Did anyone else find it odd that none of the clerks had anything good (or factual) to say about Nintendo? Most of them stated blatant mistruths in favor of the PS2 and Xbox. The Toys 'R' Us guy made up a bunch of stuff about the PSP, the Best Buy clerk claimed that the GameCube is "for toddlers" and that Nintendo makes games for other systems, and the EBGames salesperson recommends the PSP hands down, no questions asked.
Is there a valid business reason for this, or is it just personal preference? I just find it odd that three out of four of them recommended anything but Nintendo. At my local game stores, most of the clerks at least try to figure out which console fits the customer's interest, rather than trying to sell them on one specific product. Maybe they get paid more commission for selling PS2s?
"Well, do the experiment. Buy a PC joypad or a trio linker, set it up, and join a CS or UT game. You'll lose, likely very badly."
That's because CS and UT are designed for the mouse and keyboard, so they favor it. You can't compare PC controls and console controls using a PC game without being biased. The only accurate test would be to design a game that equally caters to the M&K player and the dual analog player, but that would be nearly impossible.
There's your problem. I've yet to see a dual analog hater that's been playing PC and console FPSs for the same amount of time. It's always hardcore PC gamers who can't seem to figure out how to use their thumbs. Not to say that dual-analog is better, but I've never seen anyone with an unbiased opinion. My roommate started out on Halo, and he can't stand mouse and keyboard.
FWIW, the GB Player isn't an emulator, but stripped down Game Boy Advance hardware in a different form. There's no reason that the GameCube couldn't emulate the GBA, but for one reason or another, Nintendo chose to use existing hardware instead of software.
You'd have a point if it weren't for the fact that most of the "trolls" are simply HDTV-owning whiners who act like resolution is more important than any other feature. People are going as far as saying that this news alone will cause them not to buy a Revolution.
To all the upset HDTV owners: Yes, we know you spent a lot of money on your TV, and yes, we know you'd like to use it, but stop trying to extend your feelings to the 90% of console owners who this doesn't affect in the least. It's not going to cause Nintendo to go bankrupt, and it's certainly not going to affect the quality of the games, unless your satisfaction comes solely from counting pixels. If the Revolution fails, it'll be from a different poor design choice.
And shame on anyone who actually believes that HD support will be the defining feature of the next generation. If you can't find anything in the PS3, Xbox 360, or Revolution that's more interesting than the resolution, you're not trying.
"If they don't care about power (and don't forget, power describes things like physics and AI as well as graphics), why release another console?"
Funny, I never read anything about Nintendo abandoning physics, AI, or whatever this fictional "power" is. You know, they never even said anything about graphics. Resolution is just one factor in a graphically impressive game, and it's really not that important. What looks more realistic: "It's a Wonderful Life" at crappy, black and white 480i, or Dig Dug at 1080p?
"First of all, consider that people who own HD TVs already are people who spend a lot of money on consumer electronics. These people are almost certainly going to be disproportionately likely to be early adopters of the next-gen consoles, even if they aren't hardcore gamers."
It should be obvious by now that Nintendo isn't trying to sell to the self-proclaimed "hardcore" gamers. Do you think that NES and SNES fans who dropped gaming since the mid-90s are going to be turned off because Super Metroid isn't playable in 1080i? Hardly.
"Oh, and I know I'll get modded down for saying this, but the "it's the games, stupid" rhetoric would sound a lot more convincing if Nintendo had any real track record of being able to deliver sufficient quantity of games over the last decade, or if they weren't making decision after decision that looks set to drive third-party cross-platform developers away."
You'd have a point about online support and cartridges, but how is the lack of HD support going to drive developers away? It has absolutely no bearing on gameplay, and it makes games cheaper to produce. How is that a disadvantage?
You might argue, "the games won't sell as well if they don't look good," but look at the PS2. No HD support, clearly inferior graphics, but due to some great games and some clever developers, it's dominating the market. Developers don't follow the most powerful console; they follow the userbase that will buy their games. If they can make a profit writing "ugly" games for the Revolution, they'll do it. It's simple economics.
Sony and Microsoft are just blowing smoke with this HD spiel. When you look at the graphics of GTA, the first fault you notice isn't going to be the resolution. MS and Sony are just hyping this feature because people are equating resolution with graphics, which is hardly true. Half-Life 2 running at 640*480 looks worlds better than Half-Life running at 1280*1024 or whatever high resolution your computer can handle.
"Of course, everyone's hyping their stuff - but, in the case of the original XBox, I really feel that they lived up to what they promised and delivered a damn fine system - so (ironic, isn't it?) I guess I trust them a little more than Sony who lied their asses off, didn't live up to what they promised, even if they did deliver a nice console."
Microsoft did the same things, like inflating polygon count numbers and claiming a bunch of BS stuff like "only the Xbox can handle fur-shading effects". I don't know if you ever read the "77 reasons to own an Xbox" that MS produced at the Xbox launch, but it was full of opponent-bashing much worse than Kutaragi is doing now. The whole thing was mocking the PS2 for being underpowered and the GameCube for being kiddy. If you think Microsoft never stooped to this level, you're just fooling yourself.
"Except Microsoft has (presumably) learned all their lessons from the original X-Box and from what I've seen they've managed to stable a large number of publishers for the 360, far more than they had last time."
This just means that there are more publishers willing to jump on board if the 360 succeeds. Nintendo and Sony have both claimed that there are over 100 developers working on the DS and PSP, but where are the games? Both portables have something like 40 games (after both have been available for nearly six months), and neither have any real "killer apps".
Given the rising cost of game development, it's not unreasonable to expect a lower game-to-publisher ratio, and I certainly wouldn't be surprised if some of those developers put more effort toward the PS3 than the Xbox 360. All Sony needs is one great launch title to sweep the floor with the 360, and it's entirely possible that they'll get it.
It's a little too early to determine the loser of the PSP/DS battle, but it's true that the PSP has been losing ground in Japan recently. I wouldn't count it out, yet, though. The PSP may be able to sustain a longer shelf life due to the superior graphics, and after a price drop it could catch on a little more. A few decent games wouldn't hurt either.
True, 512 MB isn't huge compared to most hard disks, but for game saves it's certainly enough. Downloadable games and demos might be more of an issue, but the Revolution also supports SD flash cards, which are already becoming very affordable. Nintendo has confirmed that users will be able to transfer files from their Revolution to the SD cards and even to your PC, so space should never be an issue. I'd expect that a 1 GB SD card will be both affordable and spacious enough for most people. Who knows, Nintendo might even package a small card with the console for people who just want to swap all their files to the computer.
"They also enjoy beating their franchise properties to death."
Consider this: Had Rockstar released the first GTA in 1985 (when Super Mario Bros. was released) and continued producing sequels at their current rate, there would now be 22-23 Grand Theft Auto games in the series, not counting multiplatform titles and compilation packs.
In a similar situation, the Halo series would be up to 12 titles, and the Madden, Splinter Cell, and Tony Hawk series' would each be 20 games strong.
Granted, Mario has probably starred in upwards of 30 games since his creation, but those games have spanned over at least 10 genres, whereas the previous examples have never strayed from their original genres over the course of the entire series.
You could argue that Nintendo should come up with original characters to star in the tennis, golf, kart, and party games (and I would agree with you), but when Nintendo owns the rights to the most recognizeable character in the world, can you really blame them for using his face on different games? Sonic, Crash, and Spyro were just as "beaten to death" back in their day, but they were never popular enough for anyone to care.
GTA was one of the worst things to happen to video game soundtracks, in my opinion. Although the fully licensed soundtracks add to the immersion and the personality of the game, other developers (I'm looking at you, EA) have taken the concept to an extreme by inserting licensed music into nearly every game. The custom soundtrack feature on the Xbox (and soon the Xbox 360) provides a little more freedom to the consumer, but ultimately it also discourages the production of original video game soundtracks.
It wasn't that long ago when games like Mario and Zelda featured catchy, original tunes, and even recent games like Halo and Katamari Damacy had good music. But it seems that the current trend is to use mainstream, "popular" bands in soundtracks, which will drive up production costs and ultimately cost the consumer more.
I'm very grateful for great game composers like Koji Kondo (Mario, Zelda) and Yu Miyake (Katamari Damacy), but sadly it seems that their jobs are beginning to become outdated by the rapidly changing industry. If only the major players in the industry would spend more time focusing on creativity, the industry could expand without having to be transformed into a trend-driven contest of mediocrity.
"Miyamoto has no involvement in Twilight Princess. That is mostly why it is so much different looking than the previous ones."
That's what I thought, too, but IGN's new Hyrule Times says differently:
"Luckily, I had the opportunity to interview some key members of the game's development team, including director Eiji Aonuma and also Shigeru Miyamoto, who will have a much more influential role on this new Zelda than he has the previous two."
Maybe Miyamoto's involvement is one of the reasons it looks different. IIRC, Miyamoto was opposed to the cel-shaded look of Wind Waker. Perhaps he wants to take the series back to its dungeon-based roots, since both Wind Waker and Majora's Mask were a little short on dungeons.
Recent Zelda games (Wind Waker, Minish Cap) have added warp points that lead back to the beginning of the dungeon. Generally you can be back where you left off within a minute or two after restarting.
Also, his point still stands in regard to the overworld. Unlike most RPGs, you can freely move from point to point in the overworld without any restrictions, so it's easy to spend 15 minutes just attempting a sidequest, then be back to your dungeon after a quick warp song.
"As for GTA... It just proves that people are easily impressed. I'm tired of hearing people say "it's totally open-ended. You can do ANYTHING YOU WANT". No you can't. You have clear objectives, clear limitations and clear side games."
In regards to GTA, I've always liked to say, "You can do anything you want, as long as it involves driving cars and shooting people."
There's a PSP playable at my local Best Buy, but that's the only one I've seen. It was tethered down with two big plastic bands covering 1/4 of the screen. The analog nub was completely broken off, and the screen was pretty scratched up. I started up the demo, but it took so long to load that I went to play Wario Ware Touched for a while.
Needless to say, I wasn't too impressed by the hands-on. The graphics were nice, but the durability and loading times made it a pretty disappointing experience.
You could probably buy a DS with 3 games for the price of a PSP, since DS games tend to fall around the $30-35 price range. And Zelda is confirmed to be in development for the DS.
Slashdot Mirror
Did anyone else find it odd that none of the clerks had anything good (or factual) to say about Nintendo? Most of them stated blatant mistruths in favor of the PS2 and Xbox. The Toys 'R' Us guy made up a bunch of stuff about the PSP, the Best Buy clerk claimed that the GameCube is "for toddlers" and that Nintendo makes games for other systems, and the EBGames salesperson recommends the PSP hands down, no questions asked.
Is there a valid business reason for this, or is it just personal preference? I just find it odd that three out of four of them recommended anything but Nintendo. At my local game stores, most of the clerks at least try to figure out which console fits the customer's interest, rather than trying to sell them on one specific product. Maybe they get paid more commission for selling PS2s?
"Well, do the experiment. Buy a PC joypad or a trio linker, set it up, and join a CS or UT game. You'll lose, likely very badly."
That's because CS and UT are designed for the mouse and keyboard, so they favor it. You can't compare PC controls and console controls using a PC game without being biased. The only accurate test would be to design a game that equally caters to the M&K player and the dual analog player, but that would be nearly impossible.
"I've played PC games for over half my life..."
There's your problem. I've yet to see a dual analog hater that's been playing PC and console FPSs for the same amount of time. It's always hardcore PC gamers who can't seem to figure out how to use their thumbs. Not to say that dual-analog is better, but I've never seen anyone with an unbiased opinion. My roommate started out on Halo, and he can't stand mouse and keyboard.
FWIW, the GB Player isn't an emulator, but stripped down Game Boy Advance hardware in a different form. There's no reason that the GameCube couldn't emulate the GBA, but for one reason or another, Nintendo chose to use existing hardware instead of software.
You'd have a point if it weren't for the fact that most of the "trolls" are simply HDTV-owning whiners who act like resolution is more important than any other feature. People are going as far as saying that this news alone will cause them not to buy a Revolution.
To all the upset HDTV owners: Yes, we know you spent a lot of money on your TV, and yes, we know you'd like to use it, but stop trying to extend your feelings to the 90% of console owners who this doesn't affect in the least. It's not going to cause Nintendo to go bankrupt, and it's certainly not going to affect the quality of the games, unless your satisfaction comes solely from counting pixels. If the Revolution fails, it'll be from a different poor design choice.
And shame on anyone who actually believes that HD support will be the defining feature of the next generation. If you can't find anything in the PS3, Xbox 360, or Revolution that's more interesting than the resolution, you're not trying.
"If they don't care about power (and don't forget, power describes things like physics and AI as well as graphics), why release another console?"
Funny, I never read anything about Nintendo abandoning physics, AI, or whatever this fictional "power" is. You know, they never even said anything about graphics. Resolution is just one factor in a graphically impressive game, and it's really not that important. What looks more realistic: "It's a Wonderful Life" at crappy, black and white 480i, or Dig Dug at 1080p?
"First of all, consider that people who own HD TVs already are people who spend a lot of money on consumer electronics. These people are almost certainly going to be disproportionately likely to be early adopters of the next-gen consoles, even if they aren't hardcore gamers."
It should be obvious by now that Nintendo isn't trying to sell to the self-proclaimed "hardcore" gamers. Do you think that NES and SNES fans who dropped gaming since the mid-90s are going to be turned off because Super Metroid isn't playable in 1080i? Hardly.
"Oh, and I know I'll get modded down for saying this, but the "it's the games, stupid" rhetoric would sound a lot more convincing if Nintendo had any real track record of being able to deliver sufficient quantity of games over the last decade, or if they weren't making decision after decision that looks set to drive third-party cross-platform developers away."
You'd have a point about online support and cartridges, but how is the lack of HD support going to drive developers away? It has absolutely no bearing on gameplay, and it makes games cheaper to produce. How is that a disadvantage?
You might argue, "the games won't sell as well if they don't look good," but look at the PS2. No HD support, clearly inferior graphics, but due to some great games and some clever developers, it's dominating the market. Developers don't follow the most powerful console; they follow the userbase that will buy their games. If they can make a profit writing "ugly" games for the Revolution, they'll do it. It's simple economics.
Sony and Microsoft are just blowing smoke with this HD spiel. When you look at the graphics of GTA, the first fault you notice isn't going to be the resolution. MS and Sony are just hyping this feature because people are equating resolution with graphics, which is hardly true. Half-Life 2 running at 640*480 looks worlds better than Half-Life running at 1280*1024 or whatever high resolution your computer can handle.
"Of course, everyone's hyping their stuff - but, in the case of the original XBox, I really feel that they lived up to what they promised and delivered a damn fine system - so (ironic, isn't it?) I guess I trust them a little more than Sony who lied their asses off, didn't live up to what they promised, even if they did deliver a nice console."
Microsoft did the same things, like inflating polygon count numbers and claiming a bunch of BS stuff like "only the Xbox can handle fur-shading effects". I don't know if you ever read the "77 reasons to own an Xbox" that MS produced at the Xbox launch, but it was full of opponent-bashing much worse than Kutaragi is doing now. The whole thing was mocking the PS2 for being underpowered and the GameCube for being kiddy. If you think Microsoft never stooped to this level, you're just fooling yourself.
"Except Microsoft has (presumably) learned all their lessons from the original X-Box and from what I've seen they've managed to stable a large number of publishers for the 360, far more than they had last time." This just means that there are more publishers willing to jump on board if the 360 succeeds. Nintendo and Sony have both claimed that there are over 100 developers working on the DS and PSP, but where are the games? Both portables have something like 40 games (after both have been available for nearly six months), and neither have any real "killer apps". Given the rising cost of game development, it's not unreasonable to expect a lower game-to-publisher ratio, and I certainly wouldn't be surprised if some of those developers put more effort toward the PS3 than the Xbox 360. All Sony needs is one great launch title to sweep the floor with the 360, and it's entirely possible that they'll get it.
It's a little too early to determine the loser of the PSP/DS battle, but it's true that the PSP has been losing ground in Japan recently. I wouldn't count it out, yet, though. The PSP may be able to sustain a longer shelf life due to the superior graphics, and after a price drop it could catch on a little more. A few decent games wouldn't hurt either.
True, 512 MB isn't huge compared to most hard disks, but for game saves it's certainly enough. Downloadable games and demos might be more of an issue, but the Revolution also supports SD flash cards, which are already becoming very affordable. Nintendo has confirmed that users will be able to transfer files from their Revolution to the SD cards and even to your PC, so space should never be an issue. I'd expect that a 1 GB SD card will be both affordable and spacious enough for most people. Who knows, Nintendo might even package a small card with the console for people who just want to swap all their files to the computer.
"They also enjoy beating their franchise properties to death."
Consider this: Had Rockstar released the first GTA in 1985 (when Super Mario Bros. was released) and continued producing sequels at their current rate, there would now be 22-23 Grand Theft Auto games in the series, not counting multiplatform titles and compilation packs.
In a similar situation, the Halo series would be up to 12 titles, and the Madden, Splinter Cell, and Tony Hawk series' would each be 20 games strong.
Granted, Mario has probably starred in upwards of 30 games since his creation, but those games have spanned over at least 10 genres, whereas the previous examples have never strayed from their original genres over the course of the entire series.
You could argue that Nintendo should come up with original characters to star in the tennis, golf, kart, and party games (and I would agree with you), but when Nintendo owns the rights to the most recognizeable character in the world, can you really blame them for using his face on different games? Sonic, Crash, and Spyro were just as "beaten to death" back in their day, but they were never popular enough for anyone to care.
GTA was one of the worst things to happen to video game soundtracks, in my opinion. Although the fully licensed soundtracks add to the immersion and the personality of the game, other developers (I'm looking at you, EA) have taken the concept to an extreme by inserting licensed music into nearly every game. The custom soundtrack feature on the Xbox (and soon the Xbox 360) provides a little more freedom to the consumer, but ultimately it also discourages the production of original video game soundtracks.
It wasn't that long ago when games like Mario and Zelda featured catchy, original tunes, and even recent games like Halo and Katamari Damacy had good music. But it seems that the current trend is to use mainstream, "popular" bands in soundtracks, which will drive up production costs and ultimately cost the consumer more.
I'm very grateful for great game composers like Koji Kondo (Mario, Zelda) and Yu Miyake (Katamari Damacy), but sadly it seems that their jobs are beginning to become outdated by the rapidly changing industry. If only the major players in the industry would spend more time focusing on creativity, the industry could expand without having to be transformed into a trend-driven contest of mediocrity.
"Miyamoto has no involvement in Twilight Princess. That is mostly why it is so much different looking than the previous ones."
That's what I thought, too, but IGN's new Hyrule Times says differently:
"Luckily, I had the opportunity to interview some key members of the game's development team, including director Eiji Aonuma and also Shigeru Miyamoto, who will have a much more influential role on this new Zelda than he has the previous two."
Maybe Miyamoto's involvement is one of the reasons it looks different. IIRC, Miyamoto was opposed to the cel-shaded look of Wind Waker. Perhaps he wants to take the series back to its dungeon-based roots, since both Wind Waker and Majora's Mask were a little short on dungeons.
Recent Zelda games (Wind Waker, Minish Cap) have added warp points that lead back to the beginning of the dungeon. Generally you can be back where you left off within a minute or two after restarting.
Also, his point still stands in regard to the overworld. Unlike most RPGs, you can freely move from point to point in the overworld without any restrictions, so it's easy to spend 15 minutes just attempting a sidequest, then be back to your dungeon after a quick warp song.
"As for GTA... It just proves that people are easily impressed. I'm tired of hearing people say "it's totally open-ended. You can do ANYTHING YOU WANT". No you can't. You have clear objectives, clear limitations and clear side games." In regards to GTA, I've always liked to say, "You can do anything you want, as long as it involves driving cars and shooting people."
There's a PSP playable at my local Best Buy, but that's the only one I've seen. It was tethered down with two big plastic bands covering 1/4 of the screen. The analog nub was completely broken off, and the screen was pretty scratched up. I started up the demo, but it took so long to load that I went to play Wario Ware Touched for a while. Needless to say, I wasn't too impressed by the hands-on. The graphics were nice, but the durability and loading times made it a pretty disappointing experience.
You could probably buy a DS with 3 games for the price of a PSP, since DS games tend to fall around the $30-35 price range. And Zelda is confirmed to be in development for the DS.