Slashdot Mirror
The Next Gen Consoles - The Bigger Picture
Next Generation Magazine is running a series of articles on the next generation consoles, and what they mean in a larger perspective. The Xbox 360, PS3, and Revolution have a lot riding on them as the start of the next round of console wars gets underway. All three companies have their own goals and histories to consider when it comes to the business of games. From the 360 article: "Someone, somewhere, probably still believes Microsoft got into console games for the kudos of putting out Halo. Good for them. The world needs believers, and every time you say 'Xbox is a Trojan Horse', a fairy dies."
You know, if Nintendo comes out of the gate with games that are significantly cheaper (at least 10 dollars) than the Xbox's 60 price tag... I can't see many parents justifying the additional cost. Hell, I can't see myself logically justifying the additional cost.
please bear in mind that Nintendo is the only profitable game company of these 3. no "Nintendo is dying" claims please.
I see dead fairies.
=:-O
Seriously, think about it. The better the grahpics, the more expensive it becomes to produce a game. If the trend of increasing grahpics so rapidly continues, I can honestly see all the "smaller" game devellopers dying off IMO.
It already costs millions to make a decent, good selling, cross-platform game. Can the little guy realy keep up with Ubi-Soft, Vivendi and EA Games when that price doubles? Triples?
The smaller companies will either die off or have to surrender to larger publishers (like the ones listed above). It could be a good thing, but it could also bring an even greater shortage of origionality and risk-taking in the game market, not to mention fewer releases all together. Remember, big production companies don't take risks.
Nasa spent billions making a pen capable of writing in space. The Russians just use a pencil.
"And from the technical specs, Revolution is no Cell-beater - just as Nintendo had warned."
Strange, I don't remember Nintendo releasing any technical specs. The writer of this article is just pulling information out of his ass, and the article reflects this. He's another "Nintendo's next consoul is going to fl0p!!!11" because it doesn't appeal to the inner-city "hip" crowd that wants more games where they can shoot heroin and kill anything that moves. He never once mentions that due to the Revolutions price-point (which, by the precedent of other Nintendo consoles compared to it's Sony and Microsoft brethren, as well as Nintendo's own statements about it) will be significantly lower than the competitions. There's a bunch of parents out there that aren't going to buy a $300-400 game console, and they trust the Nintendo brand.
Just another Nintendo-naysayer with no idea what he's talking about.
I'm no zealot, but you my friend are way off base. The Nintendo controller is not going to be based around a gimmick. It has been said many times that it is going to be soemthing totally unique in design that will allow everyone to enjoy gaming. I have a feeling it will be either a super-streamlined design with few buttons... if there are buttons at all. It is going to be intuitive, so that even a non-gamer can easily pick it up and play. This has all been stated so far.
At first I thought of a few possibilities: A NES controller with new styling, a touch-pad, a gyro/tilt sensor... but the more I thought about it I don't think any of these will be it. It has been said by Nintendo that the controller is "The Big Gun" so it is most certainly NOT a cheap gimmmick.
Now to take you to task on your statement that access to old games is for the "hardcore"... what, you smokin crack? This move is FOR the casual gamer, and also happens to appeal to all types of gamers. My sister (30-ish non-gamer with kids/family) is already planning on buying one simply so she can play old favorites and her kids can play the newer games and GC titles. She was excited to be able to play Bubble Bobble again, and a number of other old favorites.
You also seemed to miss the fact that Nintendo has already stated they will allow even single person game developers the ability to create content. This is the ace in the hole and most people already forget about this little "feature" While the PS3 and 360 will take major budgets and teams to produce for (which leads to less games over the lifespan and only "safe" games get made - like licensed games, sports, FPS, and some RPG's) the Revolution will get all the indie developers, homebrew crowd, and even new entries... remember shareware and ID? Well Nintendo could potentially be opening the doors to a hundred exclusive "ID's" on top of top-notch first-party titles and some solid third-party offerings.
This race is far from started, let alone in the home stretch.
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
Right now, the main event is Sony Vs. Microsoft. The Xbox 360 will, eventually, support HD-DVD. The Playstation 3 will use Blu-Ray technology. Which ever HD technology gets adopted by the masses could make or break Microsoft's or Sony's video gaming initiative. And they are both spending a lot of money trying to out do each other in various ways.
Then there is Nintendo, hiding in the shadows, watching the two titans waste their hit points (and money) fighting each other. Nintendo could potentially give the fatal blow to the , with a low cost unit, and huge classic game library. They're taking a risk by not supporting HD. But probably a very calculated risk, as HD won't be fully adopted until the very end of this next generations life cycle. And they aren't betting the farm like the other two.
My guess is, if someone is going to fall this next round, it will be either Sony or Microsoft. IMHO.
the cosmos in 20 words or less: thumbuki.com
"All three companies have their own goals and histories to consider when it comes to the business of games. "
Sony's goal: spend more money than Microsoft
Microsoft's goal: spend more money than Sony
Nintendo's goal: profit