There’s been a lot of debate in our industry in the past year about the so-called “middle market”. This is the class of games between say Call of Duty and Angry Birds. Not quite AAA (i.e. not $25 million to produce) but also not $250,000 to make the game. The middle market is the world that Stardock and Paradox thrive in. And both of us have done very well in this market.
The argument against the middle market basically boils down to market size. That the middle market just misses the “sweet spot”. Retailers don’t want to carry middle market products because they don’t sell as well AAA or the casual market. The thing is, digital distribution changes all this.
I contend that a game like say Baldur’s Gate (with updated graphics but no where near Dragon Age) would likely sell very well at a fraction of the cost of Dragon Age. The same is true on a whole host of games. The challenge, of course, is for developers to carefully budget their title based on their best guess on the market size. A game like War in the East may not sell a million copies but they also didn’t cost that much to make.
What’s your take?
I would have to agrre with crass_monkey. I would love to see more time put into the SUBSTANCE than the STYLE. Shogun 2 is one huge exception to the notion that most so-called AAA titles are all style and very little substance.
Count me in as another person that loves middle market games.
I "discovered" Stardock with GalCiv II and was quite impressed.
I now love Stardock games and I also love the attitude of the company. You guys genuinely seem to "get it".
I've been playing Paradox Games since EU1. I love history, turn based games and historical what-ifs, so they are right up my alley.
I love EU3 divine Wind and am having a blast playing. EU Rome I immensely enjoyed and Victoria II is excellent as well.
Paradox is one of the companies that also really seems to care about their fans.
I loved the Civ series as well since I think you could describe the first four as being middle market. I don't like the fifth one and perhaps that's because it decided not to be middle market any more in my opinion.
Runic Games put out an hack and slash RPG called Torchlight (and soon to be Torchlight II). They are middle market as well and they make quality games at a very reasonable price.
I think digital distribution will help keep these companies going and I'll gladly keep paying money for quality products. There's a big enough market for it. I'm trying to get the word out to help you guys. ^^
Ditto!
Considering that I've been waiting 10 years or more for a game even half as good as MoM, Torment, or BG2, and considering that by now the chances of ever seeing something like those again during my lifetime are essentially zero (especially for "another" Torment, which really was one of a kind), yes, I'd say such a game would be well worth $ 100 if it DID come out (in an alternate universe).
Cool nick, BTW
Well said!!
I think that your use of the term "casual gamer" is a bit harsh here. The fact is, this forum is filled with folks that are pretty hardcore, and there is a lot ot gray space between hardcore and casual. Most COD gamers are not casual gamers, but are also very far from hardcore.
For us minority here, yes, middle games are often preferred. I still haven't finished Dragon Age 1, and with a big gaming budget don't even want DA2, but I just picked up Might and Magic 7 from GOG and I am loving it! Somewhere, gameplay can real challenge got replaced with flash: all hat and no cattle, that is what most modern games feel like to me (at all cost levels)... but again, I'm a jaded hardcore gamer, and we only compose about 10% of the market.
More and more gamers will graduate to be hardcore enough to want some depth in their games, that will help. Ultimately, however, it is those developers who really love gaming themselves and are willing to make a reasonable profit who will please us hardcores. If you want to hit the ball out of the park on profit, you'll always have to appeal to the lowest common... sad but true.
There are some somewhat rare exceptions. Due to brilliant engine reuse, I had a complete blast with New Vegas recently. That game felt AAA to me (except initial QA) and I enjoyed it as much as other hardcore titles, if not more, because graphics, after all, ARE nice when the challenge and depth hasn't been gutted...
Great topic!
I pretty much feel the same way. The cool thing about digital distribution and the eventual sale weekends is that I can gift games to friends and family who have never been interested in certain genres. I have done this before on both impulse and steam but I have never done it at a brick and mortar shop.
I look at the cover, first, and then read the reviews (but more often just the previews) and pretty much purchase that which appeals to me when I'm in a good mood.
Middle, upper, lower, sub-prime markets...what? I didn't even realize that there was some distinction here...
Anyway...
I'm not much of a gamer since I'm too busy with work, but keep the games coming and I'll help you out .....for really.
-.-
"I contend that a game like say Baldur’s Gate (with updated graphics but no where near Dragon Age) would likely sell very well at a fraction of the cost of Dragon Age.............The challenge, of course, is for developers to carefully budget their title based on their best guess on the market size."
I agree, you can make money in the middle market if you can manage your costs. Stardock; for example, could reduce the cost of developing an BG/TOEE style RPG by taking advantage of some of the work they used to create Elemental.
I personally don't care which market a game belongs to, I buy AAA titles as well as indie and middle market stuff if I find it interesting. Right now I'm equally excited about Dirt 3, Fallen Enchantress and Panzer Corps.
I have no problem paying $50 for a game, regardless if it is a large or a small game. Imo, PC games are cheap.
I play a large mix of games from almost all genres and markets. But, to me, anyone who pays full release day price for a AAA game is an idiot (and I've been an idiot on occasions, before anyone takes offense).
Here's my take on things (numbers and time scales variable):
AAA games drop in price by 25 - 30% within around 3 months of release. Within 6 months you can pick them up discounted by 50 - 75% (heck 85% discounts on occasions). Wait a year or so and you will get the "complete/remastered/enhanced/go faster stripes" pack with the worst bugs fixed and all the expansion packs bundled in for a few quid (dollars/euro/...) in a sale.
Middle market games (and indi/casual games) tend not to drop in price so quickly. I suspect their cash flow is slow and steady as opposed to fast and furious so it wouoldn't make sense to drop your prices too early. But the same principles apply - just over a longer term. However, they start off a bit lower anyway so it balances out.
I can see one area where this principle wont apply - multi-player games. They have you by the short and curlies - if you don't get in early everyone will be ahead of you and leave it too late and the player base has dropped out. But then I don't play multi-player games so that doesn't affect me.
So, I tend to apply a little patience and get more games for my cash.
But then if everyone did this the market would adapt - so, shh, don't tell anyone else.
P.S. A little off topic but someone mentioned netbooks above. I too recently got a netbook (for my wife - honest) and have rediscovered old games - on the small screen the old graphics end up looking good again. Casual games also tend to work well - and Torchlight also has a good netbook mode.
Personally, I know I won't drop $100 on a game anymore, because there's always the chance of it being a disappointment. I may get $100 value from a game, but the odds of a $50 game providing that aren't always that high. Even games I thought would be a slam dunk can and have turned out disapponting.
Standard release+ XP model is the safest model for me. I usually know from the original whether the XP's will be worth the money, and if they are, the game usually was worth $100 in the end, or will have. While XP's rarely provide huge value, they rarely fail to produce their value.
If someone could update all the TSR goldbox games and the infinity engine games to some nice graphics with updated mod content that would be pleasant. It's not super necessary. I still play them but maybe you would catch a couple of the kiddies and give some new life to the disappearing intelligent game market.
I love Paradox games and I love Gal Civ, and I want to love Elemental. I don't RTS but Sins is supposed to be pretty great.
I don't think the middle is dead but even Bioware has started reaching for sales figures. Maybe that's EA's influence, I don't know.
I'll agree, Frogboy. I think one major obstacle is something you touched on in your post: there's not a lot of infrastructure for these B-list titles despite the fact that they're often strong consistent sellers, if not necessarily multi-million sellers. This is tools, this is retailers, this is other things, but I think this is also developers. One would be hard pressed to say that most developers aren't at least tempted or dream of making a AAA title of the highest quality at some point. Developers are naturally creative people so it's simply very easy to dream big.
Case in point: I bought Crusader Kings Complete earlier today on Impulse, like 8 years after it was released. And I don't know what the hell is going on in that game quite yet, but I think that I like it. Now if I could only bind the pause function to the space bar...
Good call on Lionheart. The game didn't live up to its enormous potential but the setting was extremely cool and as you said, the premise was excellent. It'd be nice if Stardock could acquire the rights to that game. ^^
Any Baldur's Gate type game would do well I think if they were brought out nowadays. I won't Minsc my words. I loved those games.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ozv1RcQJAHA
EDIT: Lol. I knew I recognized the character Featherstone's voice from the movie Gnomeo and Juliet. Jim Cummings (who did Minsc's voice) rules.
A part of me wonders how much of it is just marketing. If most AA games got the marketing push a WoW expansion or Madden 45 got, then I'd imagine there would be a greater volume of sales, though who knows if the net profits would pay for the marketing. So the digital distribution landscape is great for both the indie and middle market. No shelf space to argue with retailers about, and the various ways that digital stores can showcase games or provide connections to similar games certainly helps the buyer to see something that maybe they wouldn't know about otherwise. That and forums/ word of mouth is how I've gotten connected to a lot of great games.
But as others mentioned, from a purchaser standpoint, its tough sometimes. You can get the big well advertised games from a year ago on sale pretty regularly. Do I spend my 40 bucks on a couple games that were all over tv last year? A new AA game? A handful of indie games? Save up for the next best thing that everyone is salivating over but may be terrible when it arrives? I've tried a bit of it all and still don't know.
I do think that the middle market tends to have the most consistently interesting games. Indies might have a single great idea they run with, but they tend to be too short or repetitive to have lasting replay. I love em, just don't keep going back year after year . .and there's almost never a mod for an indie. The AAA that lives up to its hype is great, though great production values have the downside to those of us that still love modding . . .full voiced characters in RPG's and high end gfx has really hurt the independent modder. More often I wonder where the money went, and since the AAA is locked in the world of "not too complex" and "not over 40 hours . .in fact 10 hours is better than 60" it does rankle a bit. Middle market seems to be more willing to try something different, and enough money behind it to flesh it out. Do something that breaks the mold a bit, something long or complex or PC only. The modding community is generally much better supported as well, and to me mods are huge. A great way to help a game continue to have value after years, or make an okay game great.
It also feels like a cycle. I remember when space flight sims were huge, and had the early AAA hallmarks of in game movies with popular Hollywood actors and the like. They were marketed and hyped and were big buisness, then bam, the market died. The whole flight sim genre is largely dead from a AAA standpoint. But the middle market keeps it alive. The wheel slowly comes around. The traditional complex RPG was kept alive in middle markets, and Bioware brought it back to AAA with DAO. Did great, huge sales, game of the year. DA2 tried to become a bit more AAA popular minded, and there seems to be discontent. In that, there may be a hint. I think that what a lot of people *want* is a AA style game from a design and gameplay standpoint. .just with the AAA potential for the latest greatest graphics, voicing, or polish. Not that you're guaranteed to get that anywhere.
One thing I thought about is that before Steam & Impulse I never THOUGHT of the term "Middle Market". It has always been "check the store/gaming magazine" (before the year 2000 when I dealt with consoles) and even after I gotted my first PC I checked the big gamesites and my PCGamer magazine.
So what I see is that the Middle Market has always been there. Just check one of the game magazines that review games. Those crapgames that get 1-5/10 that no serious gamer wants to buy could not have costed much to create.
I'm saying this because I gotted the impression that indie games like Paradox wargames were considered (atleast in this thread) Middle Market when they are just one side in all this.
Well, as for me, AAA-games killing gaming industry. At least, PC-industry. It's because they become more and more expensive, so it need more and more auditory to be successful, and it is, in turn, force it to be addressed to max. broad amount of people. And it is made games too easy and simple for me. Well, graphic become more and more impressive, complex and unrestricted, but gameplay behind it become easier and easier accordingly. I was forced to reload each second fight in the beginning of Baldur's Gate 2, but Mass Effect 2 mostly was beaten from 1st try on "Normal". It is not good for me.
So I presume, middle market is necessity for such gamers as me. And I am very pleased that digital distribution allows it to work.
Your AAA game example is good and makes sense. But you say one thing that's wrong.
If a game is too easy and you're NOT playing on the hardest difficulty, then you increase the difficulty.
The Future of the Middle Market http://i.imgur.com/FyFcJ.jpg
Middle Market games are primarily what I buy. I don't buy AAA titles any more. Oblivion was the last one. AAA titles are marketed on consoles as well as PCs. This means the game has to be dumbed down for the console audience for fear of it not selling as well. Middle market games also tend to bring more than just graphics to the table. I don't care about stupendous graphics. My primary concern is if the game is fun and it has replay-ability. Graphics are a bonus. Middle market also tend to be the innovators of the industry with the AAA companies stealing ideas from the middle market games if they become popular enough.
One thing I miss more than anything are first person party based fantasy games like Might and Magic and Wizardy. You'll never see those again from AAA companies. Maybe some middle market company will get bold and try to make one again.
Funny enough there is a lot of quality to be found in the middle market, sure often it's geared towards niches but at least it's often more in depth. Both middle and upper market suffer from the same syndrom though, copy-catting. Example Battlefield:Bad Company was a real good game because it gave an arcadish feel, however the success of Call of Duty meant that BF:BC2 was forced to be a Call of Duty clone loosing the arcadish feel and with that loosing the fun that BF:BC gave. Middle market does it too but often based on remaking a game that was succesfull in the past and still had/has a passionate fanbase. True innovation in the sense of introducing a completely new game genre is basicly not done in both upper and middle market.
Hmm anyway I kinda lost my train of thought since work interfered.
Middle market!
Jon
Is that you Jon?
I buy games from any end of the spectrum if they're good.
My current Atom Zombie Smasher fetish being a good example
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
