The best part of Halo 1/2 and Battlefront 1/2 for the Xbox was the split screen multiplayer.
If I want killer multiplayer and single player games, I can pretty much find everything I want to play on the PC. The console, for me, is about having a bunch of guys over, drinking too much, and playing a lot of Halo.
It's infuriating when games come out for the console with multiplayer ONLY on Live. I'm talking about you Quake 4, Prey and Battlefield 2. Heck, where are the 4-player split screen driving games?
The only way to truly fail at anything is not to try.
If you feel like you need a change, you need a change.
What would you be doing with that time otherwise? Watching TV?
A life of learning and growing is far more entertaining than anything humanity can devise.
This "too old" shit is talk show fodder. You can do what you want at any age. If company A won't hire you, why would you want to work for them? The right company will recognize skills, talent and initiative. Someone who likes to learn is an asset to any company, but HR people are as statistically incompetant as the rest of the planet. Worse case scenario: work for yourself.
The best game that got trashed that year was Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath, even as far as driving the developer out of business. It feels like there was a conspiracy to bury Stranger. Maybe Lorne Lanning made some enemies at EA.
At least BG&E gets press.
It was good, I won't argue that. I have a lot of "good" games, though. BG&E wasn't the second coming.
I linked to the appropriate data for 2005 that indicated the majority of the highest selling games in North America are by North American developers. That seems pretty self explanitory. If you don't have competing data, or haven't read the data I've linked, then you've failed to make any argument at all.
North Americans, for the most part, purchase games by North American developers, regardless of what console they own. That was my opinion, and I linked to data to back that up.
Now you want to agrue about how we argue? Seriously, you really don't have anything else to say?
This is not a trial. This is my opinion vs. your opinion, and I'm happy to disagree with you, since you've offered no reason not to. If you've already decided what to think, and the facts don't move you, have a nice day. I'm out.
I don't have to justify a trend to you, if you want to argue semantics, fine. Go look up competing statistics if you want to have an argument on fact. If you're too lazy to, stop piping up.
Why do sports games not count? Maybe this is what North American's are buying, year after year, with only a roster change. Wouldn't all genre's love to have that kind of free ride.
I was more curious why people continue to question why Microsoft is not accepted in Japan, when it's a north american company making games for a north american audience. Does it matter terribly to anyone other than fanboys whether MS "wins" Japan? It seems like it has a lot more to do with the acceptance of American popular culture in Japan, and a lot less about the quality of the software, or the console. If an american company can not succeed in a Japanese market simply because they are american, what importance should we place on that market as a guage of the companies success?
I don't have any raw data to back that up, because it's never mentioned anywhere as even tangentially related. Those are the questions I'd be asking. Far more interesting ones.
And I'll argue that, as Nintendo and Sony continue to focus on the Japanese or Asian market, they'll continue to produce more and more games that just don't draw NA gamers like they used to when Japanese gaming was the only show in town.
India may be the biggest market for motion pictures, but the market has recognized that the cultures are too different to create worldwide hits for all markets.
As gaming becomes more mainstream, the need for north american developers to produce relavent content for a north american audience, that reflects it's unique values and priorities, is only going to increase. As cosmopolitan as we think we are, I don't think anyone would argue that we're nationalistic based on the idea that we have a north american literary culture or a north american cinema culture. In fact, I'd argue that both of those are a hallmark of a strong society.
It's also worth noting that video games are a north american invention, and the first slew of consoles came from NA companies: Atari, ColecoVision, Intellivision, etc. The asian markets stranglehold on the market has been borne primarily on increased technological prowess in power and minuturization in the 80's, along with rock bottom manpower costs.
As the workforce globalizes, US companies have the same labour advantages as any other market, and we already lead in modern processor and electronics design.
Whatever you may think of the missteps MS has made so far this generation, they still have an innovative edge over the PS3 with their Live service, as well as a price advantage. I think the success of Nintendo in the NA market is going to ride heavily on their NA developer support in an increasingly mature market that just doesn't care for installment 10 of Mario Party, or yet another toy-driven property. That being said, if the games are there, I think the price advantage of the Wii will play heavily in an economy that will believe it's in a recession for years to come after the dot com boom, regardless of the numbers.
Bioware Inifinity Ward Bungie Id EA Bethesda Relic (although the outfit was terrible) Monolith Ubisoft Rockstar Obsidian Valve etc.
Gee, anyone else know any good NA developers?
Capcom and Team Ninja are already faithful MS console developers who make western friendly games. Square has already released a game for the 360. Who are all these killer developers you're waiting for?
No, I don't care about the Japanese market. Sorry, it doesn't effect me. The original Xbox bombed in Japan, and I still got a slew of great games.
Japan has always been seen as "the flag" in console circles. And to "win" the console wars, you need to take it. If MS wants that money, all the power to them. In my little world, the whole issue is pointless. Most of my favourite consoles didn't "win" the console war, and I haven't suffered for it.
Increasingly, the best-selling games in North America are made by North American developers. Is there some kind of sick need for Japan to "approve" of the console to lend it credibility?
If MS can make a business out of making a western console for a western market, all the power to them. Maybe it's time to play hard-to-get and let the japanese pine for imports and translations of the western hits. Or not, doesn't really effect me any.
MS should concentrate on getting good games on the console for "any" territory, and stop worrying about the asian market. Blizzard seems to be doing well in China with almost no effort to adhere to some kind of asian sensibility, other than language translation. Good games are good games, regardless of territorial borders.
Does anyone else find these studies somewhat pointless? It seems like some basic common sense could be applied, and companies can skip these self-serving focus groups.
If the game is a must-have, kick-ass, breakthrough title, then ads won't really impact sales much. "well, you know, I'd like to play the best game of the year, but I can't look at a Pepsi logo occasionally." Unlikely.
If the ads are extremely jarring or out of place, they probably won't go over well. If Fable 2 has a billboard for Gatorade, expect much flipping out.
If the ads are unfocused or regionally misplaced, then they'll likely annoy. Eg. if Canadians have to sit through ads for US telecoms, or if they advertise the next Dr.Phil book in GTA4 or something.
Common sense: If they do things tastefully, then it will go over well. If they don't, then they get what they deserve. And some people will bitch no matter how they do it.
And I think it's clear that if they don't reduce the price of the game somewhat to account for signifigant new revenue, they will generate ill-will in their consumer base. Money talks. As much as people hate marketing, if they could purchase GTA4 for $30 because it was sponsored by Coke, Nike and Honda, it WOULD make the game more attractive, and represent a positive mindshare return for the sponsors.
I agree. I can't imagine some games being the same without it.
In some games, there's a lot of information coming at you, and not all of it is visible. Rumble isn't perfect, but it's a way to convey information that you can't see or hear. Tire grip and side/rear impacts in driving games is a prime example, but more than that, it means you've hit the ground after a jump in Oblivion, tells you how well you connected with a hit in DOA, it's your heartbeat in Indigo Prophesy, and it's how you escape from cops in The Warriors.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of motion sensing, but not at the expense of feedback.
I think there's a very narrow definition of "art" being tossed around here. Is ballet art? Is syncronized swimming or figure skating art?
Is he really saying that video games aren't art because they don't explore the same themes that particular books or movies do? Because books and movies explore many themes, with many different types of narratives, genres, etc.
I think we're all getting wrapped up in an argument about what Roger Ebert likes. I don't give a shit what Roger Ebert likes, and there's really no reason to argue it.
I like Fajitas. Can we build a thread on that? Anyone for or against?
I have over a thousand books in my collection, it's not an aversion to reading.
If you find a 15 yr-old on Xbox Live that has read "War and Peace" and found it relevant (or even understood what the hell was being said) then I'll eat crow.
Games may not be "art" on the level discussed here, but in the end, it's one of the only "arts" getting to the demographic.
If Shakesphere were alive today, he would choose the medium that allowed him to reach the most people and make the most money. His choice of medium was somewhat restrained in those days.
You should take a look at what Will Wright is actually working on before making a broad statement like that. He knows what kind of crappy spiral MMOs are taking, he's trying to innovate beyond trying to get the outfits skimpier and the blood shinier:
I think the real comment here is just that there is far too much entertainment out there for one person to consume. Even the good stuff. We have to rely on some sense of personal taste to guide our choices.
Harry Potter books might be wonderful, but it's not the kind of thing I would pick up. I don't think that's condescending, but those books are intended for another audience, and I'm going to get far more out of something by Stephen King or Clive Barker. That's just personal taste, not a judgement.
In the case of videogames, it's all just personal taste. There's a reason Nintendo does smashingly well in Japan and Microsoft tanks, and it's not all "national pride". Almost every top selling game in the US last year (and the year before) skewed North American in North America. A people's culture tends to cater to itself naturally. I get the slang and pop culture references in North American entertainment, I understand the political discourse, of course I'm going to lean towards entertainment catered to me.
I can't imagine Japan putting out a good Star Wars game (can stormtroopers have boobs?) or a good WW2 game (maybe there's a reason for that) or a good Civilization game (no joke here, CIV4 would put Dragonball Z fans into a coma).
And I don't think I misused the term "Mature", as in "intended for a mature audience". It doesn't always mean boobs and guns, sometimes it just means that the themes presented would just be confusing or misunderstood to younger viewers.
The entire conservative view of games like GTA just puzzles me. If you were to rent any NC-17 rated movie, you're likely to get far more sex and violence than any video game ever created. Yet the effect of two mannequins dry-humping each other in an already "17+ mature" title has sent shockwaves through the industry.
If "Pulp Fiction" were a video game, it would be banned in at least 50% of the US just based on the Zed scene. How is any real social commentary going to be made in such a sanctimonious atmosphere?
Alright, that's the end of my "mature" rant. Now that we're in "end of thread" limbo, I guess I'm writing primarily for myself =)
By "mature" I simply meant older. My tastes have envolved, and most Nintendo games strike me as saccharine. And I have given a few CG titles a shot. Metroid Prime, Pikmin 2, F-Zero, RE Zero. I don't like the controller, the graphics look terrible on my TV, and I'm no longer a fan of the Nintendo assets. Mario just doesn't evoke the same sentiments after 15 years of marketing experience. He's just another mascot, unfortunately. Destined to have someone making minimum wage play him in a giant felt costume at product launches.
Morrowind, Knights of the Old Republic, Strangers Wrath are all games that I enjoy. What am I possibly going to get out of Mario Sunshine?
Please, no need to be condescending. I'm just not part of the Nintendo demographic. What's so hard to understand about that? Plenty of companies market products to people other than me.
First of all, you aren't really part of the market today, since you don't buy games or consoles. If the Rev brings you into the fold, great! That's creating a market, though, not stealing marketshare from MS/Sony.
I own an Xbox, 360 and a GameCube. If the 360 hadn't come out when it did, I probably would have bought a second-hand PS2 just to play God of War. I'm definitely not console-biased.
I just don't see the Rev biting into the marketshare for the PS3/360. The kid-friendly outlook has made them money, why would they switch-up now? The Rev can be successful without impacting PS3/360 sales in the least. I guess that's my only point, really.
You were the one that said none of your friends are interested in any next-gen consoles.
I'm declaring shenanigans on your comment. I think all your friends are interested in next-gen consoles. I wasn't implying that you had to buy or preorder one in order to be "interested". If you're a console gamer, chances are that you WILL own a next-gen console at some point.
There's the implication in some of these posts that MS, Sony and Nintendo are all so far off the mark that the console market will crash. I think that's all chicken-little talk. I think we'll be in trouble if we don't start getting some killer games shortly, but with Revenge, Fight Night, GRAW and Oblivion released for the 360 month, I think we'll see a bit of a turnaround, at least in March.
"all the analysts agree" "ask anybody out there" "The simple fact is"
I love how this smacks of credibility =)
Which analysts agree that HDTV isn't making any headway? All the research I've seen suggests that HDTV adoption is still pretty brisk. The cost difference is not what it used to be, and people tend to think of their television as the hub of their entertainment area. Is HDTV here in force right now? Well, no. But a company that hopes to make money for the average console cycle would likely try to predict where the market is going, and it's going HDTV. The money tends to roll in over the long-haul, so you have to think about 3+ years ahead, not right now.
So I can really ask anyone? Because I asked my friday night group. 4/6 have HDTVs already, and 2/6 have 360's already. 5/6 plan to buy both. How's that for a biased market?
Is there a chance that YOU don't have that kind of money, and YOU like Nintendo's games, so it doesn't make sense to YOU?
I should point out that PC gaming has ALWAYS had a giant barrier to entry, and games are still released for that platform.
Books and movie theaters aren't exactly tearing up the entertainment market's bottom line. Where do you think the entertainment budget of the average, employed 25-35 year old is going these days?
Right, but one of the Rev's main selling features will be backward compatibility with old nintendo games (which is a BS line anyway. what they really mean is that you'll be able to repurchase these games. as much as I loved megaman or bionic commando, I just don't see it happening.) I can see them selling on a hand-held, primarily because they are simple to pick up and the graphics are simple and bright.
If no one in your circle is interested in next-gen consoles, are any of your friends gamers?
I'm a real gamer if I say so, I don't need your validation.
As a child of the original Nintendo revolution, I get the appeal, I'm just not in that place any more. I can't get excited about collecting coins with a plumber to save the princess anymore.
What do you think the possibility is of Oblivion or the next GTA coming out on the Rev if it's developed for the 360/PS3 crowd? Considering the performance delta this time around, I get the feeling that 3 platform releases are going to be shit this time around. Either they're going to suck in comparison, or they're just not going to happen.
The people that have the disposable income for a $500 console and an HDTV aren't Nintendo's customers anyway. I don't see Nintendo impacting the market for the other players at all this time around.
I keep hearing this "nintendo is going to sweep the market" line from fanboys.
What market are you referring to? Because I don't know anyone in my circle of friends, online and off, that could care less about the Rev. Maybe I have a biased circle, but all current consoles are represented.
I bought a Cube for RE4, which was totally worth $100+game. Outside of that, as a "mature" gamer, I could pass on the entire game library other than RE4.
Are people really itching to play NES games that badly? It seems to me that current games don't really do well if the graphics are a few months out of date. The "retro" market is a complete fabrication, as far as I'm concerned.
Slashdot Mirror
The best part of Halo 1/2 and Battlefront 1/2 for the Xbox was the split screen multiplayer.
If I want killer multiplayer and single player games, I can pretty much find everything I want to play on the PC. The console, for me, is about having a bunch of guys over, drinking too much, and playing a lot of Halo.
It's infuriating when games come out for the console with multiplayer ONLY on Live. I'm talking about you Quake 4, Prey and Battlefield 2. Heck, where are the 4-player split screen driving games?
The only way to truly fail at anything is not to try.
If you feel like you need a change, you need a change.
What would you be doing with that time otherwise? Watching TV?
A life of learning and growing is far more entertaining than anything humanity can devise.
This "too old" shit is talk show fodder. You can do what you want at any age. If company A won't hire you, why would you want to work for them? The right company will recognize skills, talent and initiative. Someone who likes to learn is an asset to any company, but HR people are as statistically incompetant as the rest of the planet. Worse case scenario: work for yourself.
The best game that got trashed that year was Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath, even as far as driving the developer out of business. It feels like there was a conspiracy to bury Stranger. Maybe Lorne Lanning made some enemies at EA.
At least BG&E gets press.
It was good, I won't argue that. I have a lot of "good" games, though. BG&E wasn't the second coming.
I linked to the appropriate data for 2005 that indicated the majority of the highest selling games in North America are by North American developers. That seems pretty self explanitory. If you don't have competing data, or haven't read the data I've linked, then you've failed to make any argument at all.
North Americans, for the most part, purchase games by North American developers, regardless of what console they own. That was my opinion, and I linked to data to back that up.
Now you want to agrue about how we argue? Seriously, you really don't have anything else to say?
This is not a trial. This is my opinion vs. your opinion, and I'm happy to disagree with you, since you've offered no reason not to. If you've already decided what to think, and the facts don't move you, have a nice day. I'm out.
I don't have to justify a trend to you, if you want to argue semantics, fine. Go look up competing statistics if you want to have an argument on fact. If you're too lazy to, stop piping up.
Why do sports games not count? Maybe this is what North American's are buying, year after year, with only a roster change. Wouldn't all genre's love to have that kind of free ride.
I was more curious why people continue to question why Microsoft is not accepted in Japan, when it's a north american company making games for a north american audience. Does it matter terribly to anyone other than fanboys whether MS "wins" Japan? It seems like it has a lot more to do with the acceptance of American popular culture in Japan, and a lot less about the quality of the software, or the console. If an american company can not succeed in a Japanese market simply because they are american, what importance should we place on that market as a guage of the companies success?
I don't have any raw data to back that up, because it's never mentioned anywhere as even tangentially related. Those are the questions I'd be asking. Far more interesting ones.
And I'll argue that, as Nintendo and Sony continue to focus on the Japanese or Asian market, they'll continue to produce more and more games that just don't draw NA gamers like they used to when Japanese gaming was the only show in town.
India may be the biggest market for motion pictures, but the market has recognized that the cultures are too different to create worldwide hits for all markets.
As gaming becomes more mainstream, the need for north american developers to produce relavent content for a north american audience, that reflects it's unique values and priorities, is only going to increase. As cosmopolitan as we think we are, I don't think anyone would argue that we're nationalistic based on the idea that we have a north american literary culture or a north american cinema culture. In fact, I'd argue that both of those are a hallmark of a strong society.
It's also worth noting that video games are a north american invention, and the first slew of consoles came from NA companies: Atari, ColecoVision, Intellivision, etc. The asian markets stranglehold on the market has been borne primarily on increased technological prowess in power and minuturization in the 80's, along with rock bottom manpower costs.
As the workforce globalizes, US companies have the same labour advantages as any other market, and we already lead in modern processor and electronics design.
Whatever you may think of the missteps MS has made so far this generation, they still have an innovative edge over the PS3 with their Live service, as well as a price advantage. I think the success of Nintendo in the NA market is going to ride heavily on their NA developer support in an increasingly mature market that just doesn't care for installment 10 of Mario Party, or yet another toy-driven property. That being said, if the games are there, I think the price advantage of the Wii will play heavily in an economy that will believe it's in a recession for years to come after the dot com boom, regardless of the numbers.
Sure
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_in_video_gaming
8 of the top 10 NA games in 2005 came from US developers, and were mostly sports games for NA leagues that I doubt would have much pull in Japan.
All 10 of the top NA computer games were NA.
Were you just hoping I wouldn't show up to defend myself?
Sorry, I'm calling shenanigans on you.
Good western developers:
Bioware
Inifinity Ward
Bungie
Id
EA
Bethesda
Relic (although the outfit was terrible)
Monolith
Ubisoft
Rockstar
Obsidian
Valve
etc.
Gee, anyone else know any good NA developers?
Capcom and Team Ninja are already faithful MS console developers who make western friendly games. Square has already released a game for the 360. Who are all these killer developers you're waiting for?
No, I don't care about the Japanese market. Sorry, it doesn't effect me. The original Xbox bombed in Japan, and I still got a slew of great games.
Japan has always been seen as "the flag" in console circles. And to "win" the console wars, you need to take it. If MS wants that money, all the power to them. In my little world, the whole issue is pointless. Most of my favourite consoles didn't "win" the console war, and I haven't suffered for it.
Increasingly, the best-selling games in North America are made by North American developers. Is there some kind of sick need for Japan to "approve" of the console to lend it credibility?
If MS can make a business out of making a western console for a western market, all the power to them. Maybe it's time to play hard-to-get and let the japanese pine for imports and translations of the western hits. Or not, doesn't really effect me any.
MS should concentrate on getting good games on the console for "any" territory, and stop worrying about the asian market. Blizzard seems to be doing well in China with almost no effort to adhere to some kind of asian sensibility, other than language translation. Good games are good games, regardless of territorial borders.
Does anyone else find these studies somewhat pointless? It seems like some basic common sense could be applied, and companies can skip these self-serving focus groups. If the game is a must-have, kick-ass, breakthrough title, then ads won't really impact sales much. "well, you know, I'd like to play the best game of the year, but I can't look at a Pepsi logo occasionally." Unlikely. If the ads are extremely jarring or out of place, they probably won't go over well. If Fable 2 has a billboard for Gatorade, expect much flipping out. If the ads are unfocused or regionally misplaced, then they'll likely annoy. Eg. if Canadians have to sit through ads for US telecoms, or if they advertise the next Dr.Phil book in GTA4 or something. Common sense: If they do things tastefully, then it will go over well. If they don't, then they get what they deserve. And some people will bitch no matter how they do it. And I think it's clear that if they don't reduce the price of the game somewhat to account for signifigant new revenue, they will generate ill-will in their consumer base. Money talks. As much as people hate marketing, if they could purchase GTA4 for $30 because it was sponsored by Coke, Nike and Honda, it WOULD make the game more attractive, and represent a positive mindshare return for the sponsors.
I agree. I can't imagine some games being the same without it.
In some games, there's a lot of information coming at you, and not all of it is visible. Rumble isn't perfect, but it's a way to convey information that you can't see or hear. Tire grip and side/rear impacts in driving games is a prime example, but more than that, it means you've hit the ground after a jump in Oblivion, tells you how well you connected with a hit in DOA, it's your heartbeat in Indigo Prophesy, and it's how you escape from cops in The Warriors.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of motion sensing, but not at the expense of feedback.
Why does sex have to be about control? Isn't sex as much about the giving as it is about receiving?
I think you may have some feminist bullshit of your own to work through.
Has anyone heard of "performance art"? "pop art"?
I think there's a very narrow definition of "art" being tossed around here. Is ballet art? Is syncronized swimming or figure skating art?
Is he really saying that video games aren't art because they don't explore the same themes that particular books or movies do? Because books and movies explore many themes, with many different types of narratives, genres, etc.
I think we're all getting wrapped up in an argument about what Roger Ebert likes. I don't give a shit what Roger Ebert likes, and there's really no reason to argue it.
I like Fajitas. Can we build a thread on that? Anyone for or against?
Meaning what, precisely?
I have over a thousand books in my collection, it's not an aversion to reading.
If you find a 15 yr-old on Xbox Live that has read "War and Peace" and found it relevant (or even understood what the hell was being said) then I'll eat crow.
Games may not be "art" on the level discussed here, but in the end, it's one of the only "arts" getting to the demographic.
If Shakesphere were alive today, he would choose the medium that allowed him to reach the most people and make the most money. His choice of medium was somewhat restrained in those days.
It will if no one reads it, or the language becomes stale enough that no one finds it relevant.
WTF is "art for the ages" anyway? Are kids today really being influenced by War and Peace, or even Shakesphere for that matter?
Does anyone give a shit about "the art world" other than academics and the filthy rich?
You should take a look at what Will Wright is actually working on before making a broad statement like that. He knows what kind of crappy spiral MMOs are taking, he's trying to innovate beyond trying to get the outfits skimpier and the blood shinier:
0 420559198&q=spore
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=837260333
I think the real comment here is just that there is far too much entertainment out there for one person to consume. Even the good stuff. We have to rely on some sense of personal taste to guide our choices.
Harry Potter books might be wonderful, but it's not the kind of thing I would pick up. I don't think that's condescending, but those books are intended for another audience, and I'm going to get far more out of something by Stephen King or Clive Barker. That's just personal taste, not a judgement.
In the case of videogames, it's all just personal taste. There's a reason Nintendo does smashingly well in Japan and Microsoft tanks, and it's not all "national pride". Almost every top selling game in the US last year (and the year before) skewed North American in North America. A people's culture tends to cater to itself naturally. I get the slang and pop culture references in North American entertainment, I understand the political discourse, of course I'm going to lean towards entertainment catered to me.
I can't imagine Japan putting out a good Star Wars game (can stormtroopers have boobs?) or a good WW2 game (maybe there's a reason for that) or a good Civilization game (no joke here, CIV4 would put Dragonball Z fans into a coma).
And I don't think I misused the term "Mature", as in "intended for a mature audience". It doesn't always mean boobs and guns, sometimes it just means that the themes presented would just be confusing or misunderstood to younger viewers.
The entire conservative view of games like GTA just puzzles me. If you were to rent any NC-17 rated movie, you're likely to get far more sex and violence than any video game ever created. Yet the effect of two mannequins dry-humping each other in an already "17+ mature" title has sent shockwaves through the industry.
If "Pulp Fiction" were a video game, it would be banned in at least 50% of the US just based on the Zed scene. How is any real social commentary going to be made in such a sanctimonious atmosphere?
Alright, that's the end of my "mature" rant. Now that we're in "end of thread" limbo, I guess I'm writing primarily for myself =)
By "mature" I simply meant older. My tastes have envolved, and most Nintendo games strike me as saccharine. And I have given a few CG titles a shot. Metroid Prime, Pikmin 2, F-Zero, RE Zero. I don't like the controller, the graphics look terrible on my TV, and I'm no longer a fan of the Nintendo assets. Mario just doesn't evoke the same sentiments after 15 years of marketing experience. He's just another mascot, unfortunately. Destined to have someone making minimum wage play him in a giant felt costume at product launches.
Morrowind, Knights of the Old Republic, Strangers Wrath are all games that I enjoy. What am I possibly going to get out of Mario Sunshine?
Please, no need to be condescending. I'm just not part of the Nintendo demographic. What's so hard to understand about that? Plenty of companies market products to people other than me.
First of all, you aren't really part of the market today, since you don't buy games or consoles. If the Rev brings you into the fold, great! That's creating a market, though, not stealing marketshare from MS/Sony.
I own an Xbox, 360 and a GameCube. If the 360 hadn't come out when it did, I probably would have bought a second-hand PS2 just to play God of War. I'm definitely not console-biased.
I just don't see the Rev biting into the marketshare for the PS3/360. The kid-friendly outlook has made them money, why would they switch-up now? The Rev can be successful without impacting PS3/360 sales in the least. I guess that's my only point, really.
Uh, why should I define "interested?
You were the one that said none of your friends are interested in any next-gen consoles.
I'm declaring shenanigans on your comment. I think all your friends are interested in next-gen consoles. I wasn't implying that you had to buy or preorder one in order to be "interested". If you're a console gamer, chances are that you WILL own a next-gen console at some point.
There's the implication in some of these posts that MS, Sony and Nintendo are all so far off the mark that the console market will crash. I think that's all chicken-little talk. I think we'll be in trouble if we don't start getting some killer games shortly, but with Revenge, Fight Night, GRAW and Oblivion released for the 360 month, I think we'll see a bit of a turnaround, at least in March.
Just my opinion, like everyone elses.
"all the analysts agree"
"ask anybody out there"
"The simple fact is"
I love how this smacks of credibility =)
Which analysts agree that HDTV isn't making any headway? All the research I've seen suggests that HDTV adoption is still pretty brisk. The cost difference is not what it used to be, and people tend to think of their television as the hub of their entertainment area. Is HDTV here in force right now? Well, no. But a company that hopes to make money for the average console cycle would likely try to predict where the market is going, and it's going HDTV. The money tends to roll in over the long-haul, so you have to think about 3+ years ahead, not right now.
So I can really ask anyone? Because I asked my friday night group. 4/6 have HDTVs already, and 2/6 have 360's already. 5/6 plan to buy both. How's that for a biased market?
Is there a chance that YOU don't have that kind of money, and YOU like Nintendo's games, so it doesn't make sense to YOU?
I should point out that PC gaming has ALWAYS had a giant barrier to entry, and games are still released for that platform.
Books and movie theaters aren't exactly tearing up the entertainment market's bottom line. Where do you think the entertainment budget of the average, employed 25-35 year old is going these days?
Right, but one of the Rev's main selling features will be backward compatibility with old nintendo games (which is a BS line anyway. what they really mean is that you'll be able to repurchase these games. as much as I loved megaman or bionic commando, I just don't see it happening.) I can see them selling on a hand-held, primarily because they are simple to pick up and the graphics are simple and bright.
If no one in your circle is interested in next-gen consoles, are any of your friends gamers?
I'm a real gamer if I say so, I don't need your validation.
As a child of the original Nintendo revolution, I get the appeal, I'm just not in that place any more. I can't get excited about collecting coins with a plumber to save the princess anymore.
What do you think the possibility is of Oblivion or the next GTA coming out on the Rev if it's developed for the 360/PS3 crowd? Considering the performance delta this time around, I get the feeling that 3 platform releases are going to be shit this time around. Either they're going to suck in comparison, or they're just not going to happen.
The people that have the disposable income for a $500 console and an HDTV aren't Nintendo's customers anyway. I don't see Nintendo impacting the market for the other players at all this time around.
I keep hearing this "nintendo is going to sweep the market" line from fanboys.
What market are you referring to? Because I don't know anyone in my circle of friends, online and off, that could care less about the Rev. Maybe I have a biased circle, but all current consoles are represented.
I bought a Cube for RE4, which was totally worth $100+game. Outside of that, as a "mature" gamer, I could pass on the entire game library other than RE4.
Are people really itching to play NES games that badly? It seems to me that current games don't really do well if the graphics are a few months out of date. The "retro" market is a complete fabrication, as far as I'm concerned.