blame space
Banned
we play minecraft on the streets
I think CoD has some of the best FPS campaigns out there. Not sure if controversial though.
I think CoD has some of the best FPS campaigns out there. Not sure if controversial though.
Work that one out.
I've often felt the American obsession with online gaming has led to the Single player campaign being relegated to an after thought in alot of games.
So whilst i wouldnt say 'Americans ruined console gaming', i would say they have pushed publishers in a direction i dont like.
Spawn,die,spawn,die,spawn,die...is not paticulary my idea of fun.
I'll take a focused, 20hr Half Life 2 campaign, over potential hundreds of hours of boring repetative, tedious variations on a theme, online shooting anyday.
Note: this is mainly aimed at PC games, console games are now the home of truly exciting single player campaigns, but seeing as i dont own, or want, a console, the focus on multiplayer gaming has left me cold TBH.
I've often felt the American obsession with online gaming has led to the Single player campaign being relegated to an after thought in alot of games.
So whilst i wouldnt say 'Americans ruined console gaming', i would say they have pushed publishers in a direction i dont like.
Spawn,die,spawn,die,spawn,die...is not paticulary my idea of fun.
I'll take a focused, 20hr Half Life 2 campaign, over potential hundreds of hours of boring repetative, tedious variations on a theme, online shooting anyday.
Note: this is mainly aimed at PC games, console games are now the home of truly exciting single player campaigns, but seeing as i dont own, or want, a console, the focus on multiplayer gaming has left me cold TBH.
Half Life 2 is an American game too.
Minecraft sucks.
All JRPGs suck (from random combat to girly boys).
Nintendo make no interesting games (at least very few to me).
Nintendo lagging with technology is a joke.
Good graphics are pretty freakin important.
Tank controls ruined DR2 and RE5. Capcom sucks from not learning.
Fighting/sports/racing/dungeon crawler games are boring as hell.
Most of my top games are PS3 exclusives (not really controversial but many probably aren't the same)
What indie games have you played? And why do you think they "fucking suck"?Indie games fucking suck.
ExplainAmericans ruined console gaming.
This is as nonsensical now as last time you tried to push it.I honestly don't think Nintendo is going to be a console manufacturer for much longer.
[citation needed]Their mindshare is at an all-time low.
Systems not breaking even on hardware sales during the first year (or even years) is the norm for the industry. (Selling as well during the first year as 3DS now does however is not.) Even Nintendo are not strangers to the concept.And while the 3DS is selling well, it took a massive price cut to do so, one where Nintendo isn't even breaking even.
Sony is posting a much bigger loss and has done so for four years running.And to make matters worse - I'm sorry, I don't care how big of a company you are, and how much resources you have, you don't just shrug off a billion dollar loss.
That would be completely inane. I'm pretty sure Nintendo made more money this generation than any other company in the industry has done in their lifetimes, and long term no one has come even remotely close to matching the success of their business model. In fact, I believe they were the #1 money maker even during the GC/GBA generation where their handheld market was ~1/2 and their console market ~1/5 of this gen. Why ape the business model of less successful companies?Unless the Wii U is a huge, Wii in December 2006-level hit, I think this time next year, Nintendo's shareholders will have enough, get Iwata canned, and put someone in to make investors happy and change around the business model, shutting down Wii U and 3DS production and moving into game development for the next gen of consoles.
That would be completely inane. I'm pretty sure Nintendo made more money this generation than any other company in the industry has done in their lifetimes, and long term no one has come even remotely close to match the success of their business model. In fact, I believe they were the #1 money maker even during the GC/GBA generation where their handheld market was ~1/2 and their console market ~1/5 of this gen. Why ape the business model of less successful companies?
My most controversial opinion that I can recall right now is that I hated Bioshock.
You must have missed the recent thread, hating Bioshock is the new hot.
That thread was ridiculous. The less its mentioned, the better.
I really doubt Nintendo made more money this gen than Microsoft has done since they were founded.
That is very rarely the discussion, the more common discussion is exclusives. Games like Mass Effect, or the first Gears of War, or Alan Wake, cannot be counted as exclusives. I think this is basically what the others are attempting to get at.
Right. It comes down to can I play it on just that 1 console or not? And with quite a few 360 games the answer is no. You can't say that about any of Sony's games, they're only on their console.
Americans ruined console gaming.
You must have missed the recent thread, hating Bioshock is the new hot.
Super Mario Galaxy is the best Mario game ever made.
I never liked the PSP and I don't think I'm going to end up liking the Vita. I never, ever will understand the mentality of playing a console on the go portable experience.
This is as nonsensical now as last time you tried to push it.
[citation needed]
Systems not breaking even on hardware sales during the first year (or even years) is the norm for the industry. (Selling as well during the first year as 3DS now does however is not.) Even Nintendo are not strangers to the concept.
Sony is posting a much bigger loss and has done so for four years running.
That would be completely inane. I'm pretty sure Nintendo made more money this generation than any other company in the industry has done in their lifetimes, and long term no one has come even remotely close to matching the success of their business model. In fact, I believe they were the #1 money maker even during the GC/GBA generation where their handheld market was ~1/2 and their console market ~1/5 of this gen. Why ape the business model of less successful companies?
I see where you're coming from, but in the case of Sony, I don't know what "selling at a loss" has to do with them being the worst thing that ever happened to the industry when they brought great franchises to it. They entered the industry with a great interest in offering as much quality games as possible. They clearly didn't get into it for a quick buck.
Fortunately for them, and for many of us, they offered a pretty cool affordable console with a nice variety of games. Sega had the brand strength to keep up, but they couldn't and I don't think the blame is on anybody, but themselves. Nintendo ended up doing just fine, only that they ended up catering the casual market first and their long time fans second. That could be one of the worst things that has ever happened to the gaming industry, but that's another "tiresome" topic.
Also, Sony and MS have opened the doors for many small creative independent companies that are developing/have developed great games that you would normally only find on PC.
I think catering to the casual market is far worse than Sony and MS joining the consoles gaming industry. That's just me though.
Although I love Ocarina of Time for what it is, I don't get why it is so loved for what it isn't, original. My first thought upon finishing or getting late into the game was that it was the same game as a link to the past just different. Same structure is mainly what I mean. 3 start dungeons, past/dark world another 5, o no wait ALTTP had 6 or 7 after so yeah it the better game and my favorite IMO.
I think Ocarina of Time isn't the best game to come out of 1998. I'd rank Daytona USA 2, Need for Speed III and Half-Life ahead of it, and that's off of the top of my head.
Not impressed how JRPG fans sometimes rip on Golden Sun when its brought up in a discussion. I'd say it's a humble series, with some great production value for its time and platform. Not amazing in comparison, but not terrible.
Yet I think some Final Fantasy fans just like having a punching bag.
It also is excessively verbose for how simple the stories really are, being a lot more concise would go a LONG way given the base games are sound enough, not to mention NOT insulting players who know what they're doing. Don't think it's really an FF fan thing so much as a general JRPG fan thing anyway, games like Trails in the Skies are just as verbose if not moreso, but the story it's telling is far more engaging and likeable, whereas I just want to ADVENTURE in Golden Sun.
Crazyness. The devs & pubs are just giving the market what it demands.
Because I feel 'selling at a loss' is a very negative thing for any company that isn't Sony or MS, Nintendo had never sold hardware at a loss before Gamecube's launch, Sega never had before the PS1's price point forced them to drop Saturn's price. The only exception to each of those was when Nintendo cut loose unsold Virtual Boy's and Sega cut loose unsold 32X units, at least in the states. Basically selling at a loss is a anti-competitive tactic which is often used to kill the smaller companies, it's similar to the price cutting that GM, Ford and Chrysler practiced when attempting to deal with Studebaker-Packard and eventually AMC. Before Chrysler bought out AMC for their Jeep line because they realized it would be more expensive to develop their own competitor and as such decided to purchase the entirety of AMC for that one marquee. They only continued the 'Eagle' marquee because it was in their contract to do so for a number of years if I remember correctly.
Back into the gaming industry, obviously Sega is more responsible for their downfall than anyone else, but I also feel it is quite likely they would still be in the manufacturing business had Sony or MS never entered. Regardless, I never blamed Sony or MS for Sega's death. Not sure why that was brought into this, I was merely commenting on the fact that what Sony did in regards to pricing and the trend they started by selling their hardware at a loss -- a trend Microsoft joined in on, and Nintendo avidly tries to avoid -- is a technique that is used by companies with large revenue streams to push out small fry competitors. Not a fan of anti-competitive tactics like that, and I never will be.
Finally, those indie titles were doing fine on PC and still are, and most set ups can run them fine due to their low system requirements. I don't care if they are on consoles. In regards to Sony's contributions vs. Microsoft's, I agree, in terms of consoles I prefer Sony's efforts over Microsoft's. Uncharted 1/2 are in my top five games this generation, where as not a single MS game is in there or even in the top ten. Still, that's not really pertinent to this discussion as I never portrayed the quality of Sony's first party output in a negative light and never even mentioned it until you brought it up. My stance on Sony is largely in regards to their business practices, same with Microsoft, and before we get even further I'll clarify that I consider Microsoft's practices worse.
Tekken is the only popular fighting game franchise currently being released that continually rewards the player for the time put into it.
Super Mario Galaxy is the best Mario game ever made.
The market demands what is marketed to them.
I agree with Daytona, probably one of the few who would. Also Metal Gear Solid, Dragon Force II, Panzer Dragoon Saga, Gran Turismo. I'd probably take OOT over MGS, but not the other 3. Some other PS1 goodies were Resident Evil 2, and I believe Xenogears was out that year.
To a point, yes. Devs & pubs test the market to see what works/sells, and what doesn't. Then they create the product that will sell and thus, make them money to operate & expand their business. Basically, this is Business 101.
There would be a lot more of these (niche) JPN titles in the market if they sold better.
Terrible idea. Pokemon appeals to everybody, not just kids. So there's absolutely no point to that. Plus, asking for a mature Pokemon is no different than asking for a mature Sonic.Nintendo should make a more mature main series Pokemon game to cater to the grownup fans. Or make the games for older people by default, with an optional "child setting".
Zelda games shouldn't have Ganon in them anymore. I was going to say that Majora's Mask is the best Zelda game, but apparently quite a lot of people already agree with that sentiment.
That's a bit of a hyperbole, but either way, treating gaming journalists or analysts as prophets is a very bad idea. Here're some blasts from the past:Okay, let me put this a different way. If you're right, then why is practically every analyst and gaming journalist out there saying that my opinion will come true? Not saying you're wrong, but you'd be hard pressed to see some sort of printed word over the last six months saying something positive about Nintendo.
Michael Pachter said:in five years it will look like this:: Microsoft at 30-35 percent, Sony at 45-55 percent, and Nintendo at what's left.
Strategy Analytics said:The report predicts that Sony will sell 121.8 million PS3s worldwide through 2012. Sales of Xbox 360s are expected to reach 58.8 million and of Nintendo's Revolution nearly 18 million. Cumulative retail revenues for all consoles over this period will exceed $47bn.
SIG said:SIG has compared year-by-year sales and estimates for the first five years of each machine's life, using sell-in and factory shipments. It points out that in its first year both PSP and DS managed around 13 million units each, with DS slightly ahead.
Year two cumulative stats give PSP 25 million over DS' 22 million. In Year Three the difference rises to ten million (38m to 28m). In Year Four, PSP's lead has stretched to 15 million and to 20 million by Year Five.
Citigroup said:A report released by Citigroup (C) on Jan. 16 predicts that Xbox 360 will hold its lead and edge out the PlayStation 3 in the U.S. at the peak of the next cycle, selling an estimated 8 million units in 2008 compared with 7.1 million PlayStation 3s in that year (for a grand total of 19.8 million since launch vs. 11 million, respectively). Citigroup expects Nintendo to have sold 3.9 million Revolution systems by 2008.
In-Stat said:Through 2010, the Sony PS3 will account for just over 50% of the installed base of next-generation consoles, while the Microsoft Xbox 360 will have 28.6%, and the Nintendo Revolution will have 21.2%, the high-tech market research firm says.
Nomura Securities said:Yuta Sakurai, an analyst at Nomura Securities in Tokyo, says PS3 will sell 71 million units by 2011 compared with an estimated 40 million units for Wii.
Yankee group said:The group predicts that the PS3 will capture 44 percent of cumulative console sales in North America by 2011, with 30 million units sold. Microsoft is expected to sell nearly 27 million units, taking up 40 percent of the market, while the Wii is forecasted to sell a little over 11 million units, accounting for just 16 percent of the market.
IDG (International Development Group) said:North American yearly sales through 2010
X360
2006 4.9 Million / 5.6 million
2007 6 Million / 11.6 million
2008 5.3 million / 16.9 million
2009 4.1 million / 21.1 million
2010 2.8 million / 23.9 million
PS3
2006 0.9 Million / 0.9 million
2007 5.6 million / 6.5 million
2008 6.3 million / 12.7 million
2009 5.6 million / 18.4 million
2010 5.2 million / 23.5 million
Wii
2006 1.1 Million / 1.1 million
2007 3.4 million / 4.5 million
2008 3.9 million / 8.4 million
2009 3.1 million / 11.4 million
2010 2.2 million / 13.6 million
(Thanks to JoshuaJSlone for keeping track of the predictions.)SFG Research said:The cumulative NORTH AMERICAN sales for each platform are as follows:
Xbox 360
2006: 6.0m
2007: 12.7m (6.7m)
2008: 19.5m (6.8m)
2009: 24.9m (5.4m)
2010: 29.4m (4.5m)
PlayStation 3
2006: 0.5m
2007: 7.6m (7.1m)
2008: 13.8m (6.2m)
2009: 19.5m (5.7m)
2010: 24.2m (4.7m)
Nintendo Wii
2006: 2.0m
2007: 5.3m (3.3m)
2008: 8.6m (3.3m)
2009: 11.4m (2.8m)
2010: 13.5m (2.1m)
The cumulative WORLDWIDE sales for each platform are as follows:
Sony PlayStation 3
2006: 1.0m
2007: 19.5m (18.5m)
2008: 35.5m (16.0m)
2009: 50m (14.5m)
2010: 62m (12m)
Xbox 360
2006: 10m
2007: 20.5m (10.5m)
2008: 30.5m (10.0m)
2009: 39m (8.5m)
2010: 46m (7.0m)
Nintendo Wii
2006: 4.0M
2007: 10.5m (6.5m)
2008: 16.5m (6.0m)
2009: 21.5m (5.0m)
2010: 25.0m (3.5m)
No, you make the game then market the shit out of it. That's the trick. It's the same "trick" used since the 80's to get kids to buy toys and watch the show based on the toys (so that they market each other in a loop) Nobody "tests the market" in this industry. That would be a waste of money when your customers are so easily persuaded to buy anything if marketed properly.
Blame it on microsoft, really.
So much drivel in one post. Games aren't created in a vacuum.
Marketing helps, yes, but it won't convince consumer to keep buying/supporting a product they don't like. If gamers didn't like CoD, then they would stop buying it every year. Marketing only helps insofar as letting consumer know your product exists, and getting said consumers to purchase your product for the first time. The product needs to actually be worth the investment if the business wants continued support. There is no "trick" involved.
Also, nearly every new game is a test of the market. If said game is successful, then dev/pub will iterate on the product. Heck, even sequels still test the market with new ideas & features....ideas & features that are either expanded upon, or taken out depending on their success.
And as a father of a 3yr old, I wouldn't use kids as the measuring stick of marketing efficiency. Kids are highly persuadable. That's one reason why I don't let my daughter watch too much TV, she wants everything shown on commercials. Adults are more discerning.
No, not really. :lol
JPN lost their dominance this gen because their games no longer have mass market appeal. That's not Microsoft's fault.
GodDuckman said:Okay, let me put this a different way. If you're right, then why is practically every analyst and gaming journalist out there saying that my opinion will come true? Not saying you're wrong, but you'd be hard pressed to see some sort of printed word over the last six months saying something positive about Nintendo.
LosDaddie said:JPN lost their dominance this gen because their games no longer have mass market appeal. That's not Microsoft's fault.