LATEST CHATTY HEADER
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
New to Shacknews? Signup for a Free Account
Already have an account? Login Now
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
With all of the closures in the last few months, I wonder if we'll see any kind of shift in how the industry operates. Honestly, I think we need to see a shift away from these monolithic titles that consume an entire company for years and requires hundreds of employees, to smaller more diverse titles so dev houses can have more than one game every 4 years on the market, and one flop doesn't mean the end of the line for the entire company.
Now, I'm sure someone's going to jump in here and start yelling about how it's the global recession that's doing this, and these poor companies just can't stand in the face of such odds, but titles like Haze were flops before the pinch happened. And even with the recession, we're still hearing about how gaming has grown by leaps and bounds in 2008.
So many companies are like a house of cards. Any disturbance will knock them over. It might be time for the structure of things to change.
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 17 replies.
Many studios start out by taking on small projects: such as ports and hand held titles. This generates a good amount of confidence from investors and it helps fund the studio for a while. One of the issues seems to be is that studios stop doing the smaller projects when they land the big titles. Suddenly all of their eggs are in one basket and if the big one fails they have nothing else going.
The post has been reported. Thank you!
You must be logged in to post.
You must be logged in to post.