Slashdot Mirror
The U.S. Arcade is Dead?
Via GameSetWatch, an article by one of the editors of GamePro positing that the U.S. arcade is now a dead thing. By positing, I really mean ranting. From the article: "Americans play videogames for one reason and for one reason only, to kick ass. It doesn't matter if you're crushing skulls in the fighting arena or on the football field. Being a virtual DJ, riding a horse (not into battle), and playing other violence-free games is not enough to draw people into arcades. Gaming isn't about having family-friendly fun it's about indulging in man's carnal desires. And then Konami drove the nail through the heart of coin operated gaming... The abomination of videogaming known as DDR served as an outlet for wannabe Travoltas to flail around wildly and quickly made the house of tank simulators and street fighting a haven for lamos. "
So, umm, all arcades are havens for Horse Riding(tm) and DDR?
Someone never played Mortal Combat or any number of the racing games in most arcades. "Lame-o" games didn't kill arcades, the cost of playing at an arcade did (when you can play it at home with people around the world).
The arcade died the day powerful personal computers became affordable for the masses. Why go down to the arcade to stand in front of a machine and shovel money when you can just pass disks/carts/CDs around your friends and play all the latest games?
The trend continued and now "LANNING" is the new norm. Why go out when the Interdoodle has all the game servers you could ever need and your connection is plenty fast enough to use them?
I drink to make other people interesting!
It's interesting that he should pick DDR as signaling the death of arcades, when, in fact, DDR was the beginning of a (albeit temporary) revival of arcades. The death of arcades started many years before DDR's release in the States, beginning with the rise of home gaming.
Specifically, the main draw of arcades for most goers wasn't the "competition" factor. It was that the technology available in arcade games was leagues above what was available at home. Anyone else remember the Genesis and SNES ports of Mortal Kombat 2? People were willing to pay for play at arcades because the games there were simply BETTER than what was available at home.
As commodity computing became a reality, and the technology required to run arcade-quality games became widespread, the draw of going to an arcade to play dampened significantly. It got to a point (around '99 or '00, plus or minus a bit depending on locale) where arcade machines were no longer able to outperform home computers and consoles. As a result, people were no longer willing to drop $50 a month at an arcade because they can spend that same $50 at home and get a BETTER gaming experience.
The reason why DDR did so well in the arcades was because of the speciality of the controllers. The game itself was well-designed, has an easy learning curve, and is attractive to players of both genders. This, coupled with the fact that good dance pads simply weren't feasible to purchse for one's home, meant that a central location (read: an arcade) was an ideal arrangement.
This, too, however, has been superceded by the level of tech available for home use. Now that reasonable dance pads are available for purchase affordably, the interest in DDR at the arcades has waned. So much so that Konami is no longer producing new machines, and has turned their focus primarily (and in the US, exclusively) to home releases.
If another thing comes along that substantially improves the gaming experience in a way that simply isn't economical to do in one's home, then the arcade will make a resurgence. No amount of "competitive" gaming draw will cause the same effect. (As an example, I'll point to the rise and fall of LAN-gaming shops.)
That green slime had it coming.
"Lame-o" games didn't kill arcades, the cost of playing at an arcade did (when you can play it at home with people around the world).
Aside from the fact that arcade game variety had dwindled, it was the fact that it had begun to cost a dollar a game or more that really put me off arcades. I used to spend a lot of time and money in them too. But the fact was that we could play more interesting games as much as we wanted at home for less money overall. So really, consoles and the Internet killed the arcade.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
I think arcades can be saved once they realize that they need to have content that can't be reproduced at home. Why would I want to spend money at the arcade to play Teken or Mortal Kombat when it's available on my home console. The advantage arcades used to have was they could offer games that needed more powerful hardware than what was available on computer or on home consoles. I remember having Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II for Nintendo, but I would still play TMNT at the arcade because the quality was so much better. Now with MAME, we see that PCs have more than enough processing and graphics capability to play arcade games. Couple that with unlimited quarters on the emulator and the draw for traditional arcade games goes way down. Arcades can still draw people though. These days, when I go to an arcade, it isn't to play regular games. I play skiball, because I don't have a skiball machine at home. I play pinball because I don't have a pinnball machine at home. I play gun games like Police 911 because that game uses hardware that I wouldn't have at home. That's where an arcade's strength lies, offering access to hardware and games that aren't practical for people to personally own. Just because the era of the arcade's dominance in computing ability is over, doesn't mean it doesn't have other elements to it.
When VR equipment is at a stage where it is too expensive for the average person to have at home, but is cutting edge enough for arcades to buy it and "rent" it by the hour or so, then we will see arcades make a comeback.
Just about everyone here in the U.S. has access to a PC. You can play games that are somewhat compatable with the arcade games of the 80's for free on Yahoo Games and similar sites.
Even plucking some game from the 9.99 bargain rack at BestBuy will get you a game that is better done than pretty much any arcade game worth anything. And that 9.99 will get you a lot farther in that game than it will in an arcade.
It's a simple Cost vs Reward scenario. High cost, low satisfaction reward.
The only money I would spend in an arcade is on an old fashion pinball game. Those can still be a lot of fun, when the mood strikes me.
Even American kinds aren't so dumb as to not figure this out.
When I was a kid, back around the days of Pac Man (like '82), there still existed the singluar arcade - aimed at kids/teens. It was a place that I wasn't allowed and always reaked of weak 70's weed. Adults didn't play games then, cause they didn't grow up playing games.
Kids today don't need that. It's cheaper to own a XBOX or PS2 and it takes alot less effort than actually commuting to wherever.
Gaming at home is better for adults too - we all have computers much more powerful than TI-994a's at home, at work and built into our cell phones (we have cell phones). We have entertainment centers more impressive than those old theaters too, and that's why the kids are the only ones that go to theaters now - to get away from us.
The only really viable market is for the family or for games that just cannot be repeated at home. The arcade is in the Dave & Buster era. Shallow, materialistic, lots of machine guns and gaudy plastic appendages....it's the material excess that comes from reaching maturity, making money, and going corporate. That's where arcade gaming is.
Eventually gaming will reach the zen state, and the level of Shuffleboarding. I can see it now. I'll be retired, on a park bench in Florida, pwning some 80 yr old noob over a global-supe-dupe-fi connection in Doom XI (sponsored by Efferdent Denture Cream).
So the writer of the article is pissed because arcades these days do not cater to his tastes. Tough! Had the writer cared about the type of games in the arcade, then he should have supported it by not buying a gaming rig and play video games on the cheap. Then the arcade would not have lost money, and not have to look elsewhere for revenue like (gasp!) casual gamers.
But of course that would be silly. The writer did what he had to do to get his gaming fix, and the arcade did what it had to do to stay alive.
Arcades are not dead. They just evolved. They still serve the purpose of amusing people, but the people they amuse and the means of doing so changed. The video games that the writer rants against are what's keeping the modern arcades afloat. Arcades cannot just cater to the typical console gamer, since those folks hardly show up. The games these days have to be fun, easy to pick up, and something that you can't experience at home.
I remember playing his paddle boat game with a friend a while back. It had a control mechanism that simulated a real paddle boat. We were going through some prehistoric river. Near the end of the game we were chased by a T-Rex so we began paddling like mad. Our arms were getting tired, but our friends who were watching urged us on and cheered when we escaped. Try simulating that at a home system.
For the record, I've owned a console since the 2600, and I suck at DDR. However, I do like going to Dave and Busters every now and then with my friends. You know why? Because I like looking at my opponents' faces when I win (or lose) and most of my friends can't even spell 'LAN Party'.
Pinball beats almost every other arcade game because it's not perfect. You're dealing with real mechanical components, so you can't predict everything. You'll occasionally get a lucky shot that sends the ball flying through the air some place it was never intended to, and you can nudge the table to do seemingly impossible shots. And like scrolling shooters, pinball is a game where you can get into "the zone", where everything flows smoothly and you rack up crazy scores almost unconsciously. Unfortunately tables are rare now, and too many of them are poorly maintained.