Where did he say it was a bad thing for the industry? It's of course bad for Nintendo...

Say it loud, Fanboyamoto!!

sensationalist reporting at NWR?? 'BOUT TIME!

Samus caught topless at Zebes beach! Pictures on page 3!

WHERE'S PAGE THREE!

I REPEAT, WHERE IS PAGE THREE!?

I KEEP CLICKING THE FORWARD BUTTON ON MY BROWSER AND NOTHING!

ONM changed their article.  Their tagline originally said that Miyamoto said that it wasn't good for the business; now it says that he wasn't sure if it was good for business.

Tough crowd!

Yes!  I am ready for some new Nintendo magic.  Waggle is not unique anymore!

Waggle is still unique.

Those new competitor controllers are so advanced that the designers won't utilize waggle.

Waggle stays with Nintendo, the winning team.

Given thats its almost 2010, and we really haven't seen much of the new motion controllers, I'm thinking MS and Sony aren't going to make much of a push here (especially considering Sony doesn't even have a name yet!).  I expect these projects to go down a similar road Tony Hawk Ride has gone.  Until the next consoles are released I'm sure Nintendo will remain in the lead with MS and Sony lucky to find the wake.

thats jumping the gun d_average, Sony will probably have 30 games at e3 that have motion controll, 20 will be shovelware, and 9 will be descent, 1 will be awesome

microsoft will have like 5 games no one cares about

So you admit to copy/pasting the article without reading it first?

where have our standards gone? it's like were posting in the forums or something....

Coming soon to the PS3, Metal Gear Solid 4: Wagglestance.

Waggling the Ice Cream cone moves the camera around during cutscenes. You get more gameplay that way.

So you admit to posting without reading my comment first?  They changed their article content after our article went live.  Our article reflects the original article content.  We didn't copy/paste, but it's an original source, so I don't even understand how your question relates to the problem.  Also, I didn't write the article.  Stop being a troll.

Mr. ET is clearly an 'imp.

I read the comment and I was kinda joking. But since you want to be all serious about it

What you said right there suggest that only the line under the title was read before the article was copy/pasted to rush it to post. It does not imply that the article itself, as in the content/text of the interview was changed. So maybe you should check your comment before you comment on the comment commenting on your comment ;)

The game industry doesn't want to deal with things that could disrupt their formulas. Expect some minigames and some shoehorning and mostly ignoring the MS and Sony motion systems.

It's good for the industry, because it will push Nintendo to further differentiate itself from the new competition.

This headline is misleading though, as Miyamoto doesn't actually say it's "bad"... just that he doesn't know if it's good. Those are quite different things.

BnM, we get "all serious about it" because all you do is troll the hell out of our news coverage day in and day out.

We post things later than other sites, you troll us.  We post things quickly that change under us, you "jokingly" troll us for inaccuracy.  It just gets old.

It's good for gaming but is it good for the industry? The industry wants standardized inputs. They want linear improvements that are easy to advertise. They don't want new controls that mess up their established formulas.

Ladies and gentlemen, the video game industry as interpreted through the novel 1984.

CREATIVITY IS OVERDONE
STANDARDIZATION IS UNIQUE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

Going back to the original topic, and the accusation of sensationalism, I will accept the guilt for that one.  I've revised the article title to more accurately reflect the quote from the source.  My mistake was in misinterpreting the quote, not in attempting to put words in Mr. Miyamoto's mouth.  You have my apologies, and I'll do my best to make sure it doesn't happen again.

And that's...one to grow on.

I think the motion controllers essentially ARE the next consoles from MS and Sony.  If Sony released a PS4 at this point wouldn't it just recreate the issue they had with the PS3 where it was too expensive?  The PS3 is just now finally at a price point people consider acceptable.

I'm not impressed with motion control.  I find it inprecise and frustrating to use.  90% of the time it's used merely as a replacement for buttons.  And this is with Nintendo, perhaps the greatest videogame developer in the world, calling the shots.  If what we have now is the best Nintendo can do then how could I expect Sony or MS to make anything worthwhile?

I suspect it will be bad for the industry because of the sheer amount of third party junk we see on the Wii.  Most devs have no idea how to use motion control.  Now spread that over all three consoles.  That sounds like a quality control disaster.  Kind of like the quality control disaster that created the first crash.

The future is brighter this way.  Can't wait for the new crash.

The future of video game is touch screens. Apple ripped off the DS to make this our destiny. Embrace the mobile, fanboyz.

SMALL SCREENS FOR ALL

I don't troll your coverage. I'm not the only one to point out the often lateness of the news at times.
My only gripe with your news coverage was that alot of it was in the forums already and that it would be nice to point some traffic in that direction. That was then. Here is a admitted mistake that was implied to have been copying of the "tagline". I make a comment on that comment (after people point out the mistake) and I'm trolling!? day in and day out?

now that is sensationalistic.
you may be annoyed with me for a few reasons, but it surely isn't "trolling" the news coverage, especially day in and day out. All my post about the news have been directly related to the same stories in the forum, not the quality or quantity of news being posted by staffers.

I still don't understand your argument.  How else are you supposed to take content from another news article?  You can either quote or paraphrase.  YOU are the one who made the assertion that only a certain part of the article was cut&paste and the rest of the article was left unread, neither of which are true or were implied by any rational reading of my comment.  The fact that our article went into more detail proves that there was no copy and pasting of a single line involved, which makes me question how you could even come up with such an argument if you had read the article.  We don't have access to the original interview since it's a European print mag, so we are left with what was posted on the mag's website, which was changed after the fact.

I was referring to the title which he said was the same as the their "tagline" which was obviously wrong if you read the quote by Miyamoto that was also quoted in the news story.

Obviously you used their tagline instead quoting miyamoto himself in the title.
how is that hard to understand?

I only commented on it because of your comment.

A mistake was made, it was caught and pointed out by several people and now it is fixed.
so just let it go.

The assumption was that he said both.  Obviously, that turned out not to be true.

There's a crash coming either way. I don't think the new controllers will get the main support from the industry (didn't Sega show us all that making your next console an addition to your current one is suicide?) but no matter how little or how much they support it their main problem is rising costs without rising userbases. They compensate by exploiting the existing customers more but that'll just alienate the customers and prevent them even more from making new ones. Without customers there is no revenue and that will mean bankruptcy for the industry. The industry thinks this can be fixed with new business models, with turning everything into rentals and services to extract more money but that just makes gaming even less approachable. Honestly, I don't care about that industry crashing, the companies that care about the customer will survive anyway and the dead ones will leave room for new ones to grow that may be more adapted to reality. Nintendo made the whole Wii move because they were expecting the core market to collapse. Of course the media loves to talk like it's the new audience that's about to crash while the core market is so loyal and whatnot but the only evidence ever provided is "they're casual, duh!" when "casual" is just an arbitrary label stuck onto them without any regard for whether it's really the case.

Without customers there is no revenue and that will mean bankruptcy for the industry.

You seem to really want it, but the core gaming market is not going anywhere.

Those games have significant audience overlap, and are spare change compared to numbers in previous generations.

i have no evidence, haha beat that

No suicide is making your next console an addition to your current one at the same time that you're releasing a seperate new console because your company is so poorly managed that the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing.  Sega's incompetence was at a bizarre stars-aligning level.

But I'd also argue that this is a different time where the benefits of new hardware are less and less substancial.  The 32X was released during a time where we transferred from 2D to 3D.  For Sony and MS, motion control is the next logical step and a new console isn't needed for that.

The videogame crash was a result of companies using strategies that involved conning people into buying junk and then having business go in the toilet once their customers wised up.  Any future crash will be caused by the same thing.  Only casuals are ignorant enough to be the victim of such tactics.  Any crash will come about by targetting casuals and making no real effort to please them.

http://i33.tinypic.com/nec8z5.jpg

I'm the dude playin' the dude, disguised as another dude!

No need to apologize, i was joking around. or joke-trolling, whatever its called now.

Owned.

As for the original video game crash, it's been extremely overstated as time has gone on.  Atari flamed out in 1983, and the NES was released in 1985.  It amounted to a two-year North American hiatus for the industry (game consoles were being produced in Japan the whole time, so it's not like the video game industry came to a screeching halt), but it's sold as some sort of apocalypse followed by fifty years of darkness, pestilence, famine, and flood, kids going back to playing with yo-yos and frisbees.  The market is too big to crash now, there are too many gamers, too many players around the world.

It's like the auto industry...you could classify the period that we're in right now as "The Great Auto Crash of 2009", but the auto industry isn't going anywhere.  A couple of players are struggling/exiting the market, but in two years people will still be buying cars.  Just like people will still be buying games in HD, and developers will be making games in HD.

Oh, speaking of developers throwing their weight behind HD...

http://www.edge-online.com/news/ea-montreal-re-focusing-on-hd-quality-products

You may scoff at EA, but games like Assassin's Creed II prove that HD games, when executed and marketed well, sell like hotcakes.  Much like SD games, when executed and marketed well.

Most of those seem to focus on launch sales only. Everybody knows core games sell a lot at first but how long do they keep it up? More importantly how many sales are needed to break even? The rule of thumb is 100k sales per million invested in development (I assume that's because of costs like marketing and overhead and whatnot, MW2 had 50M in dev costs but 200M in advertising costs), examples like Bioshock's 1.5 million sales would cover only a 15 million dollar budget which would be too little to make a game like it.

Your original point was that there were no customers for core gaming products.  There are customers.  Loads of them.  It's up to developers to figure out how to serve those customers while still breaking even.  I'd argue that a developer like Bungie or Infinity Ward has solved that problem. 

I'll repeat it, because it bears repeating: the core gaming market is not crashing.  It is not going away.  There are too many gamers out there.  Too many gaming companies.  Too much interest.  Just because Malstrom says so doesn't make it true.

I said there will be a shrinking, I didn't say there are none (especially today). The big dying won't start until the number has receded below a critical point.

The longer it takes for this crash to happen, the more prevalent HDTVs are and the cheaper HD gaming is.  If your crash was going to happen, it would have happened in 2006 when companies were asking us to spend $600 on their consoles.

The HDTV is not be big cost factor (you don't need one to play these games anyway). The overuse of DLC and overexploitation of franchises is. Look at Guitar Hero, for example, that got overexploited and is dying. Activision puts more teams on CoD to exploit it more, while it may go up for a game or two (though it's likely that MW2 is the peak) expect a drop too. More importantly the aging population means fewer people enter the demographic core games are aimed at than leave it. There's little effort put into expanding the appeal of core games beyond that demographic. The development of the demographics is pretty predictable (one year's 15 year olds are the next year's 16 year olds) so the decline can be predicted already. Gaming has followed the population growth for the last two decades, the core market grew with the population and will shrink with it. While gaming as a whole will never die the console game industry just might.

Oh and something else...

How can you be so certain of that? Last I checked Wii sales are very concentrated on specific games which suggests the buying patterns are not random but informed, the sales rise fairly slowly after release as the biggest advertising to these people is via word of mouth (and games like Carnival Games sold because people were happy with their purchase and suggested it to others). On the other hand, core games are hyped to high heaven, sell a ton for a week and then quickly fade into obscurity. It's happened plenty of times that core gamers got duped into buying garbage through hype (the example of Enter The Matrix will forever ring in my mind) and there's plenty of bribery going on to distort previews and reviews so that what we are informed about is just what the marketers want us to know.

This happens all the time, though.  3D platformers were all the rage in the days of the N64, and then everybody got sick of them and the genre died.  It also happened to side-scrolling platformers and shooters in the 16-bit era...people got sick of them, tastes and technology changed, and those genres were relegated to the fringe.  The same thing has happened to JRPGs, which had their heyday on the PS1 and PS2, and are now on the cultural back-burner.  When interest wanes in one genre, another genre rises up to take its place.  Music games have had their day in the sun, they've reached their zenith in popularity, and now they'll be put on the back burner.  The same thing will happen to Motion Control games.  It's all cyclical.  To say the industry overall is doomed because of what's happening to one particular genre or franchise is a complete overexaggeration.

I think the CONSOLE game industry's days are numbered, but that's not based on demographics (it's based on technology, and the console eventually becoming outdated as a game delivery mechanism).  You're discounting the fact that the core demographic will probably EXPAND with an aging population.  Do you think that hardcore gamers will look at their watch and suddenly say, "Oh!  I just turned 40, I guess I can't play Modern Warfare 2 anymore, I have to start playing Minesweeper and Solitaire...I would play Peggle but I suddenly can't grasp its complex control scheme."  It doesn't work that way.  If you're a hardcore gamer at 20, you'll be a gamer at 30, 40, and beyond.  My gaming tastes will not change when I'm 50...the only thing that will change is the amount of time I have to devote to games, if anything.  I'll become more selective in my purchases, but I'll still be buying stuff like Uncharted 2 and playing MMORPGs.  Plenty of other people I know will be doing the same thing...they'll be buying games to play with their kids, but they'll also be buying games for adults too.

Your assumption that these purchases are informed is just that - an assumption.  Wow, people buy Mario games and Wii Fit.  How informed does somebody need to be to buy those games?  Everybody knows those franchises, or has seen them profiled in USA Today.  Muramasa selling through the roof would be an informed buying decision.  Would you consider somebody buying Halo 3 if they owned a 360 an "informed" buying decision?  I wouldn't.  That game was advertised with McDonald's Happy Meals.

I don't know, I'd hardly say that games like Grand Theft Auto IV and Call of Duty 4 "fade into obscurity".  If anything, they keep selling thanks to price drops.  Call of Duty 4: Game of the Year Edition for PS3 was a deal on Amazon yesterday for $25, and guess what?  It sold out no problem.  These games keep selling, because they become known in the hardcore community.  Furthermore, hardcore gamers are the tastemakers - casuals come to THEM to find out what they should buy.  A friend of mine asked me about Uncharted 2 the other day because he wasn't sure about it, and I told him it was amazing.  He bought it and he loves it.  Don't think that hardcore gamers are this elite cadre of people that don't talk to casual gamers...it couldn't be further from the truth.  If anything, they use their expertise to recommend "hardcore" titles to casuals, and set trends simply by letting people know what they're playing.

This obsession with seeing the "hardcore market" die is very very strange.  Where did it start?  Though Malstrom is the high priest of the movement I'd guess it's roots started elsewhere.

The hardcore market must die because it clashes with Nintendo's casual focus and Nintendo is always right.  It's no different than how CDs, FMV, RPGs, and online gaming were at some point all evil and horrible.  Because Nintendo didn't support them so they must suck because surely perfect Nintendo would never deny its fans something that is actually worthwhile.

Rare was the greatest developer in the world until Nintendo sold them to Microsoft and now they suck and have always sucked and their old games that we all loved were overrated and we were mistaken in liking them.  Same with Square who used to be awesome, then they sucked, then they developed games for Nintendo again so they were awesome, except when they make games for the competition like Final Fantasy XIII which will obviously suck.

HD will be awesome when Nintendo starts supporting it.  Sales didn't matter when Nintendo was in last place but now that they're in first, sales are everything.  Reviews used to be everything back when Nintendo got the most favourable reviews but now that they don't, reviews are full of shit and don't mean anything.

It is nothing new and is not even specific to Nintendo.

Facts are always twisted to meet the argument at hand.

What a ridiculous straw man. No, people don't drop out of the core from one day to the next but they may look at their schedule and see that between their job, spouse and children they shouldn't be spending hours on the gaming system all alone, either they play something that the family can participate in or they just quit big gaming altogether and only play games during the coffee break at work because they've got more important things to spend their free time on.

That's informed enough to not buy only garbage and thus get alienated from gaming because of the impression that all games suck. That's good enough to avoid a quality-based crash.

A pricedrop makes people who have previously considered a game buy it, it causes a short burst in sales but not sustained sales, the total volume gained over these bumps is fairly small.

I can tell you that if a true casual came up to me and I recommended him a core game he'd not be satisfied. You give advice to uninformed core gamers, those can easily play a third person shooter with killing and everything, they aren't casual gamers as the term is currently used. I can throw World of Goo, Prof. Layton, Plants vs Zombies or Wii Sports at people who have never gamed before (outside of Tetris maybe) and they'll enjoy it, even a basic FPS completely overwhelms them and the thought of graphical violence is repulsive to them because they haven't been desensitized to it.

Never got the feeling that there's too little innovation in gaming, too little deviation from the norms that previous games established? That's pretty much it, the games industry is seen as a machine that only clones and copies, rarely leads and recently tries to screw us over a lot (from DRM to DLC to 70€ games...). The hope that a massive infusion of new blood as that vacuum would cause would help make gaming feel fresh again.

@Ian
That's hilarious about CD's. Good point. I completely forgot how much many Nntendo fans hated them. Even I bought the idea they were worthless. I think I was 12. 

@KDR
While we do have a lot of clones, I'm finding more variety than ever this gen. And most games I pick up new for around $30. Hasn't been an issue for me since I don't need my games day one.  Just like movies and music the game industry has it's fair share of mainstream crap. But the industry is so big there's enough content to supply each genre. 

Straw man?  Apparently you didn't read what I wrote: "My gaming tastes will not change when I'm 50...the only thing that will change is the amount of time I have to devote to games, if anything.  I'll become more selective in my purchases, but I'll still be buying stuff like Uncharted 2 and playing MMORPGs."

The time I allot to gaming may change (which you also state), but my gaming tastes will not.  I'm not going to suddenly start buying Wii Music.  I might buy it for my kids (actually, no, I wouldn't, but I digress), but I'll still be a gaming consumer and my hardcore tastes will not change.  Personally, I'll keep buying games aimed at an adult demographic, and other people will too as they age.  Our kind isn't going to up and disappear in a puff of smoke, believe me...I know people with two or three kids - raising them well - that play games like Uncharted 2 on a regular basis.

Every hardcore gamer is not a bloodthirsty frat boy FPS nut, and every casual gamer is not a carebear pacifist who can only comprehend puzzle games with pretty colors.  There are many games in the middle of the spectrum across all the consoles.  I wouldn't recommend Gears of War 2 for a grandma, but I could certainly find something for them on PS3 and 360 (especially with downloadable titles).

Golden Phoenix just dropped out of gaming, what hope is there for the rest of us?

Also, Lindy buy a big block of text up there that was too long to read, but did he say the Lindemanns have a baby on the way?

it's plural


I might buy it for my kids

These hypothetical children will make people fear the future.

My grandma would love Flower, for my methHead of a uncle, I'd recommend Motorostorm, Pacific Rift.  He loves to go fast!!!  The PS3, it only does everything!

Is it powered my nanomachines?

Brown shading?

Bankrupty powers?