Am I still a gamer if I prefer checkers?
Checkers is an underrated game.
Am I still a gamer if I prefer checkers?
Oh look, a "I quit gaming if company Y wins" thread
Checkers is an underrated game.
Daily dose of meltdowns leading up to Wii U launch have been so good:
"yeah if wii u dominates i am done, might as well just kill myself gaming is dead"
delicious, whose next?
As a broader point, I do think it's likely we're looking at a significant shift in industry behavior in the near future, and I strongly suspect that these changes will cause a culture shock among "hardcore" gamers.
To be specific, it's obvious to me that "hardcore" gamers both expect and are accustomed to huge companies essentially throwing money at them to win their love. For nearly 15 years, big companies like Sony and Microsoft have on frequent occasion lost billions of dollars to woo the favor of these gamers; even the PS2 lost a billion in its early days to accomplish this feat. In the past, this choice was made because the companies believed that "hardcore" gamers were the path to a convergence device future.
Well, those times are drying up. Sony is out of money, Nintendo has long since dropped out of the arms race for the high end tech consumer, and it looks like Apple and Google ("non gaming" companies) are running off with the convergence device prize. I think we're starting to see a shift away from an industry that basically threw money at "hardcore" gamers and towards a rational industry where consumers are treated normally.
"Normal" would mean seemingly crazy things -- like products which cost 300 dollars to make would actually be sold for 400 dollars, and not sold at a significant loss. It means very few games will be made at a loss just because the industry is booming and they'll figure out how to balance the booksheets later once the engine is streamlined. These are normal economic conditions that virtually all other industries deal with, but I suspect it will feel like a bucket of cold water to "hardcore" gamers who are accustomed to being treated like kings.
I haven't played the game enough to have an opinion on it.How about Chinese Checkers?
OP is thrilled with Vita and its potential, but would stop playing if Wii U dominates.
I'd say if one can immensely enjoy Vita games, they should be able to enjoy Wii U games too.
So... I don't get this thread.
As a broader point, I do think it's likely we're looking at a significant shift in industry behavior in the near future, and I strongly suspect that these changes will cause a culture shock among "hardcore" gamers.
What? You need new eyes mate. The graphics for chess are almost photo-realistic and the frame rate is silky smooth too.
I believe it is not only for hardcore gamers, but for traditional gamers in general.As a broader point, I do think it's likely we're looking at a significant shift in industry behavior in the near future, and I strongly suspect that these changes will cause a culture shock among "hardcore" gamers.
To be specific, it's obvious to me that "hardcore" gamers both expect and are accustomed to huge companies essentially throwing money at them to win their love. For nearly 15 years, big companies like Sony and Microsoft have on frequent occasion lost billions of dollars to woo the favor of these gamers; even the PS2 lost a billion in its early days to accomplish this feat. In the past, this choice was made because the companies believed that "hardcore" gamers were the path to a convergence device future.
Well, those times are drying up. Sony is out of money, Nintendo has long since dropped out of the arms race for the high end tech consumer, and it looks like Apple and Google ("non gaming" companies) are running off with the convergence device prize. I think we're starting to see a shift away from an industry that basically threw money at "hardcore" gamers and towards a rational industry where consumers are treated normally.
"Normal" would mean seemingly crazy things -- like products which cost 300 dollars to make would actually be sold for 300 dollars, and not sold at a significant loss. It means very few games will be made at a loss just because the industry is booming and they'll figure out how to balance the booksheets later once the engine is streamlined. These are normal economic conditions that virtually all other industries deal with, but I suspect it will feel like a bucket of cold water to "hardcore" gamers who are accustomed to being treated like kings.
I agree with your post almost entirely, but made one very small correction.
edit - I also think there's probably one more attempt at the old model in the industry before it moves on entirely.
Good post. Ubisoft AC3 team said they were among the last dinosaurs, Michael Ancel said he could never do a BG&E with a team as large as before, etc. That's an unfortunate trend.As a broader point, I do think it's likely we're looking at a significant shift in industry behavior in the near future, and I strongly suspect that these changes will cause a culture shock among "hardcore" gamers.
To be specific, it's obvious to me that "hardcore" gamers both expect and are accustomed to huge companies essentially throwing money at them to win their love. For nearly 15 years, big companies like Sony and Microsoft have on frequent occasion lost billions of dollars to woo the favor of these gamers; even the PS2 lost a billion in its early days to accomplish this feat. In the past, this choice was made because the companies believed that "hardcore" gamers were the path to a convergence device future.
Well, those times are drying up. Sony is out of money, Nintendo has long since dropped out of the arms race for the high end tech consumer, and it looks like Apple and Google ("non gaming" companies) are running off with the convergence device prize. I think we're starting to see a shift away from an industry that basically threw money at "hardcore" gamers and towards a rational industry where consumers are treated normally.
"Normal" would mean seemingly crazy things -- like products which cost 300 dollars to make would actually be sold for 300 dollars, and not sold at a significant loss. It means very few games will be made at a loss just because the industry is booming and they'll figure out how to balance the booksheets later once the engine is streamlined. These are normal economic conditions that virtually all other industries deal with, but I suspect it will feel like a bucket of cold water to "hardcore" gamers who are accustomed to being treated like kings.
Except the bread and butter for 3rd party is already on the Wii U?
I could make a list, but go check the launch list for yourself, I don't see what part of the "bread and butter" the Wii U is lacking.
meh
Wii dominated this gen and it didn't affect me negatively. Watch, WiiU is going to be the same story as it's predecessor.
At the end of the day though, the PS4/720 will have the better gaming content much like their predecessors. That's all that matters.
Call it hate call it whatever you want but I think I'll be hanging up my jacket if Wii U becomes the driving force next gen. Yes the software plays the biggest part but 5 more years of a minor leap in tech won't do it for me. I purchased both a vita and 3ds at launch and although its more Sonys fault than anyone else's it irks me that tech so good will probably never be used to its fullest.
Ps4 and the next xbox could still benefit from pc ports and such but I don't think devs are going to sleep on nintendo like they did with the Wii. They left a shitload of money on the table and with every nickel and dime being necessary to stay afloat these days a year will be a long time to be sitting around waiting for ms and Sony. I think nintendo has a real chance at getting way more support than they did with the Wii if they play their cards right.
With that said if Wii U dominates and the other 2 get side lined next year I'll be just watching from the outside for awhile next gen. Maybe buy some nintendo stock and jump in 2 or 3 years after next gen starts. Catch up on my backlog instead. No way I'll be jumping in day one again anytime soon.
It brings a smile to my face remembering when "graphic whores" used to be the ones being called casual. Man, how things change in so little time.
How do you know? What will you do if WiiU gets a majority of the good games?
I agree with your post almost entirely, but made one very small correction.
edit - I also think there's probably one more attempt at the old model in the industry before it moves on entirely.
The last time Nintendo released a home console that got the majority of good games the year was 1990.
fixed
Even though I think the N64 had the better games overall than the PlayStation. The PS just had more of them.
I think Sony especially will continue down the self-destructive path they've been on. I'm not sure if WiiU is a sign of a shifting trend since Nintendo, even when they competed in the power race, was all about the profits.
![]()
(Credit goes to kage from the old gafman thread)
The last time Nintendo released a home system that got the majority of good games the year was 1990.
Minor point but this is basically false. The attach rate was marginally lower then the other two, something like 6.6 to 7.6 off the top of my head.
I'm starting to think some Gaffers only play games because of the graphics...
The Wii U, PS4, and Xbox 720 will all have great looking games and great games in general.
I suspect it will feel like a bucket of cold water to "hardcore" gamers who are accustomed to being treated like kings.
Forgot to add that, will edit it in. He did say "majority".
I'm starting to think some Gaffers only play games because of the graphics...
The Wii U, PS4, and Xbox 720 will all have great looking games and great games in general.
Different standards, as in double standards?I don't know. Vita is a handheld? Maybe he has different standards for consoles. I'd imagine if the next round of consoles were only as powerful as Vita he'd be pissed.
And what's funny is, as we saw in the OP, this trend will somehow be blamed on Nintendo, when really it was just Nintendo identifying the trend early.
I do think, generally speaking, that the days of people with your apparent inclination -- tech focused gamers or "graphics whores" -- being the driving force of the industry are gradually coming to a close. Whether that means Wii U in particular dominates is not the point; I have no guess on that front in particular.
If you don't like this, and would rather not play at all if you're not the apple of the industry's eye, that's your choice.
Different standards, as in double standards?
You know, people with handhelds also play at home, whereas they could be playing much better looking games on their console.
Gravity Rush would be trounced techwise by any x360 game, but will likely be a top 5 GOTY contender.
If OP wants more Gravity Rush, it's because he appreciates good games first and foremost. Despite tech limitations. And so there's no reason why he couldn't enjoy good games on a Nintendo console. Despite (lesser) tech limitations.
Instead of a real Mario, those who choose to partake will get a cookie cutter cash grab that would have been laughed at in the past.
Of course, and that's why you also have at least another console. Even if Wii U had insane graphics, would it be the only console he'd buy? No, because there would be exclusive games he likes on other platforms. Eventually, Wii U will add to the medium if it provides great games you can't find elsewhere. There's no reason it can't achieve this goal, and there's no reason to fear it does.I bring my 3DS everywhere with me and I love it. Doesn't mean I want my console games at that level.
Of course, and that's why you also have at least another console. Even if Wii U had insane graphics, would it be the only console he'd buy? No, because there would be exclusive games he likes on other platforms. Eventually, Wii U will add to the medium if it provides great games you can't find elsewhere. There's no reason it can't achieve this goal, and there's no reason to fear it does.