The be all and end all of it is that for any subset or category of the population of the Warcraft universe you'll have good and bad. If we divide up into the Alliance and Horde categories we see good (establishing a home, rebuilding from disaster, etching out a living) and bad (plotting the death of all things living, corrupt governments, traitors etc). The only completely "pure" good or evil are the benevolent Naaru and the Old Gods respectively, and even then it's probably only because we know so little about them.
The game is good if it makes money. (SOE) The game is good if it adheres to lore and provides an authentic Star Wars experience. (Elitists, hard core nerds) The game is good if I can be a jedi. (Lots and lots of people, including elitists and hard core nerds)
The intersection point of these is a game with jedi, at least from SOE's simplified point of view.
2. The lack of "High Art" in games.
Until such time as games become a true form of mass media, people with complex tastes are not going to be catered to. It isn't cost efficient, and there aren't enough of them in any one place/interest. When, like books or movies, the "playerbase" is arguably the entire population we'll see a thriving "niche" market. Until then, jedi and next year's madden release.
3. SOE screwed up.
We can argue about what appeals to the mainstream over the intricate desires of a small group with complex tastes and the proportions of various IQ ranges to each, but in the end the SOE shot SWG several times in the face. Bugs, ill-conceived changes and various other game breakers are the result, jedi or no jedi.
The key difference between DVD vs VHS and BR/HD vs DVD is simple; the DVD's targeted device had 100% market penetration at the time.
For all of the feature differences, that's the single-most important distinction. If you had a TV you could use a DVD player with it and have full access to all its benefits. The same can not be said of Bluray or HD-DVD.
Eventually, everyone will have HDTVs. This is not a contestable point. However, "eventually" can be a long time from now. As you aptly noted, it's entirely possible that by the time we hit "eventually" Bluray and HD-DVD will be obsolete anyway.
I think the "shorter product cycles" refers to software rather than hardware. Hence the citing of Super Mario Galazy and Metroid Prime Corruption.
"Permanent Catchup Mode" in this case is only because said companies can't think of anything new. With the 2-3 year developement cycle they had time to hear about the Next Big Thing(TM) and rehash it into their games. With the speedy developement times of the DS and Wii, you can't copy things fast enough.
A: You don't have a clue. It's clear by your statements that you pay attention to specific subsections of the industry that appeal to you. For example...
What does Nintendo even have slated for Q4, I don't know.
Anyone with a clue would either be able to go to Nintendo's website and look this information up, or would already know it offhand.
B: As it stands, the video game industry is young. For a gamer that massive amount of money being thrown around may seem like "legitimization", but it isn't. Games are not yet "mass media", because they haven't reached the masses. Everyone reads books, watches movies, TV, reads news etc. Games aren't yet that prolific, and people who are not gamers often have many negative perceptions of them.
Until games are played by everyone the same way we all read books or watch TV, the industry will not yet be legitimized. The DS, the GBA and the Wii reach out to demographics not known for playing games. This moves us much closer to that goal.
Your opinion is your own, and I wouldn't want you to play the Wii if you didn't enjoy it. However, be aware of your own personal biases and how they might affect your knowledge, your outlook, and your arguments.
He didn't call any games stupid, he just stated he personally disliked many popular genres. He then moved on to discuss what he did like, and how the genres and types of games he liked were maligned by the big publishers.
I don't believe that he was implying at any point his game taste was "superior", but he was implying that it was largely forgotten. His conclusion is that one of the reasons Nintendo is doing so well is because they are releasing games that target all those gamers whose tastes were not being served by the big publishers.
Lastly, attacking him back by implying his "fun" was stupid doesn't help your arguments.
Your comment didn't deserve a redundant, but it didn't warrant any acclaim either.
Tenured programmers/engineers tend to like what they know. Obviously when the execs walked down the latter and said, "We need a database" this person said, "Alright, we'll use this" and went wax nostaligic about Jet.
That, or the morass of our government dictated a few things that didn't make sense. They tend to be behind the times in terms of software/hardware advances.
I can understand why Hardcore gamers are afraid of what you say. We've had the industry to ourselves for two decades, and now our exclusive hold is fading. The attention will not be wholly on us, and there is (as you articulated) the fear that this will coincide with a reduction in games for us.
I'm more optimistic than that.
The industry is set to expand, and finally be considered "mass media". To be mass media, it has to be consumed by the masses in every way, shape and form. This doesn't just mean casual games, but hardcore games, non-games and many other things. Art is not limited to impressionism, nor cubism, nor photorealistic styles. Books are not all Harry Potter, Dune, or Dr. Seuss. Movies vary from summer blockbusters, to indie shorts, to avant garde films. In a mature media, there is room for everyone.
We will see a vast increase in the number of "casual" games. Regular games media outlets will be more focused on the broader audience, with articles about hardcore games present but overwhelmed. This seems bad, but this is the information age. Websites and publications will arise that target YOU the Hardcore gamer and YOU alone. There you will be able to meet with your brethren and discuss the latest and greatest. There you will find the advertisements and buzz for the newest Hardcore games. There and many other places like it you will find your home.
Hardcore games and gamers will lose their exclusive hold on the industry, but by no means will they diminish or disappear. It wouldn't be healthy for such events to pass. Every media form has its enthusiasts, it's hard"core". They are pivotal in importance, and neglecting them is like forgetting to eat. Though the % of games target to the hardcore will drop, the volume will increase such that we'll not want for our style of gaming.
There will be bad hardcore games, and there will be excellent hardcore games. Aside from the industry expansion, things will be very much the same as now. We'll get our FPSs, our Ninja Gaidens and our Final Fantasies. We'll call each other Fucktards, pwn n00bs and declare our 1337n355 with pride. We spend too much money to be ignored.
Not for a Wii game, you can't. Only the GC and VC ones.
Super Smash Bros: Brawl uses these controllers, and not the Wiimote.
I'll concede your point about "filled". It just sounded like you were imagining hundreds of strange controllers. I don't expect this to happen, as even Nitendo is maintaining some connection to the old modes (as evidenced by SSB:B).
The Voice of Reason(TM) is not a welcome one here.
I just wanted to say it was refreshing to read your comments. I was shocked at the blind hatred and vitriol being thrown about here. I'm all for "celebrating death" in the religious sense, that it leads to new life. However, I'm not one to dance on anyone's grave.
Very often we here at/. rail against people like Jack Thompson, who paint us as that which we are not without even stopping to consider what we might be. I find it saddening that we are largely doing the same thing to Valenti. He's not even cold and we've celebrating, much as Thompson was already exploiting the VA Tech shooting within hours of it occurring.
This isn't saying everything Valenti did was mete and right, but I don't think it is just of us to judge him so harshly.
Sci-Fi based MMORPGs are not as popular as their fantasy based siblings. I may be a neophyte, but the only reasonably successful Sci-Fi MMORPG I can think of is EVE. SWG strikes me as a train wreck. Meanwhile, we have EQ, EQ2, FF11, DAoC and WoW as easily recognizable examples of successful MMORPGs in the fantasy setting.
If Warhammer Online passes muster and is successful I think we can expect a Warhammer 40k followup MMO, much like the constant rumors of "World of Starcraft" (Heaven help Blizzard if they can't come up with a better name than that).
I think the AMOUNT of total MMO players is about peaked...
I think you assume too much. If I recall, this same argument was used to note that WoW would not surpass EQ by much. The idea that there are a fixed amount of people who play MMOs is one that will likely fade in coming years.
If the Next Big Thing(TM) comes out tomorrow, we won't see Blizzard's subscriptions drop down to near nothing overnight. Drop perhaps, but not collapse. In fact, I could easily imagine Blizzard retaining even 75% of their current subscriptions while the Next Big Thing(TM) doubles what they have already.
In short, the userbase for MMORPGs is growing daily. New, excellent and appealing MMORPGs only serve to further this.
One of the more amazing things I saw in Japan was a sumo wrestling match on TV. Normally you'd expect the two of them to collied in a Godzilla-esque clash of the titans. I was in awe of how it actually went down.
This huge guy dodged the other's charge and used his own momentum to send him flying out of the ring. It looked like the winner was going to head on collide with the loser, but he slipped around him and that was that.
I feel like Nintendo has done the same thing. They could potentially compete head on with Microsoft and Sony, but that's actually more risky than stepping to the side. Sony and Microsoft have the potential to stick around for another five generations without making a cent. Nintendo might last one generation of pure losses. It's possible Nintendo could win such a fight, but it's also possible they might lose.
So instead Nintendo's let the two giants fight each other, draining both of their funds, while they frolick elsewhere unopposed. Thus, they get to weaken their competitors without having to compete!
It has its own risks, but the strategy appears to have paid off.
It does indeed sound like Nintendo might be the only winner this generation. That scares me.
What if they conclude that gamers only want gimmicky games? The next generation would be filled with crazy controllers and half-assed games to play them with.
You needn't be scared.
The only companies that might make your assumption are shovelware companies. Few other companies are stupid enough to think that "gimmicky" is good.
Even if we make the assumption that just about every studio decides that gimmicky is the way of things, that doesn't imply a generation "filled with crazy controllers". At most, we'd see three (one from Sony, one from Microsoft, and one from Nintendo). There might be smoe others (ala Guitar Hero) but the industry certainly wouldn't be "filled".
If Super Smash Bros: Brawl is any evidence, even Nintendo isn't completely ditching the old modes. The industry is going to change, but it is for the better. Everyone will benefit, whether hardcore or anything else.
If the Wii had a standard controller as an option, my thoughts might be different, though. I don't need the hyper-realistic graphics on my console. My PC handles that readily. But the Wiimote sucks at standard games. only 2 buttons, placed funny, and the controller is no fun to hold sideways. (I had my doubts before Super Paper Mario, and now I know it's not much fun to hold that way.)
1) You can use Gamecube controllers with the Wii. If you don't have Gamecube controllers, you can buy the "Classic" controllers.
2) I've had a lot of fun holding the controller sideways for Super Paper Mario and Excite Truck. I've also had fun playing the original Mario brothers. To each their own I guess.
He's still parroting the supposed Counter-Striking Cho did as a teen. I'm not sure that claim has really been validated anywhere, but the facts haven't ever proven much of a barrier to this man.
There's so much more to this than the summary. I was simply amazed by the wealth of information. There is no way on earth anyone could have possibly done the article justice in any summation, and I'm amazed as good a quote was to be found as was used. We learn so much, and yet are left hungering for more./sarcasm
Yes. As an owner of both a 360 and a Wii I can say you are right. The only overlay in demographic are people like me who are more than willing to buy both.
No. The Wii is a threat to the 360. Because I now own both my budget and time is split between the two. Some developers will stop developing for the 360 because the Wii's market is my demographic + many others, and is cheaper to developer for.
Maybe. The elite SKU is black. Maybe they're changing colors because they're scared.
Why do people play chess online? Scrabble? Anything?
Why do people play Soccer? Football? Baseball?
Why do people do any of this professionally?
Some people enjoy competition. Some people enjoy it to the point where they make their living by competing. Whether it's Halo or Hearts, many people enjoy pitting their skill, luck and wits against others.
Slashdot Mirror
Nerdy nitpick, Sargeras wasn't Eredar. He was a Titan.
The be all and end all of it is that for any subset or category of the population of the Warcraft universe you'll have good and bad. If we divide up into the Alliance and Horde categories we see good (establishing a home, rebuilding from disaster, etching out a living) and bad (plotting the death of all things living, corrupt governments, traitors etc). The only completely "pure" good or evil are the benevolent Naaru and the Old Gods respectively, and even then it's probably only because we know so little about them.
It boils down to several things.
1. How do we measure success/good?
The game is good if it makes money. (SOE)
The game is good if it adheres to lore and provides an authentic Star Wars experience. (Elitists, hard core nerds)
The game is good if I can be a jedi. (Lots and lots of people, including elitists and hard core nerds)
The intersection point of these is a game with jedi, at least from SOE's simplified point of view.
2. The lack of "High Art" in games.
Until such time as games become a true form of mass media, people with complex tastes are not going to be catered to. It isn't cost efficient, and there aren't enough of them in any one place/interest. When, like books or movies, the "playerbase" is arguably the entire population we'll see a thriving "niche" market. Until then, jedi and next year's madden release.
3. SOE screwed up.
We can argue about what appeals to the mainstream over the intricate desires of a small group with complex tastes and the proportions of various IQ ranges to each, but in the end the SOE shot SWG several times in the face. Bugs, ill-conceived changes and various other game breakers are the result, jedi or no jedi.
The key difference between DVD vs VHS and BR/HD vs DVD is simple; the DVD's targeted device had 100% market penetration at the time.
For all of the feature differences, that's the single-most important distinction. If you had a TV you could use a DVD player with it and have full access to all its benefits. The same can not be said of Bluray or HD-DVD.
Eventually, everyone will have HDTVs. This is not a contestable point. However, "eventually" can be a long time from now. As you aptly noted, it's entirely possible that by the time we hit "eventually" Bluray and HD-DVD will be obsolete anyway.
I think the "shorter product cycles" refers to software rather than hardware. Hence the citing of Super Mario Galazy and Metroid Prime Corruption.
"Permanent Catchup Mode" in this case is only because said companies can't think of anything new. With the 2-3 year developement cycle they had time to hear about the Next Big Thing(TM) and rehash it into their games. With the speedy developement times of the DS and Wii, you can't copy things fast enough.
That's my cynicism talking.
Anyone with a clue would either be able to go to Nintendo's website and look this information up, or would already know it offhand.
B: As it stands, the video game industry is young. For a gamer that massive amount of money being thrown around may seem like "legitimization", but it isn't. Games are not yet "mass media", because they haven't reached the masses. Everyone reads books, watches movies, TV, reads news etc. Games aren't yet that prolific, and people who are not gamers often have many negative perceptions of them.
Until games are played by everyone the same way we all read books or watch TV, the industry will not yet be legitimized. The DS, the GBA and the Wii reach out to demographics not known for playing games. This moves us much closer to that goal.
Your opinion is your own, and I wouldn't want you to play the Wii if you didn't enjoy it. However, be aware of your own personal biases and how they might affect your knowledge, your outlook, and your arguments.
He didn't call any games stupid, he just stated he personally disliked many popular genres. He then moved on to discuss what he did like, and how the genres and types of games he liked were maligned by the big publishers.
I don't believe that he was implying at any point his game taste was "superior", but he was implying that it was largely forgotten. His conclusion is that one of the reasons Nintendo is doing so well is because they are releasing games that target all those gamers whose tastes were not being served by the big publishers.
Lastly, attacking him back by implying his "fun" was stupid doesn't help your arguments.
Your comment didn't deserve a redundant, but it didn't warrant any acclaim either.
Tenured programmers/engineers tend to like what they know. Obviously when the execs walked down the latter and said, "We need a database" this person said, "Alright, we'll use this" and went wax nostaligic about Jet.
That, or the morass of our government dictated a few things that didn't make sense. They tend to be behind the times in terms of software/hardware advances.
I can understand why Hardcore gamers are afraid of what you say. We've had the industry to ourselves for two decades, and now our exclusive hold is fading. The attention will not be wholly on us, and there is (as you articulated) the fear that this will coincide with a reduction in games for us.
I'm more optimistic than that.
The industry is set to expand, and finally be considered "mass media". To be mass media, it has to be consumed by the masses in every way, shape and form. This doesn't just mean casual games, but hardcore games, non-games and many other things. Art is not limited to impressionism, nor cubism, nor photorealistic styles. Books are not all Harry Potter, Dune, or Dr. Seuss. Movies vary from summer blockbusters, to indie shorts, to avant garde films. In a mature media, there is room for everyone.
We will see a vast increase in the number of "casual" games. Regular games media outlets will be more focused on the broader audience, with articles about hardcore games present but overwhelmed. This seems bad, but this is the information age. Websites and publications will arise that target YOU the Hardcore gamer and YOU alone. There you will be able to meet with your brethren and discuss the latest and greatest. There you will find the advertisements and buzz for the newest Hardcore games. There and many other places like it you will find your home.
Hardcore games and gamers will lose their exclusive hold on the industry, but by no means will they diminish or disappear. It wouldn't be healthy for such events to pass. Every media form has its enthusiasts, it's hard"core". They are pivotal in importance, and neglecting them is like forgetting to eat. Though the % of games target to the hardcore will drop, the volume will increase such that we'll not want for our style of gaming.
There will be bad hardcore games, and there will be excellent hardcore games. Aside from the industry expansion, things will be very much the same as now. We'll get our FPSs, our Ninja Gaidens and our Final Fantasies. We'll call each other Fucktards, pwn n00bs and declare our 1337n355 with pride. We spend too much money to be ignored.
Personally, I'm excited.
Super Smash Bros: Brawl uses these controllers, and not the Wiimote.
I'll concede your point about "filled". It just sounded like you were imagining hundreds of strange controllers. I don't expect this to happen, as even Nitendo is maintaining some connection to the old modes (as evidenced by SSB:B).
The Voice of Reason(TM) is not a welcome one here.
/. rail against people like Jack Thompson, who paint us as that which we are not without even stopping to consider what we might be. I find it saddening that we are largely doing the same thing to Valenti. He's not even cold and we've celebrating, much as Thompson was already exploiting the VA Tech shooting within hours of it occurring.
I just wanted to say it was refreshing to read your comments. I was shocked at the blind hatred and vitriol being thrown about here. I'm all for "celebrating death" in the religious sense, that it leads to new life. However, I'm not one to dance on anyone's grave.
Very often we here at
This isn't saying everything Valenti did was mete and right, but I don't think it is just of us to judge him so harshly.
Sci-Fi based MMORPGs are not as popular as their fantasy based siblings. I may be a neophyte, but the only reasonably successful Sci-Fi MMORPG I can think of is EVE. SWG strikes me as a train wreck. Meanwhile, we have EQ, EQ2, FF11, DAoC and WoW as easily recognizable examples of successful MMORPGs in the fantasy setting.
If Warhammer Online passes muster and is successful I think we can expect a Warhammer 40k followup MMO, much like the constant rumors of "World of Starcraft" (Heaven help Blizzard if they can't come up with a better name than that).
I think you assume too much. If I recall, this same argument was used to note that WoW would not surpass EQ by much. The idea that there are a fixed amount of people who play MMOs is one that will likely fade in coming years.
If the Next Big Thing(TM) comes out tomorrow, we won't see Blizzard's subscriptions drop down to near nothing overnight. Drop perhaps, but not collapse. In fact, I could easily imagine Blizzard retaining even 75% of their current subscriptions while the Next Big Thing(TM) doubles what they have already.
In short, the userbase for MMORPGs is growing daily. New, excellent and appealing MMORPGs only serve to further this.
Somehow, it makes me think of Sumo wrestling.
One of the more amazing things I saw in Japan was a sumo wrestling match on TV. Normally you'd expect the two of them to collied in a Godzilla-esque clash of the titans. I was in awe of how it actually went down.
This huge guy dodged the other's charge and used his own momentum to send him flying out of the ring. It looked like the winner was going to head on collide with the loser, but he slipped around him and that was that.
I feel like Nintendo has done the same thing. They could potentially compete head on with Microsoft and Sony, but that's actually more risky than stepping to the side. Sony and Microsoft have the potential to stick around for another five generations without making a cent. Nintendo might last one generation of pure losses. It's possible Nintendo could win such a fight, but it's also possible they might lose.
So instead Nintendo's let the two giants fight each other, draining both of their funds, while they frolick elsewhere unopposed. Thus, they get to weaken their competitors without having to compete!
It has its own risks, but the strategy appears to have paid off.
You needn't be scared.
The only companies that might make your assumption are shovelware companies. Few other companies are stupid enough to think that "gimmicky" is good.
Even if we make the assumption that just about every studio decides that gimmicky is the way of things, that doesn't imply a generation "filled with crazy controllers". At most, we'd see three (one from Sony, one from Microsoft, and one from Nintendo). There might be smoe others (ala Guitar Hero) but the industry certainly wouldn't be "filled".
If Super Smash Bros: Brawl is any evidence, even Nintendo isn't completely ditching the old modes. The industry is going to change, but it is for the better. Everyone will benefit, whether hardcore or anything else.
1) You can use Gamecube controllers with the Wii. If you don't have Gamecube controllers, you can buy the "Classic" controllers.
2) I've had a lot of fun holding the controller sideways for Super Paper Mario and Excite Truck. I've also had fun playing the original Mario brothers. To each their own I guess.
Meh, he's Jack. Persistant as ever.
He's still parroting the supposed Counter-Striking Cho did as a teen. I'm not sure that claim has really been validated anywhere, but the facts haven't ever proven much of a barrier to this man.
I second this motion. Who wants to commission Penny-Arcade?
I should get a job in law, it obviously doesn't require the slightest bit of intelligence.
If I were a lawyer I'd be deeply offended by that complaint. Lord help us if Jack ever writes a biblical commentary.
I'd post my own emotional moments from video games, but I'd be beating a dead horse.
There's so much more to this than the summary. I was simply amazed by the wealth of information. There is no way on earth anyone could have possibly done the article justice in any summation, and I'm amazed as good a quote was to be found as was used. We learn so much, and yet are left hungering for more. /sarcasm
It's raining in Shanghai...
Yes. As an owner of both a 360 and a Wii I can say you are right. The only overlay in demographic are people like me who are more than willing to buy both.
No. The Wii is a threat to the 360. Because I now own both my budget and time is split between the two. Some developers will stop developing for the 360 because the Wii's market is my demographic + many others, and is cheaper to developer for.
Maybe. The elite SKU is black. Maybe they're changing colors because they're scared.
Why do people play chess online? Scrabble? Anything?
Why do people play Soccer? Football? Baseball?
Why do people do any of this professionally?
Some people enjoy competition. Some people enjoy it to the point where they make their living by competing. Whether it's Halo or Hearts, many people enjoy pitting their skill, luck and wits against others.
Not everyone, but many.
*Muffled sounds of attempting to speak, raising a finger with a slack jaw* ....ah.
I... suppose I had fun going through all those comics to find that one. Yeah.
I remember "Moof", I just never knew it had a name. :D