Exactly. A great group of people supported well will make endless amounts of good stuff for as long as they wish. A great investment game built by a supported studio will only make that one game.
Oh, absolutely. Players are far more loyal to a company that simply listens to what they want and then tries to give it to them, than a company that's blatantly nickel-and-diming them at every turn while systematically making their games _less_ fun in order to pressure players to spend on "boosters" and "enhancements". I personally barely touch the big company titles any more, indie games are generally more fun, way more interesting and ambitious, and cheaper to boot. You roll the dice, sometimes you get a depressing mess, and a lot of other times? A shining gem of a game. Works for me!
@Soapy-chan Yeah, I hate how games like Call of Duty shamelessly promote solving disputes with gun violence. Even making deals with the big gun manufacturers to help market them by telling their players, many of whom are young, that guns are 'cool.'
@@JadedRabbit559 call of duty famously can't even name their guns by their real names because they can't form agreements with firearm manufacturers, but apparently they're some how in cahoots for propaganda purposes? 😂
@@fawazgerhard2742 it's also a naive take. As a developer you NEED to care about the money aspect if you plan on sticking around. Doing market research and surveys/play testing and meetings is all a part of the business. A lot of devs crash and burn because they think all they need is the ability to code.
@@crushycrawfishy1765 True I forgot that it was a naive thinking as well. Money is needed not just to live but also to sustain the development of games as you need other developers collaborations and game assets that usually need to be bought, if multiplayer, you would need moeny to hire server hosters or buy computers to host the servers yourselves.
With corporations basically being legally obligated to maximize profits for shareholders, predatory monetization is running rampant and destroying games.
As the person above, the person above me said, they're are only legally(Not actually how that works, but I'm going to use your own words here) obligated to make the shareholders money, when they are publicly traded. Even then, it's up to the company to sit the shareholders down, and explain to them that you make more money with good, fun games, that gamers actually want, than with bad, boring slop that you regurgitate every year.
@@kiritotheabridgedgod4178 The problem is that boring regurgitated slop DOES make money. Make a good core game ONCE and the fanbase will stick with it and buy any regurgitated slop for years after in the hopes it'll match the original. It doesn't sell as much as the original, but it doesn't need to since it cost nearly nothing to make a copy with some random slop thrown in, so any sale is profit right off the bat. Then the investors sell their shares and abandon the company after a couple of years when the companys reputation has gone to crap and they made their profit. It's bad for the company but good for the investors and as long as the investors have a say, that's how it'll keep going.
@@beastatfun technically second but fluent in both, in this case, been a long day and was 5 pints in when I wrote the top one. Premise is still fine, just a bit stroke inducing to read.
It's not an issue with capitalism, it's more of an issue with dumb fanbases. Sure capitalism allows this to happen, but it's ultimately the consumers faults for continually buying into the micro transactions and the same cookie cutter games over and over. If people keep buying, of course companies will continue to rip them off. The issue is that it's become an industry and is no longer a meritocracy. Why create new and inventive games when you could just make the same call of duty game year after year with different skins and make loot off it?
Man, as a game dev, I cant stress how much what you said there resonates with my vision of our industry. I sincerely hope that your discourse can spread more.
But as a guy who always wanted to make the best wrestling game of all time, I can tell you that a dev without the right levels of investment, is just another member of the "Nearly-man Society".
Money and art are two concepts that naturally don't go hand in hand when you force them together its like mixing the entire color pallet, turns brown and gross
Actually mixing entire color palette of primaries makes black. Tho in reality paints have different amount of pigments so brown and dark brown are most likely when just mixing without concideration. Had to have my painter autism moment.
@@littlejack59the idea told by the comment is that when you make art to earn money you cease to make art. Art cannot exist if it is meant to make money. This is, of course, a generalised statement, because there are artists who do it for money but that genuinely love what they're doing and they wish to do the best.
try being a sculpture 2500 years ago and being commissioned by Pericles to construct the Parthenon statues. 😂 Capitalism has been critical to art for ever.
@@garethkalum8297 Paying for a service isn't capitalism mate, basic human trade for service has existed for thousands of years, capitalism has only existed for a small space in human history very recently.
You can invest into games, as long you come in with a benefactor mindset instead of a profit mindset. Benefactors like what you do and financially support you . Profit mindset always destroys inevitably by cutting corners, setting schedules, setting profit targets. Benefactor = long term Profit = short term.
Okay...but benefactors are often seeking something like political influence and messaging. Games made for political influence are generally way worse than games made for profit. What do you think a benefactor is, somebody who just gives you stuff for nothing?
@@rareosts5752 Possible but not always the case. Case in point Denzel Washington was a benefactor to Chadwick boseman. Paid for his schooling. Nobody knew until Chadwick boseman mentioned it. That's the benefactor type I'm referring to. The hands off, let the artist work type.
@@rareosts5752then they're not really a benefactor, they're basically a lobbyist or special interest group A benefactor just likes what you're doing and is essentially your material cheerleader Ulterior motives not aligned with the one invested in aren't benevolence
I honestly miss unlocking stuff. I feel like that went away with microtransactions. The terror I felt when I saw someone with full hayabusa+katana on the enemy team when I was younger was unmatched. Maybe, it's nostalgia, but damn.
i completely disagree that games are *supposed* to be a doversion/escape from life. they *can* be that, but if you're constantly escaping, that's not good. for me, vidoe games are a full PART of my life. I've learned a lot from them, gained friends and experiences, and they just made life more pleasent overall
That is totally fair, would not describe your opinion (at least what I understand from the comment) as totally disagreeing. Also, I feel like Thors take was pretty good. At least for me, video games are definitely an escape.
@@Alicornriderm i didn't say his opinion/take was "bad", i said i disagreed with it. and if video games are an escape for you, then i'm glad you at least have that outlet, but i still don't think that this is what games *should* be
Nailed it Thor! If an art form is viewed primarily as a money extractor, the end product will not connect with audiences. Just make the game you want to play.
The idea that its a financial "investment" is based on the idea of moral relatively. Its why alot of shows are failing due to bad writing, because no one understands basic morality. Its also why deadpool vs wolverine (being a mediocre comic flick full of member berries) did so well. They understood good vs evil. See tolkien and his series (and the financial flop of rings of power) vs dune. Dune is absolutely a moral grey....but it understands how evil works, and how "unknown" works
Former Game-Dev here. The amount of times I had to actively have this conversation with other devs was astounding. Games are escapism. For fun. If it's not fun, we shouldn't be building it. Some studios have completely lost the plot.
Larian is one of the only major devs that I think understand this. The amount of effort and passion they put into their games is exactly why they got the chance to create Baldurs Gate 3 and go on to win a very well deserved GOTY. Indie devs still have that passion but AAA devs just see dollar signs.
Thor I have been inspired by you multiple times and I just wanted to say that it’s partially thanks to you that I will be enrolling into game development university. I personally thrive to make games that have an impactful or meaningful purpose for a person who plays my game. You have inspired me so much!
The issue is artists and programmers need to eat and have shelter. They need wages. Wages means there is costs involved. You need to recoup those costs some how. The reason AAA is the way it is, is because it has a budget of 500 million (mostly wages) and the $60 at launch, covers maybe 200 million of that. So of course they need microtransactions, dlc, and expansions to cover the remainder. And as many people will judge a game by how it looks, rather than how it plays, if you skimp on the art budget, people may not play the game. Its why so many indies go bankrupt after the first title, as its not pretty enough.
Yup, the best and most worth indie games are made by hobbyists (also counting in devs that work contracts to make the money to finish a vision for a game they have (Project Zomboid, 7D2D)), exceptionally talented folks that at this point even get invited to make sequels/remakes of some games, small companies barely keeping in the green with alright quality and enough releases. Also a lot that go bankrupt are actually good companies that make exceptional titles, they're often just companies that don't exactly get known previously (got a few games around that I only found after the company went bankrupt, no clue as to why they weren't known, feels like no one had time to cover games in a genre that got too little releases and which do everything right somehow).
Im not a game developer or even know about coding or anything related. I dont even watch livestreams or twich. But all of his shorts, advice, insights are so good. It also makes me happy to see good role models out there in the world.
This was how it was supposed to be forever. Too many people who only saw the money destroyed the intended purpose. That’s why indie games are GOATED. The adventures I’ve went on through them always brings me back to before the corporate takeover. I hope to achieve even the smallest modicum of that experience through my games in the future for others. Anything else is extra.
i love the absolute look of horror as he reads the message like "this is a topic that is very important to me, i need to inform this guy and the world immediately how that shit works"
Am I the only one who thinks Thor misunderstood the question? Seems like he can finally afford to buy games and spend time playing them, and doesn't know where to begin.
Could be both, but it also sounded more like a "I finally got money for myself after selling my business, what games do you recommend" - but the "investment" part makes me wonder as it makes it sound less like "what games should I buy" and more like "what stocks should I buy"
I dunno, that TTS' "What do I do?" at the end seems to suggest the person was asking how to invest into making games rather than playing them. A normal person would ask "Which ones do you recommend?" Unless they're actually asking about how to even start playing games (like which console, what build of PC etc) which honestly has too many factors to consider, some that the person has to come up with answers on their own (like how much are you willing to spend, which studios's games have you tried before and liked).
@@Velp I read further through the comments yesterday and someone mentioned that the full conversation goes into investment for profit on stock trading, so overall this generally is something that's not precisely great for a short as it leaves out a lot of stuff apparently (if true).
Not related to the vid but started my game dev journey yesterday, I'm so excited, I'm learning unreal engine, watching tutorials on TH-cam, it's so fascinating.
Solid advice. This can be applied to just about every product/service and capitalism more broadly. People will always be incentivized to increase capital at the cost of everything real and human under such a system… not saying there aren’t outliers-but the general rule is quite evident.
Will Wright once wisely said, "I don't make games for other people to play, I make games ''I'' want to play, I'm just lucky alot of other people like to play what I make too."
This exact same philosophy applies to housing policy. Housing as an investment, who does that serve? What incentives does that give those who own/seek them? Housing as human habitat and dwelling, who does that serve? What incentives does that give society as a whole? That right there is the housing trap. There are so many other aspects of life this exact philosophy applies. ❤
The whole point of a game like a board or card game is for the player to be able to PLAY the gameand have FUN. Just like with cars, if the drive is terrible, nobody wants to buy the car. If the gameplay is terrible, nobody wants to play it, no matter how much money you throw at it. If you wanna make games, always keep the player's feelings and enjoyment at the center of it.
In most industries, investing into something with money will never result in a quality product. Invest your passion into what personally drives you as a human, and the revenue will follow by itself.
I remember when games felt like they had heart and soul. They were looked at as toys and nothing more, but there was enough money to allow devs to create interesting and new ideas. Then it became big time and it was all about the investors. Mid 00s were nothing but grey shooters and zombie games because they sold the best.
An alternative would be just to view it more as philanthropy. Donating 5k-10k can be life changing for some indie devs, and if it helps them make the games you love better than that's just an awesome side effect.
Invest in the developers as a patronage, supporting them to produce a work of art. if its absolutely amazing then it could be extremely profitable, but thats just a bonus.
Video games is technically a risky investment. AAA gaming is about removing all the risk but ends up making crappy games. If you're doing games right either you'll make a game people will love or you fail to do so. Microsoft and Steam have made it so much easier for Indie developers to release products and make money.
That's also a good way to look at playing games. Instead of looking at it "is it worth 40$ for how many hours I will play it" just evaluate if the gameplay and story are enjoyable enough for you.
I’m not personally interested in game development but I do work in software dev. And the way I find it is, just make something that you enjoy or that you find useful. If you try to make something based on what you think others will like, then you’ll struggle to find the motivation and it makes it more painful if it doesn’t work out
This sounds like the main reason Indie games have been absolutely killing it these past few years and why media coverage on them seems to be rather huge depending on the game.
This is the same thing that happened to the automotive enthusiasts market media. Look at top gear, car throttle, donut,and Hoonigan as big names. Things created by people enjoying a passion. Then investors came in and ruined them. Now we have the birth of other enthusiasts but investment changed the focus from “enjoying cars” to “making money” and the market responded by walking away from those production companies.
The irony is someone in the industry recently went private after accusing anybody who cares about the gameplay first as being racist/sexist/every-ist imaginable if they are even slightly critical of consultants whose sole purpose is to suck resources and attention away from games. In almost every other field, we recognize that consultants are mostly a scam. Yet people will defend it in games, where the consultants have literally said in plain terms they want to see the industry burn, and encourage people to terrorize their boss with the threat of social backlash if you don't hire them. I wish there was more representation for people of my own background, that'd be great. But that comes second to the experience and gameplay. There are games that do it well, because they focused on gameplay first. Things like DEI are extra nice-to-haves, not the only selling point meant to make heartless corporations look like they care about us.
To build on this, if you have money and you dont actually want to directly make games, thats okay. Take the skills you learned from running your own business and enable people to make their games. Find people with the skills and desire and say "hey, if you can put together a design document and tell me what you would need to make your game come to life, I'm willing to fund this amount of money for this amount of time in exchange for this amount of return once you finish it." because some people do have good ideas but cant afford the assets they want or cant afford to commission the art or music they want. Or they dont have the skills to lead a team and communicate. There are things you can bring to help a game come to life they arent the creative aspects we would typically associate with game design. But do put the "Make a great experience" part first and let the money just be guard rails for "What needs to happen for this to keep everyone involved and this project sustainable?" If the goal is to make money and not the passion to create a cool experience, dont get involved with games. There's frankly just better ways to make money and more worthwhile ways to invest if profit is the goal.
A big part of the problem is that when games starting making a lot of money, a bunch of CEO’s from other industry’s jumped into gaming because they saw the profit to be made. The result being that the people at the top knowing next to nothing about games, while wanting to maximise profits.
You can extend that truth to nearly everything. Once Boeing, Intel, and others stopped being manufactures of high-end, world-class products, and were relegated to nothing more than investments, their product quality suffered. Food quality in the US has also has been substantially worsened because profit focused demands.
I honestly understood that question as, "I used to not be able to afford video games, but now I can. What games would you recommend?" I did not expect for a moment for this to be about business.
As a game designer, I both agree and disagree. I want to make something awesome which players will remember fondly in years to come. I also want the game to make a profit so people can remain employed and there is money to make the next game. This does mean considering whether the thing I design is able to be expanded on in the future for DLCs which realistically cant always be free. From my experience, aim to make the best experience for the player and they will want to give you the money
That is the ONE good thing about the current times: people start to catch on to that - AAA companies are bleeding like crazy at the moment and rightfully so. Corporate greed killed the gaming industry. I feel sad for the workforce in those companies - while corporate will still syphon bonusses while workforce is being laid off...
All while there's the irony that those companies were formed to specifically fight that. Go back a few decades and Activision suddenly is the first indie company formed to fight bad pay and poor + restrictive working conditions. It got nothing to do with "current times", it's how it'll always be if people bring a company into a position of power, people just never learn it.
This reminds me a lot of how import cars started to ravage domestic cars in the US. As soon as profiteers and investors came up with the idea of building something that has to be replaced often as a ways to make more money, they didn't stop to consider that the customer base might turn to buying something designed to last, instead. Sure, you only sell the product once, but when everyone is buying it, you only have to sell it once.
Funny thing is, when the games are actually fun to play, the money will flow. Not the bloated AAA garbo that is released in recent years. Look what games left a positive mark in gaming history in the last 5 years. And i don´t mean GOTY i mean actual good response throughout the gaming world. This is what a gamestudio should strive for. Everything else will come with time then.
I will say, games aren't just to be fun. They are to make you feel something in a way that no other medium can, and do it in a safe and controlled way. Games will hurt you. Games will traumatize you. Games will make you sad, angry, happy, laugh, cry, frown, smile, all of it. And that's what we're here for. The fun is nice to have, it is. But it shouldn't get in the way of delivering experience and emotion.
Thats just the problem with everything nowadays, everything is some form of investment strategies. Cards, books, movies, toys, games, food, housing, etc.
lol, you must be a teenager, this was always the case. The modern world didn't make people greedier. Greedy people have always been around with more ways to do it. I grew up in the 90's and people scoured the world for beanie babies, cabbage patch kids and first edition comics like they did NFTs
@@crushycrawfishy1765 Also a 90s kid, and ya it's always been this way, but something about the last maybe at least decade or so to me makes it seem that it's gotten more prevalent. Funny enough sports cards can be on that list you mentioned too.
I wholeheartedly agree, though could an argument not be made to rather than starting a studio, invest in a small studio you believe in to allow growth? As long as it's seen as a long-term investment and not something to be returned in a single game, that too should allow healthy growth and quality products.
In addition to escapism, which can be necessary, especially in today's world but can also be detriment, I believe games are a learning tool. Play is seen so often as recreation but is used by animals as a way to learn and grow. I think we are wired to enjoy play because it's evolutionarily beneficial but because we enjoy it it is seen as not practically beneficial. Only suffering is seen as beneficial but with the correctly designed game we can grow and enjoy ourselves while we do it.
Don't treat games like an investment strategy, treat them like an art and if you fund an artist to do a retreat and make stuff, you wouldn't expect them to produce you an art piece that is guaranteed to make you a return on your investment. You're doing it so they can get better at their art and show how they've improved in the time that you gave them to work on their pieces. Now if you do that, and give a good game dev their proper time, you will probably make your money back, but you shouldn't expect it. If it happens, it's a bonus. if it doesn't you still got a good game out of the situation.
This is the entire problem of investors wanting short term profits, which leads to games being rushed and crappily made. If you want to invest in games, it kind a needs to be long term investments. Take your time, accept that initially, you won't turn a profit, make good games and you have a passionate fanbase that will eat out of the palm of your hand.
I fully agree on a moral and personal level; but ultimately we gotta see reality for what it is. These soulless corporations that make cashgrab pieces of shit are incredibly successful, and while we've all been praying on their downfall for ages, it still hasn't happened and doesn't look to be happening any time soon. One falls, another rises to take its place. You may be selling your soul, but you're definitely getting a return on that investment. Just like sweatshops; you're bad person if you own one, but you are going to outcompete those that don't own them.
With investment comes the expectation of profit. So board members pressure CEOs who pressure VPs who pressure mid level managers who pressure the people actually making the product.
I do thing it is a bit muddies, because the term "invest" can be used in two different ways: as in "invest in Apple" where you are talking about getting a return on that investment; and "invest in the local Amateur Shakespeare Troupe" where you are basically going "I like what you do, I'd like to support what you are doing". And asking "I have some extra money that I'd like to go towards making more, better, games, how best should I go about doing that?" is a valid question.
That's a very difficult question to answer though. But I guess the core part of Thor's response still applies: Invest in something you think is fun, because if the developers are making something fun, they are making good games that people would like to play.
the thing is, in gaming this the way, you make the better product that is less shitty and you WILL get better results than those who dont, and rn those who don't are the triple a studios, the one we think are on top are exactly the thing thatbis wrong with gaming rn so everything thro is is saying is 100% true u focus on making good games and you will have the success and people will WANT TO GIVE YOU MONEY
Because if AAA companies thinking of it as an investment and a way to earn money, most of them suck now. It is rare for me to find an indie or small company game that does suck. Most indie and small companies want to make their games good and fun and that is more worthwhile to me than a super hyped game that sucks once you start playing it
This is 100% why I stepped away from current video games platforms and industry. The only system worth getting is Nintendo cause they actually care about the games they make and really embrace the indie game scene. When Sony and Xbox were buying out productions companies marked the end of me giving a shit. People lost their jobs because they were the victims of an unobtainable investment meeting goals. You can't keep making market gains, and shoving a turd shape object in a consumer shape hole. Play indie if you want true gaming innovation and actually true/ good storytelling.
Invest in the people making the games and the ideas behind it(along with good/clever marketing), not just the straight up games. That’s the key. It’s like Ratatouille; not everyone can make games, but it can come from anywhere, and anyone can help that process in some way.
Investment companies stink because their standards for games are so over the moon that any moderately successful title is considered a flop and has future plans cancelled on a whim. You can think of numerous examples.
Don't invest in a product. Invest in the people, skills, and knowledge necessary to produce good games.
Invest in cool ideas for games, game mechanics, story.
Sounds like the books I'm reading. XD
Create a world where the outcome is the priority, not the profits gifted along the way.
Exactly. A great group of people supported well will make endless amounts of good stuff for as long as they wish. A great investment game built by a supported studio will only make that one game.
This, exactly
The irony is?
If the game industry kept making good games instead of turning it into a money scheme, they'd be making money hand over fist.
Oh, absolutely. Players are far more loyal to a company that simply listens to what they want and then tries to give it to them, than a company that's blatantly nickel-and-diming them at every turn while systematically making their games _less_ fun in order to pressure players to spend on "boosters" and "enhancements". I personally barely touch the big company titles any more, indie games are generally more fun, way more interesting and ambitious, and cheaper to boot. You roll the dice, sometimes you get a depressing mess, and a lot of other times? A shining gem of a game. Works for me!
also if they wouldnt use it as a propaganda tool
@Soapy-chan Yeah, I hate how games like Call of Duty shamelessly promote solving disputes with gun violence. Even making deals with the big gun manufacturers to help market them by telling their players, many of whom are young, that guns are 'cool.'
@@JadedRabbit559 huh? what did you smoke
@@JadedRabbit559 call of duty famously can't even name their guns by their real names because they can't form agreements with firearm manufacturers, but apparently they're some how in cahoots for propaganda purposes? 😂
This is why indie games are goated. The devs actually care about the game and not the money most of the time.
Generalizing that all indie devs are this saints is kinda misleading.
@@fawazgerhard2742 it's also a naive take. As a developer you NEED to care about the money aspect if you plan on sticking around. Doing market research and surveys/play testing and meetings is all a part of the business. A lot of devs crash and burn because they think all they need is the ability to code.
@@crushycrawfishy1765 True I forgot that it was a naive thinking as well. Money is needed not just to live but also to sustain the development of games as you need other developers collaborations and game assets that usually need to be bought, if multiplayer, you would need moeny to hire server hosters or buy computers to host the servers yourselves.
@@fawazgerhard2742 when I saw that the comment had no buffer words I was expecting this type of reply to show up
@@fawazgerhard2742 did you just... Not read the comment? They said "most of the time", not all.
With corporations basically being legally obligated to maximize profits for shareholders, predatory monetization is running rampant and destroying games.
It ruins everything
As the person above, the person above me said, they're are only legally(Not actually how that works, but I'm going to use your own words here) obligated to make the shareholders money, when they are publicly traded.
Even then, it's up to the company to sit the shareholders down, and explain to them that you make more money with good, fun games, that gamers actually want, than with bad, boring slop that you regurgitate every year.
@@kiritotheabridgedgod4178 The problem is that boring regurgitated slop DOES make money. Make a good core game ONCE and the fanbase will stick with it and buy any regurgitated slop for years after in the hopes it'll match the original.
It doesn't sell as much as the original, but it doesn't need to since it cost nearly nothing to make a copy with some random slop thrown in, so any sale is profit right off the bat. Then the investors sell their shares and abandon the company after a couple of years when the companys reputation has gone to crap and they made their profit.
It's bad for the company but good for the investors and as long as the investors have a say, that's how it'll keep going.
@@kiritotheabridgedgod4178is English your first language?
@@beastatfun technically second but fluent in both, in this case, been a long day and was 5 pints in when I wrote the top one. Premise is still fine, just a bit stroke inducing to read.
"Worry about making something you're proud of."
I'm gonna be thinking about this one. Thanks.
Nothing better than when a developer sees you as a player and not a credit card 😂
I'll take being called a registered loser over a company considering me nothing more than a bank account any day.
The look in his eyes when it said "sold" was priceless 😂
Man just described the entire conflict between capitalism and art
This is what I mean when I say that Thor is secretly political in the best way possible
It's not an issue with capitalism, it's more of an issue with dumb fanbases. Sure capitalism allows this to happen, but it's ultimately the consumers faults for continually buying into the micro transactions and the same cookie cutter games over and over. If people keep buying, of course companies will continue to rip them off. The issue is that it's become an industry and is no longer a meritocracy. Why create new and inventive games when you could just make the same call of duty game year after year with different skins and make loot off it?
@@baba-booey3232 not reall. I mean, he is learned and has seen a lot of shit. So all his opinions on complicated topics can sound like that
Thats the problem, if capitalism enters art, in any Genre, art gets ruined usually
@@littlejack59 AUUUUGGGGGHHHHHHHH OH BROTHERRRRR
Man, as a game dev, I cant stress how much what you said there resonates with my vision of our industry. I sincerely hope that your discourse can spread more.
But as a guy who always wanted to make the best wrestling game of all time, I can tell you that a dev without the right levels of investment, is just another member of the "Nearly-man Society".
Money and art are two concepts that naturally don't go hand in hand when you force them together its like mixing the entire color pallet, turns brown and gross
Actually mixing entire color palette of primaries makes black. Tho in reality paints have different amount of pigments so brown and dark brown are most likely when just mixing without concideration. Had to have my painter autism moment.
@@littlejack59the idea told by the comment is that when you make art to earn money you cease to make art.
Art cannot exist if it is meant to make money.
This is, of course, a generalised statement, because there are artists who do it for money but that genuinely love what they're doing and they wish to do the best.
@@0lemus0lent0in other words, painter autism is artism
try being a sculpture 2500 years ago and being commissioned by Pericles to construct the Parthenon statues. 😂
Capitalism has been critical to art for ever.
@@garethkalum8297 Paying for a service isn't capitalism mate, basic human trade for service has existed for thousands of years, capitalism has only existed for a small space in human history very recently.
You can invest into games, as long you come in with a benefactor mindset instead of a profit mindset. Benefactors like what you do and financially support you . Profit mindset always destroys inevitably by cutting corners, setting schedules, setting profit targets.
Benefactor = long term
Profit = short term.
That just sounds being a producer
Okay...but benefactors are often seeking something like political influence and messaging. Games made for political influence are generally way worse than games made for profit. What do you think a benefactor is, somebody who just gives you stuff for nothing?
Not to mention that profit motive can apply to long-term as well, this is such basic stuff you have to be ideologically propagandized to not know
@@rareosts5752 Possible but not always the case. Case in point Denzel Washington was a benefactor to Chadwick boseman. Paid for his schooling. Nobody knew until Chadwick boseman mentioned it. That's the benefactor type I'm referring to. The hands off, let the artist work type.
@@rareosts5752then they're not really a benefactor, they're basically a lobbyist or special interest group
A benefactor just likes what you're doing and is essentially your material cheerleader
Ulterior motives not aligned with the one invested in aren't benevolence
I honestly miss unlocking stuff. I feel like that went away with microtransactions. The terror I felt when I saw someone with full hayabusa+katana on the enemy team when I was younger was unmatched. Maybe, it's nostalgia, but damn.
I miss that hype for hayabusa
Reach's top tier didn't feel the same either
The more I hear this dude talk the more I start to love his energy
So honest and sincere
Much love!
i completely disagree that games are *supposed* to be a doversion/escape from life. they *can* be that, but if you're constantly escaping, that's not good. for me, vidoe games are a full PART of my life. I've learned a lot from them, gained friends and experiences, and they just made life more pleasent overall
That is totally fair, would not describe your opinion (at least what I understand from the comment) as totally disagreeing. Also, I feel like Thors take was pretty good. At least for me, video games are definitely an escape.
@@Alicornriderm i didn't say his opinion/take was "bad", i said i disagreed with it. and if video games are an escape for you, then i'm glad you at least have that outlet, but i still don't think that this is what games *should* be
Nailed it Thor! If an art form is viewed primarily as a money extractor, the end product will not connect with audiences. Just make the game you want to play.
Thank you for this one Thor. A dev being aware of this is refreshing. Big respect to you and yours man.
I appreciate your takes so ****ing much. Thank you.
The idea that its a financial "investment" is based on the idea of moral relatively.
Its why alot of shows are failing due to bad writing, because no one understands basic morality.
Its also why deadpool vs wolverine (being a mediocre comic flick full of member berries) did so well. They understood good vs evil.
See tolkien and his series (and the financial flop of rings of power) vs dune. Dune is absolutely a moral grey....but it understands how evil works, and how "unknown" works
Former Game-Dev here. The amount of times I had to actively have this conversation with other devs was astounding. Games are escapism. For fun. If it's not fun, we shouldn't be building it. Some studios have completely lost the plot.
Larian is one of the only major devs that I think understand this. The amount of effort and passion they put into their games is exactly why they got the chance to create Baldurs Gate 3 and go on to win a very well deserved GOTY. Indie devs still have that passion but AAA devs just see dollar signs.
Thor I have been inspired by you multiple times and I just wanted to say that it’s partially thanks to you that I will be enrolling into game development university.
I personally thrive to make games that have an impactful or meaningful purpose for a person who plays my game.
You have inspired me so much!
The issue is artists and programmers need to eat and have shelter. They need wages. Wages means there is costs involved. You need to recoup those costs some how.
The reason AAA is the way it is, is because it has a budget of 500 million (mostly wages) and the $60 at launch, covers maybe 200 million of that. So of course they need microtransactions, dlc, and expansions to cover the remainder.
And as many people will judge a game by how it looks, rather than how it plays, if you skimp on the art budget, people may not play the game. Its why so many indies go bankrupt after the first title, as its not pretty enough.
Yup, the best and most worth indie games are made by hobbyists (also counting in devs that work contracts to make the money to finish a vision for a game they have (Project Zomboid, 7D2D)), exceptionally talented folks that at this point even get invited to make sequels/remakes of some games, small companies barely keeping in the green with alright quality and enough releases.
Also a lot that go bankrupt are actually good companies that make exceptional titles, they're often just companies that don't exactly get known previously (got a few games around that I only found after the company went bankrupt, no clue as to why they weren't known, feels like no one had time to cover games in a genre that got too little releases and which do everything right somehow).
The amount of insight from this guys is enormous.
Im not a game developer or even know about coding or anything related. I dont even watch livestreams or twich. But all of his shorts, advice, insights are so good. It also makes me happy to see good role models out there in the world.
This was how it was supposed to be forever. Too many people who only saw the money destroyed the intended purpose. That’s why indie games are GOATED. The adventures I’ve went on through them always brings me back to before the corporate takeover.
I hope to achieve even the smallest modicum of that experience through my games in the future for others. Anything else is extra.
i love the absolute look of horror as he reads the message like "this is a topic that is very important to me, i need to inform this guy and the world immediately how that shit works"
Am I the only one who thinks Thor misunderstood the question? Seems like he can finally afford to buy games and spend time playing them, and doesn't know where to begin.
definitely misunderstood, yeah
Could be both, but it also sounded more like a "I finally got money for myself after selling my business, what games do you recommend" - but the "investment" part makes me wonder as it makes it sound less like "what games should I buy" and more like "what stocks should I buy"
@@Unknown_Genius Sounds like someone with a business mindset asking how to invest their time into their hobby.
I dunno, that TTS' "What do I do?" at the end seems to suggest the person was asking how to invest into making games rather than playing them. A normal person would ask "Which ones do you recommend?"
Unless they're actually asking about how to even start playing games (like which console, what build of PC etc) which honestly has too many factors to consider, some that the person has to come up with answers on their own (like how much are you willing to spend, which studios's games have you tried before and liked).
@@Velp I read further through the comments yesterday and someone mentioned that the full conversation goes into investment for profit on stock trading, so overall this generally is something that's not precisely great for a short as it leaves out a lot of stuff apparently (if true).
Thor with a solid mic drop point here.
Until you need money to finish a project and end up falling in line with every other studio where shareholders control your company.
Just wanna say, Thor, you are a awesome human being, I love your honesty and how you pass on knowledge and wisdom , bless you!
Pirate Software doing good work over here preventing the next EA games
Gaming is PASSION
Not related to the vid but started my game dev journey yesterday, I'm so excited, I'm learning unreal engine, watching tutorials on TH-cam, it's so fascinating.
Well said!
We need cool new investments strategies!
Swedish Minister of education: Hold my beer
Solid advice. This can be applied to just about every product/service and capitalism more broadly. People will always be incentivized to increase capital at the cost of everything real and human under such a system… not saying there aren’t outliers-but the general rule is quite evident.
Will Wright once wisely said, "I don't make games for other people to play, I make games ''I'' want to play, I'm just lucky alot of other people like to play what I make too."
5yrs from now, there will be a new indie studio created by that guy
This exact same philosophy applies to housing policy. Housing as an investment, who does that serve? What incentives does that give those who own/seek them? Housing as human habitat and dwelling, who does that serve? What incentives does that give society as a whole? That right there is the housing trap. There are so many other aspects of life this exact philosophy applies. ❤
So many game dev companies need to see this and learn it
The whole point of a game like a board or card game is for the player to be able to PLAY the gameand have FUN.
Just like with cars, if the drive is terrible, nobody wants to buy the car. If the gameplay is terrible, nobody wants to play it, no matter how much money you throw at it.
If you wanna make games, always keep the player's feelings and enjoyment at the center of it.
SCHD is pretty decent
In most industries, investing into something with money will never result in a quality product. Invest your passion into what personally drives you as a human, and the revenue will follow by itself.
The world was a wonderful place, and then came the investors.
I remember when games felt like they had heart and soul. They were looked at as toys and nothing more, but there was enough money to allow devs to create interesting and new ideas. Then it became big time and it was all about the investors. Mid 00s were nothing but grey shooters and zombie games because they sold the best.
An alternative would be just to view it more as philanthropy. Donating 5k-10k can be life changing for some indie devs, and if it helps them make the games you love better than that's just an awesome side effect.
Invest in the developers as a patronage, supporting them to produce a work of art. if its absolutely amazing then it could be extremely profitable, but thats just a bonus.
Truer words have never been uttered...😢
I’m in the club that has problems investing in a value meal
Video games is technically a risky investment. AAA gaming is about removing all the risk but ends up making crappy games. If you're doing games right either you'll make a game people will love or you fail to do so. Microsoft and Steam have made it so much easier for Indie developers to release products and make money.
That's also a good way to look at playing games. Instead of looking at it "is it worth 40$ for how many hours I will play it" just evaluate if the gameplay and story are enjoyable enough for you.
Great advice, very true, and very sincere ❤
The two moods of Thor.
Eternal wisdom.
Absolute troll.
Truer words were never spoken
Absolute wisdom
I’m not personally interested in game development but I do work in software dev. And the way I find it is, just make something that you enjoy or that you find useful. If you try to make something based on what you think others will like, then you’ll struggle to find the motivation and it makes it more painful if it doesn’t work out
This sounds like the main reason Indie games have been absolutely killing it these past few years and why media coverage on them seems to be rather huge depending on the game.
This is the same thing that happened to the automotive enthusiasts market media. Look at top gear, car throttle, donut,and Hoonigan as big names. Things created by people enjoying a passion. Then investors came in and ruined them. Now we have the birth of other enthusiasts but investment changed the focus from “enjoying cars” to “making money” and the market responded by walking away from those production companies.
The factory must grow
Kaizo hacks: *nervous side glance*
masochism
Swap the word game with the word movie and boom, you have hollywood.
Man I'm so glad I invested in Salvador Dali and Nirvana, really paid off.
The irony is someone in the industry recently went private after accusing anybody who cares about the gameplay first as being racist/sexist/every-ist imaginable if they are even slightly critical of consultants whose sole purpose is to suck resources and attention away from games.
In almost every other field, we recognize that consultants are mostly a scam. Yet people will defend it in games, where the consultants have literally said in plain terms they want to see the industry burn, and encourage people to terrorize their boss with the threat of social backlash if you don't hire them.
I wish there was more representation for people of my own background, that'd be great. But that comes second to the experience and gameplay. There are games that do it well, because they focused on gameplay first. Things like DEI are extra nice-to-haves, not the only selling point meant to make heartless corporations look like they care about us.
To build on this, if you have money and you dont actually want to directly make games, thats okay. Take the skills you learned from running your own business and enable people to make their games. Find people with the skills and desire and say "hey, if you can put together a design document and tell me what you would need to make your game come to life, I'm willing to fund this amount of money for this amount of time in exchange for this amount of return once you finish it." because some people do have good ideas but cant afford the assets they want or cant afford to commission the art or music they want. Or they dont have the skills to lead a team and communicate. There are things you can bring to help a game come to life they arent the creative aspects we would typically associate with game design. But do put the "Make a great experience" part first and let the money just be guard rails for "What needs to happen for this to keep everyone involved and this project sustainable?"
If the goal is to make money and not the passion to create a cool experience, dont get involved with games. There's frankly just better ways to make money and more worthwhile ways to invest if profit is the goal.
"It's not what we do, it's why we do it" - Simon Sinek
Goblin King spitting facts 🗣️
I wish Thor was my teacher in high school.
A big part of the problem is that when games starting making a lot of money, a bunch of CEO’s from other industry’s jumped into gaming because they saw the profit to be made. The result being that the people at the top knowing next to nothing about games, while wanting to maximise profits.
Games as an investment strategy is how we got games as a service.
You can extend that truth to nearly everything. Once Boeing, Intel, and others stopped being manufactures of high-end, world-class products, and were relegated to nothing more than investments, their product quality suffered. Food quality in the US has also has been substantially worsened because profit focused demands.
I honestly understood that question as, "I used to not be able to afford video games, but now I can. What games would you recommend?" I did not expect for a moment for this to be about business.
As a game designer, I both agree and disagree. I want to make something awesome which players will remember fondly in years to come. I also want the game to make a profit so people can remain employed and there is money to make the next game. This does mean considering whether the thing I design is able to be expanded on in the future for DLCs which realistically cant always be free. From my experience, aim to make the best experience for the player and they will want to give you the money
That is the ONE good thing about the current times: people start to catch on to that - AAA companies are bleeding like crazy at the moment and rightfully so. Corporate greed killed the gaming industry. I feel sad for the workforce in those companies - while corporate will still syphon bonusses while workforce is being laid off...
All while there's the irony that those companies were formed to specifically fight that.
Go back a few decades and Activision suddenly is the first indie company formed to fight bad pay and poor + restrictive working conditions.
It got nothing to do with "current times", it's how it'll always be if people bring a company into a position of power, people just never learn it.
This reminds me a lot of how import cars started to ravage domestic cars in the US. As soon as profiteers and investors came up with the idea of building something that has to be replaced often as a ways to make more money, they didn't stop to consider that the customer base might turn to buying something designed to last, instead.
Sure, you only sell the product once, but when everyone is buying it, you only have to sell it once.
Why is bro so wise
Funny thing is, when the games are actually fun to play, the money will flow.
Not the bloated AAA garbo that is released in recent years.
Look what games left a positive mark in gaming history in the last 5 years. And i don´t mean GOTY i mean actual good response throughout the gaming world.
This is what a gamestudio should strive for. Everything else will come with time then.
I will say, games aren't just to be fun. They are to make you feel something in a way that no other medium can, and do it in a safe and controlled way. Games will hurt you. Games will traumatize you. Games will make you sad, angry, happy, laugh, cry, frown, smile, all of it. And that's what we're here for. The fun is nice to have, it is. But it shouldn't get in the way of delivering experience and emotion.
Thats just the problem with everything nowadays, everything is some form of investment strategies. Cards, books, movies, toys, games, food, housing, etc.
lol, you must be a teenager, this was always the case. The modern world didn't make people greedier. Greedy people have always been around with more ways to do it.
I grew up in the 90's and people scoured the world for beanie babies, cabbage patch kids and first edition comics like they did NFTs
@@crushycrawfishy1765 Also a 90s kid, and ya it's always been this way, but something about the last maybe at least decade or so to me makes it seem that it's gotten more prevalent. Funny enough sports cards can be on that list you mentioned too.
I wholeheartedly agree, though could an argument not be made to rather than starting a studio, invest in a small studio you believe in to allow growth? As long as it's seen as a long-term investment and not something to be returned in a single game, that too should allow healthy growth and quality products.
In addition to escapism, which can be necessary, especially in today's world but can also be detriment, I believe games are a learning tool. Play is seen so often as recreation but is used by animals as a way to learn and grow. I think we are wired to enjoy play because it's evolutionarily beneficial but because we enjoy it it is seen as not practically beneficial. Only suffering is seen as beneficial but with the correctly designed game we can grow and enjoy ourselves while we do it.
100%. Make the game you want to play, and odds are there will be other people who want to play it too.
Don't treat games like an investment strategy, treat them like an art and if you fund an artist to do a retreat and make stuff, you wouldn't expect them to produce you an art piece that is guaranteed to make you a return on your investment. You're doing it so they can get better at their art and show how they've improved in the time that you gave them to work on their pieces.
Now if you do that, and give a good game dev their proper time, you will probably make your money back, but you shouldn't expect it. If it happens, it's a bonus. if it doesn't you still got a good game out of the situation.
This is the entire problem of investors wanting short term profits, which leads to games being rushed and crappily made. If you want to invest in games, it kind a needs to be long term investments. Take your time, accept that initially, you won't turn a profit, make good games and you have a passionate fanbase that will eat out of the palm of your hand.
Put this on repeat at Ubisoft
devs don't need investors, they need patrons. It's an art at its core, not a product.
Super good advice indeed.
thank you
we don't play games because they're profitable we play them because they're fun
I fully agree on a moral and personal level; but ultimately we gotta see reality for what it is. These soulless corporations that make cashgrab pieces of shit are incredibly successful, and while we've all been praying on their downfall for ages, it still hasn't happened and doesn't look to be happening any time soon. One falls, another rises to take its place.
You may be selling your soul, but you're definitely getting a return on that investment. Just like sweatshops; you're bad person if you own one, but you are going to outcompete those that don't own them.
With investment comes the expectation of profit. So board members pressure CEOs who pressure VPs who pressure mid level managers who pressure the people actually making the product.
I do thing it is a bit muddies, because the term "invest" can be used in two different ways: as in "invest in Apple" where you are talking about getting a return on that investment; and "invest in the local Amateur Shakespeare Troupe" where you are basically going "I like what you do, I'd like to support what you are doing".
And asking "I have some extra money that I'd like to go towards making more, better, games, how best should I go about doing that?" is a valid question.
That's a very difficult question to answer though. But I guess the core part of Thor's response still applies: Invest in something you think is fun, because if the developers are making something fun, they are making good games that people would like to play.
don't be an investor. be a patron (not the site)
I think the guy just wanted some recommendations
I love this man.
Now, I'm not gay
But if i were....
the thing is, in gaming this the way, you make the better product that is less shitty and you WILL get better results than those who dont, and rn those who don't are the triple a studios, the one we think are on top are exactly the thing thatbis wrong with gaming rn so everything thro is is saying is 100% true u focus on making good games and you will have the success and people will WANT TO GIVE YOU MONEY
I could listen to his advice for hours.
Because if AAA companies thinking of it as an investment and a way to earn money, most of them suck now. It is rare for me to find an indie or small company game that does suck. Most indie and small companies want to make their games good and fun and that is more worthwhile to me than a super hyped game that sucks once you start playing it
Also .. Make a game you want to play. Making something that you want someone to make.. is probably one of the best motivators you could ever have.
This is 100% why I stepped away from current video games platforms and industry. The only system worth getting is Nintendo cause they actually care about the games they make and really embrace the indie game scene. When Sony and Xbox were buying out productions companies marked the end of me giving a shit. People lost their jobs because they were the victims of an unobtainable investment meeting goals. You can't keep making market gains, and shoving a turd shape object in a consumer shape hole. Play indie if you want true gaming innovation and actually true/ good storytelling.
Invest in the people making the games and the ideas behind it(along with good/clever marketing), not just the straight up games.
That’s the key. It’s like Ratatouille; not everyone can make games, but it can come from anywhere, and anyone can help that process in some way.
This knowledge is superior to most people in today's generation 👏 🙌 you sir are extremely articulate I love your kind
Investment companies stink because their standards for games are so over the moon that any moderately successful title is considered a flop and has future plans cancelled on a whim.
You can think of numerous examples.