Planescape: Torment - EE Release Date: April 11

[Damian]

There is no difference. Most of the influential games after the Video Game Crash released on more than one platform.

I wasnt talking about influential games, rather just "great" games. Most "great" games at that time were on consoles. There were probably more influential games on the pc.

No risk, no interest. Without interest, low incomes don't even have a chance to end their life in decent conditions. Welcome to capitalism.

Still doesnt make videogames a good stock for retirement. At best you have it in your portfolio at about 1% of your investments.

 

[JDR13]

I wasnt talking about influential games, rather just "great" games. Most "great" games at that time were on consoles. There were probably more influential games on the pc.

That's completely subjective.

 

[Avantenor]

I don't know many "great" games besides first party titles, that released on a single platform.

Still doesnt make videogames a good stock for retirement. At best you have it in your portfolio at about 1% of your investments.

If every customer of Black Rock invests 1 % in video games, it's still a lot of money. A lot of money EA needs to develop another Battlefield, that many players think is great. Without that money it wouldn't exist. And this money wouldn't be invested, if there wouldn't be a significant RoI for all stakeholders. Even developers depend on paychecks and bonus payment.

 

[Damian]

That's completely subjective.

While the quality of a game is subjective you can see objectively that the sheer number of highly rated games per month is higher by about 2x or 3x the rate that PC's had. That is about as objective as we can get really. Some months the PC didnt even have a good release on PC.

 

[Damian]

I don't know many "great" games besides first party titles, that released on a single platform.

That isnt true, even EA was great back then.

If every customer of Black Rock invests 1 % in video games, it's still a lot of money. A lot of money EA needs to develop another Battlefield, that many players think is great. Without that money it wouldn't exist. And this money wouldn't be invested, if there wouldn't be a significant RoI for all stakeholders. Even developers depend on paychecks and bonus payment.

Videogame stocks are a high risk investment. You shouldnt be EXPECTING it to always return dividends. But you can always have a great pay day once in a while from video game stocks, that just how those stocks work.

 

[Deleted User]

Episode 1 of my "Let's Play in 4K" is up on my channel, if anyone's interested. It's my first run through PS:T:EE, playing in 4K.

 

[Avantenor]

That isnt true, even EA was great back then.

Even EA released on several platforms. It was the case for the mythical six first titles as well as for Madden or FIFA.

Videogame stocks are a high risk investment. You shouldnt be EXPECTING it to always return dividends. But you can always have a great pay day once in a while from video game stocks, that just how those stocks work.

Seriously? I talk about funds and institutional investors and you answer to single investment and day-trading issues? Do we really have to go into detail about the differences between these types of investment? About spreading risks, core and satellite portfolio management, probability of losses for long-term investments in funds and so on? I don't think so. It also doesn't matter what you think is reasonable.

Of course, if all the money goes to a small group of rich people, it's easier for them to wait for their RoI. If it is spread among many people, it's more complicated and "art" isn't a factor that really matters. That leads to the conclusion, that games industry is either a business like everything else or a hobby investment of some filthy rich people.

 

[Damian]

Even EA released on several platforms. It was the case for the mythical six first titles as well as for Madden or FIFA.

I was commenting on third parties in general. Almost all third parties were great back then. Many of them didnt make ports.

Seriously? I talk about funds and institutional investors and you answer to single investment and day-trading issues? Do we really have to go into detail about the differences between these types of investment? About spreading risks, core and satellite portfolio management, probability of losses for long-term investments in funds and so on? I don't think so. It also doesn't matter what you think is reasonable.

Of course, if all the money goes to a small group of rich people, it's easier for them to wait for their RoI. If it is spread among many people, it's more complicated and "art" isn't a factor that really matters. That leads to the conclusion, that games industry is either a business like everything else or a hobby investment of some filthy rich people.

I think you missed my point. I was referring to how it doesnt matter if a high risk stock doesnt make much money normally as long as it creates large profits once in a while, ie overall more gain. If the high risk stock fails in that you just find some other high risk stock to replace it.

 

[Avantenor]

I was commenting on third parties in general. Almost all third parties were great back then. Many of them didnt make ports.

And your list of examples?

I think you missed my point. I was referring to how it doesnt matter if a high risk stock doesnt make much money normally as long as it creates large profits once in a while, ie overall more gain. If the high risk stock fails in that you just find some other high risk stock to replace it.

Long term profits means growth, growing needs money.

 

[Damian]

And your list of examples?

Capcom
Milton Bradley Company
Ocean Software
Hudsonsoft
Konami
Bandai
HAL America
Activision
Acclaim
Data East
LJN
Mindscape
Vic Tokai
Taito
Infogrames
Jaleco
Koei
Sunsoft
Broderbund
Tradewest
JVC
Taxan

That is from going through titles from A through B on the NES games list and picking out developers with great games. Cant be bothered looking through all the games.

Long term profits means growth, growing needs money.

You cant grow without a constant stream of large revenue?

 

[JDR13]

While the quality of a game is subjective you can see objectively that the sheer number of highly rated games per month is higher by about 2x or 3x the rate that PC's had. That is about as objective as we can get really. Some months the PC didnt even have a good release on PC.

Rated by who? Can you provide any sources that supports your claim? There wasn't a ton of people\media doing video game reviews back in those days.

I was commenting on third parties in general. Almost all third parties were great back then. Many of them didnt make ports.

Are you still talking specifically about console games? If so, that's a ridiculous statement. I remember the NES days well because that was the first major console I owned other than the Atari 2600. There were indeed some very good games by third party companies, but for every great game there was at least 3 or 4 that were mediocre or complete shit. That was the case for the 2600 as well.

Capcom
Milton Bradley Company
Ocean Software
Hudsonsoft
Konami
Bandai
HAL America
Activision
Acclaim
Data East
LJN
Mindscape
Vic Tokai
Taito
Infogrames
Jaleco
Koei
Sunsoft
Broderbund
Tradewest
JVC
Taxan

That is from going through titles from A through B on the NES games list and picking out developers with great games. Cant be bothered looking through all the games.

Great games according to who? You? It looks like you're trying to present your opinion as fact. Just because you think those games were great doesn't mean everyone else did.

 

[Damian]

Rated by who? Can you provide any sources that supports your claim? There wasn't a ton of people\media doing video game reviews back in those days.

Unfortunately I cannot find those old magazines online, so yes, you do have a point.

Great games according to who? You? It looks like you're trying to present your opinion as fact. Just because you think those games were great doesn't mean everyone else did.

By me obviously. These games were rated highly back then scoring 80% or higher(back then 5 was the average unless you were Gamepro) on average. But obviously i cannot prove it because I simply dont have the resources.

 

[sakichop]

Isnt that entirely on the PC side though? Hence why console gaming boomed?

No. Cost and an extremely high barrier to entry is why consoles boomed over pc gaming back then.

There's a reason why for many years PC gaming was seen as a nerd thing because you needed to know your shit back then. Managing memory, irq's, dma's ect. A console just required you to stick the cartridge in the slot.

But isnt that EXACTLY the issue? Even while Nintendo other Japanese devs still have the SAME EXACT RESPONSIBILITY, they still allow devs to make the games they want. I dont buy the grandparents thing, if they wanted a steady income, they would invest in safe stocks not video games.

I know you're a huge Nintendo fan but they want to make money just like anyone else. Theres not a successful company around that isn't trying to make money.

 

[Damian]

I know you're a huge Nintendo fan but they want to make money just like anyone else. Theres not a successful company around that isn't trying to make money.

What I doesnt mean that Nintendo stopped trying to make a profit. You can let devs make the game they want and still make a huge profit as seen by CD Projeckt revenue.

 

[azarhal]

But isnt that EXACTLY the issue? Even while Nintendo other Japanese devs still have the SAME EXACT RESPONSIBILITY, they still allow devs to make the games they want. I dont buy the grandparents thing, if they wanted a steady income, they would invest in safe stocks not video games.

Japanese developers are the kings of fanservices and catering to their market (Japan) while making small games to maximize profit. The big publishers have started to force devs to Westernized their games too now. They also invented the gacha mobile game.