• Almacca@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Because they don’t want some of the money, or even enough of the money. They want all of the money, and think all you have to do is copy a successful game to get it.

    • Mirshe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Moreover, like Hollywood, the gaming industry is largely run by people who truly do not understand the thing they’re there to make. All of the C-levels still think it’s the early 2000s where you could shit out anything that looked like a popular game and make 20 billion dollars from it. They think their entire market is dumb kids who will mindlessly play whatever is put in front of them without regard to polish, story, or even playability.

  • darthelmet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    My (completely uninformed) theory: It’s competitive advantage. Indies succeed on their creativity, but that works because there are thousands of indie devs out there and we get to see the best (and luckiest) ones. It’s not easy to replicate that creativity by just throwing more money at the problem. So what is a company with ooodles of money but no creativity to do? Make games that only a company with way too much money could make. No indie dev is going to make the next Far Cry or Assassin’s Creed or Fortnite because they just don’t have the budget to make that happen. So they know that even if they keep churning out generic crap, at least it’s generic crap with very little real competition.

    Of course then all of them got the bright idea to compete in a game business model that is inherently winner take all with already well established leaders. So yeah now it just seems like they’re lighting money on fire for fun.