Topic: Chris Kohler trolls the 3DS

[Guitar Smasher]

The Wii succeeded in being the number one console but largely failed in being a "serious" gaming machine. You gotta take what you can get, and sales for any reason are still sales.

I believe it is currently the number one console of all time for this time in their lifecycles.  Don't put some bullshit "serious" moniker after it.

Well most people did buy it for its Blu-ray capabilities.  OH WAIT.

Actually, I take it back.  Most people bought it for Netflix.  "Serious" would be like saying it's sold more total software this gen than PS3 or 360.

[MaryJane]

I really don't want to start this argument in this thread, but a lot of Wii owners are disapointed with it. And that is mostly because it doesn't get the serious, hardcore, mass appeal, cross-platform, RPGs, FPSs, sandbox, and some other type of game/inconsequential moniker used to simply make a point about the type of games the Wii does not get or gets in extremely gimped form. And I would even go as far as to say that Little Big Planet is better than a lot, if not most, if not all, the creative, blue ocean, casual games on the Wii. The motion controls of the Wii are intuitive and make some game better, but the lack of system power means the games (3rd party) are 2nd class. The games, or rather the lack thereof, is what I meant by the Wii not being a serious gaming machine, a serious gaming machine needs serious games, not the casual, dumbed-down games we mostly get. Don't get me wrong, I like my Wii, but I wish it had more serious games.

[SixthAngel]

Lets not turn this thread into some kind of "hardcore vs. casual" debate.  Can we all ignore MaryJane bringing that into it and start talking about thie actual article again?

[MaryJane]

You're the one who started it...

Someone said the PS3 was a failure, and that opened the possibilty of the 3DS being a failure because of their predecessors doing well and parenting company making mistakes with the systems. I said the PS3 isn't a failure, and compared that to the how/why the Wii sold (being casual vs. serious).

My whole point is that sales are sales, if the PS3 sold because of BluRay, good for Sony, if the Wii sold because of casual games, good for Nintendo, if the 3DS sells because of 3D, so be it! Sales are sales are sales.

In my last post I simply tried to clarify the point of what I meant by "serious" and started by saying let's not turn this thread into that debate.

Don't be a dick. You started the debate by responding to a rather inconsequential part of my post, and I tried to end it by clarifying, because you obviously didn't understand what I was trying to say and took issue with it.

[ThePerm]

Nintendo's console numbers, and low specs have given the other consoles an opportunity to last longer in a long term console situation. Nintendo could release a new console now with a slow build-up and the other console wouldnt really be hurt. Consoles are developing symbiosis haha.

[MaryJane]

So let's talk about why the 3DS might fail.

I have 5 ideas as to why, but I'll only list one to generate discussion, and it's likely others will think of the other 4. (Btw, I didn't read the article this thread is about just the qft people listed)

The 3D of the 3DS.

I know the 3DS is also a very qualified 2D gaming machine, but the point of the system is to be 3D. With reviewers already complaining of headaches (though that seems to be confined to toying with the 3D slider too much and Madden) and the sweet spot being too limited, could it be that the 3DSs 3D is a little too early?

Autostereoscopic technology is only going to get better as it ages but this first gen iteration seems to be a little limiting, especially with the sweet spot issue. I knew there was a sweet spot, but the latest reviews make it feel like it's a 1cm x 1cm area of tolerance for that spot.

I imagine that when watching a movie on a plane or long train/bus ride, moving the system won't be much an issue, but when gaming, moving the system happens frequently, and the 3DS has a gyroscope in it.

Then there is also NWR reporting that there isn't a lot of thing popping out at you, but rather "floating in the foreground". I imagine this is another thing that will get better with the age of autostereoscopic tech, but it could be another level of disappointment for early 3DS adopters.


So now I have three questions:

1. If the 3D is disappointing in its lack of "pop", too small sweet spot, and headache infliction, will that hurt word of mouth, and thus sales?

2. Is it possible that the front facing camera of the 3DS could be used to track your eyes and move the sweet spot accordingly?

3. I actually forgot what I wanted I originally wanted to ask third, but I'll replace it with; How much better will the 3DSi (I doubt they'll go with Lite because I don't see them making it much smaller) be than the original with potentially better autostereoscopic screens, display resolution bump, better cameras, and possibly 3/4G?

[MegaByte]

Then there is also NWR reporting that there isn't a lot of thing popping out at you, but rather "floating in the foreground". I imagine this is another thing that will get better with the age of autostereoscopic tech, but it could be another level of disappointment for early 3DS adopters.

I don't think this will improve with the current style of technology. 3D objects can't be projected outside of the screen frame, which means nothing can "pop" especially far outward. This can only be fixed by a much larger screen (not really possible in a portable) or a different style of technology, such as laser projectors.  That said, I suggest you try it for yourself; the effect is still pretty awesome.

[Chozo Ghost]

To be honest, I don't care about the 3D aspect of the 3DS much at all. The system could be the same as it is in every other respect, and I would still think it is a worthy successor to the DS due to the huge leap in power and the addition of the analog sticks. 3D makes for nice eye candy, and I'm sure its going to do a lot to drive sales, but I'm a gamer who cares about gameplay not about graphics, so for me I'm fine with it but if it wasn't there at all I wouldn't miss it too much.

Also, I'm old enough and one of the few people to have actually owned and used a Virtual Boy, so that's another reason why I'm not terribly excited about the 3D aspect. To me its "been there done it", of course this is no doubt going to be far superior to what the VB was capable of, but still its not like this is the first ever time something has been done in 3D. The technology has been in development and evolving for decades. Sure, it will continue to improve as time goes on, but its not like the 3DS is starting off completely from scratch with the first ever attempt. Its not like this is the Wright brother's maiden flight, or anything...

[TJ Spyke]

I have to agree with Chozo. I will give the 3D a shot (it's pretty interesting), but I would be getting the system anyways because I like everything else about the system.

[KnowsNothing]

Most 3D movies and 3D televisions use more of a depth illusion than a "pop."  Having things jump out at you is kind of cheesy and seems to be a bit of a gimmick.  It's the kind of thing that's used at Disney World or in third rate 3D movies like My Bloody Valentine or Final Destination.  More "serious" 3D movies used depth and it looks a whole lot better, at least to me.  I don't want to sound like a 3D snob or anything because even if it IS a gimmick that's not necessarily bad and it could be tons of fun, but at the same time I know I prefer the illusion of looking into the screen.

[MaryJane]

I was more speaking about the perception of what the 3DS is going to be. I've seen a few movies in 3D, surgical video in 3D, and even a basketball game in 3D. I understand that there is more to it than things popping out of the screen, but that however is the idea that comes across most of the time. People are expecting to see things come out of the screen, and I was just wondering if the lack of that on the 3DS would ruin that perception (along with the small sweet spot and headaches) and hurt sales.

And Nintendo is breaking ground. The Wright brothers were not the first to create a working flying apparatus, they were first to make an airplane. Nintendo is not the first to use 3D, and they even beat themselves to the punch for 3D gaming, but the 3DS is the first mobile gaming device that uses autostereoscopic tech to display 3D images. There is nothing, and never was anything, like it.

Then there's StreetPass and SpotPass, two other innovations that could revolutionize the entire world, and I do not say that lightly. Engadget has an article up that agrees with that point, which coincidentally was the second of my five ideas how the 3DS could fail, by Nintendo under or over-utilizing those features, but basically finding a way to turn people off to the idea of Nintendo and other people being connected to their device. Engadget looks at it differently, and I have to say I prefer the way they look at it; revolutionalizing the world. I don't like some of their suggestions, but overall it just shows Nintendo's forward thinking.

Also, there the whole idea of a dual-screened device, something that is hot in the tech world, though no mass appeal devices have come out yet, they are coming. There's one in particular (the name of which I forget) that is meant to replace text books. It could become mass market if people realize its potential and worth. But that is yet another Nintendo innovation. Then there's motion control, if only they had given the Wii serious graphical power.

Anyway, I've rambled On long enough.

[Pandareus]

2. Is it possible that the front facing camera of the 3DS could be used to track your eyes and move the sweet spot accordingly?

No. First, it's the same camera that the DSi has and the DSi can barely track your head, let alone your eyes. Maaaybe if you're in a very, very, very well lit area (can't stress the importance of lighting enough), but even then, I don't see how it would be possible to move the "sweet spot". It's not as if the orientation of the pixels physically changes when using the slider.

Unless I don't understand what you mean?

[RABicle]

Chris' entire argument was that nintendo aren't serious about downloadable games as evidenced by not having the eStore ready at launch.

As an old man told me recently, a certain other product didn't have it's online store ready at launch either.

[Ian Sane]

Some of you have pointed out that with the 3DS's third party support it should have no problem holding its own against the iPhone or the PSP2.  But the Wii has never had anything even resembling decent third party support and it has outsold the other consoles by a huge margin.  With the blue ocean crowd third party support means NOTHING.  Nintendo themselves are living proof of this.  If third party support had any impact with the blue ocean market then the Wii would have been in bargain bins six months after launch.  You can talk about how the 3DS has this game and that game and this dev and that dev but it doesn't matter.  If it didn't matter with the Wii why would it matter here?

I can see the iPhone having literally ONE game that every casual gamer wants and just outright winning over the blue ocean crowd with that title alone.  Think of the impact Wii Sports had.  The iPhone could have one game with that same type of universal appeal and run circles around the 3DS.

The 3DS has all these great things going for it but we're looking at it from a core gamer perspective.  Don't assume because you like the Wii that you're part of the blue ocean casual market.  You're not.  If you're on this site or ANY videogame site you are not part of this market.  This market is fad-based and can swarm to a certain product for reasons that seemingly make no sense.  They have no brand loyalty and quality is irrelevent.  One hot iPhone title that costs like a buck and that market can go to Apple overnight.

I think that is Nintendo's biggest threat and frankly there isn't really any way to combat that.  What they have to do is be prepared for that to happen and not piss away the traditional core gaming market.  That is the market that will continue to buy dedicated portable videogame systems.

I'm not saying Nintendo is screwed, just that the iPhone is a threat and this a way the 3DS could "fail", at least with the casual market.

[MaryJane]

@Pandareus
I was thinking of the head tracking of the DSi, and the fact the 3DSs cameras measure distance in real time.

With those headtracking games, the perspective of what you're looking at changes, and I was wondering if it would be possible to do that on the system rather than on a game by game basis. Perhaps I was too specific about it tracking your eyes, but I was basically just wondering if the sweet spot can move with you.

While autostereoscopic tech might not improve on the pop out aspect, I imagine that viewing angles can and will improve.

@Ian
What about the blue ocean crowd on the DS? Don't you think they care about Brain Age, Nintendogs, Animal Crossing, etc.? Yeah those are first party, but game support always matters. For the Wii, Guitar Hero, Mario Party, WiiSports, all matter to the casual gamer, and they buy those games up. What is a system without games?

[Guitar Smasher]

Some of you have pointed out that with the 3DS's third party support it should have no problem holding its own against the iPhone or the PSP2.  But the Wii has never had anything even resembling decent third party support and it has outsold the other consoles by a huge margin.  With the blue ocean crowd third party support means NOTHING.  Nintendo themselves are living proof of this.  If third party support had any impact with the blue ocean market then the Wii would have been in bargain bins six months after launch.  You can talk about how the 3DS has this game and that game and this dev and that dev but it doesn't matter.  If it didn't matter with the Wii why would it matter here?

I can see the iPhone having literally ONE game that every casual gamer wants and just outright winning over the blue ocean crowd with that title alone.  Think of the impact Wii Sports had.  The iPhone could have one game with that same type of universal appeal and run circles around the 3DS.

The 3DS has all these great things going for it but we're looking at it from a core gamer perspective.  Don't assume because you like the Wii that you're part of the blue ocean casual market.  You're not.  If you're on this site or ANY videogame site you are not part of this market.  This market is fad-based and can swarm to a certain product for reasons that seemingly make no sense.  They have no brand loyalty and quality is irrelevent.  One hot iPhone title that costs like a buck and that market can go to Apple overnight.

I think that is Nintendo's biggest threat and frankly there isn't really any way to combat that.  What they have to do is be prepared for that to happen and not piss away the traditional core gaming market.  That is the market that will continue to buy dedicated portable videogame systems.

I'm not saying Nintendo is screwed, just that the iPhone is a threat and this a way the 3DS could "fail", at least with the casual market.

The 3DS is not designed for the blue-ocean crowd.  I can't even remember the last time Nintendo mentioned "blue-ocean" (was it 2007?).  The platform exists simply because the tech is ready, and not because of any desire to expand to untapped markets.  In fact it could be argued that Nintendo is trying to move its DS brand up-market by increasing the power, adding 3D, and charging $250.

Oh and in your assessment of how the casuals have no brand loyalty and will swarm to whatever's hot, I'd like to know how Nintendo could "lose" that market to iPhone, if all it takes is providing another hit title to win them back?

Also, love your complete contempt for the segment.  You're way in troll territory now, but I know you're being serious.  You should be more appreciative of the casuals, after all they saved your favourite company.

[Ian Sane]

The 3DS is not designed for the blue-ocean crowd.  I can't even remember the last time Nintendo mentioned "blue-ocean" (was it 2007?).  The platform exists simply because the tech is ready, and not because of any desire to expand to untapped markets.  In fact it could be argued that Nintendo is trying to move its DS brand up-market by increasing the power, adding 3D, and charging $250.

I'm pretty sure Nintendo wants to keep the blue-ocean market they attracted with the DS.  The iPhone and other smart phones are a threat to handheld videogame systems period, not just the 3DS.  We've got a model where short casual titles can be bought for a fraction of the price and the device itself is phone, videogame system, palm computer, and MP3 player all in one.  That is a huge threat to the 3DS and it appeals to the mainstream casual gamer more than anything else.  If anything is going to sink the 3DS, it's competition from smart phones.  Only enthusiasts will want a seperate portable device dedicated specifically to gaming.
 

What about the blue ocean crowd on the DS? Don't you think they care about Brain Age, Nintendogs, Animal Crossing, etc.? 

I don't think casuals care at all.  That's what makes them casual.  The mainstream's tastes hop from here to there all the time.  What is hot today is not tomorrow and mainstream pandering IP often has no legs because there is no truly passionate fanbase behind it.  Look at music.  An album oriented rock band can have a few years of mainstream success and then fall out of favour but still tour and sell new albums with a dedicated fanbase.  Meanwhile a pop act who is strictly aiming their music entirely at the mainstream can fall out of favour and just drop off the face of the Earth with no one giving a ****.  Because they were so mainstream focused they have virtually no legitimate fanbase so once the fickle mainstream loses interest no one is left.  So I'm figuring if the casuals still dig Nintendo they'll buy Brain Age and Nintendogs and such.  But if the iPhone grabs their attention, they're gone.

[MaryJane]

If Nintendo wants to keep the blue ocean crowd, they have to cater to them and do so despite them owning an iPhone.

Nintendo can't be looking to draw people away from the iPhone because as its name implies, it's a phone.

The 3DS needs to sell alongside the iPhone, and do so by having games that are attractive to iPhone (casual) gamers, as well as the hardcore crowd.

[Tobbebobbe]

Funny how people call him a troll just because he's not of the same opinion as everyone else.


But I think that the PSP suffered from a "mini Ps2" syndrome. Why play the PSP when you can play your Ps2 on a bigger screen?


The 3DS has 3D, and although both 360 and Ps3 have that too, very few people can use it today. With other words, 3DS offers a unique experience that can't be found on either smartphones or home consoles, and I very much doubt that the PSP2 will have a 3D screen.

[Ian Sane]

But I think that the PSP suffered from a "mini Ps2" syndrome. Why play the PSP when you can play your Ps2 on a bigger screen?

One thing that did not help was that the original PSP exclusives like Lumines and GTA: Liberty City Stories got ported to the PS2.  One thing Nintendo has always done well is making sure their portables have exclusive games so that even if you have no need to play games on the go there is an incentive to own the system just to play the unique games.

[ShyGuy]

Funny how people call him a troll just because he's not of the same opinion as everyone else.


But I think that the PSP suffered from a "mini Ps2" syndrome. Why play the PSP when you can play your Ps2 on a bigger screen?


The 3DS has 3D, and although both 360 and Ps3 have that too, very few people can use it today. With other words, 3DS offers a unique experience that can't be found on either smartphones or home consoles, and I very much doubt that the PSP2 will have a 3D screen.

I called him a troll because he's being intentionally contrarian to get a reaction out of people. Kohler is a very good game journalist in a field of horrible man-children game journalists, but this was trollicious.

[nickmitch]

Calling an unrealesed system "last gen" is kind of a troll. Especially when said system contains new(-ish) tech.

[MegaByte]

"Last gen" was more in terms of their software strategy than hardware.  But if you follow his Twitter, he clearly knew what he was getting into.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Everyone has some kind of brand loyalty, just because someone "casually" plays games (I don't even think that is an honest term anymore if you put into consideration how many hours many of these "casual" players put into games) doesn't make them less then human. It is in our nature to want to stick with the familiar and what we most recognize, that includes games as well.

[Chozo Ghost]

Calling an unrealesed system "last gen" is kind of a troll. Especially when said system contains new(-ish) tech.

That's what virtually every "analyst" and video gaming pundit said about the Wii before it was released, and in fact many still do.