Board action seems kind of slow
-
Or is it just me?
-
@Capt-Clutch-2K24_PSN said in Board action seems kind of slow:
Or is it just me?
You're right. I was thinking the same recently.
I didn't plan it, but once I finished the Extreme Program on 11/8/24, 2 weeks after it dropped, I had little desire to play as an offline player. Couple that with nothing really to say, not even funny posts. I was going to try the Verlander Showdown, but decided to watch NFL and NASCAR instead. I'll still play S4, but may be done mid-late December, as opposed to about February until the new game drops. -
I don't normally participate on this sub-forum because I have no interest in the online game modes. That said, this board's overall participation has reduced substantially. That cannot be denied.
The predominate reason is likely that interest has declined in the game itself, and that is something that SDS needs to pay attention to.
Sadly, SDS being owned by Sony is only going to be funded so long as it not merely makes a profit, but makes a profit above a minimum acceptable margin. Corporations today are in a money chase and they are run by people who constantly analyze avenues for profit. Their measure of the options ranks those avenues best able to make the most money.
If you are invested in, you make the minimum required profit, or you are divested, and your assets either sold off, terminated, or reassigned to other avenues. To spark new interest, SDS has to reinvigorate the game, but to do so requires a revamping of the code and that carries risk and costs money.
The overall lack of innovation in video games today is due to the risk/reward competing against the minimum acceptable profit margin evaluation. If interest in this game dwindles and is calculated to remain that way, the game title will be ended. If the suits in charge deem that the price to rekindle interest puts the profit below the minimum acceptable level, then the game dies long before it ever would have on a purely classic business model of reasonable rate of return.
-
@PriorFir4383355_XBL said in Board action seems kind of slow:
I don't normally participate on this sub-forum because I have no interest in the online game modes. That said, this board's overall participation has reduced substantially. That cannot be denied.
The predominate reason is likely that interest has declined in the game itself, and that is something that SDS needs to pay attention to.
Sadly, SDS being owned by Sony is only going to be funded so long as it not merely makes a profit, but makes a profit above a minimum acceptable margin. Corporations today are in a money chase and they are run by people who constantly analyze avenues for profit. Their measure of the options ranks those avenues best able to make the most money.
If you are invested in, you make the minimum required profit, or you are divested, and your assets either sold off, terminated, or reassigned to other avenues. To spark new interest, SDS has to reinvigorate the game, but to do so requires a revamping of the code and that carries risk and costs money.
The overall lack of innovation in video games today is due to the risk/reward competing against the minimum acceptable profit margin evaluation. If interest in this game dwindles and is calculated to remain that way, the game title will be ended. If the suits in charge deem that the price to rekindle interest puts the profit below the minimum acceptable level, then the game dies long before it ever would have on a purely classic business model of reasonable rate of return.
Very interesting read. You seem knowledgeable. I wouldn't worry too much though.
If SDS killed the game, I think baseball is still popular enough, another company (for better or worse) would swoop in and take over baseball video gaming.
The more I think about it though switching to another company like 2K or EA would definitely be worse. I was able to end my NBA 2K pack addiction by switching over to MLB the Show exclusively. And I am a whole lot richer for it.
-
And message to SDS - If you actually were able to sign some/many new Legends and revamped game modes, especially more offline content and without these 2-3 week periods of almost no content, I would be more tempted to buy packs/stubs.
I bought this game after Season 1, nd then no money spent, and currently have 2.6 million stubs. This could never happen in a 2K or EA game.
Which begs the question for board members. Here's your choice.
You have to choose A or B:A. Things in the game have little/no improvements, but you can easily stay No Money Spent.
B. A vastly improved game with more Legends and better gameplay. But you would have to break your No Money Spent rules.
I'd probably lean B depending on how much money spent. Certainly not what I used to throw away to NBA 2K.
