Support NeoGAF

[Ar_]

Not to mention that here in Europe - or at least in the small piece of Europe right under and in close proximity to my feet - Commodore computers were more diffused than the NES.

Edit:
After the 2600, Intellivision, Colecovision, we moved to C64 and in lesser measure Spectrum. Then Amiga and a few Atari ST. Then Genesis and SNES.
Original NES? Never played with one until the end of the SNES era.

 

[Pimpbaa]

If they were so popular?... then why was gaming about to crash then?... Gaming was about died with home conconsoles, until nintendo saved it, And gave birth to gaming as we know it...

It wasn't about to crash, it DID crash. Mainly due to atari putting out too much crap. Nintendo merely revived interest in console gaming at a later date. And for christ sakes, they did not give birth to gaming as we know it.

 

[PC Gaijin]

It wasn't even so much Atari putting out crap as it was a deluge of third party titles that Atari couldn't control that saturated the market. Combine that with a few bad decisions by Atari (the 5200 among others), excessive spending, and Atari taking a bath in the home computer market trying to compete with Commodore.

Oh and I hate seeing people (usually Nintendo droids that weren't even alive at the time) claim that Nintendo saved video games. Nintendo brought back console gaming, but video games did not go away after the crash. A lot of game development went to home computers. In fact, that was one of the things driving the crash, people decided they would rather spend money on a home computer than a console. Not to mention some home computers (the C64 in particular) were considerably better gaming-wise than the consoles available in the VCS era. If the NES hadn't come along, video gaming would have survived, just in a different form than what we know today. Without the NES I suspect the C64 would have been the dominant gaming platform of the mid to late '80s. Hell, sometimes I wish the NES had never existed so that computers like the ST and the Amiga had a better chance to catch on. Might have a much more interesting home computer market today if that had happened.

 

[DDayton]

Oh and I hate seeing people (usually Nintendo droids that weren't even alive at the time) claim that Nintendo saved video games. Nintendo brought back console gaming, but video games did not go away after the crash. A lot of game development went to home computers. In fact, that was one of the things driving the crash, people decided they would rather spend money on a home computer than a console. Not to mention some home computers (the C64 in particular) were considerably better gaming-wise than the consoles available in the VCS era. If the NES hadn't come along, video gaming would have survived, just in a different form than what we know today. Without the NES I suspect the C64 would have been the dominant gaming platform of the mid to late '80s. Hell, sometimes I wish the NES had never existed so that computers like the ST and the Amiga had a better chance to catch on. Might have a much more interesting home computer market today if that had happened.

Er... Nintendo -did- revive the home video game market, though. You can't really compare the home computer market to the home video game market, especially when the average home computer system cost at least double what the NES cost. Video games would have remained a niche market, as computer games only... and that's ignoring the fact that there were dozens of competing computer systems, and most failed miserably. Many software publishers went under by supporting the computer systems, and not just home game systems.

Even if the NES hadn't appeared, I don't think the ST or the Amiga would have caught on much more than they did. The biggest revolution in home computing was that every company on the face of the planet could make an IBM clone, driving prices down. IBM systems, and MS-DOS, were already the de facto work standard, and the introduction of cheaper clones lead to more and more home use.

Too bad... I like my Atari XEGS.

 

[gofreak]

Nintendo has said in a number of interviews now that if you want to know what the revolution in "Revolution" is, look at DS...

...i.e. it'll all be in the interface. Revolution, at least, shouldn't just be "another 3D machine".

edit:

Here's one specific quote from a Reggie interview in issue 143 of Edge:

"What does the DS reveal about Nintendo's vision for the future of the home console?
What we are saying, and I passionately believe this, is that the future of gaming is about the interface and the innovation in the interface that we provide for gamers. That's what's going to get the future gamers excited versus simply focussing on technology for technology's sake. So when we look at DS and the various input devices - touchscreen, voice activation, wireless, two screens - that's certainly a model for how we're thinking about our entire business. Just like how we look at the innovation around Donkey Konga and the bongos as an input device, that's how we see the future of gaming."

And another quote from an interview with Jim Merrick in the same issue:

"With the N64, Nintendo was criticised for having too few games which took too long to develop. You've addressed that with the GameCube. But the N64 had two Edge 10s, the GC has had none. Have you lost something with your new policy?
I don't think so. Look at Mario64. A phenomenal game, 10/10 as you say - thank you very much! - but it was a revolutionary game. It was the first game where 3D gaming really worked. GameCube isn't offering that kind of revolution. It's an evolution of 3D gameplay in the same way that the PS2 is an evolution of the PS1. Historically we've gone from revolution to evolution. NES was a revolution, SNES was an evolution. N64 revolution, GC evolution, hence "Revolution is coming". So where does that revolution come from? We don't have a fourth dimension handy, waiting in the wings, so what you're going to see is Nintendo experimenting with human interface technology...I think Nintendo can show its leadership there."

Don't think it could be clearer than that..

Now, y'all get your speculation hats on, rev your patent search engines, and try and figure out what they might be brewing!

 

[Diffense]

Great post gofreak. The 'revolution' is definitely going to be in the interface. To add a bit to what you posted, I remember Iwata saying something about response to the DS dictating Nintendo's future direction. I think they're definitely 'testing the waters' with the DS and would even accept the risk of a commercial failure for the opportunity to gauge consumer reaction to the new input features. If the ideas were rejected, they would have to go back to the drawing board with revolution.

 

[Deg]

Revolution needs to be more than just interface. It will be an acheivement if they make it adult freindly.

 

[wazoo]

If you do not like the Ds, do not even give a look to the Revolution.

 

[Prince]

do you think they can go with a kind of Eye-Toy type of interface ? it's one of the more natural developments in user interfaces but the problem is that Sony was first to implement it so Nintendo can't label it the Revolution altough it is probaly the best way to go if you want to do something with the interface imho

 

[thorns]

I like how people say "gaming has hit a wall" while games are more popular than ever before and we'll seeing record amount of sales this year. The only company to hit a wall is nintendo.

 

[wazoo]

I like how people say "gaming has hit a wall" while games are more popular than ever before and we'll seeing record amount of sales this year. The only company to hit a wall is nintendo.

In Japan, gaming has decreased 40% in, the last 5 years. It will also happen in the west one day.

 

[Deg]

If you do not like the Ds, do not even give a look to the Revolution.

DS wont be able to acheive sales that GBA gets. Because its different. They even said it themselves that they would be happy with even small sales. The DS is without a doubt succcessful has opened a new area of consoles. It just isnt going to be GBA successful thats impossible given thats its an entirely new type of device.

 

[wipeout364]

I doubt the revolution wil be revolutionary. The more Nintendo tries to gimmick it up the more market share they will lose. Look at the revolution of connectivity on the gamecube. That was a typical money grab by Nintendo. Revolution is not necessary, evoloution is occuring and that is the direction gaming will go in. I can not understand how anyone can complain about the improvements in gaming in the last 10 years . We've come a long way.

Gaming is great , No revolution required.

 

[Deg]

I hope its more of a revolution interms of how Nintendo does things.

 

[Agent X]

NES put video games into the mainstream and, for all intents and purposes, was the first really popular 2D console.

You just totally disavowed the existence of the Atari 2600 there.

 

[madara]

Sorry, there are a lot of 2D only freaks in here, thought you were one of them.

ROFL. Coming from guy that has fecilia bouncing around.

 

[Deg]

You just totally disavowed the existence of the Atari 2600 there.

What the hell is that? The NES was the first truly solid international game system for once and one that set most of the rules for today's industry.

 

[Diffense]

People use the word 'gimmick' all the time with respect to Nintendo's experiments. I think it's becuase they figure it carries a negative connotation. In that light, I found this definition interesting:

Gimmick:

An innovative or unusual mechanical contrivance; a gadget.

So, I guess it can be seen as an admission that Nintendo's gadgets are strange and innovative. Quite frankly, with two upcoming consoles that are guaranteed to be very much alike and predictable, I'll be happy for at least one that's gimmicky.

 

[Scottlarock]

nintendo will revoultise online console gaming! you will have 17 people play at once online! or have 16 mario on screen at the same time unlike the past---just having 1

 

[callous]

Sure. That doesn't make the NES generation any less consequential for those of us now in our early 20's. You played Asterioids. We played Mario. Thankfully the NES didn't lead to ET at its end.

Maybe if you're American. In Europe the NES was pretty much inconsequential next to Spectrum, C64 and even Amstrad. Even Megadrive and SNES were of little consequence next to the Amiga (yeah yeah, and the ST), though they were much, much bigger than the 8 bit consoles. It took PlayStation to get Europe really going on consoles.

 

[Diffense]

or solidsnake will feature 16x the polygons...

or ff will have 4x the cinematics...

seems another generation means little more than more of everything.

 

[PC Gaijin]

Er... Nintendo -did- revive the home video game market, though. You can't really compare the home computer market to the home video game market, especially when the average home computer system cost at least double what the NES cost. Video games would have remained a niche market, as computer games only... and that's ignoring the fact that there were dozens of competing computer systems, and most failed miserably. Many software publishers went under by supporting the computer systems, and not just home game systems.

Er...the home computer market that I'm talking about (which basically excludes the IBM PC) WAS the home video game market from about 1984 until 1987 or so (in the US). Yes, there was some business and personal (word processing, etc.) use of computers like the Apple II, C64, and Atari 8-bit, but the VAST majority of those systems were being used for gaming. The "dozens of systems" had basically been winnowed down to those three by the mid-80s. The cost of a basic Atari or C64 without disk drive were under $100 throughout the mid-80s. Yes, the selection of games would be vastly improved with a disk drive (although there were hundreds of game titles available on cartridge) yet even with a disk drive total system prices ranged from $150-200, which was comparable to NES prices at the time.

I'm just tired of hearing the myth that somehow video games disappeared from the home after the crash, and Nintendo is the reason we still have video games today. There were plenty of video games being produced during the years after the crash before the NES really took off, and those games were being played on home computers. I wouldn't consider it a niche market either. The C64 was huge in the mid-80s, it sold 7 million units in the US, and there were millions more Apple IIs and Ataris sold as well.

 

[seismologist]

The DS is single handedly holding my interest in gaming.. by a thread. I'm curious to see what developers will come up with for it.

 

[Flakster99]

Game over, read it. That is all. Nothing more needs to be said on this subject.

 

[king zell]

Game over, read it. That is all. Nothing more needs to be said on this subject.

junior!

 

[Jr.]

Don't listen to these fools, the NES was pretty much the first MAINSTREAM system to use SPRITE based graphics. I understand what you are saying, they are just dumb and want to bitch about stuff. Oh BTW, welcome, I'm a Jr. memeber too! Threads like this usually go downhill pretty quick, not many people on this board are constructive in thier conversations.

 

[Shadowmancer]

I don't think the NES gave birth to anything that I can recall (well, other than a slew of great Nintendo franchises),

The NES gave birth to one thing (atleast): Cartridge based saved.
Imagine living in a world where you still had to write down passwords. By now they would probably have to contain 256 characters to hold all the data.

 

[Gahiggidy]

I think its time for holographic games, or at least pseudo-holographic games. I can't think of anything else that can wow like the original Atari. The NES was more about getting Arcade quality games in the home but wasn't really a new experience.

Imagine it!::::::::vector like graphics::::::::blocky tanks blowing each other apart:::::::: angular spaceships dodging laserbeams::::::::X's and O's battleing for field position::::::dancing across your coffee table.

Now that's a revolution in interactive entertainment.

 

[firex]

The Revolution will not be televised... only Gahiggidy knows what that truly means.

 

[The Guivre]

Yeah, the NES was cool.

Anyway, I just thought I'd mention that after about three weeks the Nintendo DS that is on display at the Target store I work at has been broken. Not physically like, in two or something like that. The touch screen died. It's not scratched up or anything like that it simply doesn't respond to touch anymore. While I know demo hardware is hardly treated well, it does sort of lead me to wonder how long it will take before DS units not subjected to demo type treatment to start having similar problems.

Talk to most people who have had a PDA for awhile and use it a lot. No matter how "scratch proof" a surface is, it'll eventually get worn down. Physical problems aside Nintendo, at least how I've seen it has sort of 'Innovated' themselves into a corner.

The GBA was hardly innovative, but it was incredibly successful. The GameCube, despite what most hardcore Nintendo supporters say hasn't been nearly as successful as the competitors. Tiny discs? what was the point? ohhh... right, I totally wanted a two disc resident evil game. DVD functionality? who needs that when the console can look like a lunch pail?

I won't say the DS is finished, or a failure, it's far too early for that, but it just seems like Nintendo is being different just for the sake of being different, and it seems like it's not serving them so well. A $99 GC is proof of that, I've never run out of GameCubes to offer or sell people, but PS2s and Xboxes just aren't staying on the shelves.

 

[Gahiggidy]

The Revolution will not be televised... only Gahiggidy knows what that truly means.

Its is true that when Nintendo's E3 conference was waiting to start back in May, they did in fact play that very same Prince song over the sound system.

 

[Ranger X]

I'm surprised nobody defend the old NES a little more. You guys are beginning to be used at Nintendo hate and maybe forget what Nintendo really ment back there.
Gaming was at a crash and the NES revived the console gaming. Yes it's a birth of something. It was the birth on console gaming we know today. For sure gaming wouldn't have died. But maybe we would all be on PC gaming right now or something.

And what the fuck about the sales figures as a argument? NES outsold any Atari console or Intellivision, Colleco, etc.

 

[sc0la]

The revolution will not be televised is not a prince song.. =/

 

[Ar_]

Don't listen to these fools, the NES was pretty much the first MAINSTREAM system to use SPRITE based graphics.

The NES gave birth to one thing (atleast): Cartridge based saved.

Does it really matter? Assorted innovations were introduced by lots of different consoles, they aren't a Nintendo exclusive.
Besides the intellivision used sprites well before, also think the Colecovision did, not sure about 2600. C64 and MSX also used sprites. Where is the innovation? On the whole sprites were of common use already.

 

[Pimpbaa]

ROFL. Coming from guy that has fecilia bouncing around.

I like 3D and 2D games. It's just harder to like 2D games these days since they seem to be stagnating in 16-bit era graphics.

 

[Pimpbaa]

Don't listen to these fools, the NES was pretty much the first MAINSTREAM system to use SPRITE based graphics.

*bangs head on desk* NO! Consoles and computers were using fucking sprite based graphics before the NES.

-Edit And yes they were mainstream.

 

[Belfast]

Man, this virtual reality thing is going to be HOT.

 

[The Guivre]

Yeah... VR will rock the house. I hope it looks like the world of Tron but more real.

 

[Spike]

Yes, they are moving in the right direction. Change is good, as they say. You can see hints of what possibilities there are for the DS with Mario 64 DS and Feel the Magic.

I really want something different in the next gen, not just next iterations in the franchises I follow. If all the systems are going to offer are better graphics, then I'd rather just keep the current systems and have the games made for them, rather than spend another hefty amount on a console just to play the next halo/metroid/metal gear with better graphics. Give us something different, something that plays different, along with the standard sequels and such. Look at the Eyetoy, and the DS. Different, and fun. The videogame industry is challenging the movie industry for your entertainment dollars, so what needs to happen is to get people who would never play a videogame to get interested in them. If the PS2/Xbox/GCN can't do that now, what good will the next iterations of these systems do if all they can offer is better visuals?

 

[bobbyconover]

And what the fuck about the sales figures as a argument? NES outsold any Atari console or Intellivision, Colleco, etc.

The point was to show that pre-NES, "2D gaming" was very, very much "mainstream." Or is 25+ million not mainstream enough?

And please, don't even try to say that anyone in here is biased against the NES or Nintendo in general. We all love the NES, and we all grew up with the NES. It has nothing to do with whether or not we like Nintendo - it's just plain incorrect that the NES gave birth to much of anything, regardless of the fact that it sold really well and ultimately had some fantastic breakthrough games. We (well, some of us) lived through the 7 or so years prior, and since we aren't going on hearsay like some of you born-in-86 babies, we know that video games were absolutely huge before the NES came along. I remember the constant commercials on TV. I remember every 7-11, laundromat, gas station and dentist's office having arcade games crammed into it. I remember almost every one of my friends having a 2600, a c64, and in some cases a Colecovision or Intellivision as well. Video games were everywhere you looked. And yes, they were almost all 2D. Sprites.

 

[GDGF]

Whatever. Older gamers can say the same thing about the atari 2600 generation.

I guess we could, but I certainly wouldn't. I sure as hell had alot more fun with my NES than I did with my Atari 2600, and my Colecovision combined.

 

[Pimpbaa]

I guess we could, but I certainly wouldn't. I sure as hell had alot more fun with my NES than I did with my Atari 2600, and my Colecovision combined.

To each his own I guess. But the Atari 2600/Intellivision/Colecovision era really was the birth of console gaming (Pong was the hot sweaty sex that conceived console gaming) as we know it today. It brought the games out of the arcade and into our homes. It was a far more exciting time for me. I enjoyed my NES and various other consoles immensely since then, but they were always just evolutionary rather than revolutionary.

 

[vitaflo]

Given the idiocy in this thread, I expect to come back here 10 years from now and listen to people claim Sony invented gaming.

 

[GDGF]

Given the idiocy in this thread, I expect to come back here 10 years from now and listen to people claim Sony invented gaming.

Some people already believe that. No joke.

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

I was playing my Sega Genesis on Thanksgiving and had a couple relatives over. My younger cousin came into the room and saw me playing, at which point she asked "What are ya doin', playin' Playstation 2?"

I think my heart skipped a beat that day.

 

[seismologist]

Yes, they are moving in the right direction. Change is good, as they say. You can see hints of what possibilities there are for the DS with Mario 64 DS and Feel the Magic.

I really want something different in the next gen, not just next iterations in the franchises I follow. If all the systems are going to offer are better graphics, then I'd rather just keep the current systems and have the games made for them, rather than spend another hefty amount on a console just to play the next halo/metroid/metal gear with better graphics. Give us something different, something that plays different, along with the standard sequels and such. Look at the Eyetoy, and the DS. Different, and fun. The videogame industry is challenging the movie industry for your entertainment dollars, so what needs to happen is to get people who would never play a videogame to get interested in them. If the PS2/Xbox/GCN can't do that now, what good will the next iterations of these systems do if all they can offer is better visuals?

Exctly. Pretty soon it'll feel like buying a new DVD player every couple years just to watch movies with the latest special effects. People arent going to keep falling for it.

I felt the same way when I bought this $300 graphics card when Doom 3 came out. Sure it was pretty but the whole time I was trying to figure out why there are better FPS's that can be played on a 6 year old PC or an N64. Luckily I returned it before the 30 days was up

 

[DDayton]

I've lived through both the 2600 and the NES waves... and yes, home computer games sold rather well. Perhaps the better note to make is that the market shrank greatly and didn't return to the same levels until the release of the NES?

Question: what year is commonly accepted as the "video game crash" these days? Was it 1984? Didn't the US get the NES in late 1985 and early 1986? If so, it would seem that even if you ignored home computer games, the "crash" was really short, or even nonexistant. Rather, it was a market shakeup -- the major companies changed, but the industry continued. Anyone have mid 80's market data?

 

[TheDiave]

I'm excited 'bout the Nintendo DS - I'll get one once the software library has a bit more I'd play - but I've got to hand it to the PSP for its visuals. I know graphics don't make the game, but considering the fact comparisons will be (and have been) drawn between the PSP and DS, well, the argument for DS isn't all that compelling.

The grounds for my concern is Ridge Racer DS versus Ridge Racers on PSP.

 

[PC Gaijin]

I've lived through both the 2600 and the NES waves... and yes, home computer games sold rather well. Perhaps the better note to make is that the market shrank greatly and didn't return to the same levels until the release of the NES?

Yeah, I think that would be the most accurate way to describe what happened. And I think it shrank mostly in dollar terms, not necessarily the number of people playing games. Everyone that I knew that played games back then continued playing games right through the "crash", although it was more home computer games and arcade than the old consoles.

Question: what year is commonly accepted as the "video game crash" these days? Was it 1984? Didn't the US get the NES in late 1985 and early 1986? If so, it would seem that even if you ignored home computer games, the "crash" was really short, or even nonexistant. Rather, it was a market shakeup -- the major companies changed, but the industry continued. Anyone have mid 80's market data?

I think 83-84 would be the "crash". '83 in particular saw a massive shakeout in the home computer market driven by Commodore's price slashing. This had a big effect on Atari and Coleco (who were trying to market ADAM). The losses they sustained due to the computer price wars exacerbated the problems they had on the console side. '83 was the year that unlicensed 2600 games really started flooding the market and hurting Atari. Warner's sale of Atari to Jack Tramiel is what really cemented the crash. Atari was ready to introduce the 7800 that summer, which might have turned home console gaming around. At the very least it had an encryption algorithm in the carts that would have helped Atari control the software released. Tramiel had no interest in consoles and gutted Atari's gaming operations.

I don't have much in the way of numbers, but I do know that Atari continued selling the 2600 and cartridges after the "crash". A report in Atari Explorer (Atari's house magazine) reported in mid-85 that Atari had sold 2 million more 2600 consoles in the year since the Tramiels took over. Atari and others (like Activision) also continued to release new game carts for the 2600 and 5200 during this time (although at a much lower rate than before the crash obviously). Coleco continued selling the CV and carts well through '85 including advertising (I find it hard to believe they would advertise much if they weren't making at least some money).

The NES got wide release in '86, but I don't remember it picking up much steam until '87, and it really got huge in '88 and beyond.

 

[Gahiggidy]

The NES is 18 year's old? That's convienint. When the Revolution luanches NOA could trumpet the fact that it happens to be Ninty's 20 year anniversery.