I wouldn't be so quick to say that E3 2006 will be a SONY Vs. MS battle only. More like a royal rumble. New information has come out to show that Zelda: Twilight Princess may be carrying a dual edged sword... litteraly.
I covered this today in the article: A Plan Emerges Nintendo may have the biggest ace up their sleeve of any console launch in history. Zelda may just be a final swan song for the Gamecube and a launch title of sorts for the Revolution... as well as a little of both! Fairly substantiated talk has surfaced showing the release date for Twilight Princess may also be pushed to November '06 and that it may feature the ability to control the action on the GC with the Revolution controller.
We know the Revolution controller can work with the GC from the demo's in New York with Metroid Prime 2 on a GC. Even if not on the GC, the fact that the Revolution can play GC titles means it could grow new abilities by playing it on the Revolution. Either way this is an artful marketing move, and may prove to be the show stealer in May.
While I fully understand this, it is also a large chunk of B.S. that Sony was spouting off to sound important. There is no technical spec. that would ever even make 120FPS possible in 1080p on TWO display's as Sony tried to claim earlier. There is a difference in stating that your game runs at 120FPS in a minimally detailed scene and runs at say 30-40FPS throughout, but to make such insane claims that even the *interfaces* on the device are not capable of is just lame.
Again, FPS was and always will be a marketing tool. It sells video cards, it sells games. Solid FPS should be a given, not a marketing tool. I don;t buy my movies because they run at 36FPS, or TV shows that I have to suffer through at 4FPS because they have more action and detail. A standard of say 60 FPS should become the standard and all games should stick to it. FPS is a gay way to judge any part of a game.
playing on my Sony *Computer Entertainment System* for years even though it has barely any actual correlation to a computer. God forbid we play "games" I mean how gay is that?
It's a freakin game, folks. Stop trying to legitimize it and make it into an "industry" like Hollywood or the music industry... just have some damn fun playing a game. Instead of arguing over if it can display 1.2 million or 1.3 million polygons, and mortgaging your home for an SLi videocard setup so you can play at 120FPS (which your eyes can't even see nor your monitor/TV display) lets break out of this marketing bullshit and get back to fun games, that are both FUN and GAMES.
Wait... you do realize that this is Slashdot? Right? The only link people actually click and read is the "Comments" one to hastily post their view regardless of fact or fiction. And until recently the occasional Goaste link, Natalie Portman reference, or to pour hot grits down their pants.
Once a company goes public they are no longer at the helm, no matter how well intentioned their initial goals were they are no longer. Boards of directors, shareholders, etc. only care about bottom lines and profit... not furthering the good of anyone. Don;t kid yourselves, Google is far from its humble Uni. beginnings and it will never go back.
Heh, I was just being a bit sarcastic... I fully understood and agreed with you to begin with... my response was to anyone who could even question your initial statement.
People don't want or need a hundred features on one device. "convergence" is not something any consumer ACTUALLY wants. It can be "cute" or "neat" to have a cellphone/MP3 player/flashlight/wireless internet/USB Hard Drive (a real device) except for the fact that once you've used it as an MP3 player and a Wireless internet device the battery is dead for it to be used fro any of its other features... not to mention that it does none of them particularly well.
Instead of a bunch of useless features and a cellphone so small it could pose a choking hazard... hows about giving me a phone that holds its signal 100% of the time so I can use it as a PHONE first!
"Why do people own toasters when you can toast your bread in the oven?"
That's easy... because the toaster is way more simple to operate, and it does only one thing and does it well rather than a big device that can do many things slightly more complicated and less streamlined for any one task... oh, wait.... that is exactly the probleme here.
Too many devices trying to do a million and 1 things, geeks think that is cool but no one else does. Ipod, cellphone, console, whatever... just make it do 1 thing and to the best freaking ability with the least fuss. I don't need my console to shave my nuts while baking me a cake as I beat lvl boss 5 with the big pointy stick of uberness +2.
I'm not trying to get into a car thread here... but I am making a point. The FACT is that Toyota (Lexus) is #1 in reliability. Not BMW, but a BMW costs much more and is "perceived" to be the better buy and to warrant that extra cost... the simple fact is that it is not. It is a well made unit and it is reliable, but not #1. That is what I am saying.
Not to go off topic, but let me explain something. Acura's are basically the European Honda, and Kia's from 2006 on are now fully Hyundai powertrains and some have Porsche tuned suspensions... Kia' snow are much different than Kia's of even a year ago.
BMW also has had their share of dogs, and while they are "perceived" as a high quality brand they are not always so. This goes back to what I was saying.
People's perceptions are not always gospel, and most often are based on imperfect data. Personal experience (just as yours with your wife's Kia), media, advertising, and hype to name a few.
Except you miss the point of "Perceived" value. That $1 burger at McD is prolly worth close to a dollar, that $10 burger at Outback is prolly only really worth about $2.50... but the perception is that it is worth more through marketing and hype. Same for BMW, and the rest of your list.
The cause for a bit of thought here is that there is no real perceived value to 98% of America and abroad who have not adopted nor will adopt HD for another 10 years when it is supposedly mandated but will continue to be pushed back as it has so far. If everyone owned HD gear and there were no HD media, then people would pay $40+ for a Blu-Ray... but that isn't the case and the natural reaction will be exactly the reactions seen here.
Take some photo's of any evidence that may be left on the moon from the original trip to finally shut all the whack-job fucks up about us not going to the moon for real initially.
"eventually gamers are likely to tire of the GTA formula, or the games will no longer feel fresh"
Umm, so the, carjack, drive, shoot/hit, smack ho formula could get old and tired?!? *gasp* no, really?!?
For cripes sake GTA has been old and tired for some time to everyone but pre-pubescent boys who aren't really worried about much more than guns, boobies, and "flogging the bishop"... well, I guess that describes most of/. too... but I digress.
I'm not sure if you have ever done any game programming but MMO's are not difficult. They do not require lots of AI (except scripted enemies), They do not require elaborate writing/linear storylines, they do not require a number of things that many non-MMO games require. They require a fairly robust server architecture, they require a fairly balanced weapon/skill system (but it can always be tweaked as you go), a basic framework/engine, and not much more.
While not as simple as an FPS, they are easy. And they are cash cows. Take for instance the COH/COV franchise, COV took almost no time or effort once the basic framework was laid down... just like an FPS. MMO engines will become just like FPS engines, and the content will be all that changes.
Why anyone would think that an MMO is some monumental undertaking is beyond me, many user-created/indie MMO's exist and while they wouldn't stand up to WoW levels they could with enough money and infrastructure. MMO's are residual income for game developers, something only possible with expansion packs/sequels previously... and as with anything residual income is where the money is made. Companies like NCSoft are not dumb, and these companies are making money hand over fist due to the fact that MMO's are cheap, easy, and quick to produce - as long as the scope is kept reasonable such as with Guild Wars.
Sequels have and always will be a part of gaming, movies, books, and just about any media. It is seen as easy money and folks fall for it every time. Even though we all damn well know we will be getting a rushed, less thought out, money making product piggybacking on the success of its predecessor... people still buy them.
The bigger issue is that most games out right now are not being created to FILL A NEED/NICHE. They are trying to force genre's that are quick, easy, and cheap to produce on gamers. (Sports/FPS/RTS/MMO/Sequels) Gamers are at a saturation point. Innovation can never be supressed for long. Gamers are demanding new and unique experiences. Katamari Damacy was the first shot that made companies stop and take notice. Nintendogs was another. A whole shift is approaching gaming, and it is not the more powerful, more expensive, more complex, bullshit being forced down our throats now. Look how much press and play Geometry Wars has been getting, more than any other 360 launch title.
2D gaming needs to come back, it is natural for some games. 3D needs to be refined besides just more/better/faster. Emphasis needs to be placed back on creativity and innovation, not greed and hype.
Not to rain on your parade, but those are BOTH multi-platform releases... and COD2 looks and plays better on the PC. I did say out of the games that are NOT multi-platform. And yes that brings the total number way down.
Exclusives are what sell consoles, and not only exclusives, but AAA exclusives.
How blind can people be? SURE MS is bending over backwards for indie devs, that is about half their sales right now. With such a low number of games releasing and over extended periods of time they NEED indie dev's to tide people over.
So just because MS all of a sudden is opening up to help fill their void with your hard work and give you peanuts for it, doesn't make it all that and a bag of chips. It doesn't bother me though, if you like MS' arcade live then so be it.
I am completely NOT a fanboy. I have worked with Sony and the PS2 for over 4 years professionally, and that is one of the main reasons I am behind the Revolution. I have never even claimed the Revolution will be a hit, sell well, or be received in America with more than a passing glance. What I do care about is breaking out of the current rut the game industry is in. Eye-candy, FPS/RTS, no focus on game design, advertising, and unsubstantiated hype (120 FPS at 1080p on dual screens... umm, yeah sure.) I care about giving indie developers a place to showcase their talent outside of Microsoft, who is just using them to further their cause.
I never said it was unique. What I am saying is that even with Xbox Arcade, all it is is a platform for rehashes and bigger developers still. Geo Wars? Smash TV? and on and on... these are NOT indie/solo efforts that are even remotely innovative or unique.
What I am talking about is not just a way to make a quick buck off old arcade/mini games, but all new material from budding or small developers like the team behind Project Offset, or the original Doom shareware.
Why on earth would I choose Microsoft if given the choice between developing my indie game over Nintendo? Why would anyone at/.???
No, I am quite sure the PS3 and 360 very well fall into the category of "powerhouse's." I don't deny that.
In fact I'm not a Nintendo fanboy even, I am purely hopeful that the system will be very popular to help open up gaming back to small teams and creative individuals instead of big faceless corporations. Only good could come from Nintendo's success on a number of levels.
Look at Project Offset, that is a team of basicaly two or three guys and they have the ability to turn the current status quo on its ear. But they are subservient to finding a publisher who isn't going to rape them, which is damn near impossible. Now, with low cost (free?) development tools for the Revolution a small team like this and many more like them can change the face of gaming and break it out of this stagnation and downward spiral of fun and actual design.
I'm all for that. However, that doesn't mean the Xbox 360 and PS3 are weak or not rediculously powerful. It just means that the priorities are out of whack and the main focus (the games) is sadly low on the list.
Much bigger news (and news that one would think would appeal directly to the/. crowd) is that so many third-party developers have already commited to the Revolution and many more are very interested. Not only that but the fact that from day 1 Nintendo has pledged support for indie/single developers! What more could we ask for, and it gets *zero* coverage. Now, this may change once the full details are known, but with all the fluff and hype covered about everything else this has received NOTHING.
Of those supposed 86 Xbox 360 titles, how many will even be decent? Judging by the fact that out of the 15 or so launch titles, maybe 1 is decent that equates to about 5-6 decent games over the full spread. So in a year and a half you get 5 or so decent games. Now, how many of those are cross-platform or PC games? Oblivion, anyone? And the fact that the Oblivion system specs. were released and not too massive (2ghz, 512MB, common ATI/Nvidia cards, DX9).
Same for the PS3. Oh, but wait Sony has said time and time again that the PS3 is NOT a game console. They are banking heavily on the blu-ray angle. We are all aware of the standard Sony fare and the same proportions of decent:crap as MS. So they may have 3 solid titles out of their lineup.
To buy either the 360 or PS3 to play a handful of titles that are still a year out is a bit silly. Add to this the slow release schedules due to cost and dev. time and you have two expensive consoles that will be seeing more standby time than action. Unless you use your PS3 to play all the Blu-Ray discs you will be buying up like crazy to replace those "so-outdated" DVD's you just built up. I guess just like how we all own so many UMD movies and games... ooh, and mini-discs, don't forget the ubiquitous mini-disc in America.
Two powerhouse machines built around closed standards, DRM, and hype... or the Revolution, with close to open development, low cost, quick development time, standard media, and a back catalog a mile long... even if you are a fanboy it is hard to not see this.
"Advertising that draws the player out of the experience of their game rather than immerses them further into it walks a thin line and the benefits start to get outweighed by the detractions."
There is never a time where advertising in a game "immerses me further" that is the biggest load of B.S. I've ever read. The only exceptions would be team names in sports, car brands on cars, and that sort of "advertising."
Game makers need to resort to advertising because of the huge costs associated with development for the 360/PC/PS3 these days. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy, though, and they are the ones who created the need and now the solution.
Games need to return to the fun and the small dedicated teams designing them, not big faceless corporations churning out games like Nike shoes in a sweatshop (almost an exact analogy for EA). It is a shame that gaming has come to this. There have always been licenses, tie-ins, and blatant advertising (Avoid the Noid, anyone?) but it was never so subversive and underhanded. I truly hope Sony and MS lose their collective shirts this round of consoles and gaming gets back to its roots of creativity and fun, the money will follow naturally not by forcing artificial "needs" and then "solving" them.
Actually there has never been this large of a "slump" even before other releases. This "slump" is a made up excuse for low sales over the entire year to appease stockholders.
This slump has been caused by the failure to release new and exciting games that have any mass appeal. The Sims was one of the last games to do this and that is how old now? FPS, MMO and RTS games are a very narrow market, and cannot sustain an industry as game makers want to do since they are cheap, easy, and quick to pump out. The industry has stagnated over the past two or three years and sales have been a steady decline, blaming upcoming consoles is just a red herring. You will see the 360 and PS3 will not sell that well and then they will not have an excuse come 2007.
And this is exactly why the entire Slashdot, and OSS, community should be shouting the praises of the Nintendo Revolution. Nintendo from day one has made it clear that indie/single game developers will have the ability to create content for the Revolution. What more could we ask for in a console?
This is THE chance to bring gaming back to its roots.
Not to sound smug, but I have been saying for well over a year now that the game market is in a large slump and it is not this *huge* business that is raking in cash and clamoring for new, ultra expensive, consoles. Many, including the game publishers, have kept up a strong public wall of block-buster years and large profit hype... all false.
In the past month alone almost every Slashdot story has been about company after company in massive losses and huge slumps. Not surprising. The PSP and DS adoption rate has been fairly slow (until a few exceptions recently) and that was the beginning, then the 360 (even with low production massive excess in Japan, and surplus in many stores in the US now), and the balking at the PS3 price rumors.
The narrow market known as the "Hardcore" market is not sustainable, and companies are quickly seeing this. Nintendogs was the first big shot that made companies sit up and take notice. The "casual" market is where the money is right now and a major paradigm shift is in progress, the big losers? Sony and MS. If Nintendo can pull this off and possible create an alliance with SEGA, Sony and MS will have to throw in the towel and concentrate on the PC. Nintendo sheds piracy concerns, gains a super-wide audience, and as long as they don't royally fuck up along the way, it's in the bag.
Not only has it grown up, but it is now bigger and more profitable than the so called "hardcore" market. The players have more discretionary income, there is no real threat of piracy in this demographic, and the audience is very broad.
Most game developers, and a number of my close friends who are tied to gaming in some way professionally, are the first to say that their full attention and hope is on this new market. They eliminate their biggest areas of loss, increase marketshare, create less costly and complex games that appeal to the widest audience and offer the biggest opportunity for profit and growth.
I see the 360 and PS3 as the last of the "hardcore" console. That market will move to the PC where it has always generated the most money anyhow, and PC's will become more ubiquitous and more "console-like" so the progression is natural. The new "hardcore" was yesterday's "casual."
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't be so quick to say that E3 2006 will be a SONY Vs. MS battle only. More like a royal rumble. New information has come out to show that Zelda: Twilight Princess may be carrying a dual edged sword... litteraly.
I covered this today in the article: A Plan Emerges Nintendo may have the biggest ace up their sleeve of any console launch in history. Zelda may just be a final swan song for the Gamecube and a launch title of sorts for the Revolution... as well as a little of both! Fairly substantiated talk has surfaced showing the release date for Twilight Princess may also be pushed to November '06 and that it may feature the ability to control the action on the GC with the Revolution controller.
We know the Revolution controller can work with the GC from the demo's in New York with Metroid Prime 2 on a GC. Even if not on the GC, the fact that the Revolution can play GC titles means it could grow new abilities by playing it on the Revolution. Either way this is an artful marketing move, and may prove to be the show stealer in May.
While I fully understand this, it is also a large chunk of B.S. that Sony was spouting off to sound important. There is no technical spec. that would ever even make 120FPS possible in 1080p on TWO display's as Sony tried to claim earlier. There is a difference in stating that your game runs at 120FPS in a minimally detailed scene and runs at say 30-40FPS throughout, but to make such insane claims that even the *interfaces* on the device are not capable of is just lame.
Again, FPS was and always will be a marketing tool. It sells video cards, it sells games. Solid FPS should be a given, not a marketing tool. I don;t buy my movies because they run at 36FPS, or TV shows that I have to suffer through at 4FPS because they have more action and detail. A standard of say 60 FPS should become the standard and all games should stick to it. FPS is a gay way to judge any part of a game.
playing on my Sony *Computer Entertainment System* for years even though it has barely any actual correlation to a computer. God forbid we play "games" I mean how gay is that?
It's a freakin game, folks. Stop trying to legitimize it and make it into an "industry" like Hollywood or the music industry... just have some damn fun playing a game. Instead of arguing over if it can display 1.2 million or 1.3 million polygons, and mortgaging your home for an SLi videocard setup so you can play at 120FPS (which your eyes can't even see nor your monitor/TV display) lets break out of this marketing bullshit and get back to fun games, that are both FUN and GAMES.
"People need to RTFA before submitting..."
Wait... you do realize that this is Slashdot? Right? The only link people actually click and read is the "Comments" one to hastily post their view regardless of fact or fiction. And until recently the occasional Goaste link, Natalie Portman reference, or to pour hot grits down their pants.
Once a company goes public they are no longer at the helm, no matter how well intentioned their initial goals were they are no longer. Boards of directors, shareholders, etc. only care about bottom lines and profit... not furthering the good of anyone. Don;t kid yourselves, Google is far from its humble Uni. beginnings and it will never go back.
I trust them as far as I can throw 'em.
Heh, I was just being a bit sarcastic... I fully understood and agreed with you to begin with... my response was to anyone who could even question your initial statement.
People don't want or need a hundred features on one device. "convergence" is not something any consumer ACTUALLY wants. It can be "cute" or "neat" to have a cellphone/MP3 player/flashlight/wireless internet/USB Hard Drive (a real device) except for the fact that once you've used it as an MP3 player and a Wireless internet device the battery is dead for it to be used fro any of its other features... not to mention that it does none of them particularly well.
Instead of a bunch of useless features and a cellphone so small it could pose a choking hazard... hows about giving me a phone that holds its signal 100% of the time so I can use it as a PHONE first!
"Why do people own toasters when you can toast your bread in the oven?"
That's easy... because the toaster is way more simple to operate, and it does only one thing and does it well rather than a big device that can do many things slightly more complicated and less streamlined for any one task... oh, wait.... that is exactly the probleme here.
Too many devices trying to do a million and 1 things, geeks think that is cool but no one else does. Ipod, cellphone, console, whatever... just make it do 1 thing and to the best freaking ability with the least fuss. I don't need my console to shave my nuts while baking me a cake as I beat lvl boss 5 with the big pointy stick of uberness +2.
I'm not trying to get into a car thread here... but I am making a point. The FACT is that Toyota (Lexus) is #1 in reliability. Not BMW, but a BMW costs much more and is "perceived" to be the better buy and to warrant that extra cost... the simple fact is that it is not. It is a well made unit and it is reliable, but not #1. That is what I am saying.
And BTW it is the Hyundai Azera.
Not to go off topic, but let me explain something. Acura's are basically the European Honda, and Kia's from 2006 on are now fully Hyundai powertrains and some have Porsche tuned suspensions... Kia' snow are much different than Kia's of even a year ago.
BMW also has had their share of dogs, and while they are "perceived" as a high quality brand they are not always so. This goes back to what I was saying.
People's perceptions are not always gospel, and most often are based on imperfect data. Personal experience (just as yours with your wife's Kia), media, advertising, and hype to name a few.
Except you miss the point of "Perceived" value. That $1 burger at McD is prolly worth close to a dollar, that $10 burger at Outback is prolly only really worth about $2.50... but the perception is that it is worth more through marketing and hype. Same for BMW, and the rest of your list.
The cause for a bit of thought here is that there is no real perceived value to 98% of America and abroad who have not adopted nor will adopt HD for another 10 years when it is supposedly mandated but will continue to be pushed back as it has so far. If everyone owned HD gear and there were no HD media, then people would pay $40+ for a Blu-Ray... but that isn't the case and the natural reaction will be exactly the reactions seen here.
Take some photo's of any evidence that may be left on the moon from the original trip to finally shut all the whack-job fucks up about us not going to the moon for real initially.
"eventually gamers are likely to tire of the GTA formula, or the games will no longer feel fresh"
/. too... but I digress.
Umm, so the, carjack, drive, shoot/hit, smack ho formula could get old and tired?!? *gasp* no, really?!?
For cripes sake GTA has been old and tired for some time to everyone but pre-pubescent boys who aren't really worried about much more than guns, boobies, and "flogging the bishop"... well, I guess that describes most of
I'm not sure if you have ever done any game programming but MMO's are not difficult. They do not require lots of AI (except scripted enemies), They do not require elaborate writing/linear storylines, they do not require a number of things that many non-MMO games require. They require a fairly robust server architecture, they require a fairly balanced weapon/skill system (but it can always be tweaked as you go), a basic framework/engine, and not much more.
While not as simple as an FPS, they are easy. And they are cash cows. Take for instance the COH/COV franchise, COV took almost no time or effort once the basic framework was laid down... just like an FPS. MMO engines will become just like FPS engines, and the content will be all that changes.
Why anyone would think that an MMO is some monumental undertaking is beyond me, many user-created/indie MMO's exist and while they wouldn't stand up to WoW levels they could with enough money and infrastructure. MMO's are residual income for game developers, something only possible with expansion packs/sequels previously... and as with anything residual income is where the money is made. Companies like NCSoft are not dumb, and these companies are making money hand over fist due to the fact that MMO's are cheap, easy, and quick to produce - as long as the scope is kept reasonable such as with Guild Wars.
Sequels have and always will be a part of gaming, movies, books, and just about any media. It is seen as easy money and folks fall for it every time. Even though we all damn well know we will be getting a rushed, less thought out, money making product piggybacking on the success of its predecessor... people still buy them.
The bigger issue is that most games out right now are not being created to FILL A NEED/NICHE. They are trying to force genre's that are quick, easy, and cheap to produce on gamers. (Sports/FPS/RTS/MMO/Sequels) Gamers are at a saturation point. Innovation can never be supressed for long. Gamers are demanding new and unique experiences. Katamari Damacy was the first shot that made companies stop and take notice. Nintendogs was another. A whole shift is approaching gaming, and it is not the more powerful, more expensive, more complex, bullshit being forced down our throats now. Look how much press and play Geometry Wars has been getting, more than any other 360 launch title.
2D gaming needs to come back, it is natural for some games. 3D needs to be refined besides just more/better/faster. Emphasis needs to be placed back on creativity and innovation, not greed and hype.
Not to rain on your parade, but those are BOTH multi-platform releases... and COD2 looks and plays better on the PC. I did say out of the games that are NOT multi-platform. And yes that brings the total number way down.
Exclusives are what sell consoles, and not only exclusives, but AAA exclusives.
How blind can people be? SURE MS is bending over backwards for indie devs, that is about half their sales right now. With such a low number of games releasing and over extended periods of time they NEED indie dev's to tide people over.
So just because MS all of a sudden is opening up to help fill their void with your hard work and give you peanuts for it, doesn't make it all that and a bag of chips. It doesn't bother me though, if you like MS' arcade live then so be it.
I am completely NOT a fanboy. I have worked with Sony and the PS2 for over 4 years professionally, and that is one of the main reasons I am behind the Revolution. I have never even claimed the Revolution will be a hit, sell well, or be received in America with more than a passing glance. What I do care about is breaking out of the current rut the game industry is in. Eye-candy, FPS/RTS, no focus on game design, advertising, and unsubstantiated hype (120 FPS at 1080p on dual screens... umm, yeah sure.) I care about giving indie developers a place to showcase their talent outside of Microsoft, who is just using them to further their cause.
I never said it was unique. What I am saying is that even with Xbox Arcade, all it is is a platform for rehashes and bigger developers still. Geo Wars? Smash TV? and on and on... these are NOT indie/solo efforts that are even remotely innovative or unique.
/.???
What I am talking about is not just a way to make a quick buck off old arcade/mini games, but all new material from budding or small developers like the team behind Project Offset, or the original Doom shareware.
Why on earth would I choose Microsoft if given the choice between developing my indie game over Nintendo? Why would anyone at
No, I am quite sure the PS3 and 360 very well fall into the category of "powerhouse's." I don't deny that.
In fact I'm not a Nintendo fanboy even, I am purely hopeful that the system will be very popular to help open up gaming back to small teams and creative individuals instead of big faceless corporations. Only good could come from Nintendo's success on a number of levels.
Look at Project Offset, that is a team of basicaly two or three guys and they have the ability to turn the current status quo on its ear. But they are subservient to finding a publisher who isn't going to rape them, which is damn near impossible. Now, with low cost (free?) development tools for the Revolution a small team like this and many more like them can change the face of gaming and break it out of this stagnation and downward spiral of fun and actual design.
I'm all for that. However, that doesn't mean the Xbox 360 and PS3 are weak or not rediculously powerful. It just means that the priorities are out of whack and the main focus (the games) is sadly low on the list.
Much bigger news (and news that one would think would appeal directly to the /. crowd) is that so many third-party developers have already commited to the Revolution and many more are very interested. Not only that but the fact that from day 1 Nintendo has pledged support for indie/single developers! What more could we ask for, and it gets *zero* coverage. Now, this may change once the full details are known, but with all the fluff and hype covered about everything else this has received NOTHING.
Of those supposed 86 Xbox 360 titles, how many will even be decent? Judging by the fact that out of the 15 or so launch titles, maybe 1 is decent that equates to about 5-6 decent games over the full spread. So in a year and a half you get 5 or so decent games. Now, how many of those are cross-platform or PC games? Oblivion, anyone? And the fact that the Oblivion system specs. were released and not too massive (2ghz, 512MB, common ATI/Nvidia cards, DX9).
Same for the PS3. Oh, but wait Sony has said time and time again that the PS3 is NOT a game console. They are banking heavily on the blu-ray angle. We are all aware of the standard Sony fare and the same proportions of decent:crap as MS. So they may have 3 solid titles out of their lineup.
To buy either the 360 or PS3 to play a handful of titles that are still a year out is a bit silly. Add to this the slow release schedules due to cost and dev. time and you have two expensive consoles that will be seeing more standby time than action. Unless you use your PS3 to play all the Blu-Ray discs you will be buying up like crazy to replace those "so-outdated" DVD's you just built up. I guess just like how we all own so many UMD movies and games... ooh, and mini-discs, don't forget the ubiquitous mini-disc in America.
Two powerhouse machines built around closed standards, DRM, and hype... or the Revolution, with close to open development, low cost, quick development time, standard media, and a back catalog a mile long... even if you are a fanboy it is hard to not see this.
"Advertising that draws the player out of the experience of their game rather than immerses them further into it walks a thin line and the benefits start to get outweighed by the detractions."
There is never a time where advertising in a game "immerses me further" that is the biggest load of B.S. I've ever read. The only exceptions would be team names in sports, car brands on cars, and that sort of "advertising."
Game makers need to resort to advertising because of the huge costs associated with development for the 360/PC/PS3 these days. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy, though, and they are the ones who created the need and now the solution.
Games need to return to the fun and the small dedicated teams designing them, not big faceless corporations churning out games like Nike shoes in a sweatshop (almost an exact analogy for EA). It is a shame that gaming has come to this. There have always been licenses, tie-ins, and blatant advertising (Avoid the Noid, anyone?) but it was never so subversive and underhanded. I truly hope Sony and MS lose their collective shirts this round of consoles and gaming gets back to its roots of creativity and fun, the money will follow naturally not by forcing artificial "needs" and then "solving" them.
- Word to your mother.
Actually there has never been this large of a "slump" even before other releases. This "slump" is a made up excuse for low sales over the entire year to appease stockholders.
This slump has been caused by the failure to release new and exciting games that have any mass appeal. The Sims was one of the last games to do this and that is how old now? FPS, MMO and RTS games are a very narrow market, and cannot sustain an industry as game makers want to do since they are cheap, easy, and quick to pump out. The industry has stagnated over the past two or three years and sales have been a steady decline, blaming upcoming consoles is just a red herring. You will see the 360 and PS3 will not sell that well and then they will not have an excuse come 2007.
And this is exactly why the entire Slashdot, and OSS, community should be shouting the praises of the Nintendo Revolution. Nintendo from day one has made it clear that indie/single game developers will have the ability to create content for the Revolution. What more could we ask for in a console?
This is THE chance to bring gaming back to its roots.
Not to sound smug, but I have been saying for well over a year now that the game market is in a large slump and it is not this *huge* business that is raking in cash and clamoring for new, ultra expensive, consoles. Many, including the game publishers, have kept up a strong public wall of block-buster years and large profit hype... all false.
In the past month alone almost every Slashdot story has been about company after company in massive losses and huge slumps. Not surprising. The PSP and DS adoption rate has been fairly slow (until a few exceptions recently) and that was the beginning, then the 360 (even with low production massive excess in Japan, and surplus in many stores in the US now), and the balking at the PS3 price rumors.
The narrow market known as the "Hardcore" market is not sustainable, and companies are quickly seeing this. Nintendogs was the first big shot that made companies sit up and take notice. The "casual" market is where the money is right now and a major paradigm shift is in progress, the big losers? Sony and MS. If Nintendo can pull this off and possible create an alliance with SEGA, Sony and MS will have to throw in the towel and concentrate on the PC. Nintendo sheds piracy concerns, gains a super-wide audience, and as long as they don't royally fuck up along the way, it's in the bag.
Not only has it grown up, but it is now bigger and more profitable than the so called "hardcore" market. The players have more discretionary income, there is no real threat of piracy in this demographic, and the audience is very broad.
Most game developers, and a number of my close friends who are tied to gaming in some way professionally, are the first to say that their full attention and hope is on this new market. They eliminate their biggest areas of loss, increase marketshare, create less costly and complex games that appeal to the widest audience and offer the biggest opportunity for profit and growth.
I see the 360 and PS3 as the last of the "hardcore" console. That market will move to the PC where it has always generated the most money anyhow, and PC's will become more ubiquitous and more "console-like" so the progression is natural. The new "hardcore" was yesterday's "casual."