I wrote about this about a year and a half ago. At the time, it was still called the "Revolution" and game mags had all but given up on the system. Even most of it's supporters were hoping for a "good solid second place".
Exactly, but everyone can hide behind the notion that the PC is essentially, a business tool. But if PC games become the new home of loads of mainstream porn and torture porn, that will change.
The VB was almost the complete opposite of the Wii, in terms of innovation. "Virtual Reality" was the new "big thing"... a fad that was about to be completely swept away. Instead of "creating something that even gamers didn't know they wanted", the VB gave people EXACTLY what they had already been talking about for years, and were getting bored of, already. The VB may have been unique to consoles and gaming, but it was ANYTHING BUT innovative in terms of concept.
The fact is, the VB had no overall "design philosophy". It's existance was owed to one essential gimmick. The Wii is much more than just motion sensing. The motion sensing is simply a tool that's apart of a much larger design philosophy, and way of thinking about game design. There's a distinct message behind the Wii that holds both social and artistic meaning. The VB simply said, "stereoptics is the new thing". If all the Wii was was "motion sensing is the new big thing", it would have died long ago.
Although Metroid Prime may change that. And many companies are taking it as a challange to make the first killerApp full-fledged FPS on the Wii. Many non-FPS games have demonstrated a huge potential in the Wii as an FPS console. I was sold on Zelda: TP, due to the ease of aiming, Rayman Raving Rabbids seconded that... the Wiimake of Resident Evil 4 totally solidified that. Now they just need to figure out the movement part of the equation, and they're set.
You had to be blind not to see how well it was going to do, about 2 weeks after the "Revolution" was announced. I'm not talking about gamers, but the entire tech-savy population in general (which is VERY significant these days). From the start, Nintendo were labeled the "good guys", and that's really all it took. It was the innovative underdog taking on the lame, corrupt geezers (Sony and Microsoft), ironic since Nintendo, as a company, is more than 120 years old. People bought into the PlayStation and XBox names, not because they liked the system, but because they liked the content. But with the Wii—literally, you could see the international marketplace, for the first time ever, growing a direct attatchment to the basic philosophy behind the system. Wii's success is a totally different story than any other system of any other generation.
It's a duplication of the iPod's success, actually. Ya know why the iPod was/is selling so well? Because of its features... no, not really, because of it's interface? Yeah, that's a small part of it. But the main reason is because there's a philosophy behind it that's more than just the sum of its parts, a religion of sorts, that screems a combination of "form follows function", "inspiration", and "enjoyment". Apple and Nintendo take on the image of the inpirational speaker, entertainer, and silent protagonist, all rolled up into one. If you can sell those things, it doesn't matter what you put out, it will sell.
People can't put their finger on why they like the iPod or Wii as much as they do, so they quote things like "interface design", "enjoyment", "back to basics", things like that. But those are simple excuses for a larger whole: they like what the companies are preaching, and they want to be a part of it.
I'm not meaning to brag, but I could see this coming the day the "Motion Sensor Remote" was announced. I'm dumbfounded that other companies couldn't.
The thing people need to understand is that Sports Gamers don't want to actually PLAY the sports, they want to WATCH them and participate in their management. They want to play coach, manager, and maybe star quarterback. From what I've seen of them, they're sorta like an RPG but using sports teams instead of warriors. Things that actually require getting up off the coutch and being physical are deemed "kiddie" in the eyes of most sports gamers. "WiiSports" may have been a hit among people everywhere, it may have even been one of the most athletic titles ever made, but it didn't appeal to jock gamers in the slightest. It's all about playing the teams that "they know" and "they love," and it's all about how high the "badass meter" (TM) reads. In many ways, even though the Wiimote may be a sport in of itself, it's actually likely the least likely to appeal to the sports jock.
And cut down their DS playing by a third (since so many DSs are still being used to play GBA games). Probably not a very good idea, in terms of establishing accurate numbers.
Well, an NTSC TVs scan rate is a constant 60 fields per second (30fps) at 720x480. Now, it might be that consoles, simply for ease of processing, have ALWAYS processed at 60fps progressive, and then only sent half the data down the composite cable at a time, that would make sense to me. But it sounds like some PS1 and early PS2 games (like "Ico", which I just finished... fucking awesome game, btw) simply doubled the fields, producing only 720x240 (every other pixel is simply a duplicate of the one below it).
But you are correct, that the GameCube, PS2, and XBox were all capable of doing ED, 480p widescreen output. Ironically, the PS2 (the weakest of the three) even released a few titles in HD. However, there was no requirement for the games to be ED or HD. Now, the minimum for a console is 480p on the Wii, and 720p on the PS3 and 360.
Have you even talked with most people around you? Most people I know can't distinguish reality and fiction MOST OF THE TIME, let alone when a movie or interactive video game is trying to establish itself as being reality.
Not only "lots of blood," Monty Python and the Holy Grail has lots of blood, but that's satyrical. We're talking about scenes which involve a person being concious and emotional while they're disembowelled, we get off on seeing the fear in their eyes, and their blood-curtling screams. If it were just gore, autopsy films would be the thing of the day.
Personally, I think "torture porn" is a really really scary trend in today's culture. It's basically snuff, but with the ability to justify it to yourself because you're not REALLY watching someone die. It's actually a very small step to snuff films, themselves... of which I heard are growing in number, every year.
We're becoming perverted with our love of power from inflicting pain.
As much as I hate Wal-Mart and the like, I think it took some guts to stand up to popular demand like that, and try to reverse the ever-increasing trend of "torture-porn" (as you call it... love the name, btw) in our culture. Probably the first and last time I'll ever agree with them on anything.
Great, and watch the PC, as it's rebranded as the "porno-player of the videogame industry." That's a great idea. Next thing you know, it'll be just like over in Japan, where people avoid PC games like the plague in favor of consoles, partially because of the stigma. PC games are having trouble enough as it is without becoming universally branded "pornography".
Actually, it was Sony who spoke up first. Remember, Manhunt 2 was to be released on the Wii and PS3. Microsoft's a little more wishy-washy on the issue, but from what I've heard, it's only because they haven't really been forced into a possition like this before. All three of them have a strictly no-AO policy, however.
Wrong. Console manufacturers only get a small chunk... about 1/4 at MOST. Most games DO NOT use 3rd party engines, and even the ones that do pay fairly small royalties on them. Game developers, themselves, make well over 50% of the profits, even if they do use 3rd praty engines. If the title is an exclusive, the developers get even more.
Actually, the Wii is ED, not SD. No games for the Wii are strictly SD. ED requires quite a bit more processing power because of the extra screen realistate (16:9 instead of 4:3), and twice the pixels per frame (interlace only prints half of the pixels, per field). Nintendo won't allow an SD-only game on the Wii (all must be formatted for both 16:9 ED as well as NTSC).
And I'm guessing that Steve Jobs does as well. The thing is that buttons provide tactile feedback, which makes develops neurological connections between "what you want" and "what you do to get it done", with tactile feedback, the mind is much more able to learn what to do when it wants to perform a specfic action. On the other hand, too many buttons, especially if they all provide the same kind of tactile feedback, becomes very clunky. I think the "1 button" tyrade was pointless, as the mind can just as easily map functionality for one button on one side of a unit, as two. But depending upon their setup, many more buttons can become very problematic.
On the flipside, as a graphic designer, and as someone interested in aesthetic design philosophy in general, buttons are attrocios little mother fuckers. They're entirely unattractive, and they ruin the form of a piece of equipment.
Another problem with buttons is that they're not always well suited for the job. The iPod demonstrated that a jog wheel is MUCH better for scrolling huge lists quickly than a button ever would be. It's fairly "button-less" interface proved a hit with people of all demographics, because it came up with the right interface device for the job. Buttons are the status-quo, and sometimes they're exactly what you want... but if you're creating a piece of propriatary hardware, many times there are other interfaces that make much more sense.
On one hand, as an admirer of aesthetic design, the iPhone seems like a gem. But from someone interested in interface philosophy, it feels like they've abandoned the best route for something slightly less so, which runs counter to Apple's usual interface philosophy.
Bingo. In many ways, the success of one console can be judged by how well the last console was recieved. The N64 really had some major problems: weird controller, loss of 3rd parties, cartridges (which also provided some possitive things, but was overall, not well recieved). The GameCube actually fixed most of these things, but didn't sell well because of the ill image the N64 gave Nintendo.
In fact, the GameCube was a pretty well recieved console. Everyone who bought one (myself included) tended to think very highly of it. It was much more polished than the N64 in terms of it's design and direction. I think that PART of the success of the Wii is due to the fact that Nintendo won a lot of people over (if from afar) with the GameCube. It really demonstrated to third parties that Nintendo hadn't forgotten about them, so they vowed to jump on the bandwagon when the next generation came along.
Watch out Wii 2.0, or whatever is next up. Nintendo better be prepared to sell more numbers than tney can imagine. With the popularity of the Wii as it is, their next console, following the trend, will probably hit sales figures of PS2 proportions.
Quite a few. The PS2 was my first console, as it was many other people's. Every new console is TRYING to bring in new people. New people = didn't have the last console. One that can boast an extended library by having titles from its previous incarnation looks a lot better in the eyes of new gamers, than one that starts it's launch with 8 titles to choose from. Plus, as the generation got on, the very first PS2 games didn't really seem all that different from PS1 games (I'm playing ICO right now, which could have done fine on the PS1, for instance), and so the break between the generations are really quite seemless.
However, and here's the unexepected part, Mario Galaxy and Smash Bros Brawl are coming out on time, neither one has ever been slated for release, and the general expectation has been "late 2007", and now both of them coming out in November and December, respectively. Of course, there are those that were "hoping" for a summer release, or even a spring release, but there's never been any alogation by Nintendo that these titles would be released before holiday 2007, and here they are!
Nintendo, releasing something on time? Is that even possible? I don't believe it. Expect a last minute delay sometime here in the next few months. (j/k)
I do think there is a problem, and that's the inconsisistancy between game ratings and movie ratings. I have no problem with Manhunt 2 being rated AO (NC-17 equivelent), if there's any game that deserves this title on the basis of violence, it's probably this title. However, it is nothing compared to what the film industry is allowed to do. Hostel, Saw, Touristas and the like just as grim and violent, yet they somehow "buy" themselves out of the NC-17 rating. It really is the movie rating system that's corrupt. Society doesn't change all that quickly, yet the difference between ratings in the last two decades is ENORMOUS. What used to be R is now on the low-end of the PG-13 rating, or even PG these days. Rating inflation is a huge problem, and I think that it's because studios are, little by little, buying the ratings. When you have 75% of movies falling under one category (R), I think there's a problem.
I just want to see games and films be treated equally. But I really think that it's the movie ratings that are broken. And then there's the content. Show a billion severed heads, and watch people screaming for their lives as they're brutally murdered, but show two people making love, and it's NC-17 for you.
13% because it's Final Fantasy 13, that's the only reason. Why else would they say FFv13 was 1.3% done... too much of a coincidence. These numbers are arbitrary.
And I hate to say it, but Square (as with most game developers) is NOT the greatest at estimating amount completed.
This is true, FF7 is usually accepted by hardcore fans (although most feel it's overhyped), but pound for pound, tend to prefer FFVI as the first "modern console RPG". FFIX is highly regarded too as a very fine attempt at "returning to the roots" of the series. With all the references, FFIX was practically designed with hardcore fans in mind. Surprisingly, where I went to college, all the really hardcore FF fans favored FF8 as their favorite in the series (myself included), although, among more casual players and FF7 fans, FF8 is Satan incarnate (go figure).
FFX is kinda split. The increased difficulty appealed to hardcore fans, but the extreme linearity, and overly-cliche characterization was offputting to some. I like it less, as time goes on, but it's still a solid game.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll add in mine, as well, that I just recently recovered. From February 2006, before the "Wii" was christained.
#129855
I wrote about this about a year and a half ago. At the time, it was still called the "Revolution" and game mags had all but given up on the system. Even most of it's supporters were hoping for a "good solid second place".
(129855) Why Apple Won, and Why Nintendo Will
Exactly, but everyone can hide behind the notion that the PC is essentially, a business tool. But if PC games become the new home of loads of mainstream porn and torture porn, that will change.
The VB was almost the complete opposite of the Wii, in terms of innovation. "Virtual Reality" was the new "big thing"... a fad that was about to be completely swept away. Instead of "creating something that even gamers didn't know they wanted", the VB gave people EXACTLY what they had already been talking about for years, and were getting bored of, already. The VB may have been unique to consoles and gaming, but it was ANYTHING BUT innovative in terms of concept.
The fact is, the VB had no overall "design philosophy". It's existance was owed to one essential gimmick. The Wii is much more than just motion sensing. The motion sensing is simply a tool that's apart of a much larger design philosophy, and way of thinking about game design. There's a distinct message behind the Wii that holds both social and artistic meaning. The VB simply said, "stereoptics is the new thing". If all the Wii was was "motion sensing is the new big thing", it would have died long ago.
Although Metroid Prime may change that. And many companies are taking it as a challange to make the first killerApp full-fledged FPS on the Wii. Many non-FPS games have demonstrated a huge potential in the Wii as an FPS console. I was sold on Zelda: TP, due to the ease of aiming, Rayman Raving Rabbids seconded that... the Wiimake of Resident Evil 4 totally solidified that. Now they just need to figure out the movement part of the equation, and they're set.
You had to be blind not to see how well it was going to do, about 2 weeks after the "Revolution" was announced. I'm not talking about gamers, but the entire tech-savy population in general (which is VERY significant these days). From the start, Nintendo were labeled the "good guys", and that's really all it took. It was the innovative underdog taking on the lame, corrupt geezers (Sony and Microsoft), ironic since Nintendo, as a company, is more than 120 years old. People bought into the PlayStation and XBox names, not because they liked the system, but because they liked the content. But with the Wii—literally, you could see the international marketplace, for the first time ever, growing a direct attatchment to the basic philosophy behind the system. Wii's success is a totally different story than any other system of any other generation.
It's a duplication of the iPod's success, actually. Ya know why the iPod was/is selling so well? Because of its features... no, not really, because of it's interface? Yeah, that's a small part of it. But the main reason is because there's a philosophy behind it that's more than just the sum of its parts, a religion of sorts, that screems a combination of "form follows function", "inspiration", and "enjoyment". Apple and Nintendo take on the image of the inpirational speaker, entertainer, and silent protagonist, all rolled up into one. If you can sell those things, it doesn't matter what you put out, it will sell.
People can't put their finger on why they like the iPod or Wii as much as they do, so they quote things like "interface design", "enjoyment", "back to basics", things like that. But those are simple excuses for a larger whole: they like what the companies are preaching, and they want to be a part of it.
I'm not meaning to brag, but I could see this coming the day the "Motion Sensor Remote" was announced. I'm dumbfounded that other companies couldn't.
The thing people need to understand is that Sports Gamers don't want to actually PLAY the sports, they want to WATCH them and participate in their management. They want to play coach, manager, and maybe star quarterback. From what I've seen of them, they're sorta like an RPG but using sports teams instead of warriors. Things that actually require getting up off the coutch and being physical are deemed "kiddie" in the eyes of most sports gamers. "WiiSports" may have been a hit among people everywhere, it may have even been one of the most athletic titles ever made, but it didn't appeal to jock gamers in the slightest. It's all about playing the teams that "they know" and "they love," and it's all about how high the "badass meter" (TM) reads. In many ways, even though the Wiimote may be a sport in of itself, it's actually likely the least likely to appeal to the sports jock.
And cut down their DS playing by a third (since so many DSs are still being used to play GBA games). Probably not a very good idea, in terms of establishing accurate numbers.
Well, an NTSC TVs scan rate is a constant 60 fields per second (30fps) at 720x480. Now, it might be that consoles, simply for ease of processing, have ALWAYS processed at 60fps progressive, and then only sent half the data down the composite cable at a time, that would make sense to me. But it sounds like some PS1 and early PS2 games (like "Ico", which I just finished... fucking awesome game, btw) simply doubled the fields, producing only 720x240 (every other pixel is simply a duplicate of the one below it).
But you are correct, that the GameCube, PS2, and XBox were all capable of doing ED, 480p widescreen output. Ironically, the PS2 (the weakest of the three) even released a few titles in HD. However, there was no requirement for the games to be ED or HD. Now, the minimum for a console is 480p on the Wii, and 720p on the PS3 and 360.
Have you even talked with most people around you? Most people I know can't distinguish reality and fiction MOST OF THE TIME, let alone when a movie or interactive video game is trying to establish itself as being reality.
Not only "lots of blood," Monty Python and the Holy Grail has lots of blood, but that's satyrical. We're talking about scenes which involve a person being concious and emotional while they're disembowelled, we get off on seeing the fear in their eyes, and their blood-curtling screams. If it were just gore, autopsy films would be the thing of the day.
Personally, I think "torture porn" is a really really scary trend in today's culture. It's basically snuff, but with the ability to justify it to yourself because you're not REALLY watching someone die. It's actually a very small step to snuff films, themselves... of which I heard are growing in number, every year.
We're becoming perverted with our love of power from inflicting pain.
THANK YOU!
As much as I hate Wal-Mart and the like, I think it took some guts to stand up to popular demand like that, and try to reverse the ever-increasing trend of "torture-porn" (as you call it... love the name, btw) in our culture. Probably the first and last time I'll ever agree with them on anything.
Great, and watch the PC, as it's rebranded as the "porno-player of the videogame industry." That's a great idea. Next thing you know, it'll be just like over in Japan, where people avoid PC games like the plague in favor of consoles, partially because of the stigma. PC games are having trouble enough as it is without becoming universally branded "pornography".
Actually, it was Sony who spoke up first. Remember, Manhunt 2 was to be released on the Wii and PS3. Microsoft's a little more wishy-washy on the issue, but from what I've heard, it's only because they haven't really been forced into a possition like this before. All three of them have a strictly no-AO policy, however.
Freeware games are here to suck.
Wrong. Console manufacturers only get a small chunk... about 1/4 at MOST. Most games DO NOT use 3rd party engines, and even the ones that do pay fairly small royalties on them. Game developers, themselves, make well over 50% of the profits, even if they do use 3rd praty engines. If the title is an exclusive, the developers get even more.
Actually, the Wii is ED, not SD. No games for the Wii are strictly SD. ED requires quite a bit more processing power because of the extra screen realistate (16:9 instead of 4:3), and twice the pixels per frame (interlace only prints half of the pixels, per field). Nintendo won't allow an SD-only game on the Wii (all must be formatted for both 16:9 ED as well as NTSC).
And I'm guessing that Steve Jobs does as well. The thing is that buttons provide tactile feedback, which makes develops neurological connections between "what you want" and "what you do to get it done", with tactile feedback, the mind is much more able to learn what to do when it wants to perform a specfic action. On the other hand, too many buttons, especially if they all provide the same kind of tactile feedback, becomes very clunky. I think the "1 button" tyrade was pointless, as the mind can just as easily map functionality for one button on one side of a unit, as two. But depending upon their setup, many more buttons can become very problematic.
On the flipside, as a graphic designer, and as someone interested in aesthetic design philosophy in general, buttons are attrocios little mother fuckers. They're entirely unattractive, and they ruin the form of a piece of equipment.
Another problem with buttons is that they're not always well suited for the job. The iPod demonstrated that a jog wheel is MUCH better for scrolling huge lists quickly than a button ever would be. It's fairly "button-less" interface proved a hit with people of all demographics, because it came up with the right interface device for the job. Buttons are the status-quo, and sometimes they're exactly what you want... but if you're creating a piece of propriatary hardware, many times there are other interfaces that make much more sense.
On one hand, as an admirer of aesthetic design, the iPhone seems like a gem. But from someone interested in interface philosophy, it feels like they've abandoned the best route for something slightly less so, which runs counter to Apple's usual interface philosophy.
Bingo. In many ways, the success of one console can be judged by how well the last console was recieved. The N64 really had some major problems: weird controller, loss of 3rd parties, cartridges (which also provided some possitive things, but was overall, not well recieved). The GameCube actually fixed most of these things, but didn't sell well because of the ill image the N64 gave Nintendo.
In fact, the GameCube was a pretty well recieved console. Everyone who bought one (myself included) tended to think very highly of it. It was much more polished than the N64 in terms of it's design and direction. I think that PART of the success of the Wii is due to the fact that Nintendo won a lot of people over (if from afar) with the GameCube. It really demonstrated to third parties that Nintendo hadn't forgotten about them, so they vowed to jump on the bandwagon when the next generation came along.
Watch out Wii 2.0, or whatever is next up. Nintendo better be prepared to sell more numbers than tney can imagine. With the popularity of the Wii as it is, their next console, following the trend, will probably hit sales figures of PS2 proportions.
Quite a few. The PS2 was my first console, as it was many other people's. Every new console is TRYING to bring in new people. New people = didn't have the last console. One that can boast an extended library by having titles from its previous incarnation looks a lot better in the eyes of new gamers, than one that starts it's launch with 8 titles to choose from. Plus, as the generation got on, the very first PS2 games didn't really seem all that different from PS1 games (I'm playing ICO right now, which could have done fine on the PS1, for instance), and so the break between the generations are really quite seemless.
However, and here's the unexepected part, Mario Galaxy and Smash Bros Brawl are coming out on time, neither one has ever been slated for release, and the general expectation has been "late 2007", and now both of them coming out in November and December, respectively. Of course, there are those that were "hoping" for a summer release, or even a spring release, but there's never been any alogation by Nintendo that these titles would be released before holiday 2007, and here they are!
Nintendo, releasing something on time? Is that even possible? I don't believe it. Expect a last minute delay sometime here in the next few months. (j/k)
Okay, now that's excessive. I've seen figures in the high 40% ranges, I've seen it up to mid-60%, but 93% is simply ignorant.
I do think there is a problem, and that's the inconsisistancy between game ratings and movie ratings. I have no problem with Manhunt 2 being rated AO (NC-17 equivelent), if there's any game that deserves this title on the basis of violence, it's probably this title. However, it is nothing compared to what the film industry is allowed to do. Hostel, Saw, Touristas and the like just as grim and violent, yet they somehow "buy" themselves out of the NC-17 rating. It really is the movie rating system that's corrupt. Society doesn't change all that quickly, yet the difference between ratings in the last two decades is ENORMOUS. What used to be R is now on the low-end of the PG-13 rating, or even PG these days. Rating inflation is a huge problem, and I think that it's because studios are, little by little, buying the ratings. When you have 75% of movies falling under one category (R), I think there's a problem.
I just want to see games and films be treated equally. But I really think that it's the movie ratings that are broken. And then there's the content. Show a billion severed heads, and watch people screaming for their lives as they're brutally murdered, but show two people making love, and it's NC-17 for you.
13% because it's Final Fantasy 13, that's the only reason. Why else would they say FFv13 was 1.3% done... too much of a coincidence. These numbers are arbitrary.
And I hate to say it, but Square (as with most game developers) is NOT the greatest at estimating amount completed.
This is true, FF7 is usually accepted by hardcore fans (although most feel it's overhyped), but pound for pound, tend to prefer FFVI as the first "modern console RPG". FFIX is highly regarded too as a very fine attempt at "returning to the roots" of the series. With all the references, FFIX was practically designed with hardcore fans in mind. Surprisingly, where I went to college, all the really hardcore FF fans favored FF8 as their favorite in the series (myself included), although, among more casual players and FF7 fans, FF8 is Satan incarnate (go figure).
FFX is kinda split. The increased difficulty appealed to hardcore fans, but the extreme linearity, and overly-cliche characterization was offputting to some. I like it less, as time goes on, but it's still a solid game.