Originally Posted by wolfing
It's simple. Turn based is not as marketable as action.

I go even a step further: The publisher define - based on what, exactly ? - that ONLY "action games" are "cool".

I don't know where this comes from - either they just define it by themselves, or they base it on some kind of marketing studies.

An who know whether these marketing studies are corrctly assembled ? It's a little bit like those rating studios before the financial crisis. They just reated - based on what, exactly ? Sometimes they even rated regardless. And then everything collapsed.

Now, "action" is "full cool", but non-action is "lame".

Either these publishing companies want to make them believe that both "action = cool" & "non-action = lame" or … they believe so because they have some studies we don't have.

But - what no-one sees is that this "action" thing is ONLY outlined towards the targeted customer group - rather young people. NOT older ones of 40s on, for example.

Which means that ALL of their "action-oriented" marketing is scheduled acording to a single, limited (although relatively big) target group.

It's as if … I was making in my restaurant only kinds of food for a certain - the biggest ! - group of customers there - meanwhil totally neglecting other visitors.

Which means that other visitors might leave the restaurant - or ever. (Which might have happened with people migrating to consoles and away from the shooter-heavy PC platform, just as a thought.)
Which results in a drop of profits.
Which can be seen as "the increase of pirates", for example.