![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Happy 20, November, flist! If you're familiar with the Beatmania and/or Dance Dance Revolution series, consider celebrating this auspicious day by playing a song or two from said games. :)
Yesterday someone at![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
girlgamers made an interesting post about the future of micro-downloads; among other things, the TC compares the saturation of gaming apps by indie developers to the oversaturation of the video game industry in the early 80s that led to the infamous industry crash in 1983.
It seems like an odd comparison to make. It's true that certain platforms like the iOS/Android app markets and Facebook are flooded with copycat games using similar payment models (free to play with optional paid content), but other factors that led to the sudden decline in the 1980s video game market aren't present in the current app market. Notably, the costs associated with physically manufacturing cartridges and dealing with retailers, are basically non-existent in web apps--and it was oversaturation paired with enormous manufacturing costs and a lack of retail space that killed Atari and its competitors in 1983. While web app developers have to worry about development costs and recouping them, they don't have to worry about manufacturing a cartridge or convincing retailers to stock their game over a competitor's. The space in the app store is endless, and a developer only has to pay once to stick a game there.
The other major difference would be the way third-party development has changed. Third-party development didn't really *exist* until 1979, and Atari and the other console companies were completely unprepared for the effect they would have and incapable of controlling third-party output. By contrast Apple and Google designed their app stores with the express purpose of profiting from third-party software, and have complete control as to what they allow in their marketplace. Moreover, it's the third-party companies that bear the costs of development and are the only ones at risk if they fail--Apple/Google profit even if the companies making apps bomb. The absolute worst-case scenario for app gaming would see most of the small developers producing mediocre/copycat games disappear after making one or two games, and not have much of an effect on the app industry (can we call it that?) as a whole.
I think the only similarity between the early 1980s game market and the current app markets would be the overvaluation of game company profitability, but that's questionable. Certainly the 1980s market pre-crash was grossly overestimated, but it's much harder to determine how financially viable the biggest app developers are. I tend to think most social media and gaming companies are overvalued, but obviously not everyone agrees, and it will take awhile to see how things shake out.
So uh, I guess this means...crappy iOS/Android/Facebook games that are just knockoffs of more popular games are here to stay? OH WELL. :c
Yesterday someone at
girlgamers made an interesting post about the future of micro-downloads; among other things, the TC compares the saturation of gaming apps by indie developers to the oversaturation of the video game industry in the early 80s that led to the infamous industry crash in 1983.It seems like an odd comparison to make. It's true that certain platforms like the iOS/Android app markets and Facebook are flooded with copycat games using similar payment models (free to play with optional paid content), but other factors that led to the sudden decline in the 1980s video game market aren't present in the current app market. Notably, the costs associated with physically manufacturing cartridges and dealing with retailers, are basically non-existent in web apps--and it was oversaturation paired with enormous manufacturing costs and a lack of retail space that killed Atari and its competitors in 1983. While web app developers have to worry about development costs and recouping them, they don't have to worry about manufacturing a cartridge or convincing retailers to stock their game over a competitor's. The space in the app store is endless, and a developer only has to pay once to stick a game there.
The other major difference would be the way third-party development has changed. Third-party development didn't really *exist* until 1979, and Atari and the other console companies were completely unprepared for the effect they would have and incapable of controlling third-party output. By contrast Apple and Google designed their app stores with the express purpose of profiting from third-party software, and have complete control as to what they allow in their marketplace. Moreover, it's the third-party companies that bear the costs of development and are the only ones at risk if they fail--Apple/Google profit even if the companies making apps bomb. The absolute worst-case scenario for app gaming would see most of the small developers producing mediocre/copycat games disappear after making one or two games, and not have much of an effect on the app industry (can we call it that?) as a whole.
I think the only similarity between the early 1980s game market and the current app markets would be the overvaluation of game company profitability, but that's questionable. Certainly the 1980s market pre-crash was grossly overestimated, but it's much harder to determine how financially viable the biggest app developers are. I tend to think most social media and gaming companies are overvalued, but obviously not everyone agrees, and it will take awhile to see how things shake out.
So uh, I guess this means...crappy iOS/Android/Facebook games that are just knockoffs of more popular games are here to stay? OH WELL. :c
