Post by: nemo_83 on December 10, 2003, 05:57:38 PM
I believe it can be prevented, but we may still hit a noticible decline in sells before the industry realizes its mistakes. Buisnesses have cycles. They have their ups and they have their downs. As companies try to follow trends that they percieve as good strategies they begin to lose connection with the market. While following their in house plans the companies fail to see the source of problems, and they only recognize the symptoms.
Everybody is now trying to predict which direction the industry will go, but few are watching the actual market and where it is headed. One could say that the intense graphical upgrade of next gen machines will allow for or supplement the absence of any real change or progression in the integrity in which games are produced. The gameplay must improve. Less emphasis on formulative mission based gameplay and more focus on developing driving forces for which to play the game. The games next gen will obviously have longer development cycles and movie studio level budgets to support the hardwares' sound and graphical capabilties. I could also say that the console market will fall through in light of risky costly ventures in the game software market thus leaving handhelds as the only viable market for at least five years. Just like this gen companies are in great risk of not being able to turn profit just in the purpose of declaring ownership of the market. Next gen we not only need more cel shading capabilties and more polys and more real time lighting featuring variations of mood, atmosphere, temperature, value, hue, color, and intensity. We not only need graphical tricks that can simulate illusions of watercolor and oil paint for asthetic purposes. We need A list actors, symphony music, licensed soundtracks, and much more intensive character animations than we have seen on these present consoles (which are supposed to be able to produce any vision one could come up with; even a realistic zelda?).
What next generation really needs is depthening the gameplay experience. I want free standard online gaming. I believe the controller should become better at simulating our wants in the game. I would suggest a controller that is not only conforming and angled to fit the hands but also does more than any controller has ever done. A screen could become standard just as joysticks have. The left side of the pad would be your normal controller with a trigger and a shoulder button. Also a joypad and dpad. The right side should be a flight stick modified and attached to the left side with multiple functioning such as diagonal movements and turning. On top of the joystick there cold be another analog stick with the same trigger setup. The face buttons in my opinion should be modified cube layout. The surrounding x,y, and b buttons should be more unified so it is easier to go from one to the next. The color shouldn't be flamboiant just for the purpose of showing those of us with the ability to see color that the controller could get uglier. Seriously though if the designer wants to use his tools of 3d design properly then he would allow for a monochromatic color pallet, use nuetrals, and/or allow for the shape to be dominant and not the buttons we are not going to look at in the first place since we are smart enough to know how to decipher without preschool highlighting.
Microphone and voice simulation which is great from what I've heard on Xbox should also become standard. I want to speak through Link in an online/offline 3d multiplayer Zelda. The camera used with the PS2 has given me lots of ideas for controlling basically any game with combat using the hands in the game. The system could use the camera in a next gen system to track the movement of the hand without the use of lightgun technology. Imagine detaching the flight joysick from the rest of the controller and it being the tracer point that the camera follows and uses in a game like Zelda or Soul Calibur allowing you to swing the sword. Perhaps this idea would work best if the controller for a proposed next gen game console were actually two controllers (one held in each hand) which the system tracks as the player moves his/her hands for sword swiping or punching or aiming a gun. This two sperate prongs idea could be used to allow for each prong to be used as a joystick with tilt technology giving the gamer two flight sticks instead of a camera tracing technology. What do you guys prefer?
Enough fantacy of VR gadgets that could depthen and freshen the gaming experience. What will the corporations really do? Sony will rehash the SNES controller again. MS will complicate the controller layout so that it isn't really functional all while stealing what worked for Cube and Dreamcast..I mean Xbox. I predict that MS may be the only one that does offer a screen, camera, and/or mic with the controller. Nintendo may do what the others can't think to do, but they will also dumby up the design again portraying themselves as inferior despite their innovations.
Instead of hair and grass effects in games we will get dvd recorders. Instead of improved controllers we will get outrageous harddrives for what? MP3s? Pirating games? Cutting out the middle man and rentals with free demos for download instantly. Downloading old 2d games legally from say Nintendo or Sega?
The industry needs another revolution that can change the way we play not what we play on the machine. I don't need any of the functions of a PC in my gaming machine like dvd playback. The purpose of the game console is to be a stripped down computer that is cheap and soley plays games.
The industry continues to give into shoddy shortcut money making schemes and loses those buyers that are traditionally longtime customers. By applying mainly to the softcore croud the game industry is vulnurable to collapse when the softcore and noncore move on. There will be little to no hardcore left because the hardcore is there for actually rewarding experiences and is smart enough to think for themselves and realize the thrill is gone long before the drones of "cool" game croud ever nows it.
The ultimate nail in the coffin is that there can only be 2. No more no less. Two consoles can be owned by some college kids, but 3 or 4. With the fragmented market there is no way to apply to the broad market to sell games. Half the gamers are portable. The other half is split 3 ways in uneven portions. This means one must play the smaller range and availabilty of A quality titles on the one system one owns rather than being able to buy nearly every good game that comes out which one would do if the games weren't all spread out over what looks to be a new generation of 5 machines. PSP, GBCube, X2, N5, and PS3...a bit crowded isn't it? And who is to say that another company isn't learking in the shadows with a worthy gaming machine that noone is expecting. Greed; that "if I can't have it all then I'll help kill the beast," mantality is going to end the industry.
I posted this on another site and then responded to another person with the following post.
The market cannot support 5 systems and you know it Strider. The post says in it that this has not been a profitable generation with four (five if you count DreamCast) systems. Nintendo posted loses earlier in the year despite GBA sales. Nintendo could hold the momentum coming out of this gen owning already 98% of the handheld market and awesome sales this holiday which may affect the direction of the rest of the generation as PS2 sales slow and Xbox sales dwindle. If pricing wars insue to counter Cube sells then MS and Sony stand to lose more money in console sells than they could possibly gain in profits from game sells. MS is spending billions and getting nothing from this venture but the ultimate downfall of the whole industry.
I propose that if the number of systems is not limited and the level of innovation does not rise then the flemsy mainstreme market will disperse while the hardcores are the only ones left buying games and they will all be split up between 5 consoles unable to buy all of the games they could potentially buy killing the market. The industry isn't superman and cannot survive nonprofitability. Plus what is the purpose of even moving on to the next gen and buying another $300 system if nothing new is offered?
the industry thinks it is so big that it can't outgrow it own market. Well today we may be despensable users, but tommorow we will be valued again.
Post by: KDR_11k on December 11, 2003, 09:14:22 AM
I hope next time the distribution ends equal for all. That way publishers can no longer prefer one or the other based on sales numbers.
Post by: nemo_83 on December 11, 2003, 08:06:06 PM
I've heard only a few ideas like the one you're talking about. I could never figure out how it would work so I haven't really considered it. It would be phenominal if one could rearange or program a digital pad of buttons for any game. Each genre would have its on layout. This is the kind of thing Nintendo would focus on. MS seems like they would focus on depthening the control by giving us at least one flight stick if not two along with analog sticks on top giving us the ultimate options for aiming, looking, moving, and straffing (and sword play). The custom button layout idea should be coupled with the flight sticks allowing for the deepest and most versitile controller around.
Post by: MaxXUnlimited on December 12, 2003, 01:18:05 PM
And "free standard online gaming" ha, I doubt that'll never happen. They use that monthly fee to maintain the servers I believe.
"I don't need any of the functions of a PC in my gaming machine like dvd playback. The purpose of the game console is to be a stripped down computer that is cheap and soley plays games."
I agree with you 100% on that though.
Post by: nemo_83 on December 13, 2003, 05:29:23 AM
I believe and will continue to believe that the market will continue to lose its profitability and market growth with the increase in consoles on the market. I don't want this to become as the PC market has.
Post by: KDR_11k on December 13, 2003, 07:52:54 AM
Post by: nemo_83 on December 13, 2003, 09:07:01 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on December 13, 2003, 10:39:47 AM
Post by: joeamis on December 15, 2003, 01:45:53 PM
maxx the industry can in no way handle 5 different consoles, throughout history either 1 console has been dominant or 2 have been equal while the rest fail and die an early death. consoles and handhelds are separate, period.
Post by: Chongman on January 01, 2004, 07:07:14 PM
so THIS is the infamous crash everyone was talking about. I was like...wha? Now I get it.
I agree with you wholey, the market cannot support 5 different consoles...perhaps 3, tops, and thats only if its 2 console 1 handheld. It just drowns everything and like you mentioned, no one makes money so everyone dies. But hey, check out this quote from NOA vice president of marketing Perrin Kaplan in GMR magazine:
"People say 'Why don't you do what Microsoft does?' Well, thats never been nintendo and it wil never BE nintendo." Nintendo will never take a loss in hardware....and it wont do something just because everyone else is doing it. This is the Nintendo way. Dedication to a conservative business plan, Nintendo believes, means that when this crazy console war ends and we all get to go home, "It's very,very likely that we'll be the last ones standing."
I believe that is so true, and I think Nintendo's business plan, if a crash does happen, will in the end succeed to pull it through. Microsoft may lose too much money and finally quit and Sony might slowly erode away in mediocrity, but nintendo will always strive to be innovative and fresh and (though it sounds greedy, it IS essential) they'll always seek to make a dollar today so they can make another game tomorrow.
And speaking of the psp, the only possible way Sony can take over that market, is if its magical little walkman of the futre is priced at under 150 bucks, which is very very very unlikely. How stupid is Sony? They're not making a game machine for gamers, they're making a machine for preps :-P
Post by: odifiend on January 02, 2004, 09:57:40 AM
As for the PSP I heard that if it has half of what the boast it has the price will be around 500+ dollars, placing it so far from the Game Boy it isn't even in the same market. If that's true they'll fail miserably because adult gamers or not, most people don't have $500 dollars to sink in anyting much less a portable video game system.
nemo: I agree with your preminition of a crash. Also I like your ideas, but the controller would be so ridiculously expensive it would alienate the children and even the adults Nintendo caters to. Still I imagine your control and can't help but salivating. However the fighting game I idea would be harder than you made it seem. As the former owner of Sega's Activator I can tell you that for a game like Soul Calibur, the controllers would have to use your movement to mimic button combinations and that it would not be that fun. Even if the controllers could mimic your actual movement, the game would be uneventful unless the gamers were surprisingly agile. Can you do a backflip, I sure can't.
Otherwise nice read.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 02, 2004, 08:36:34 PM
Post by: darknight06 on January 08, 2004, 06:53:35 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 08, 2004, 07:46:17 PM
Post by: nemo_83 on January 14, 2004, 08:48:45 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 15, 2004, 08:34:22 AM
Post by: nemo_83 on January 29, 2004, 11:27:57 AM
The overall industry profits are down for the year by the way guys, and that overall profit is devided between GBA, PS2, GC, Xbox, Ngage, and the pc market with the GBA and PS2 taking in most of the mulla. I think it was in talkback that I read about the industry comparison year to year. And 03 was supposed to be a peak year.
Post by: odifiend on January 29, 2004, 01:38:03 PM
Aside from that there are other reasons, the catridges are expensive and Square would need a lot of them to put a game like FFVI on (only held 64 MB? where as a CD ROM holds up to 700 MB).
Post by: manunited4eva22 on January 29, 2004, 01:45:19 PM
Post by: nemo_83 on January 29, 2004, 06:42:54 PM
Post by: Blade2T33 on February 01, 2004, 12:33:31 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on February 01, 2004, 05:33:16 AM
Post by: Blade2T33 on February 01, 2004, 08:17:00 AM
Post by: darknight06 on February 01, 2004, 10:47:11 AM
Post by: nemo_83 on March 03, 2004, 06:21:19 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on March 04, 2004, 03:39:08 AM
Post by: nemo_83 on March 04, 2004, 09:58:24 AM
Also I would like to use this topic to address Deguello who locked my topic on the GameCube board and I don't feel like posting a whole new topic right now just for the one response I wanted to make; which I didn't get a chance to make since the topic got shut down before I could rebut. I don't know why Deguello is so ticked at my opinion that online is cheaper than GB/GC connectivity. As far as I am concerned it is way way cheaper. I'm already paying for broadband internet and I'm going to continue to pay for it regardless of whether Nintendo does or does not use online. So thats one bill that I'm splitting between 5 roomates here at college. Then take in the fact that I only have to own one Cube, one game, and one controller and the total so far is around $200. Maybe add whatever that FF11 charge is in (which is also being played on three different PCs in this house right now anyways.) Now if you factor in that I already have a cube, memory card, broadband, and controllers the price of online is reduced a great deal; while I would still have to pay almost $500 bucks to enjoy FFCC.
Also I would need to find friends that either don't mind playing on my several hundred dollars worth of GBs that I can't afford (hopefully they wouldn't constantly complain about how uncomfortable it is to hold like my cousin in AL; 5 hours away) and link cables for long periods of time or find friends that all have GBs, link cables, and love FF and multiplayer. Maybe if I get extremly lucky I could find some friends somewhere in the US that not only have GBs, link cables, love for FF and multiplayer, but also a GameCube and the game FFCC itself. I don't know anyone personally within a 5 hour range of driving that I could play FFCC with since noone I've asked is even willing to buy a GBA and link cable and play with me. Not even my roomates who love FF11 will do it since they don't want to spend all of that money and why do it when they've got the real deal already.
Sorry for those fast forward readers that didn't want that rant inserted so out of place here, but the place I had made for it got deleted. Plus some people in the topic thought I was calling everyone a fanboy, when I wasn't, but didn't have the time to look up dozens of names of the mindless. So then I got attacked even more before getting locked. It is illegal at planetgamecube to think and be objective to what Nintendo dictates is the law. I just criticized them for what was wrong and never called them a failure this gen or last gen; I only said they had failed to do what they had said they would do. In essence though the topic wasn't just about Nintendo's mess ups; it was about planetgamecube's messups. But if you're curious as to what topic I'm talking about go here
http://planetgamecube.com/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=3&threadid=8323
Post by: DrZoidberg on March 04, 2004, 12:30:31 PM
Post by: Jonnyboy117 on March 04, 2004, 02:59:49 PM
Your accusations of pro-Nintendo censorship are laughable. You clearly don't read any of PGC's editorials. I wrote one in January called "GameCube's Mid-Term Report Card", in which I gave Connectivity a grade of "F" and rebuked Nintendo heavily for not giving more support to developers who want to create online titles for GameCube, as well as for not experimenting more with the technology themselves. The Talkback thread for that editorial stretched to hundreds of posts, most of which contained intelligent discussion from a variety of perspectives.
I don't want to lock or delete this thread, because it looks like you have a very nice editorial and discussion going here, regarding a possible industry crash in 2005. However, I must advise you to stay on topic here and post your grievances with the moderators or with the site in the PGC Discussion area, where it belongs. As for posting about Nintendo's online plans, you are always free to do so as long as what you have to say is said in such a way as to not invite flamewars (i.e. don't troll) and does not simply rehash old information or retread the same arguments that have been presented here time and time again. You have to realize that some people on these forums have been discussing Nintendo's online plans for five years, and there's simply not much tolerance for someone who is going to rile up the same old argument without anything new to offer.
Post by: nemo_83 on March 05, 2004, 12:52:49 AM
Yes it was wrong for me to go off topic, but usually I don't go off topic. The real origin of my anger though was Luciferchild's topic getting locked; and I felt the lockdown had to be protested. Sometimes it seems there is no voice but that of the fanboy when few will come to the aid of a poster's unpopular opinions even though I know there are some logical people here; I just don't see them as vocal; or at least as often as I would like. I didn't really feel like regurgitating the same old garbage myself, but knew I had to cause someone would complain cause I didn't offer any evidence and then I would have to spew it out anyways. I didn't expect to get locked because the info was old. I can't help that the info is old; that's Nintendo's problem for going on media blackout (which I'm sure we're all tired of because it forces us to make due with what we have and sometimes it can get boring unless someone inserts a bit of passion.)
But anyways the real reason I got back on to make a reply is to beg the question of how the DS will affect the future market if it turns out to just be another gimmicky answer to the problem risen by FFCC and other connected games. It is most likely, as Nintendo's history has shown; to be a GBA that features two screens (one for the incoming Cube game data to be displayed and the other for what the GBA would normaly show.) I wouldn't expect any N64 graphics GameBoy to come out for at least a year or two seeing as how the GB is so dang successful right now. It may help them gain more mainstreme market by showing a stronger devotion to the whole connectivity thing, but in reality I think the market will move by the motions of the decissions of the hardcore and presently the majority aren't really too enthused by it and are more for the idea of going online. Nintendo is risking simply hading over willingly their hold on the multiplayer market to the other companies that they established securly with Mario Kart 64 and Goldeneye. I'm pretty sure Sony will force their players to go online by only putting 2 ports on the ps3. This is smart because they can save money on ports and hopefully find it easier to generate profits by increasing thier number of subscribers. And now at DICE Nintendo has taken more emphasis off of online gaming. Nintendo says they are for the consumer since they don't want us paying more after we have bought the game, but their actions don't reflect this as has already been pointed out about the GB/GC connectivity. What do they think we are all as blind with devotion as american republican voters?
Post by: KDR_11k on March 05, 2004, 04:14:14 AM
Post by: odifiend on March 06, 2004, 07:39:05 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on March 06, 2004, 07:53:27 PM
Post by: nemo_83 on March 10, 2004, 05:46:56 AM
http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html
It surprises me how closly to my own ideas this article is.
edit: I forgot to mention how this supports my theory that gaming has reached a plateau and requires imersing the gamers with accesible peripherals bringing in the need of the use of more of the body rather than just cramping the crap out of our fingers.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 11, 2004, 06:37:20 AM
Post by: Retroyoshi on March 11, 2004, 07:27:22 AM
Post by: nemo_83 on March 12, 2004, 09:35:14 AM
So horny violence hungry 12 year olds drive the whole market cause they think the college kids are playing the "cool" games, when we are really playing a lot of hardcore games in college. Whether that refers to hardcore racing, fighting, sports, extreme sports, adventure, platforming, strategy, or rpgs is all up to the dorm room, but nearly all college guys are gamers. The reason is that they get out of high school and grow up and realize that games are fun and not toys so they go out and get a GBSP and Mario Kart because an intelligent college kid doesn't care if the other 14 year olds at recess think he is a nerd. The college person doesn't have time for childish social wedging.
Post by: DrZoidberg on March 12, 2004, 08:58:03 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Retroyoshi
remember- that 30-50 age bracket of "game players" includes a lot of solitary, hearts, and... well... everquest. *WE* will probably be the first generation of real "older age bracket" kids unless we decided not to play.
actually my Dad, aged 54 this year, is a huge gamer, pretty skilled at RTS (AOE2, AOM, WC3 etc), Diablo 2 and others, but statisticly speaking he's probably in the minority.
oh and my Aunty and Uncle are big gamers, around late 30's
Post by: manunited4eva22 on March 13, 2004, 05:30:02 AM
Post by: NWR_insanolord on August 06, 2009, 03:21:13 AM
Post by: Stratos on August 06, 2009, 04:56:40 AM
L-O-Freaking-L.
Post by: Plugabugz on August 06, 2009, 05:48:16 AM
Post by: BeautifulShy on August 06, 2009, 09:59:02 AM
Wow Dr. Zoidberg was around then.Wonder what happened to him.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 06, 2009, 12:21:34 PM
Not kidding.
Post by: vudu on August 06, 2009, 05:04:37 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 06, 2009, 05:10:23 PM
I would know. Because, I was there.
THE
TRUTH
WILL
SURVIVE
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 06, 2009, 05:14:31 PM
Just, wow.
[KDR] "I hope next time the distribution ends equal for all. That way publishers can no longer prefer one or the other based on sales numbers."
The future bore interesting fruit.
~~~~~
Nearly SIX YEARS OLD, this thread is a treasure chest.
Post by: Stratos on August 06, 2009, 05:16:19 PM
Post by: Plugabugz on August 06, 2009, 05:21:41 PM
I think this thread even pre-dates my old forum lurker days. KDR has been here for a while. And he's still an active poster.
LOL it turns out he registered on here 12 days before i did. This thread really is a treasure chest.
Post by: vudu on August 06, 2009, 05:23:18 PM
Post by: Stratos on August 06, 2009, 05:43:27 PM
Hey, I was here before KDR. ACKNOWLEDGE ME, MAN ;)
Well, I knew you were here a long time. It just never clicked in my mind how long KDR might have been here. Granted he has one of the highest post counts so of course he's been here a while.
I know my old account here was registered in mid 2003ish but I lurked before that and was never much of a poster.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 06, 2009, 05:43:47 PM
Post by: King of Twitch on August 06, 2009, 06:02:10 PM
I saw a new topic on the crash subject in Cube discussion and it had an interesting link....so here it is since it got locked.
http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html
It surprises me how closly to my own ideas this article is.
edit: I forgot to mention how this supports my theory that gaming has reached a plateau and requires imersing the gamers withaccesibleuseless, overpriced peripherals bringing in the need of the use of more of the body rather than just cramping the crap out of our fingers.
Fixed, yet still prophetic
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on August 07, 2009, 08:54:42 PM
Wow Dr. Zoidberg was around then.Wonder what happened to him.
He post over at GAF now.
Post by: ShyGuy on August 08, 2009, 01:42:13 PM
Post by: Plugabugz on August 08, 2009, 02:03:46 PM
GAF is the lowest common denominator of gaming forums.
Yet its right up there in terms of self-referential favouritism and being dragged across the universe if you step out of line or don't understand the meme that has never been explained or even used before.
