In the 90ies you didn’t have a backlog of thousands of games that you picked up from a humble bundle where you only really wanted one game. What has changed though is the amount of games people own. I just don’t think that’s different from how it’s always been, and I think the author of this article in particular lacks quality. I mean, it’s not uncommon for solo-small teams to top the steam charts, but you really do need both quality and a little luck. Into the breach, though not single developer did well in 2018. Stardew Valley released in 2016, after the explosion. The upcoming game I’m most excited by is it lurks below, and that’s being developed by a single developer. I don’t think times have changed that much. The biggest treasure I found that way was the original x-com. I remember buying games in the 80ies and 90ies, I’d go to a supermarket and rummage through a mixed box with literal hundreds of different $5 games and pick the one that looked the most exciting. I'm continuously adding things to my Netflix queue that look interesting, but my time to actually watch them is such that my chance of getting through even a majority of the queue is almost nil. It's sort of like the Netflix queue problem. So much so that even the good things can't make good money because supply has so far outstripped demand. The problem is not (just) that a lot of crap is being released, but that a lot of everything is being released, good and bad.
To me that reads as someone that's fully aware that some people are putting a lot of effort in and making good games (Unity or not), but is upset by the realization that quality doesn't seem to be nearly enough. A tiny percentage are hits, but most are forgotten in the deluge.
And while many of them are Unity shovelware, etc., many are polished games that a lot of effort went into.
Not only the total number of games, but the rate of their release seems to be geometrically increasing! Holy crap. > The author of this article rants about the swarm of unity games, but some of those unity games are better than what the author made exactly because they took design seriously. The Economics of Superstars The American Economic Review The Macroeconomics of Superstars, Anton Korinek Our paper studies the implications of superstar technologies for factor shares, for inequalityĪnd for the effciency properties of the superstar economy. To the extent that the digital innovations are excludable, it also provides the innovator with market power. This generates a form of increasing returns to scale. Information technology that requires a fxed cost but can be reproduced at zero marginal cost. We describe superstars as arising from digital innovations, whicih replace a fraction of the tasks in production with As a result, these superstars reap enormous rewards, whereas the rest of the workforce lags behind. Examples include the high-tech sector, sports, the music industry, management, fnance, etc. >Recent technological changes have transformed an increasing number of sectors of the economy into so-called superstars sectors, in which a small number of entrepreneurs or professionals distribute their output widely to the rest of the economy. Game industry is the economics of superstars.
0 kommentar(er)
