posted 09-01-2000 10:35 AM 
The gaming industry is undoubtedly one of the strangest industries
I've ever seen. It started a few decades ago and was dismissed by
many as a fad that would soon pass. If only they knew...
Gaming
is now a multi-billion dollar industry
-Due in large part to the spectacular success of the PSX. Sony
essentially salvaged the ruins left by Sega and Nintendo's failed
ventures following their successful outings with the Genny and SNES.
, with a number of major players all hoping to claim a
dominant share of the market. Ever since it's inception, the
industry has continued to thrive thanks to one thing and one thing
only. Innovation. This innovation is what has kept the industry from
stagnating and it's popularity from dwindling. New ideas, fresh
concepts, things that haven't been done before. That's what creative
people love. People who find their creativity stifled become bored
and disillusioned.
-Thanks to the liberal constraints on development we've been able
to see games on the PSX that would never have been given the green
light of a Sega or Nintendo console.
One famous example would have to be Treasure. The company was
formed by a number of ex-Konami employees who were sick and tired of
the countless sequels they were forced to create. In fact, they've
gone so far as to refuse to ever do a sequel again.
Where am I going with this you ask? Patience, dear friend,
patience. Nintendo is a company that has always been at the
forefront of innovation.
-Yes. If it comes to hardware aesthetics then I agree. If it
comes to games then I'd say that Nintendo has been left behind, as
evidenced by their recent unveiling of the NGC demos of which most
were rehashes.
Anyone disputing this fact need only look at the number of
quality games Mario has starred in.
-Quality? LAst quality Mario game was SM3. Mario 64 was outright
boring.
Whether as a cameo, or as the headlining star, Mario has featured
in countless titles, the majority of which have been outstanding.
- In whose opinion? This "article" is becoming far more column
like. Extremely subjective.
Sure, it would be easy for Nintendo to paste their most
famous mascot onto anything and everything. They'd make money, but
they'd lose the respect of many a gamer; something many game
companies take for granted these days. Games like Mario Party and
Super Smash Brothers could have easily been marketing cash-cows, but
they weren't. Instead, they've created new genres that will
undoubtedly be copied in the future. The former, is already being
copied by both, Sony and Sega.
-just as nintendo copied Sony's exemplerary 3d title Jumping Jack
Flash, which I actually enjoyed more than Mario 64.
Brand recognition + crappy game = great sales.
-It works for Nintendo. Zelda 64 was crap IMO, but sold plenty
and garnered game of the year from several renowned publications.
It's a simple equation that has yielded more garbage than
should legally be allowed. Superman on the N64 being one of the best
examples there is. I could name a lot more on all available systems,
but that would need a column
I thought this was an "Article"? Usually "article" denotes
objective journalism, not the subjective ramblings of a columnist.
unto itself. For every company that takes it's time, that
pours it's blood, sweat and tears into creating a quality product.
There are ten others who would slap a license onto a formulaic game
in a heartbeat. So how did we go from the halcyon days of Mario and
Sonic, to this, an age where the success of a game is determined by
the size of a company's marketing campaign, not the quality of the
title?
-It's really a combination of factors. It's near impossible to
profit from a title without successfull and vigorously marketing it.
Don't blame the industry. Blame the market that swallows crap and
asks for more. There's EB and plenty of other stores that allow
returns with no questions asked. If someone purchases a title and
keeps it then how can we fault the industry?
The culprit of all this? The Mass-Market. There's no doubting
that the Playstation has opened gaming up to an audience that
previously thought of our favourite pastime as 'geeky' or
'childish'.
-Sony has contributed much more than that, but that compliment is
a start.
Gaming has gone mainstream, and in doing so, has opened up a
virtual Pandora's Box of troubles. Companies now have a huge market
for their product, so creating a mediocre game and slapping a
property onto it is easier than before, and with a market as big as
this, at the very least, the game will recoup it's costs.
-Blame the consumer, not the industry.
The best case scenario? The game sells like hotcakes and said
company makes itself some easy money. Case in point, The Dragonball
series of games. They're mediocre fighting games at best and while I
can't attest to the extent of their commercial success, their demand
seems to grow stronger by the day.
-I feel the same about Pokemon.
I'm sure any gaming site editor can tell you of the hundreds
upon hundreds of e-mails they receive asking, "Wen iz they're mekin'
a nuw dragonBall game?". The problem this poses is indeed a serious
one. An uninformed customer is more likely to buy a game based on
something which they know about than something which they do not.
-"uninformed customer". Now elitism rears its ugly head into the
ramble.
For example, say a customer walks into a store ready to purchase
a game. They don't know what game, but they'll browse the selection
of titles and decide in the store. They now see two games next to
each other on the shelf. One has the words 'Tekken 3' emblazoned on
it's cover, the other is a Dragonball Z game. "What's a Tekken?",
the customer thinks to himself. "I like Dragonball Z, that game must
be cool then.", the unfortunate customer has now purchased a title
that is lightyears behind the other, quite unaware of his mistake.
-"Lightyears" in whose opinion?
Sure, not everyone is like that. In fact, a lot of people are
incredibly well-informed and accordingly, make good game purchasing
decisions. But there just aren't enough people who do this. The
effect the above scenario has on game companies is two-fold.
Firstly, companies are less willing to release an obscure, niche
product in case it doesn't sell well. Dance Dance Revolution is one
such game, but Konami has recently relented and decided to bring the
game Stateside. I pray that it sells a boatload. Secondly, it gives
rise to the thinking that gamers want the garbage that companies
shovel their way, prompting said company to release even more
formulaic crappiness.
My point to this incessant rambling is this.
-Ahhh. We finally reach the elusive "point" to this rambling
fanboy rant.
Customers vote with their dollars, buying a certain product tells
a company that you like their product and that you'd possibly buy a
sequel or similar product. Hence the market is flooded with hordes
of 'me-too' titles. Marketing and Research tells the company that
kids like 'Xtreme' products and that's what the company delivers.
-That's the job of marketing and research.
Regardless of whether or not the title actually has any redeeming
qualities whatsoever. It's a vicious circle that can only be stopped
by you, the consumer.
-First thing in this "article" that I agree with.
In my opinion, the Playstation embodies this 'me-too' formula.
-Here comes the dubious non-partisan assessment. It's the
playstation's "fault"
Unlike Nintendo and Sega,
-nintendo and sega want niche success. They're not trying to mass
marketable. 
it has little to no first-party development.
-False. Although subsidiaries, there are companies that
essentially work as first party. Gotta love that disinformation.
It doesn't innovate, it doesn't love games. No, like the others,
it's a company who wants to make money, but unlike the others it
doesn't love games.
-Yes!!!! They don't love games. This guy is a medium, apparently,
because he has this uncanny insight into the minds of , presumably,
thousands of Sony executives. They're cold, unempathizing zombies
without emotions that cooly walk this earth in pursuit of wealth and
nothing else. To hell with leisure.
It has no discernable mascot. No, Lara Croft and Crash Bandicoot
don't count,
-Where did you ever get the idea that LAura was ever considered a
"mascot" by anyone with a functioning brain? Hello? Anyone in there
Chester?
although EA Sports comes rather close to being one. In fact,
the two companies are remarkably similar. What they both lack in
creativity, they make up for in marketing.
-
More subjective poppycock. I've enjoyed more EA titles than Nintendo
titles in the past 2 years. I guess I'm a slave to marketing. EA
does ALOT more than console publishing.
The fact that Konami makes a far superior soccer title than EA
Sports could ever hope to create is irrelevant.
-Agreed. What this has to do to support his arguement is beyond
me.
The fact that Nintendo continually drives gaming forward, while
Sony is content to copy the latest and greatest ideas is
unimportant.
-Yes. Nintendo has a game like Syphon Filter. And Syphon Filter
was in development BEFORE MGS, for those who wish to invoke the "but
it's a copy of metal gear" arguement. when is the last rpg made by
nintendo. And no, paper mario doesn't count. I don't consider Zelda
an rpg. Nintendo is a great company, but is it absolutely necessary
to disregard the contributions of Sony in order to recognize
nintendo's achivements? I don't think so.
What matters is that Sony is currently the market leader.
However, like good ol' Uncle Ben says "with great power, comes great
responsibility". Sadly, Sony is not being responsible. They're
abusing their market share and not allowing gaming to reach it's
full potential.
-Says who? 3 million Japanese beg to differ. How good will the
NGC sell in Japan? Betcha not as good as PS2. No need to mention the
Dreamcast. Is sony stifling creativity? Are they abducting our most
prized developers? Hideo Kajima? Why has he contributed to two
projects on the PS2? Clearly because it limits his vision. Clearly.
This irresponsibility was all too apparent after the recent
unveiling of Nintendo's Gamecube. The demos on display were
light-years ahead of any PS2 efforts thus far.
-Nintendo's demos were very impressive, but they were that.
Demos. They were not "light years ahead" of any PS2 efforts thus
far, because said "efforts" are actually games in development and
not "demos". I'd like to further add that the initial demos of PS2's
potential were just as impressive as anything that Nintendo
unveiled. I suppose he hasn't seen the FFX demo that is reported to
have been running off the PS2 hardware. Nothing in those demos, with
the exception of the Metroid FMV, touched that "demo".
Sony has created a machine with a number of glaring omissions
and much like Sega's much maligned Saturn, is incredibly difficult
to program for.
-Wishful thinking. Let's see how many 3rd parties are secured
next year by Nintendo and how many remain committed to the PS2.
Betcha Sony will have the clear advantage...again.
Is it not possible that like Sega once did, Sony has gotten
'cocky', they've created a machine that is undoubtedly powerful, but
lack of focus can do nothing but harm.
-The Saturn wasn't anywhere near as powerful, relative to the
PSX, as the PS2 is when weighed against the Dreamcast.
Everyone keeps saying that developers just need time to get
themselves accustomed to the system's hardware.
-Which is fundamental to ANY transition to a new console.
Why should developers have to spend that amount of time and money
just to get used to the system? That time and money should be spent
on developing new and creative ideas. Other than MGS 2, I've seen
nothing that truly embodies what I believe the next-generation of
gaming should be like.
-You're not looking far enough. Is there anything like Smuggler's
run on the DC? I never saw anything similar amongst the NGC demos.
"what I believe the next-generation of gaming should be like"
Perhaps what he believes isn't aligned with what the majority of
gamers "believe". Guess it's his way or the highway.
At this point, everyone I've spoken to is buying the system for
it's DVD capabilities, hoping.
No
comment.
[snipped remaining biased drivel, which possessed nothing
substantive or worth discussing.]
It's clear that this "article" is nothing more than a
desperate rant from another fanatic whose perspective is skewed by
the "I hate Sony" bug that crawled up his a$$.
------------------
[This message has been edited by L.O.X (edited
09-01-2000).]
Gaming
Age Forum 
UBBFriend:
Email This Page to Someone! 
.gif){kind=small}
posted 09-01-2000 07:19 AM 
. Anyway, copy
and pasted from TotalVideogames:
. I'm looking
forward to the articles next year this time when we see what Metroid
looks like as a game instead of a tech demo.
