slate, if you will.

I love Jim Sterling, definitely one of my favourite gaming personalities. I remember when he first started doing his Jimquisition show, I hated him - too much of a pompous ass about everything. But, he adapted and watching his 5 minutes on a Monday are a highlight of my week.

But yeah, agree with all he's saying here.

I don't think we need anything as extreme as Croyles suggested, but certainly some companies need to tweak their expectations a bit. I actually think AAA publishers have done pretty well making creative and interesting games over the last few years as my backlog is kind of insane right now and that seems to be the case with many gamers I know online and irl.

I do celebrate Jim Sterling for tackling these issues head on. The idea that consumers should factor in a company's profitability to their buying decisions and/or opinion not only misses the entire point of how a market works, it also shows how out of touch journalists and developers have become with the audience they rely on.

Also, any journalist who simultaneously praises Killzone and Dragon Quest Vlll is a visionary in my book. God bless Jim ^_^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

I don't think we need anything that extreme, but certainly some companies need to tweak their expectations a bit. I actually think AAA publishers have done pretty well making creative and interesting games over the last few years as my backlog is kind of insane right now and that seems to be the case with many gamers I know online and irl.

I do celebrate Jim Sterling for tackling these issues head on. The idea that consumers should factor in a company's profitability to their buying decisions and/or opinion not only misses the entire point of how a market works, it also shows how out of

---

I really really hope you are right. However, what the last few weeks have taught me is that people only take a stand when a lot of bad stuff is being done to you AT THE SAME TIME. Had Microsoft been more clever and drip-fed their bulltrout DRM strategy throughout the generation, there would be dismay, but there wouldn't have been this outcry by gamers, which a lot of gaming media tried to downplay and even say we are wrong about (with the pretty much sole exception of Jim). Ironically, it was the actual mainstream media (Forbes, Wired, BBC, CNN etc) that heard the rightfully vocal gamers, and then acted as the messenger for the wider public, which made Sony listen and Microsoft follow suit out of bricking it.

Had they been more clever and metaphorically 'poisoned us slowly' hardly anyone would have noticed, and this can STILL happen!

I know I am making gaint sweeping statements here, but then again this whole debacle has been about giant sweeping statements. Take it with a huge grain of salt. I have no clue where the industry is heading, just voicing my thoughts. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croyles

What also resonates greatly with me is the idea that the gaming industry needs a NEW generation of console publishers, not a new generation of consoles.

---

Actually, that wasn't what I took from the first article. I assume you're referring to this quote in particular?

Quote:

---

We need a new generation of game producers, not game consoles

---

Maybe you're referring to something else that I'm either forgetting or missed when skimming the articles though. But what I took from that quote in particular is that the industry isn't a stagnant, anti-consumer dinosaur because of new consoles, but rather idiotic business practices and uninteresting games furthered by out of touch executives more concerned with making the next Call of Duty than running a business by recognizing what your market is, where the holes are you can creep into that other games don't address and find your niche there. In other words, new consoles aren't going to bring new blood into the industry and make newer and better games. The fall of long time publishers who are unwilling to take risks or to manage their companies appropriately is what will open the market up to smaller developers and start ups coming in with more vision, talent, and the ability to make great games without over estimating their potential audience and blowing all of their money.

Actually, I could see some new companies, particularly some of the larger indie companies being able to step up and start filling the void if former industry titans like EA or Activision had to close up shop. If there's any group in the industry that learn the hard way how to get stuff done on a thrifty budget or risk sinking the company, it's indies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vivi22

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croyles

What also resonates greatly with me is the idea that the gaming industry needs a NEW generation of console publishers, not a new generation of consoles.

---

Actually, that wasn't what I took from the first article. I assume you're referring to this quote in particular?

Quote:

---

We need a new generation of game producers, not game consoles

---

Maybe you're referring to something else that I'm either forgetting or missed when skimming the articles though. But what I took from that quote in particular is that the industry isn't a stagnant, anti-consumer dinosaur because of new consoles, but rather idiotic business practices and uninteresting games furthered by out of touch executives more concerned with making the next Call of Duty than running a business by recognizing what your market is, where the holes are you can creep into that other games don't address and find your niche there. In other words, new consoles aren't going to bring new blood into the industry and make newer and better games. The fall of long time publishers who are unwilling to take risks or to manage their companies appropriately is what will open the market up to smaller developers and start ups coming in with more vision, talent, and the ability to make great games without over estimating their potential audience and blowing all of their money.

Actually, I could see some new companies, particularly some of the larger indie companies being able to step up and start filling the void if former industry titans like EA or Activision had to close up shop. If there's any group in the industry that learn the hard way how to get stuff done on a thrifty budget or risk sinking the company, it's indies.

---

Ah ysorry, I must of misread. I just give credence to the idea of new blood in the industry, whether that be for publishers/devs/distribution/ideas or anything else (not what Microsoft tried though). I am in agreement with everything you said.

Yeah, I wasn't sure if you just misread or if I missed another point he made somewhere. But I agree, it might actually be a good thing to see some of the giant publishers go under and see what new companies rise up in their place. There is a lot that's wrong with game development right now, even just on the business side, and most of the examples we see come from companies like EA, Ubisoft, etc. It would suck for the people who lose a job if they were to go under, but I'm not sure their problems aren't so entrenched in their minds and corporate policies that they'll actually move past them or not. Maybe if the right person with vision got the top job and started massive overhauls of how they run their business, but even that can be messy as hell, result in lots of lost jobs, and would still require someone who hasn't been indoctrinated into the way they typically run things.

And on the console end, part of the reason I get so excited about the possibility of things like the Ouya or Valve releasing a Steam console is the same thing. Get some new blood in there, get people trying to shift the current paradigms and carve out new market segments that they can compete in, or even beat the old standards to the punch with better features and services. More new entrants trying to come in and shake things up is good for everyone, consumer and industry alike.

At this exact moment in time, I am placing all my hope on indie devs. I don't ever want to give Sony a free pass when it comes to bad business decisions, but I think they at least made the right choice in allowing independent developers self-publishing rights on their new console, and even going so far to showcase those talents in a meaningful way.

Ironically the Ouya itself doesn't interest me too much, but I am glad that these sort of things are maybe starting to happen.

Yeah I'm really not a huuuuge fan of the indie scene but I do salute Sony for not only letting them self publish but then take it one step further and give those guys some stage time at their biggest show. Its support like that which i think pushed a game like Journey to the top of game of the year lists last year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolivar

Yeah I'm really not a huuuuge fan of the indie scene but I do salute Sony for not only letting them self publish but then take it one step further and give those guys some stage time at their biggest show. Its support like that which i think pushed a game like Journey to the top of game of the year lists last year.

---

It's not like I enjoy every indie game out there, but there are a LOT of good ones. These are the people who create new gameplay mechanics and tropes for the later generation, so even if you're maybe not the biggest indie guy, I think we agree that they are vital to the industry at the moment. :)