Comment on Bungie CEO Claims Layoffs Were Due to Destiny 2 Underperformance - IGN

• beefcat@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

  plenty of good games fail to meet revenue projections

  source

  • GoodEye8@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    Except Bungie isn’t creating a new game here, they’re continuing a game they’ve been supporting for years. They have years of metrics and they should have a pretty good understanding how much revenue to expect. Even if they were overly optimistic and set an unrealistic projection it doesn’t explain missing it by 45%.

    source

    • beefcat@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

      I can’t really comment on the current quality of the game in 2023, since I noped out about 4 years ago, but there are any number of explanations.

      • Lack of new content. I haven’t seen the game discussed much in the gaming press, which means there probably haven’t been any notable content drops for a while. It sounds like the game’s next expansion has been delayed, and the game is being maintained by a skeleton crew while the rest of the studio focuses on Marathon.
      • Competition. With few exceptions, good games always slowly bleed users as shiny new alternatives attract players. This is compounded if you’re running a live service game and have a long content drought.

      My point isn’t that “Destiny is good”, I don’t really know that. My point is that we can’t really draw conclusions about the quality of the game based solely on missed revenue targets.

      source

      • Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        It sounds like the game’s next expansion has been delayed, and the game is being maintained by a skeleton crew while the rest of the studio focuses on Marathon.

        FWIW, they have ~650 people even after the layoffs for destiny 2 alone. Hardly a skeleton crew. The content drops have been the same as they’ve been for years, seasonal content drops in-between expansions. There is definitely a lul period where there’s not new stuff getting released to give people a chance to catch up.

        Competition. With few exceptions, good games always slowly bleed users as shiny new alternatives attract players.

        There is some of this. I think there also just seems to be a general recoil of players at what games are costing these days. I’m personally fine with it, but I see what feels like infinite complaining about how greedy … basically every company that isn’t indie is being.

        Realistically, I’d say it’s A) bad PR and B) a failure to make new gameplay loops that shake things up significantly C) a failure to fully utilize old content (there’s not a lot of reason to play old strikes, not a lot to encourage players to help others out in old story missions, etc – replay value is artificially neutered by making too many things curated which limits choice)

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • GoodEye8@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        I agree that you can’t draw conclusions about the quality of the game simply by the fact that it missed the revenue target. But I’m not drawing the conclusion based on the fact that it missed the target but rather based on by how much the target was missed. If they missed by 15% then sure, it’s not an indication because maybe they really did overestimate their target. But 45%? You don’t miss by that much when you have yearly revenue numbers showing you the trend. My point is that such a severe miss in this case does end up being indicative of the quality because the explanations, even yours, will end up being negative about the game.

        source