Thats why gaf is a bubble, because you think that video is relevant to the actual gaming industry and corporations. no one cares about it as much as you want to believe it. Also I never said the analysis was a bubble. I am again, talking about its relevancy. Will there be change now that an asshole is the president? Probably. Probably not. I doubt it. I am noticing a trend with gaf lately though that I am distancing myself. Most of you seem to be living in an illusion and I may actually move on from here sooner than later. Anyway, enjoy your bubbles.
Why would any singular video be relevant to corporations. Hardly any of their leadership will see it. It doesn’t negate tho what she’s saying. It’ll be market forces that facilitate change, along with cultural changes and government and economic policy.
Companies are typically responsive to their bottom line eventually, particularly with the losses we’re seeing at the moment, and the high interest rates.
Companies typically are trend chasers too, which is often downstream of cultural momentum, the cultural pendulum has swung one direction the last decade or so, and has now swung in the other. So they’ll be responsive to that (how quick is another matter).
The new presidency could be a weird one…Trump is a vengeful asshole, and ran on an avidly anti woke agenda. Musk being his puppet master and a massive gamer will likely also have an impact. This could be everything from closing down DEI departments, legally prohibiting them in some manner, or pressuring financial institutions to scrap tying loan rates to ESG scores etc. There’s a lot of factors there which could have a big impact.
The other could be the continued collapse of traditional games journalism, and the bubbling “access journalism” controversies that are becoming more apparent by the day.
Personally with the advances in ai, I don’t think we’re far away from seeing the concepts of reviews change radically. Ai will play all the games, objectively understand their qualities, and based on your trophy history be able to understand how a game should be rated for you personally. One man’s 10/10 is another man’s 1/10, which is why meta scores are kinda dumb. Likewise how do compare genres effectively? You can very realistically have a big final fantasy game get an 8/10, and the same review site give a candy crush style game 9/10. Does that mean candy crush is a better game than final fantasy? Not to mention the gulf between user scores and paid critic scores.
Games are ofcourse taking horrendously long to make right now tho, so any changes actioned today won’t materialise in end products for years. We will sadly almost certainly have many more financial catastrophes like concord and dragon age and suicide squad still to come.