SmellyFingers
Banned
If he means Nintendo 3DS then sure. If not, well then he can stfu.
Doesn't sound different from other japanese companies like Capcom and S-E tbh.
I'd say "good;" that pic is pretty hilarious and detailed!... and all too real.
I want to propose the possibility that they were always about the money, but your personal tastes just happened to be the market they were focusing on.
My proposition is this: when Konami was making tons of console games, they absolutely were focused on the money, but you didn't notice that so much because you happened to personally like their output. Now you don't like their output, so you are much more likely to view their motives cynically.
Conversely, someone who hates console gaming but loves mobile gaming may experience the opposite phenomenon, where Konami seemed like a stupid company before (if they had heard of them at all), but who are now finally listening to what he, as a customer, actually wants.
They can't make the midrange budget games that would be profitable for them, so it's either mobile, or compete with 250 million dollar GTAV's. They don't want any part of that. Most of the traditional Japanese developers are struggling with this, Capcom, Bandia/Namco, Sega, Square Enix, only Nintendo seems to be able to make the games that they want and still compete.
Sorry it took me so long.
I wish Nintendo would pull its head from its 4th point of contact. And get agressive with buying companies and IPs. The will likely be the console savior in japan.
Also how hard can it be for the next system to plug into android, and Google play store? Problem solved. Now I can play boom beach on my wiiu 2 pad on the can. Capcom, Konami,namco, sega, and square should be stalked by Nintendo.
If the first move is going to be made, it's going to be against Capcom, who is the least protected of all of the Japanese game publishers.
That draws the question of, if it ever happens which I doubt, who will be the more aggressor. Sony or Nintendo? My bet is on Sony. But I highly highly doubt Nintendo is in any state of mind of buying IPs. They're starting to swim in the iOS ocean.
I wish Nintendo would pull its head from its 4th point of contact. And get agressive with buying companies and IPs. The will likely be the console savior in japan.
Also how hard can it be for the next system to plug into android, and Google play store? Problem solved. Now I can play boom beach on my wiiu 2 pad on the can. Capcom, Konami,namco, sega, and square should be stalked by Nintendo.
Weren't companies saying this 7-8 years ago too? PS4 sales numbers say hi Konami.
To be fair it's not that different from what some other Japanese companies have shifted focus towards, but I shudder to think of all their good IPs going mobile only. Yikes.
Hey look you guys we made it to Kotaku.
http://kotaku.com/konami-could-suck-worse-sure-the-future-of-the-silent-1704942076
Our internet fame will last forever!! AHAHAHAhahahaha!!!!
Congrats.Chinese news services (AFAIK?) ran it. Yay? http://www.yxdown.com/news/201505/188473.html
After running through Google translate they seem to reference some existing Silent Hill trilogy on mobile over there. Obviously could be nothing, but anybody know anything about it?
They're next.I think people need to put a line in the sand and make a distinction here. SE and Capcom and Namco Bandai may lean on mobile now more than ever before, but they still have respect for their legacy businesses atleast and make an effort, even if we personally may have certain issues with that effort.
Its a world away from Konami simply giving up entirely, taking their ball and going home
I wish they'd sell Suikoden. They're not using that one, and haven't for years.
Please sell Suikoden off!!
I think the likelihood of Nintendo or Sony buying companies depends on how well the kickstarted expies of games do... In essence, if games like Mighty No. 9, Yooka-Laylee, and Bloodstained end up being successful in their own right and parlayed into franchises, why would either Nintendo or Sony need IPs like Mega Man, Banjo-Kazooie, or Castlevania beyond legacy concerns? It is possible that companies like Konami will find that their IPs are worthless without actual quality behind them even in the mobile realm.
Congrats.
It's a mighty big "if", for starters.
It also makes pretty big (and false) assumptions:
1) Inafune, Igarashi and Mayles et al have some sort of power over a franchise's themes and gameplay elements, that they are the one and only authority on what makes the IPs they laboured on great.
2) Kickstarting new franchises with base mechanics of another franchise, replicating a past success, somehow devalues an IP by prior association.
Let me start off with an example: Igarashi is not and never has been the authority on what makes Castlevania games great. There were game designers before him that made great games in the franchise. He is only an authority on "Igavania" style games. He made a very particular sub-category of titles in the Castlevania franchise and, due to him being the only one making games in the Castlevania franchise for several years, having a preference for that style and a possible unwillingness to deviate from it, people make the false assumption that his vision somehow defines Castlevania.
But if Igarashi can supposedly "re-define" what a Castlevania game is, why couldn't anyone else?
The same can be said of Inafune and Into Creates.
The IPs hold value so long as you put out a quality product that people want with the name on it... sometimes even without the quality product, people will buy on name alone, at least a few times.
And in spite of several missteps, these names do still hold weight and have value. Hell, do you think people would have bought Lords of Shadow (aka Belmont of War) if the name Castlevania didn't mean something to people and were willing to try one that Igarashi hadn't touched?
I'm not saying that having the original teams on these games is worthless, but I am saying it does not necessarily make or break an IP's value, either. In some cases, it may in fact be beneficial to let someone else take a crack at them.
The only thing potentially devaluing these IPs is that their IP holders want nothing to do with them anymore. Bomberman isn't appreciating in value with the franchise's extended absence. And if someone wants to buy them, that might be exactly what is being hoped for: that they'll get them at a low price simply because the current IP holder sees no value in them anymore and has let their perceived value depreciate due to lack of releases.
Your assumptions of what I am saying is faulty. What I am saying is that IPs do not matter unless there is talent behind them, and the lack of talent to make those games are what's going to kill those franchises. MercurySteam made a great game with Lords of Shadow but it isn't like Konami's announced another Castlevania in that style or any other style, even a budget digital release. Nor has Capcom announced another Mega Man in any sort of style. Both Castlevania and Mega Man lost their top talent and are currently going unused. To use the example you give of Bomberman, the property is being mishandled because it is one of those properties that should theoretically be perfect for the F2P model. In my vision of a F2P Bomberman, you download the game and it's multiplayer Bomberman, but by purchasing outfits with real money, you can customize your Bomberman's look. It's one of the few games that could fit with the Valve Hat Model. I expected the Bomberman released on mobile last year to be exactly that, but apparently it's just a spinoff from what I hear.
In any case, it would not be a problem, but it does become one when a creator is making a game in the same genre as what they are known for while the original property languishes in limbo or mediocrity. To give a counter-example, Naughty Dog originally made the Crash Bandicoot games for PS1 and Crash was a pretty popular thing back then, even being treated as an equal to Mario and Sonic. However, once Sony lost the rights to make Crash Bandicoot games, Naughty Dog went on to make another platformer series for Sony, Jak & Daxter, and eventually shifted focus to make Uncharted and the Last of Us. However, throughout all of this, Naughty Dog kept making high quality games... Now their name on a box means that a gamer will get a high quality game no matter the name of the game. Meanwhile, Crash Bandicoot had mediocre game after mediocre game until the franchise was put to rest by Activision. Another counter-example is with Bungie as they made excellent Halo games but then moved on to make the excellent Destiny while Microsoft and 343 have mismanaged the Halo IP so far. It is this sort of mismanagement of a property compared to a creator's successful launch of a similar property that leads to games like Mighty No. 9 and Bloodstained to find success in the market while Capcom and Konami languish as companies despite having Mega Man and Castlevania which should be the bigger name.
I hate you :lol
I think my japanese got better!Konami said:"We will pursue mobile games aggressively," says Konami's new CEO Hayakawa in an interview with Nikkei Trendy Net.
"We will tentatively fill our pocket with consumer money via aggressive pay2win mechanics in mobile games, it's the only way to save us"
"Our main platform will be mobiles. Following the pay-as-you-play model of games like Power pro and Winning Eleven with additional content, our games must move from selling things like "items" to selling things like "features."
"We will let you play winning eleven with 11 nobody, and you will have to pay to change your attacker into a REAL attacker, or if you want to use a barca's player.. additionally we might take out stuff like championship and league, gating the content over money-wall"
"We saw with these games that even people who buy physical games are motivated to buy extra content. The success of Power pro especially has motivated us to actively push more of our popular series onto mobile than ever before."
"We've seen that if we bet on cell game, we can make more than we dare hope to make, given that we still have IP, but no senior/storical staff or new star players of the developers league to take care of it.. We are motivated to do low-budget cell games that we can hire cheap phone dev to take care of!"
"Gaming has spread to a number of platforms, but at the end of the day, the platform that is always closest to us, is mobile. Mobile is where the future of gaming lies."
"Gaming is now widespread, but cellphones are everywhere.. Hopefully we can scalp their ass off by selling low cost product with plenty of gated content"
"We hope that our overseas games such as MGSV and Winning Eleven continue to do well, but we are always thinking about how to push our franchises onto mobile there too."
"We hope that you will buy our few console titles, to fuel our cellphone switch"
"With multiplatform games, there's really no point in dividing the market into categories anymore. Mobiles will take on the new role of linking the general public to the gaming world."
"We will rip-off via f2p titles both android and ios market, don't you worry!"
http://jin115.com/archives/52080348.html
Might as well just say why did I post in the thread, period. Or why post in any thread at all, ever.oh no I bumped a thread that was last active a whole 7 hours ago! Lol Maybe because his article was lifted wholesale from the thread, therefore it's relevant to the topic?Why did you bump this thread for a forbes contributor with whom you disagree
You and I seem to be on the same page, more often than not. I think our only disagreement has been on the value of IP in that other thread. But regardless...
You won't be missed Konami.
I can't wait for the bubble to burst.
Please leave your IPs to someone who cares...
Mobile is just a different market, that's true, but he's right in the sense that those games weren't designed for that market. A mobile version could still be a good game, but chances are it will not offer the same kind of experience due to multiple factors (design changes, control method, screen size, sound quality, budget, etc) and would leave fans rather disappointed.I'm going to use this specific post as an example of the filter being applied here, but I want to make it clear that you aren't the only one to do this, Pilgrim, nor do I think your post is particularly bad. It just highlights the lense through which most people seem to be looking, and it's that lense I want to examine.
You want a company to "give [these games] a console release" rather than "whoring [these games] out for mobile." The implication here is obvious; consoles represent quality, real gaming, while mobile is not only worse, but is just a cynical money grab.
What I want to propose is that mobile is not better or worse, it's just different, with its own strengths and weaknesses. It happens to be different in a way that doesn't fit your personal tastes, but that's different than it being inherently inferior. We don't always get what we want.
You know how many console players feel rubbed the wrong way when PC gamers act superior to console gamers, and act like games that make any concessions for a console release are somehow infected and lesser? That's how many of you sound right now. So if you don't like it when PC gamers do it to you, I suggest you try to avoid doing it back to someone else. I'm not asking you (or anyone here) to change their personal preferences, but I would like it if people didn't get so angry at others for liking things they don't like.
Why do people always assume mobile gaming means playing on a tiny phone screen?Mobile is just a different market, that's true, but he's right in the sense that those games weren't designed for that market. A mobile version could still be a good game, but chances are it will not offer the same kind of experience due to multiple factors (design changes, control method, screen size, sound quality, budget, etc) and would leave fans rather disappointed.
From that point of view, I can understand why a fan of any of those games would prefer a console release. A Silent Hill or MGS game on a phone screen can't provide the same kind of immersive experience. Even watching a movie on a phone just isn't the same as watching it in your living room or a cinema.
Why do people always assume mobile gaming means playing on a tiny phone screen?
Considering that 30% of all IOS devices sold are iPads (250 million out 800 million total), I think your figures might be slightly offBecause 99% of "mobile gamers" does that. Or even 99.9%
Why do people always assume mobile gaming means playing on a tiny phone screen?