Are game developers too comfortable for their own good? Are EA's revenue losses economy based, or do you think game sales are more related to product or artistic quality? Are game developers recession proof? Why or why not?

Regards,
Neil

games are all the same nowaday.. thats why i went to 3D..

and that's why I play the older games. At least they work good in S-3D and the new games are so similar it's not worth the upgrade of all the hardware...

well I think game developers are really trying hard to keep everyone interested, however just as with action movies their technology has sorta reached it's peak and nowadays special effects (in 2d) are no longer impressive and the only thing that can make an action flick watchable is if there is some added humor/storyline/uniqueness, exactly the same goes for games, Crysis was fun for a while but once the novelty of the slightly better graphics wore off I stopped playing it. Should game companies invest the extra time to make their games s-3d ready? Depends on whom you ask. Ask anyone here then sure it's the future, but financially I don't think investing those hours will pay off just yet since I doubt it will help sell this game, frankly even if they were to put a sticker saying "designed for stereo3d" on the game box I think it would scare people away since they would assume it would not work well in 2d or in fact simply not understand what that means and think it's just a marketing ploy of some sort. Don't get me wrong- the more games work well in stereo3d the better, but if I'm a game development company with a tight deadline and a limited number of personnel and budget would I really invest in that just yet? I guess it all comes down to stereo3d awareness of the population. Speaking of which Neil from the U-DECIDE survey I'd love to see some data of how stereoscopically-aware populations of different countries are once the survey is finished. Frankly I can foresee the results- countries where IMAXes and Reald theaters are widespread will have the higher amount of awareness since those in my opinion are the best means of educating people about stereo3d. Without people knowing what stereo3d is there will be no widespread demand for stereo3d and thus no need for game developers to do anything at all in this area.

Neil, billy G said innovation was key. Games suffer from the same thing movies suffer from for me, I am tired of the average movie. Only very exceptional movies get me into the theater anymore. Same with games, I buy far fewer games than I used too. The economy is going to affect all companies everywhere unfortunately, but this is a chance for the game companies to grow their industry as many bored unworking people will want to be entertained to take thier mind off problems. Personally I would like to see games that drive cultural revolutions. EA sports 2009 john madden isn't doing much for the good of humanity, but if they were to make a game that got young kids to have fun while thinking of new engineering concepts or biogenetic concepts and taught REAL SCIENCE and physics in the game I could see this really doing a lot for the future of mankind. Take a game like deus ex, it taught about political dystopian futures with a good storyline and fun gameplay. Now we live in a world where the CIA has just been given the greenlight to torture terrists. Perhaps games like spore and MMO games will help too. Honestly how many first person shooters can keep an average human interested, the innovation becomes marginalized after so many clone copies. Doom was fun, then doom 2, then castle wolfenstien and Duke Nukem and Redneck Rampage, etc etc etc but now I am not even interested in any of these type games anymore. Burnout.

agree completly. Deus Ex 1 was a classic, the epitome of good FPS gaming. They just don't make games like they used to. One of the few exceptions for me is the half life saga, it's timeless and the new ones just keep getting better.

You should try playing FPS against 63 other players - teamwork, fun and hardcore fighting. Singleplayer is not so fun, I think.

10 new games cost the same as 1 new computer. I find that adsurd. If EA can't make money with these prises then they are burning the money in the backyard instead of saving them. New games cost 80-100$ here, maybe it's cheaper elsewhere, I donno.

Personally I'm through running around in dark basements chasing monsters. Half Life 1 cured me years ago of that. No more!
They should make a beautiful new WoW game, a spectacular multiplayer flying game, a 500 player FPS without all the postprosessing (not a big fan of that) and a 30 player online racing game (with lots of individual settings) and update them for years. All capable of stunning 3D offcause.

Gaming is an essential part of my life, so there is some resession proof I think.

About the part with 30 player racing game you could try trackmania. It's even free to play online and is amazing in 3d. It's not a usual racing game since it contains loops, screws, wallrides etc etc but it's all about skill.

lol... got ya with that game.. long time since the last time i played.. might be time to kick your XXX again..

No i think we are just a demanding lot. Well some more than others. All my gaming friends are lapping up each new fps that comes out and would rather play them in 2d than some nerdy 3d.

yeah I guess it all depends on the computer rig in question, and the type of game. I usually play non-competitively in single player and prefer slightly older games that run faster in 3d, just my taste though.

also I'm very lucky that in my country and region there is no term for "nerdy/geeky" and in fact no such social class. If you are good with computers here that just means you're smart.