I disagree. The PC gaming market is about $76.67B. That's ~$4M for each of the 18,626 games, most of which are asset flip crap. Many of the remainder are by indie devs (generally <30 people). The article mentions about ~10% of those games receive 500 or more Steam reviews, so we're probably looking at $40M on average person game w/ 500+ reviews (i.e. probably not asset flip crap).

There are only about 20-30 AAA games released every year. The indie game market size is about $5B, and that's across platforms. Even if that was only for PC games, that's still 85% going to AAA studios, as in those 20-30 games that get media attention.

We don't have too many games, we have a problem where too few people buy indie games. The average successful indie studio isn't making $40M per game, it's likely much less than that.

Why does anyone read Bloomberg? That shit is the equivalent of the suit wearing shitty little twerp on a college campus c. 2017 being a conservative edge lord. Change my mind.

This isn't a problem. For the first time in a very long time, I actually have a queue of games I want to play and din't just mindlessly scroll steam store or wait for big releases. In fact, I no longer follow game releases, there is something at any given time I can find to play

There have been 'too many games to play all the ones that seem interesting to me' since the late 90s, at least.

There has always been absurd levels of competiton in video game releases.

What this person is describing has been the broad state of the overall industry as long as I have been alive.

It is not a problem.

It is totally fine that decent games are moderately popular and quite good games are quite popular and occassionally something seemingly simple is actually novel in a fun way, or hits just the right combo of gameplay / art style / narrative elements at the right time and is a breakout hit.

It is totally fine that giant evil megapublishers who exploit their employees and then slave drive and mismanage them into producing shiny, but buggy and lackluster garbage... are not making back their marketing budgets.

It is in fact very very good that they are failing.

The only thing different now is that video gaming is massively mainstream nowadays and normies struggle with choice paralysis more publically these days.

A real dedicated nerd is capable of seeing through marketing and doing their own research, thats... kinda the whole thing that makes one into a nerd, a seemingly odd obsession and inordinate amount of time spent trying to understand their hobby.

If you are just a consumer who is overwhelmed by choice and marketing, pff i dunno, get gud scrub, capitalism be doin what it do, figure it out, develop your own actual personality and sense of taste and discernment, or keep crying I guess?

Video game development democratizing via lower barrier to entry is a great thing.

Players are more likely to find and get something they want for a reasonable price, megacorps are more and more likely to spend way too much money on things they don't understand anywhere near as well as they think they do.

Whats not to love?

If their form of video gaming as a business model is unsustainable, well that sucks for them I guess?

And you know, if wouldn't hurt my ability to play more games if more of them were shorter.

From the article:

In 2024, a staggering 18,626 games were released on Steam, according to SteamDB, a website that tracks data on the popular PC platform. That’s an increase of around 93% from 2020, when 9,656 games were released.

By my count, if you don't sleep or eat and only play videogames you need every game to be about 30 minutes long on average.

I mean, it wouldn't hurt, but I'm gonna say it's not enough.

In all seriousness, I'm more concerned by the competition from social media and on demand video. I'm typing this, which isn't that interesting of an activity. Idling online is a huge time sink, and it's getting bigger.

EVE ONLINE UNTIL I DIE

It's not a problem for me just because of the cost. I want to play Expedition 33 but I'm not sure I want to pay $70 to do so.

I'm happy just playing my old ROM collections or booting up Cyberpunk or whatever. but now I just can't justify dropping $70+ on a game anymore.

sigh, I'll probably just end up going back to EVE Online.

Reviewers rave about a game, I pick it up and play it, and they're raving about a new one before I've finished that last one.

That's why i only wishlist games that i'm interested in. by the time i get around to them, there's usually a sale and/or price drop. Some games have been on my wishlist for years, while I'm working through my backlog, waiting for their price to drop even further.

Elden Ring has been praised by everyone.

It's one thing if a reviewer says it's good. His livelyhood relies on the video game industry thriveing. If you stop buying this game, the studio won't make the next game. If the studio won't make the next game, the reviewer can't review the next game. If the reviewer can't review the next game, then where does their paycheck come from?

So I'm not saying they knowingly artificially raise scores and sell games. I'm just saying maybe a 7 gets reviewed as an 8 just so the reviewer won't feel awkward when meeting with industry folk at the next industry get together.

But when gamers collectively band together, and say itxs 10/10, and game of the year, I feel rest assured that Elden Ring is as good as people say.

I have not bought Elden Ring. I have not played Elden Ring. In all honesty, I probably won't. Why?

BECAUSE YOU DON'T NEED TO PLAY EVERY SINGLE GAME JUST BECAUSE IT'S AMAZING!!! YOU CAN JUST NOOOOOT PLAY IT!

Don't blame too many games. Don't blame reviewers. Don't blame anything. This is only a problem if you let it control your life. Variety is good for everybody. Some games you can just let others enjoy. I'm glad Elden Ring is so great. I don't feel bad I missed it. I'm happy for you if you loved it.

Isn't that so much healthier of an attitude to have?

It’s the same with tv. I am very picky with my time. So i play very few games or watch very few shows.

This becomes even worse when you also want to play old gems that missed because you weren't even born, or because you had kid taste in your early gaming days, but there are worse things to complain at.

My first two video games that I had were Gran Turismo and Dragon Ball Z Ultimate Battle 22, so at my 6 years old or so I already had negative time of hundreds of nice jRPG gems LMAO.

I've been playing The Binding of Isaac for decades. I've bought it probably 5 times on different systems, for friends, etc, bought the expansions as well. I've probably still spent less on that game than what a current AAA title costs, and I still have new content to play.

The problem with the industry is they are all trying to get the "next big thing" and they stick to the same formula, there's no innovation from the big studios anymore. That's also why I play way more Indie games, I think the last major title I bought was Tears of the Kingdom, and that was probably the last Nintendo title I'll purchase.

Silksong & Hades 2 will probably be enough to last me the rest of the year. Having 1000 games to pick from doesn't bother me because I don't need to play them all.

The problem is the immature critique and not the quantity.

Hmm… newest game in my library is Under Night In-Birth II Sys:Celes from last year, which is a re-release anyway.

I bought 13 old-ish (pre-2022) games this year for less than $100. I have no reason to spend %60-80 of that on 1 game I probably won't even like, and that's if it clears the seemingly impossible "playable" hurdle.

Let me count upcoming games I look forward to playing/am curious about:

1. Ninja Gaiden 4 (Happy to wait for a deep sale)
2. Onimusha (Happy to wait for a deep sale and may even refund if I don't enjoy it)
3. Okami 2 (Happy to wait for a deep sale)
4. Marvel: Tokon (Will definitely wait for a deep sale—$10 base game)

That's it.

I definitely went to see more new movies at the cinema this year than I played new games. IDK where the industry is headed and I feel for all the underpaid, overworked developers at risk, but there isn't much I can do if publishers collectively decided to abandon my favorite genres.

How is having more options a problem?

I'm playing games that came out 10 hears ago, and I have a backlog of many years and I couldn't be happier with it.

It's better than no having anything to play.

At a industry level we all know that gamedev is not a great career. Specially if you are indie the most common profit is 0. But it's ok. You can do it just for the love of it as I do. I spent time making games just because I love it. No everything have to turn a profit.

This is also a lot of covid era games/funding come to fruition imo

The answer is slow gaming. If it is not still known as a good game 5-10 years after release, it is not worth buying.

Also helps avoid games which vanish like a fart after they get your money.