|
If you don't have time to read, let me sum up the death of the video game industry in one animated GIF:
This week is maybe the biggest of the year in the world of entertainment. This is when all of the games you'll be playing for the next 12 months are unveiled at the Electronic Entertainment Expo. This year's event, however, will more likely be remembered as the precise moment video gaming as we know it died a tragic and embarrassing death.
If you haven't been keeping up with the conference, let me summarize by saying Microsoft--and I'm not making this up--had Cirque du Soleil unveil a $150 kitten petting simulator via interpretive dance. The Cirque du Soleil performers rode in on animatronic elephants:
See those people wearing white in the background? Yeah, they also had the audience dress in white cult robes. Here's the kitten petting simulator in action:
All of that actually happened. Does this all sound like an industry's desperate, final plea for attention? Because I'm pretty sure it was. Let me back up a little bit. The games industry has had a massive problem from day one, one that nobody is quite sure how to fix. This problem is the reason thousands of arcades had to close down after the 80s, and it's why Atari, Sega, NEC and countless other electronics giants had to bail out of the console business after losing millions. It's the reason why even Microsoft has lost billions on its gaming division. The problem is that video game players simply won't keep playing without a new gimmick every five years or so. Where people have been happy watching celluloid movies for like 80 straight years, for whatever reason gamers won't keep playing games unless given a completely new format every half decade.
Now, some people mistakenly say, "Well, duh, we stop playing the old games because the new ones have hit the market, making the old ones look obsolete!" Not so. We stop playing the games long before the new games arrive. For instance, there are no new consoles on the horizon now, yet video game hardware and software sales are both collapsing. Eventually we just get bored with the medium. That's a huge problem for the industry; it costs billions to develop a new console from scratch. It's getting to the point that game makers can't make a profit off the last console in the five years before gamers have given up on it and started demanding a new one. Which brings us to the animatronic elephants. See, the console that "won" this generation was the Nintendo Wii, because Nintendo 1) designed it primarily to cost very little and 2) introduced gimmicky motion controls and other peripherals that made the console seem like easy-to-get-into fun for the whole family. You can stand in your living room and wave your arms around for an hour and have a great time. But going on four years later, people are starting to get tired of that, too--the Wii's sales are plummeting like everyone else's. But this gave Microsoft and Sony both the bright idea that, instead of bringing out expensive new consoles at the five-year mark (the Xbox 360 has been out since 2005) they'd just introduce their own motion control gimmicks, and sell it as a whole new machine! With Microsoft, this device is called "Kinect" and it was the star of the first day of E3.
It has a built-in camera and microphone, so it can track the movement of your body, and recognizes both your face and voice commands. Microsoft sold the device as controllerless gaming--you don't even need a Wiimote for this, you just wave your hands through the air like Minority Report. Sounds like it could be cool. And then they showed us the games, and a bedridden industry started coughing up blood. The game that launched the Nintendo Wii in 2006 was called Wii Sports, a collection of motion-controlled minigames including bowling, boxing and tennis.
So Kinect is launching with... Kinect Sports, a collection of motion-controlled minigames including bowling, boxing and table tennis.
The same game, only four years later. Meanwhile, the rest of the launch lineup looks like the cheap knockoff fitness games they've made for the Wii balance board over the last couple of years, most of which you can find in the bargain bin at CostCo.
I see... three fitness games, three dance games and something called Game Party. Are you starting to see why this is a crisis? Those games up there are what they are depending on to save the industry. All those people who've stopped buying games? THAT is the shit that is supposed to get them excited about gaming again.
Oh, wait. We have Kinectimals. It's a virtual pet simulator. Microsoft demonstrated it by having a young Asian girl take the stage and air-pet her virtual tiger.
Of course, you can't feel the animal's fur or warmth, and it can't curl up on your lap or sleep in your bed or snuggle up against you. But, you know, it can do all of the other things pets can do. At one point the virtual cat licked the screen, and the little Asian girl giggled and reacted as if she was being licked and tickled by a real cat.
The audience at the conference reacted in exactly the same way you react when you notice the homeless guy next to you on the subway is masturbating. Hey, did I mention that Kinect is apparently going to cost $149, in addition to what you've already paid for the console? I mean, this is it. There are no other huge, ground-breaking games coming. The only other games they showed off at the conference were sequels--the third game in the Gears of War series, the fifth game in the Halo franchise, the seventh game in the Call of Duty series and the 800th game in the Metal Gear series. I'm pretty sure all of those games star space marines, except for Call of Duty, which stars Earth marines. Oh, hey, Metal Gear uses Kinect! You can slice your hands in the air and operate the guy's sword that way.
But none of that is what convinced me the industry was on its proverbial deathbed, having just pooped a proverbial lung. No, what convinced me my favorite hobby is dying was the fact that Microsoft devoted easily half of their conference to showing things the Xbox 360 can do other than play games. For instance, you can download TV shows! And movies! And it can do it almost as well as the devices you already own! They actually demonstrated the viewer waving around their hands to make the menu bring up the right movie, then using voice commands to pause, stop and fast forward. So saying "Xbox, stop" will stop your movie, and waving your hand will presumably make it skip ahead. Awesome! Nothing can go wrong with that, as long as you remember to stay perfectly still and silent while your movie is playing. If you're not clear on why random conversation or ambient sound in the room would fuck up your playback, I'm guessing you've never used a voice operated device in your life.
Also, you can use Kinect to get on Facebook. And watch sporting events. I mean, how else are you going to do those things? It also has video chat. You know, like ChatRoulette. Yes, in just a few short months your child, too, can see a stranger masturbating on your 58-inch plasma. Sony has their conference today. I'm not hopeful. Why? Because they're devoting their conference to two things: Move, their new, completely original motion controllers...
...and 3D games, aka Games with Glasses and Headaches. HERE ARE MY IMPRESSIONS OF DAY TWO. David Wong is the Senior Editor of Cracked.com, and the author of the horror novel John Dies at the End, currently banned in 36 states. Also read his 5 Reasons It's Still Not Cool to Admit You're a Gamer and 5 Creepy Ways Video Games Are Trying to Get You Addicted. |
The 6 Creepiest Things Ever Slipped Into Children's Cartoons
The 6 Most Gigantic Everything in the History of War
6 Organizations You Didn't Know Were Secretly Badass
5 World Changing Decisions (Made for Ridiculous Reasons)
Sep 2nd: A Day In Cracked History
The 20 Worst NES Games of All-Time
5 Reasons It's Still Not Cool to Admit You're a Gamer
5 Guilty Pleasures The Web Killed While You Weren't Looking
5 Things That Are Being Automated That Probably Shouldn't Be
Copyright © 2005 – 2010 Cracked Entertainment, Inc. All rights reserved. CRACKED, CRACKED.COM and the "CRACKED" logo are trademarks owned by Cracked Entertainment, Inc. All rights reserved.
I think the biggest hindrance is the lingering perception that games are for kids. Mature players will buy the consoles so they can play in the privacy of their own homes, and parents would rather buy the handhelds because they're cheaper and don't need a bunch of peripheries. Also, the only "mature" titles are labeled for gore and language, usually not for actual story of character maturity, hence the popularity of the FPS (even in truly non-shooter RPG style adventure games like Oblivion or Fallout 3). With s**t marketed like "Kinectimals" for 360, and EVERY NINTENDO GAME EVER MADE, it's no wonder why some professional schmo would rather be misconstrued "texting" on his phone while really playing a game than be seen playing with an actual game machine.
Wanna renew interest in videogames? Renew our faith in your pledge to stand beside your products. I would gladly pay a fee for online play of a particular game, since its been proven this is the number 1 loss in profits for massively popular online console games. Hell, MW2 might've been the bestselling game ever, but that don't matter if everyone and their brothers're playing it if the only cost recouped was the original title sales, and further profitability is reliant upon a sequel. Howabout charge a small, reasonable (perhaps monthly) fee to the actual f**kin' game developers (not Microsoft, sans Halo) that will ensure a long-lived online community, and make another franchise or ambitiously different title that could garner its own lucrative following? Hell, you could insure the profitability by just adding game elements via DLC forever on popular games, thus almost eliminating the need for mega-expensive sequels every 1 1/2-2 years. Also, if one of these f**kin' console companies could guarantee continued online play for certain titles after the console's lifecycle (like online PC gaming), you could sustain a base for years. Instead of unfurling a new, lavishly expensive console every five years, just keep refining and producing winning experiences for the one you have, instead of nickle and diming me for every little side-service.
Oh, and for once, please fully test a system before releasing it, thus eliminating the mega hassle of major glitches on a supposedly "quality" product and having to throw millions at pacifying your angry customer base (this is obviously sans Nintendo, and even Sony to a much, much smaller extent). Ya know, instead of treating us like... well, children.
...basically, the consumer's gotten greedy, and wants new content - ALL THE TIME - for virtually nothing, and eventually when they're sick of playing they need a gimmick after a few years(i.e., Kinect and Move) to remind them that videogames are still around.
Alright, ElectricLarry's and Miserychick's comments got me thinking about how to renew interest in the gaming industry. First off, if you can't change tech for a game, change style and feel. Halo 1 feels a hell of a lot different than its sequels, and while this is due in part to different tech and improved graphics, it's also because, I think, different times they were made. Halo 1 was made to save the Xbox in its time of need, which was just two years after half-life and system shock 2, and its sequels were made to feed casuals and new fanboys with more gameplay and graphical improvements. Halo 1 and 2's more limited graphics made them more moody, Halo 1 especially. Now, if we could play with graphics and storylines, we could alter the feel of games from "gritty urban hardcore brutal" games (Killzone, GoW, CoD, pretty much any game with roots after 2002) to something more novel, like Halo 1's water-colorish landscapes braved in isolation and seperation from comrades, or even to an older Doom-like "Satanistic, run n gun, don't bother aiming" atmosphere which newbies haven't encountered yet, we could prolong gaming's life 2-5 years.
A second option would be to step down the graphics on games so that more effort, hardware, and software could be spent on making the game longer. This would simultaneously increase initial playtime as well as replay value. This would work for casuals who play the game one time and for hardcores who savor every moment and replay. I mean, didn't it suck to have a game like Halo 3 or CoD4, which felt great to play, but had a combined playtime of about 5 minutes? Longer games with new atmosphere are needed. Graphics are good enough as-is, we can sacrifice them a little bit to prolong gametime.
Graphic quality doesn't matter one whit, and as for downplaying graphics for gameplay, you've obviously never played Oblivion or Fallout 3 or even the Mass Effect games, which can possibly offer hundreds of hours of gameplay. I think a big problem is with over-saturation of the combat shooter genre, specifically the FPS. They are all marketed on their multiplayer, and develop loyal online communities over time as a result. The problem with multiplayer is that someone gets MW2, they play that s**t nonstop (for free) everyday, and disregard other titles. If you paid to play or paid the developer, you would definitely be more driven to find the best online experience, and to move on after the experience had become stale. I mean, the reason Halo and CoD storylines are short is because, well, about 90% of customers weren't even that f**kin' interested in the campaign, as much as "pwning noobs" or their friends online for chumpchange on XBL (or free on the PSN), so it made sense to shortsight that end of it and develop the s**t out of the online portion.
Their problem is that they're developing fiendish loyalty to 2 - 3 individual games that make all their profit upfront, while later titles are often ignored or not as successful. I'll make a prediction: Cod: MW Black Ops won't sell as well as MW2, and even if it does, it won't amount to a bit of difference in the long run because gamers who like a unique experience will have long since abandoned ship with their aging peers and declared that gaming is really for the young... in the head.
And I despise your assumption that all games are (seemingly) FPSers. I mean, damn. Strategy, role-playing, puzzle games, racers, sports, flight simulators, fighters- the options are limitless to ballsy programmers and adventurous gamers, who ultimately sustain the industry. Pick something different, for a change.
Btw Fallout 3 is one of the most beautiful games on the market, kicking the s**t out of gears of war and halo series. So a good develop does NOT have to sacrifice aesthetics for depth.
I usually go for story based games, I did buy COD 5, but figured that the money spent on a slight variation of COD 5 would be better spent on something like Uncharted 2 or Assassin's creed 2
I agree, less d*****t, more games like Black and White 2, CoD, Halo, LittleBigPlanet, ect... The reason this is happening is becuase in the next 10 years your gonna have to press 100 buttons simutaniously to move forward.
Perhaps instead of complaining about the lack of new gaming consoles and original games, you put your thinking hat on and figure out some innovative technology that will live up to your expectations.
Nice. I agree, too many people are just b***hing about games and not coming up with their own ideas....
I too buy an xbox 360 every year to help the industry look like it's not dying. Btw, I have never in my whole life met another gamer who does not appreciate or replay old video games. Why do I keep reading that crap everywhere? So, you're saying nobody every replays the old Zelda games? what about duke nukem 3d??? that game was a parody of all the stupid space shooters that were saturating the market at that time. To bad they will never release the new duke nukem because now would be a good time for it considering we have a thousand new space shooters trying to catch onto the Halo craze, you know the one, yeah that game, the one invented space shooters...after everyone apparently forgot that they played that game a million times before. I've played through VTM: Bloodlines like 30 times now. I wonder how many more times I can beat TMNT 4: Turtles in time. Video games are the target of some much BS I'm about to place them under immigrants and gays.
The hardware is selling less because people who WANT the hardware already have the hardware. Why would I want a new XBOX. That's just silly.
I cringe everytime they talk about a new XBox. I am completely content with the 360. As consoles improve, they get more expensive and so do the games. I think the tech is pretty much maxed right now. Just keep pumping out decent shooters and people will obviously keep buying them.
actually, the games don't get more expensive.
look at the N64, it had extremely expensive cartridges
and look at how low the prices are for downloadable games on steam.
the technology isn't maxed either, look at the Xbox 360's 4 CPU's by example, we can compare them to a Core 2 Quad now and the i7 is even more powerful.
the graphics cards of current PC's are also much more powerful, and as soon OpenCL makes a breakthrough we'll all have great and fast physics too.
this entire article is BS by the way, the console sales are dropping because everyone who wants one already has one.
it also doesn't only feature gimmicks, I like the idea of head tracking (look it up on google) by example and yes, that guy worked on kinect.
also, look at why PC games are dying; they're only console ports nowadays.
Aspyr is the porting company nobody has ever cared about, they've always done Mac games, but now they're doing Windows games too (hey, I can't complain, their Mac titles run better than Valve's ones)
To RobinVanae, pc gaming market is dead bc f**king thieves would rather illegally download a game than pay for it.
The industry isn’t dying, it’s maturing.
Movies had massive audiences when they were new, audiences dropped off steadily as the medium aged. Now people only come to the cinema for big releases or social reasons (you go to see a tried and tested formula movie for a date / with friends).
It’ll drop steadily, level off in a few years, and we’ll see more knock off tech, and more generic lowest common denominator games.
The recession is also a contributing factor: it's just harder to justify buying hardware and games.
This article is meant to be mostly satirical, I'm assuming. Yes, the new motion technologies from Microsoft and Sony are likely no more substantial than Nintendo's, but the video game industry isn't dying any time soon.
Also, I have never heard ANY gamer, in all my life, say that they are bored of a game console, and that they're going to cut down on playing games until a new system comes out.
The real reason that video game sales drop a few years after a new generation of consoles are released is because the NON-gamers lose interest, not the gamers. The non-gamers get the new consoles because of the initial shiny-and-new factor. There are plenty of tech enthusiasts who buy new consoles even though they hardly play games.
Agreed on certain points. We don't get bored of the medium, we get bored of the content. Why do you think people still read books after so many centuries? The medium is generally the same, digital or paper, but the content changes, and writers continue to write innovative and fresh stories. Movies also had quite a long run with essentially the same format, and are mostly getting hurt by what most everything else is getting hurt by: the economy.
The problem isn't so much the people (though some people are ALWAYS a problem) as it is the industry. We don't WANT the gimmicks in the long run, because the very definition of one is a short-lived amusement with no deeper substance. We want substance in our games, original stories, lasting or profound entertainment value, and innovative gameplay. Not gimmicks. The gaming industry is bleeding itself to death by pushing out so many trashy games, when instead it could be focusing on game quality. Quality games earn money--trashy games siphon it away. And when the gaming industry fails to understand its target audience, it loses even more money.
Personally? Games, despite the climbing prices, are still cheaper than shelling out hundreds for 2-3 consoles every 5 years. I do also generally agree with the sentiments of this article. E3 has been a disaster, and I could care less if the Wii burns.
I am a gamer and I say games now are better than ever before, even from comparing them to games released allong with the current console gen launch. I don't know of any gamer who would say they want a new console, developers are just now working nice with the hardware. Picking out a travesty like kinect and claiming it is because of the gamer community's inability to focus on one thing for more than 1/4 of a second is, frankly, retarded. Watching coverage of E3 it was easy to tell no one was impressed with the kinect.
It said in the linked article that portable sales are the biggest hit, and most gamers with similar tastes to me dont give a s**t about portable gaming. Sure the DS is sweet but not worth it to most hardcore gamers and thats the only portable device worth owning. To say the industry is dead is a vast overstatement.
Glenn Beckian? I can't remember one lie he's told on TV, yet you're assuming he must as people he disagrees with hate him?
There are reasons the video game industry is "on the ropes". One is the economy,stupid(this phrase has just about reached it's limit). When the economy is bad,people shop for what they need, and leave luxuries in the dust. That's reason one.
Reason two is that video games are under attack and are about to be under siege. You see, idiots? The left, who you so often champion in these posts, are the main antagonists against video games for anyone. No, they're not content with mature labels, they want them gone. Period. Look at the names at the top of the list against video games: Pelosi, Clinton(Hillary only),Gore(both husband and wife), Barney Franks(Elmer Fudd of liberals), and mostly Joe Lieberman. Liberals, people. They will campaign against it the way they do against cigarettes. They can seem to take the "moral high ground" that we all know is complete twaddle but the public buys. All they have to say is it's "For the children".
THird reason is that nobody can keep up with changing tastes anymore. Fads are shorter in length. When you constantly demand something "new and innovative" a limit is reached, a brick wall. Then it becomes simple redundancy, meaning they just reuse ideas over and over. This is the same thing with movies, just rehashed crap.
Right now is the time to stick with whatever console you have at the moment(Mine's an Xbox 360 + an old PS2 and PC) and buy games only for it. They have just got to drop in price or they'll have trouble giving refried games away. keep praising those games that are truly visionary, and avoid movies made into games at all costs. Teach younger gamers about gameplay, like it's ancient history. I can remember when dying every couple of minutes in a game was normal. Give developers that give away free games(a little out of date but fun anyways) your praise.
This new Microsoft machine? I can't wait to not buy it.
I completely agree with your analysis but you misunderstand me when I say Glen Beckian. I personally have a great deal of respect for Glen Beck and enjoy his program; as far as I've seen he has not said anything that I disagree with greatly. I own the same three systems and I also plan not to buy this "new" product, but I would bet money that many people say they won't buy it, but many many people will, it's going to be everyone's dirty little secret that they keep at the back of the closet while there friends are around but when no one is looking they pull it out and swing there arms like a chicken with its head off. I can prove this by explaining that maybe 60% of people that own an Xbox own a Wii secretly or publicly, and everyone just loves those new gimmicky ideas with a shiny coat of paint. If they tried to sell a new iPhone and changed the design but kept the software the same, they would still make millions; people want the new shiny coat of paint so they will buy this new toy, even if they don't plan to play it. The saddest part of this whole thing is this won't be the death of videogaming, I'd rather have anything happen than this, this is the equivalent of videogaming being shot in the chest and begging for its life then offer its baby as a sacrifice instead of itself. Microsoft and Sony could have dished out their money and kept the cycle going, but instead, they decided to ride the coattails of a game system that they oh-so-recently mocked, it's poetry, corporate poetry, and it's des**cable.
You can't remember one lie Glen Beck has told? Lol.
Glenn Beck may not tell an outright lie, but he makes outrageous claims which are as far from a truth or a lie as anyone's rational basis for their personal faith. His faith is obviously in his own demeaning theatrics: he treats the viewer like a child and his point of view does not come from cold hard facts but by the childishly majestic wonder of comparing two things on a board that he relates only through sheer force of will and spending the next 90 seconds before commercial trying desperately to convince you of his inane and baseless comparison. But simply because he named two people or things that are historical or can be proved to be real, everyone is too f**king lazy to actually compare and realize his crass generalizations are baseless at best and at worst completely pathetic and insulting. This does not mean that his popularity is a sign that conservatives are stupid: people (especially in the modern Rome of America) are getting stupider and lazier, and appreciate this chubby bad actor for being something they could almost aspire to. Most glaring example in recent memory: his histrionic "9/12 Project", in which he squeezed tears out without (somehow) managing to giggle at the camera and beseeched all Americans to unite and feel like they did the day after 9/11... in other words, to feel as sad and hopeless and dejected and terrified as everyone following the worst attack in U.S. history. Not to mention how that makes the surviving families of the victims feel. Yeah, way to make a tastelessly broad generalization and smear it with credibility by attaching it to something truly tragic underneath a smattering of ratings tears. Beck is popular because he doesn't require research to enjoy, and its his viewers lack of requiring research that sadly makes him seem credible in the first place. He's his own dog and pony show, and ignorant enough for most Americans to rally behind.
Oh s**t. This is a gaming column post... oh yeah, pt. 2, did the liberals putting the ratings on music make it stop? Hell no. Music and games are getting s**ttier bc of the goddamned internet making it easier to play s**t without paying for it, and opening up the market to a much wider selection of choices rather than the rigid options of yesteryear. That's why you can't even find a PC game for PC that much anymore, bc everyone would rather load it off a torrent.
As for moral high ground, that's really the conservative fortay,
isn't it, what with all the Bible thumping and gay bashing going around.
Hell, I hate both liberals and conservatives equally, bc despite yalls constant bickering, both parties like to spend a helluva lot of money on equally pointless endeavors, while lying all the time about it. One just focuses on war and controlling the brown peoples of the world and the other on social programs and debt relief by (sob) INCREASING DEBT.
s**t, no-one ever took liberal attempts at social consumer control that seriously. Joe Lieberman also wanted the big Internet killswitch. Well, I reckon if Bushie had wanted this s**t you wouldn't have a problem with it, because unlike my ass you're go down with a sinking ship, as long as the flag is red and elephant shaped.
Whew. I do agree I'll never buy this Kinect s**t, though.
Wow, the videogame industry released something s**tty to appease the masses, that can only means that the end of videogames is imminent! One would think a mature person who writes many articles based on videogames would not write such a stupid, alarmist, Glenn Beck styled piece of s**t.
I don't think it's Glen Beckian, I think it's logical. He uses provable facts to base a point about videogameing hitting an impassable wall because people will get bored without new ideas. No one came out with new ideas, it's the same s**t that everyone is ALREADY tired of. It only makes sense as a following step that the videogame industry will collapse with nothing interesting to do.
GerronVaughn, they may be running out of technological innovations, but there is an entire library of artistic innovations that have yet to be explored within video games.
The sad thing about all this is that the industry itself won't die. What's going to die are ideogames as art, or if you don't like the term or hate nerds, a "Creative media".
It's really a sad thing that the very first thing that made videogames great, the gameplay, has been forgotten for the sake of "accesibility". Where's now the sense of accomplishment that you once got when you mastered a difficult game? Interactivity doesn't mean "I move and this s**t reacts" is "I recognize an event unfolding in my screen, I act accordingly with a given sequence of commands that requires skill/memory/good luck to pull off correctly and I'm rewarded after that or punished if I f**k up".
I'm not a hardcore gamer, whatever that means these days. I only want my games to be like I know and love them. Videogames were always different from toys because they actually get better as you grow old , just like books, wine or sex. You don't play dolls at 28, just like you don't f**king play a pale imitation of sports to have "fun".
It's really sad, because games were really reaching maturity in its content and its use of the gameplay as the key element of the story (Want a simple game that is really f**king better than any of that "Waveyourarmsaround" bulls**t? Braid. Two buttons and a pad, just like twenty five goddamn years ago) the industry will just simply throw it aside.
If there's one hope to videogames, is in the independent gamemakers. Until the day they turn greedy, just like everybody else.
A person can also buy a machine if (s)he feels that the console has something better to offer, to the extent that now its a worthy item. Atleas with me; I'm seriously on the edge should I buy 3DS or Wii after Nintendos conference, while before it was just a quite nice buy (with Mario Galaxy and the promise of new Zelda).
And retro-playing is not dead. Why would tehre exist sites dedicated for it if it was? My latest two games are both remakes. Modern games are not completely superior or inferior. I dare to say that the 2D games of 1985 - 1995 are better than most modern 2Ds. And they have many qualities surpassing modern 3Ds (My main ones being difficulty and sometimes lenght).
I do agree about old 2D games being better than a lot of what's out there. Do you have an Xbox? There are quite a few really good 2D games ranging from $5-$15. A lot of them are more or less old school in flavor with nice graphics. 'Splosion Man, Bionic Commando: Rearmed, Braid, etc. Comic Jumper due out later this year looks amazing for a downloadable game. Heck on all consoles you have a huge library of old school games for usually $5-8 apiece. The Wii has a virtual marketplace that is nothing short of amazing. Tons of old NES games, tons of old SNES games, tons of old Genesis games. Can't beat it.
I wanted a Wii so badly and when I got it I played my Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess 5 times in a row then beat Fire Emblem twice. bought Metroid and was saddened at the much easier than the last sequel and slightly less awesome of it. I also played a few of my old games Like Megaman X which I still haven't beat. I never touched Wii Sports. only my favorite games of the previous Consoles
I don't know about needing gimmicks/new consoles. Okay, say there's only a certain number of people in the world who want a Wii. Over the course of a few years the number being bought stays high until eventually the number of people who still want to buy a Wii compared to the number of those who already did is incredibly low. Unless everyone who has it wants to buy 2 or 3 you can't keep a steady number each advancing year. Right?
Yeah, I agree. Unless they are programmed to break there aren't going to be a lot of repeat console purchases. Also after a system or game is released it isn't too long until used ones start showing up at gamestop. I think that is the main factor causing sales of new games and systems to start high and drop off so fast. You have a certain number of people who wait in line for the thing or buy it shortly after it's released, but then after those die off a lot of people would just rather buy it used and pay less.
I don't agree that gamers will stop playing without new gimmicks, I really don't. All we want are good games that are actually fresh. Your Day 2 impressions were very blunt about the fact that 90% of what comes out these days is completely unoriginal. I still maintain Nintendo's stuff wasn't though, so maybe there's hope for creativity. I speculated just yesterday that we would all be better off if Nintendo just became a third party developer for the other consoles (well, all of us except Nintendo haha). Christ I think they're the only company left that consistently rolls out games that feel new, fun, and don't involve an ounce of blood (i.e., anyone can play them).
Plus retro gaming isn't exactly going to stimulate the economy but it just proves that people have no problem playing old games.
Creativity is the problem. The game industry is going the way of the movie industry, sorry to say. Honestly though the other thing is that video games are a luxury item that still aren't very cheap. In this economy (I know, I hate rolling out that excuse but....) a lot of people are probably in the same boat as me: I could buy a new game every 3-4 weeks and get away with it, but realistically I should and do only spend on a game roughly every 3 months. That's a big difference.
dwindling sales = console boredom is your hypothesis.
i would postulate that most consumers that would buy a wii would buy it within the first five years.
but boredom probably does still play a role...
there is a perfectly different and yet simple reason why sales on consoles are slipping years after a release other than people are bored with them. the people who are going to buy one already have one. i don't need another 360 or ps3. i won't be buying a wii because they made link right handed. sure, every once in a while a system will sale due to a person replacing a system, prices being lowered motivating those that were fence sitting to shell out to get a new system, or a family member thinking it might make a nice gift. But, in the end, the group most likely to buy a system, already owns one by the third or fourth year of it being out. console sales aren't where companies should be attempting to make money.
the problem in my opinion is that companies started spending way too much to make a game. this happened so much that the bar was set. each game had to surpass the other, not in story, but in graphics and size. new systems had to be created in order for more costly games to be able to be made. this drove up prices for systems and games. I buy very few games these days, due to price. when i do buy a game it is a used one from gamestop. buying new is too risky at the price. I am still pissed about wasting my money on the piece of crap FFXIII.
I would buy more games if they were cheaper.
I would buy games for my old systems if they still made them, especially since they would be cheaper. I have the tendency to spend more money when prices are reasonable than high. i would likely spend 200 to 250 a month on a ton of games from older systems in a months time. these days i spend about 60 dollars on games in three months time on new systems.
i don't get bored of classics. i still play nes,ps1,snes,genesis games.
expensive games are something we have tunnel visioned ourselves into when it isn't necessary. most of my friends play fb app games almost religiously. every day i am spammed by people asking me to be their neighbor or some such in some random game. these aren't random people on the net. everyone on my list are real life friends or people who i have engaged and corresponded with on various discussion forums.
some new gaming company should come onto the scene and make a system called old skool. it should play lower caliber, yet fun games. I'd spend more money on that than these new next gen games.
yea, i know. most likely it will be a tl:dr. i ramble. too bad
"exactly the same way you react when you notice the homeless guy next to you on the subway is masturbating."
What, you mean you all got out your cameras & shouted encouragements?