Slashdot Mirror
Why Must You Destroy The Industry, PSP?
Because I know you haven't had your fill of the surreal today, Grand Text Auto has up a link to a Flash movie which depicts a climactic battle between the consoles of old and the PSP...using the end of Final Fantasy VI. Commentary available at Game Girl Advance. My favorite part is where the GBA, GameBoy, GameCube, and N64 team up to defeat the Master Famicom and Rob. Actually pretty cool, if long.
The entire GGA post is:
"Simply fantastic flash video that manages to be at once a critique of the PSP, an elegy for consoles and games past, and a paean to one of the greatest RPGs ever. It's funny, but also extremely moving. At least, to me.
(To see thoe whole piece, click on New Game.)"
Note to Zonk: The above does not make a commentary! At most it's a "hey lookit this cool thing", or a "blurb" if you're feeling generous. A commentary would be an analysis of why single-purpose consoles would feel threatened by the PSP, and how it might really be threatening the industry (or at least changing its direction), or why each platform was a perfect choice to represent each FFVI character (example: the XBox as Umaro is freaking hilarious).
"Jesus saves, but everyone else in a 10 foot radius takes full damage from the fireball."
Actually those who want innovation AND graphics are getting a PSP too. Its capable of so much other handhelds aren't. The definition of innovation.
Innovation is a pretty loose subject in this case, too. An innovative system is nothing if it doesn't have solid and innovative games. It ends up getting delegated to gimick standing. The system feels like a waste since the games don't take advantage of what it was made for, and the games seem unfinished for the same reason.
A system completely devoid of innovation, however, can excell with innovative games. The games are great, and they earnthe system a reputation as innovative in doing so.
Right, before I begin this rant, I'll moderate it a little by saying that I do agree with your main point; this article is just another example of slashdot's paranoid Nintendo-fanboy mentality exerting itself.
However, what I'm going to take issue with is your assertion that people who want innovation over graphics should go for the Nintendo DS. This is simply not true and just reflects how successful Nintendo propaganda has been in areas such as slashdot. Yes, the DS has an "innovative" control system, but in terms of what you can actually play on it, innovation is basically non-existent. Let's look at the launch lineups for both the DS and the PSP:
On the DS, the biggest launch title was Mario 64. This is not innovative. This game is... what... seven years old(?) and it's being released here with a handful of minor tweaks and a few minigames. We've also got Warioware, which might have been cool and innovative once, but has been through so many iterations that it's just plain tired now. Besides these, what else do we have? Madden? Check. Tiger Woods Golf? Check. Ports of a few movie/license games also released on every other system under the sun? Check. Looking ahead a little, I have a funny feeling we might also end up seeing a Mario Kart game and a Zelda Game. Both will probably be near-pixel-perfect remakes of their N64 incarnations.
Now let's look at the Sony PSP. Sure, you've got a few straightforward franchise games, such as Wipeout and Ridge Racer. However, arguably the biggest PSP launch title is Lumines; a quirky and off-beat puzzle-game of the easy-to-learn-hard-to-master school that normally gets the slash-horde drooling. Then there's Mercury, a bizarre little puzzle game based around fluid physics. Then there's Metal Gear Acid. Before anybody cries "sequel!", take a look at what this actually is. It's not a stealth/action game, like the previous Metal Gear games have been, rather it's a stealth/tactical card game. Sure, it upset a few Metal Gear fans who didn't get what they expected from it, but it's undeniably innovative.
So why does the DS (and Nintendo) still have this reputation for being "innovative"? Easy... it's because they're very good at playing the gaming press. Every year at E3 and the other big gaming events, that Reggie guy stands up and shouts "innovation" and "gameplay" at the audience for a while, whips the fanboys into a frenzy and gets affectionate tributes from the more gullible sections of the gaming press. Hell, even Penny Arcade fall for it most years, although I did notice a slight touch of welcome scepticism this year. At the same time, Microsoft and Sony give their spiels about integrated home entertainment systems, and the slash-horde denounces them as soul-less profiteers who must be mere days from financial ruin.
And then what happens in the year that follows? Sony and Microsoft both get vast numbers of new third-party games on their systems. Some of these are dross, some are franchise fodder, but there are usually a few real gems (and sometimes genuine innovation as well) thrown into the mix. Nintendo, on the other hand, puts out a new controller which will "revolutionise gaming" (we had the bongos this year), one or two games which require it (before it's promptly forgotten) and maybe a tired franchise game. Meanwhile, third-party developers continue to largely ignore them. (Ok, in fairness, they got Resident Evil 4 this year, which is awesome, but it's still only one game). Then the next year's round of games-shows comes up and the cycle begins again.
The PSP is not going to destroy the industry. Of the three current competitors, there is only one which actually has any desire to destroy the industry. This is Nintendo. Nintendo do not like the fact that they have lost control of the gaming industry. They always seemed to have a slight upper-hand during their battles with Sega and were generally able to set the pace of the industry. They were happy back then, in the NES and SNES generations. Then Sony came along and it all change