Nintendo President Plays Down Sony Handset
- Thread starter Kon Tiki
- Start date
I definitely think Nintendo is on the right path, but understand the frustrations and confusion this approach causes.
I think proof that this is working can be found in the dozens of posts on this boards from people who say they are having much more fun with the minigames than the main quest in Mario 64 DS.
I think proof that this is working can be found in the dozens of posts on this boards from people who say they are having much more fun with the minigames than the main quest in Mario 64 DS.
Nerevar said:
It's a first person game that I can actually play, I'd think that alone proves you wrong.
But seriously, have you played either? Both do an excellent job of easing you into the control scheme. At first you can only basically run, shoot, jump, and use the morph ball. It isn't until later - that you've obviously mastered those enough to even get upgrades, that things are stepped up.(That, and I did say it was up for discussion. I'm well aware that not everyone's too hot on Metroid and it's deviation from the "norm" of console first-person games.)
I think you have more of a crisis of perspective here than anyone else. You've just generalized all games as too complex, when there are plenty of games that are very simple on all platforms. The simplest games generally aren't selling in significant numbers though, like the more complex games do.JasoNsider said:
The problem is that Iwata and others seem to be delivering a poor diagnosis of the problem. They say there's a problem getting the attention of non/novice gamers and they say its because there's not enough simple gameplay experiences on the market. But there are plenty. So either simple gameplay isn't really the issue or they aren't marketing what simple games are out there now effectively.xsarien said:
Either that or its just the kind of flamboyant statement that makes for good PR at the release of a new piece of hardware
MP might be harder for people to get into who have played dual analog FPS to death, but I wonder if the same can be applied to people who haven't played any games with dual analog set up buy might be familiar with 3d platformers and such?
I think this is another case of where we gamers have a hard time reflecting on what it means for use to pick up a game versus what it would mean for our parents, girlfriends or siblings.
I think this is another case of where we gamers have a hard time reflecting on what it means for use to pick up a game versus what it would mean for our parents, girlfriends or siblings.
ge-man said:
As someone who only touched on Halo briefly, and having Metroid Prime being my first console first-person shooter/platformer/whatever, we're not getting into that now, the controls were about as "pick up and play" as anything could possibly be for a game like that.
They actually said that games are too complex. They're not talking about a lack of simple games, more that the majority of the industry is obsessed with complexity.kaching said:
Since the PlayStation introduced 3D to games (OK, not historically correct, but you know what I mean), the industry boomed and then shrank again. Nothing new has been provided since 3D. Famicom and PlayStation are the two major breaths of fresh air the industry has had in its history, and it's about time for another one, whoever it comes from.
The way the industry is going, Japan are becoming less influential. That is why there are so many threads about it these days. Microsoft could easily copy anything Sony does, and Japanese developers are not exactly wooing Western audiences with games. Nintendo knows this, so they are trying to come up with fresh ideas that neither Sony or Microsoft are thinking about. Hence the hype and mystery surrounding the DS (back at the start of the year) and the Revolution.
Okay, we're talking about a market that doesn't play / knows nothing about games. They know little Johnny has a PS2 and its' got a ton of buttons and THREE different directional inputs. Assume the last game these people played was on the Atari with its one joystick, and one button.
You honestly think that person knows enough about games to plow through a library of HUNDREDS of PS2 games and magically they'll pick out the few games that they think are 'on their level'.
Or do you think its more likely that'll they'll just say 'screw it' and go watch the Gilmore Girls.
Now how about a system where its got buttons, but the only 'real' thing they ever see (through advertising and primary input when people use it) is the touch screen. It's a screen, they put their finger there, shit happens. Perceptionally they know that *all* games they ever buy for that system (whether its true or not isn't the point) will be as simple as touching the screen, and having shit happen.
Software tie in is also a big issue. I know tons of people (my sister and her boyfriend for instance) that own a PS2, and they've got a football game and maybe Tiger woods, and thats about it. The software to system tie in is crap. My sister likes games, she owned a Genesis at some point, but her comment was always 'why can't this be more like Mario Brothers, I could play that)'. A month or two ago one of my gaming friends came over with a friend of theirs and we were playing whatever but this other person was just sort of sitting there. I offered her the controller, she said 'no thanks, i don't think I could do that' and I asked her if she had any games she did like and she said 'Oh Sonic, I used to play that a lot'. So i broke out the Mega Collection, put it in my cube and she was off and happy.
We're the minority people, you have to accept that. Our buying power doesn't mean shit compared to the potential profits of true 'mass market'.
JasoNsider
Member
kaching said:
I'm not talking about sales here. Whether or not something sells, doesn't necessarily make it better or worse. If every single person had the chance to play Katamari Damacy, I can guarantee that millions upon millions would "want" it. This is exactly what I'm speaking of.
There is no "crisis of perspective" on my end, I assure you. If middle aged men and women, young girls, seniors, and the public in general pay no attention to this medium, you have to realize there is a problem. Who is the one with the perspective problem - the man looking at this industry from an outsider's perspective, or the man trying to speak on behalf of the dedicated core audience? I'm pretty sure you know the answer to that question.
There are simple games out there, on all platforms even. However, with that being said, you can't tell me that there is a balance. We need more Wario Ware, Yoshi's Touch and Go, and Zoo Keepers to accompany the Splinter Cells and Ninja Gaidens. The balance is not even in critical condition, it's practically non-existant.
Look at Super Mario Brothers for a moment:
The input method: 1 digital pad, one run button, one jump button
The action verbs: Walk, run, jump, sometimes throw fireball, swim.
Now for Super Mario Sunshine (sticking with one series here):
The input method: 2 analog sticks with 365 degrees of movement and variable sensitivity in these directions. 4 face buttons, 2 trigger buttons with 256 degrees of sensitivity each, a digital pad, seperate functions for the trigger clicks, etc.
The actions: Walk, run, jump, hover, slide, climb, walk the tight rope, tight rope spin, fill water tank, spray water, spin jump, speed run, side jump. Now you must also move camera to even see where you are going.
Even with all those features, the actual depth of the game did not increase proportionally. Super Mario Brothers was a game with simple play mechanics that were applied in increasingly difficult areas until you had to be a master of the few features available. Even though it was simple, it took lots of people a very long time to get through it (many have not finished it to this day.) One of these games is easy to pick up and play, the other is not.
Edit: vark seems to be on the same page here.
jarrod said:
The two iterations of the GB and the GBC are the same thing. I hate when people try to differentiate, but they're not. It's the same system. All their sales should be glommed in together. I mean, the GBC gavee colorized versions of the originals, it wasn't even what you'd consider a full color system. The GBA and GBA SP are also one system, and the DS will be on seperate system. If we can split the GB up like that, they we might as well differentiate between the Playstation and the PSOne. Or the Playstation2 and the PSTwo. Just my thoughts on that.
Anyway, onto the topic, let's not defend that bullshit PR. Gamers aren't drifting away from complexity. Matter of fact, that's where the market's been heading. Look at the two most popular games this gen, GTA and Halo. Two of the most vast and complex games around. Even Gran Turismo (the bog standard in car games) is extremely complex. The reason we look forward to each new hardware iteration is for the bump in complexity. I want games to mimic real life.
Now, it says nothing about input schemes. GTA is a complex game with a very simple control scheme. The same for a lot of other games. If the DS is targeting non-gamers, I don't see the point. It's the razors and razor blades thing. If there's a non-gamer who will somehow be attracted to cheap parlor games over an RPG or action game, then I guess they don't really need to be buying gaming hardware. I mean, is playing Mario64DS with the touch screen really simplifying anything? Is a stylus really going to enable more intuitive gameplay options? This sounds like GC PR redux Trying to distract people by claiming the competition is after a different market despite every indication to the contrary. The DS and PSP will hit the same market. The non-gamer market won't amount to a drop in the bucket compared to the sales to the 100M or so regular gamers out there. I think any company would rather sell to the people who will buy 10-20 games in the console's lifetime rather than casual non-gamers who'll only buy like the dog game and then use the system the rest of the time for Pictochat. Just seems like the steamiest pile of bs to be offered up since we could jack into the Matrix on our PS2s.
PEACE.Duckhuntdog
Member
Society said:The Xbot Queen said Nintendo should stick to Flash games. Flash Games do make sense on the NDS.
Mina is back??
Pimpwerx said:This sounds like GC PR redux Trying to distract people by claiming the competition is after a different market despite every indication to the contrary. The DS and PSP will hit the same market. The non-gamer market won't amount to a drop in the bucket compared to the sales to the 100M or so regular gamers out there. I think any company would rather sell to the people who will buy 10-20 games in the console's lifetime rather than casual non-gamers who'll only buy like the dog game and then use the system the rest of the time for Pictochat. Just seems like the steamiest pile of bs to be offered up since we could jack into the Matrix on our PS2s.
The thing you are missing is that Nintendo has been saying these things about difficult controls for a long time. In spite of the massive success of Mario 64, Miyamoto still criticized the he directed for not having the same pick up and play of the original Mario games. These ideas they keep harping on go back further than what is happening with Nintendo today, but people like to zero in on the arguments as if it's defeatest talk.
I also don't agree with the whole idea of companies prefering someone who would buy 10-20 games a year. If the industry could consitently recreate the broad cultural, gender, and age success of Pac-Man and Mario, they wouldn't pay lip service to the hardcore.
JasoNsider
Member
ge-man said:
Miyamoto also expressed his dissapointment with Super Mario Sunshine as well. Even with Mario 64, there was the option to just screw around outside in the castle grounds without worrying about missions or enemies. People just loved to run and jump around.
The sad thing about all of this is that this forum and others like it are the last place on earth that will ever realize there is a problem with the current setup. We are all so into our games that we don't realize that what we find simple is actually quite complicated. Teaching someone to play Yoshi's Touch and Go or the slingshot game in Mario 64 DS took about 5 seconds. "draw clouds to guide Mario." "pull back slingshot to fire at the enemies." With most of the console games today you practically have to give a lecture on camera controls, lock-on targetting, combos, etc.
I'm actually expecting Spring 2007 (following Revolution in Fall 2006). That gives DS about 2.5 years on the market as the top Nintendo handheld, which is line with with GB/GBC/GBA before it. If DS takes a trun they can push the date up, if it's smashing success they can delay if they like too.human5892 said:
1. GB and GBC are different chipsets. PS1/PSone and PS2/PStwo aren't.Pimpwerx said:
2. The original GB really had 2 distinct lifecycles. It was essentially dead and revived... it'd be like Sega reintroducing a sleeker cheaper Saturn with a killer app after Dreamcast had died. GB did not have an uninterrupted decade long reign though, that's highly deceptive. It had 2 distinct highly active lifecycles.
ge-man said:
As they keep saying that stuff, they keep losing marketshare. Clearly, they're wrong.
Razors and razor blades. Companies generally take a loss on hardware, unless they go cheap like Nintendo, then they don't. They want to sell software more than hardware, so they want the hardcore crowd that buys 10-20 games. That's where the money's at. As for the success of Pacman and Mario...video games are so much bigger now than those days. The cultural, gender and age success has grown exponentially since then. You couldn't sell 100M consoles in those days. Games didn't really break 5M in a couple of months then. The appeal and draw of gaming is so much larger today than yesterday that it's obvious that Nintendo guy is talking out of his ass. The game market exploded thanks to the PSX and its "complex games". The jump to 3D, and its increased complexity has driven game sales, just not for Nintendo who has lost out since the jump to 3D. THAT's why he's talking out of his ass, to explain away the company's lack of success in the face of the Playstation juggernaut. PEACE.
Marketshare isn't everything however. While Nintendo has lost it on the console side, their overall audience has grown thanks to handhelds, from N64/GBC being about 60 million in 2001 to GC/GBA already at 75 million in just 3 years.Pimpwerx said:
And while the market at large has grown substantially this generetion, it's also lost diversity. Console gaming more than ever is now catering to a specific base... the industry is actually getting farther from reaching the truly mainstream audience film, music and books enjoy.
I don't think it's that simple. Yes, 3D has increased the popularity of gaming. But have machines like the GB continued to thrive with more advanced options out there? Why are cell phone games and online parlor games increasing in popularity? Why are companies bothering with retro collections and such? WHy did the PS2 loose so many female gamers when compared to the PS1? There are still a lot of people out there who want to play games who are being underserved by today's console market.
Yeah, Nintendo is losing market share, but they are not just trying to talk away their problems--they are acting in the way they think is appropiate. I think these next few years will be a better indicator of the success of Nintendo's philosophy than their current console (the GC has the misfortune of having to be concieved during a moment of huge transitions within the company personal and thinking.)
Yeah, Nintendo is losing market share, but they are not just trying to talk away their problems--they are acting in the way they think is appropiate. I think these next few years will be a better indicator of the success of Nintendo's philosophy than their current console (the GC has the misfortune of having to be concieved during a moment of huge transitions within the company personal and thinking.)
OG_Original Gamer
Member
I thought he wasn't talking about me(Iwata), when he speaks of gamers straying away from complex games, he means them specifically.
I don't understand the reason for disagreement, you, we are not the target. Its all about money, Nintendo wants to create another market, create another source of income. They have two now, the DS is a attempt at creating the third.
Let's say Nintendo succeeds at creating this market, now they extra have funds to leverage off console cost. Nintendo now are going into the animation film market, the underlying goal is to do just like any other company and that is create more income.
Some of you guys will just have to accept the fact that the DS wasn't designed with you in mind.
I mean why release a title like Metroid Prime2, if you believe games need less complexity for all gamers.
I don't understand the reason for disagreement, you, we are not the target. Its all about money, Nintendo wants to create another market, create another source of income. They have two now, the DS is a attempt at creating the third.
Let's say Nintendo succeeds at creating this market, now they extra have funds to leverage off console cost. Nintendo now are going into the animation film market, the underlying goal is to do just like any other company and that is create more income.
Some of you guys will just have to accept the fact that the DS wasn't designed with you in mind.
I mean why release a title like Metroid Prime2, if you believe games need less complexity for all gamers.
You can test the Nintendo theory yourself. Get a Gamecube, a couple of GBAs, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles, Mario Kart: DD, and a friend who doesn't play games.
Sit them down with a GBA and FFCC and try explaining to them how the game works, which character they are, what the value is of creating a new one, what the point of the game is, how the controls work, what magicite is and how to use it, how the GBA works as a submenu, how to fuse spells together, etc etc.
Next, put MK
D in, load up a track, hand them a controller and say "the joystick on the left is to turn corners, the big green button is gas".
Now see which one they pick up faster.
(Disclaimer: MKD is not the ultimate example of simplicity, but if you want to compare games inside the spectrum, gas and movement is about as reduced as you can get)
Sit them down with a GBA and FFCC and try explaining to them how the game works, which character they are, what the value is of creating a new one, what the point of the game is, how the controls work, what magicite is and how to use it, how the GBA works as a submenu, how to fuse spells together, etc etc.
Next, put MK
D in, load up a track, hand them a controller and say "the joystick on the left is to turn corners, the big green button is gas".Now see which one they pick up faster.
(Disclaimer: MK
D is not the ultimate example of simplicity, but if you want to compare games inside the spectrum, gas and movement is about as reduced as you can get)even Mario Kart is almost too difficult. The simple (to us) analog stick is an alien object to anyone that doesn't have a console. Seriously. They simply cannot connect the controller to what happens on screen. You understand because you have been indoctrinated in the use of controllers
And while my dad and others would like to play games, they simply take one look at the controller, or their children playing with all the buttons, and switch off (mentally).
DS is a good start, as the touch screen needs little explanation (I can't help think the two screens is a step backward - complicating things)
I think you need a real 'under the TV' console with simple stuff. Remember how many families had Tennis games under the TV? one twisty knob like on a cooker or TV, and the bat went up and down. Everyone played that - mums, dads, grannies.
There are a lot of people with consoles this gen, but there are a *lot* of people with no console. So plenty to play for.
And while my dad and others would like to play games, they simply take one look at the controller, or their children playing with all the buttons, and switch off (mentally).
DS is a good start, as the touch screen needs little explanation (I can't help think the two screens is a step backward - complicating things)
I think you need a real 'under the TV' console with simple stuff. Remember how many families had Tennis games under the TV? one twisty knob like on a cooker or TV, and the bat went up and down. Everyone played that - mums, dads, grannies.
There are a lot of people with consoles this gen, but there are a *lot* of people with no console. So plenty to play for.
First of all, I think sales of the DS are great, Nintendo looks to have a hit on their hands....
NOW... for all these folks screaming a touch screen makes things simpler... I have to wonder... as an IT employee I see people using PDA's all the time... and I have to say.... a touchscreen by itself does not make things easier.
NOW... for all these folks screaming a touch screen makes things simpler... I have to wonder... as an IT employee I see people using PDA's all the time... and I have to say.... a touchscreen by itself does not make things easier.
Pedigree Chum
Banned
I like complex games on my VG systems. On Handhelds, I want simple fun games...Nintendo has a point when it comes to handhelds, but not consoles.
mrklaw said:
True and good points, but when comparing Mario Kart to a "typical" relatively simple RPG like FFCC, it's fairly obvious which is the easier to get into. My point is this: with MK, all you have to do is explain the nature of basic interaction with the controller. Once you learn that (which shouldn't take all too long; remember when you first played Mario 64 and getting him to walk was hard enough, let alone navigate along a cliff?), it's pretty straightforward: you push the button, the kart starts moving. You move your thumb, the kart turns. With FFCC it's a different story; you have to worry about a ton of other things (for instance: monsters, which is something the experienced gamer takes for granted) as well as just getting your fingers to do the right thing with the controller.
Admittedly, of course, the touchscreen/stylus is a more ... accessible approach. Why? Because people have spent year training their fingers to use a pen. So drawing stuff on a screen and having it respond in the same way is as intuitive as you could ever want it to be. This is also why sci-fi movies barely show people using a keyboard, because they just have to touch whatever it is on the holopanel, or talk to it, and it reacts naturally. None of this cheap-ass "keyboard" stuff. (that reminds me of the scene in Star Trek 4 where Scotty sits down at a desktop computer in the 80's and tries asking the mouse to do something for him, not realising it's a mouse and not a voice input device :lol).
Anyway, I get the point. I just noticed that when you want to have fun with people who aren't hardcore gamers, the single button approach with a straightforward minigame mechanic is the best way to do that. And with 90% of people, minigames are the only thing they have time for, because they aren't hardcore gamers and therefore don't consider it their primary hobby, eg. something to spend several hours a day on.
OG_Original Gamer
Member
DarienA said:First of all, I think sales of the DS are great, Nintendo looks to have a hit on their hands....
NOW... for all these folks screaming a touch screen makes things simpler... I have to wonder... as an IT employee I see people using PDA's all the time... and I have to say.... a touchscreen by itself does not make things easier.
Come on, man. You can't be serious, your comparing to different devices that functions are of different means. Nobody is navagating a OS on the DS, or using it to organize their schedule.
The F14 Tomcat has a flight stick similar to what gamers use today, does that mean I'm experiencing G-force sitting in front of my PC monitor.
As much as I agree that the DS has potential to appeal to ultra-casual gamers, I don't see anything scheduled for the system that will sell systems to them in the first place.
Zoo Keeper is the best chance for this so far, but it's so underhyped that it's tough to imagine someone w/ only a passing interest in games buying a DS to play it.
Zoo Keeper is the best chance for this so far, but it's so underhyped that it's tough to imagine someone w/ only a passing interest in games buying a DS to play it.
OG_Original Gamer said:
I said simply ADDING a touch screen doesn't automatically mean easy... jesus... Whether it's navigating an OS or organizing their schedule I'm talking strictly in terms of learning to use a stylus. Yes it's like a pencil which theoretically should make it easier to use... but it's still a question of getting the fine touch necessary to move objects around on a small screen, different levels of pressure, and just like learning to use a mouse these things are automatic.
Put down your torches and pitchforks.
OG_Original Gamer
Member
DarienA said:
:lol Your hilarious.
The Guivre
Member
I'm going to ignore the whole GB timeline arguement thing and focus on the whole simplicity issue.
Statement: The average middle aged man, or woman is not into games.
These are the people who pumped quarters into Pac-Man and Ms. Pac-Man during highschool. So they obviously aren't opposed to games.
Statement: Complex controls drive people who don't know the 'back log' away.
Have you ever been to Xbox Live? Granted they aren't the greatest but there are plenty of 12 year olds and even younger out there who demonstrate on a daily basis that they're capable of playing 'complex' games and enjoying them. They weren't even alive for any of this 'Back log' that people are talking about, and it certainly isn't holding them back.
Statement: Middle aged people (Target audience?) would rather watch TV than play a 'complex game'
Several titles - EverQuest (I&II), Dark Age of Camelot, Anarchy Online.
EverQuest is especially successful at navigating to this supposeldy unreachable middle aged consumer market, male or female. Final Fantasy was mentioned as being complex. Like EverQuest is a cake walk? You manage job classes or whatever you'd like to call them, learn spells which you must make sure not to over use, find people to help you accomplish multi-leveled quests across vast virtual spans of territory and all with a mouse and keyboard. Granted this isn't the fast paced action of Halo 2. But look at Morrowind or the Final Fantasy types.. these are games that are rather close to EverQuest in design as far as gameplay, turn based, stat managing and so on.
I think people are assuming that everyone should be able to play Halo 2 before you could consider them willing or capable of being called a consumer of the gaming industry. Kids are all over games, those of us here on the forums are even more so. Our parents (who because of the baby boom out number us and are therefore a potentially untapped gold mine to people like Nintendo). Aren't scared of complexity, a good portion of EverQuest subscribers are older. They just don't want to play games at all, they have careers, hobbies and other things that occupy the same time that we fill with gaming. The older you get the more set in your ways you become. Getting grandpa to tear ass with you along the gullies of Burial Mounds is not likely to happen no matter how easy you try and make it for him to do so, he just isn't interested.
Statement: The average middle aged man, or woman is not into games.
These are the people who pumped quarters into Pac-Man and Ms. Pac-Man during highschool. So they obviously aren't opposed to games.
Statement: Complex controls drive people who don't know the 'back log' away.
Have you ever been to Xbox Live? Granted they aren't the greatest but there are plenty of 12 year olds and even younger out there who demonstrate on a daily basis that they're capable of playing 'complex' games and enjoying them. They weren't even alive for any of this 'Back log' that people are talking about, and it certainly isn't holding them back.
Statement: Middle aged people (Target audience?) would rather watch TV than play a 'complex game'
Several titles - EverQuest (I&II), Dark Age of Camelot, Anarchy Online.
EverQuest is especially successful at navigating to this supposeldy unreachable middle aged consumer market, male or female. Final Fantasy was mentioned as being complex. Like EverQuest is a cake walk? You manage job classes or whatever you'd like to call them, learn spells which you must make sure not to over use, find people to help you accomplish multi-leveled quests across vast virtual spans of territory and all with a mouse and keyboard. Granted this isn't the fast paced action of Halo 2. But look at Morrowind or the Final Fantasy types.. these are games that are rather close to EverQuest in design as far as gameplay, turn based, stat managing and so on.
I think people are assuming that everyone should be able to play Halo 2 before you could consider them willing or capable of being called a consumer of the gaming industry. Kids are all over games, those of us here on the forums are even more so. Our parents (who because of the baby boom out number us and are therefore a potentially untapped gold mine to people like Nintendo). Aren't scared of complexity, a good portion of EverQuest subscribers are older. They just don't want to play games at all, they have careers, hobbies and other things that occupy the same time that we fill with gaming. The older you get the more set in your ways you become. Getting grandpa to tear ass with you along the gullies of Burial Mounds is not likely to happen no matter how easy you try and make it for him to do so, he just isn't interested.
"The old-style formula for success of relying on technological innovations to deliver dazzling graphics simply doesn't work, Iwata said."
Every time Iwata says this I want to slit his throat. Right or wrong, GRAPHICS SELL. My God, man. As I've said before, I'm a Nintendo whore, but they're so fucking insane that they need their asses kicked hard.
PSP will wipe the floor with DS, and when it does, maybe Nintendo will wake up and do sensible things like adding graphical power and an analog stick to their portable systems.
Every time Iwata says this I want to slit his throat. Right or wrong, GRAPHICS SELL. My God, man. As I've said before, I'm a Nintendo whore, but they're so fucking insane that they need their asses kicked hard.
PSP will wipe the floor with DS, and when it does, maybe Nintendo will wake up and do sensible things like adding graphical power and an analog stick to their portable systems.
ironichaos
Member
You're talking about kids here. It's their job (in addition to drinking Kool Aid) to learn new things.
Nintendo realizes this otherwise we wouldn't be getting the new Zelda. Hell, Nintendo's motto on the Nintendo 64 even was our graphics are better than Sony's.
However, there's no reason the company can't also appeal to different audiences.
Chittagong
Gold Member
I won't deny that Nintendo's PR spin is the correct one for them.
However, it's pretty obvious that things aren't so black and white. It's like saying that special effects in movies have reaced their limit and can't be improved any more, and for that reason people will prefer european arthouse movies from now on.
Nintendo's path allows unique innovation but not so good progress in graphics.
Sony's path allows some innovation but big progress in graphics.
Innovative games do not require specific hardware, but instead a brilliant Lead Designer. A brilliant designer can do a fun game that uses only one button and 16 x 16 monochrome screen. That said, Touch Made In Wario is a work of a genius designer.
However, it's pretty obvious that things aren't so black and white. It's like saying that special effects in movies have reaced their limit and can't be improved any more, and for that reason people will prefer european arthouse movies from now on.
Nintendo's path allows unique innovation but not so good progress in graphics.
Sony's path allows some innovation but big progress in graphics.
Innovative games do not require specific hardware, but instead a brilliant Lead Designer. A brilliant designer can do a fun game that uses only one button and 16 x 16 monochrome screen. That said, Touch Made In Wario is a work of a genius designer.
OG_Original Gamer
Member
It just sounds so many of the people on this forum, don't want to try to find another market. The next Gameboy will be yours to play with, its all about income baby.
"Have you ever been to Xbox Live? Granted they aren't the greatest but there are plenty of 12 year olds and even younger out there who demonstrate on a daily basis that they're capable of playing 'complex' games and enjoying them. They weren't even alive for any of this 'Back log' that people are talking about, and it certainly isn't holding them back."
These people aren't the market we're talking about. We're talking about untapped market potential among people that can actually afford to buy games without bothering their parents. If the kid already owns an xbox, he doesn't really count
As far as MMO's and what not I read an interesting thing in GDM that catagorized MMO players and the 'elusive' females and age groups all had in common the fact that they played MMO's not for the RPG elements, the spell systems or whatever, they played it for social interaction. They don't really take the time to 'learn' a system inside and out because they're not power leveling or anything. They just need to know enough to get by and will learn in the process. The point still stands though that its the point of entry that needs the breaking down.
These people aren't the market we're talking about. We're talking about untapped market potential among people that can actually afford to buy games without bothering their parents. If the kid already owns an xbox, he doesn't really count
As far as MMO's and what not I read an interesting thing in GDM that catagorized MMO players and the 'elusive' females and age groups all had in common the fact that they played MMO's not for the RPG elements, the spell systems or whatever, they played it for social interaction. They don't really take the time to 'learn' a system inside and out because they're not power leveling or anything. They just need to know enough to get by and will learn in the process. The point still stands though that its the point of entry that needs the breaking down.
Smiles and Cries
Member
I'm buying a PSP and I never thought I would buy a sony gaming anything.
I don't buy the notion that games complexity is preventing the market from expanding.
Take film, which was being touted earlier in the thread as a true mass media. Go look at turn of the century silent film - say, The Great Train Robbery (1903) - then go look at films from the mid-to-late30s. Early on things are pretty damn rudimentary, and you'll spend a lot of time watching extended static shots of basic activity and think to yourself, "Okay, I get the point already." The editing isn't what you'd call fast paced. Now sit down and watch The Wizard of Oz (1939). There's obvious technical improvements - sound, color, and what have you - but you'll also notice the method of narative storytelling has really picked up. The pace of editing has increased, it all flows pretty smoothly, and it's essentially like a movie you'd see today. (Hell, two years later and Citizen Kane gave us the definition of modern film.)
Video games are the same way. We've come a whole helluva long way from Pong, which gained mass-market appeal through it's simplicity (and the ability to play it with a beer on your other hand). After 32 years, most people have absorbed a certain amount of gaming vocabulary well beyond "move the paddle to hit the ball", "move Pac-Man to eat the dots and avoid the ghosts", and "make Mario run, jump, land on heads, and maybe fire off a fireball or two". We're all the way up to "make CJ become a crime lord through a wide variety of gameplay" that anyone can pick up in short order. You just start with "the joystick makes him run, this makes him shoot people, and this makes him jack cars"; from there, folks will figure out the complexities of the game (such as they are) on their own without much help. It isn't that difficult. Now, whether or not the non-traditional audience wants to play San Andreas is an entirely different matter, but doesn't have any bearing on their ability to do so.
Each successive generation that continues to grow up with videogames expands the mass market appeal of videogames in general. I'd say that if the 35 year old woman down the hall doesn't play videogames - not something I'd bet on, by the way - it's because publishers aren't selling the sort of games she wants in a thematic sort of way, not because of the inherent difficulty of the games.
FnordChan
Take film, which was being touted earlier in the thread as a true mass media. Go look at turn of the century silent film - say, The Great Train Robbery (1903) - then go look at films from the mid-to-late30s. Early on things are pretty damn rudimentary, and you'll spend a lot of time watching extended static shots of basic activity and think to yourself, "Okay, I get the point already." The editing isn't what you'd call fast paced. Now sit down and watch The Wizard of Oz (1939). There's obvious technical improvements - sound, color, and what have you - but you'll also notice the method of narative storytelling has really picked up. The pace of editing has increased, it all flows pretty smoothly, and it's essentially like a movie you'd see today. (Hell, two years later and Citizen Kane gave us the definition of modern film.)
Video games are the same way. We've come a whole helluva long way from Pong, which gained mass-market appeal through it's simplicity (and the ability to play it with a beer on your other hand). After 32 years, most people have absorbed a certain amount of gaming vocabulary well beyond "move the paddle to hit the ball", "move Pac-Man to eat the dots and avoid the ghosts", and "make Mario run, jump, land on heads, and maybe fire off a fireball or two". We're all the way up to "make CJ become a crime lord through a wide variety of gameplay" that anyone can pick up in short order. You just start with "the joystick makes him run, this makes him shoot people, and this makes him jack cars"; from there, folks will figure out the complexities of the game (such as they are) on their own without much help. It isn't that difficult. Now, whether or not the non-traditional audience wants to play San Andreas is an entirely different matter, but doesn't have any bearing on their ability to do so.
Each successive generation that continues to grow up with videogames expands the mass market appeal of videogames in general. I'd say that if the 35 year old woman down the hall doesn't play videogames - not something I'd bet on, by the way - it's because publishers aren't selling the sort of games she wants in a thematic sort of way, not because of the inherent difficulty of the games.
FnordChan
UltimateMarioMan
Member
I've had quite a few times while playing a game where I've thought "What moron decided this over complicated control setup was a good idea?" Things that could be done with a single button using several.
The Guivre
Member
Complex controls? I'm sure some of us might remember a little game called Gun Valkyrie. Much of the game's challenge was coming to grips with what was initially a cumbersome control set up.
As games have progressed in depth and technology it's become pretty much essential that the controls follow suit. Could you play Jak 3 with your old rectangular NES controller? of course not, it simply doesn't have enough input to navigate a character through a 3D world.
Trying to wrangle this untapped market of older, non-gamers seems almost not worth the effort. By the time you hatch plans and such for new games, simpler controls and the like, the people you were trying to reach will be in retirement homes or in the ground. During that time the people you've always had on your side will still be there. Nintendo's loyal army of fan boys is evidence of just how effective "hooking them while they're young" can be.
As games have progressed in depth and technology it's become pretty much essential that the controls follow suit. Could you play Jak 3 with your old rectangular NES controller? of course not, it simply doesn't have enough input to navigate a character through a 3D world.
Trying to wrangle this untapped market of older, non-gamers seems almost not worth the effort. By the time you hatch plans and such for new games, simpler controls and the like, the people you were trying to reach will be in retirement homes or in the ground. During that time the people you've always had on your side will still be there. Nintendo's loyal army of fan boys is evidence of just how effective "hooking them while they're young" can be.